If you read the 2 memoriales, in full, they are pretty clear. If you make an honest statement one day, to the best of your recollection, then you remember more the next day, does this mean the first day was a lie?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#3
- Thread starter wasnt_me
- Start date
- Status
If you read the 2 memoriales, in full, they are pretty clear. If you make an honest statement one day, to the best of your recollection, then you remember more the next day, does this mean the first day was a lie?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's an assertion they made. Where is the proof?
There is also testimony that there was glass above, below, and within the clothes. They allowed Filomena to look through her room, disturbing the contents, after they discovered Meredith's body. Filomena was able to take her computer out of the crime scene.
Read both statements, in full. Not just what has been posted here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You have linked the letter of November 9. We were discussing the letter of November 7 where Knox supposedly retracted her accusations against Patrick. In fact, she did not retract those statements, she confirmed them in court during the trial.
Which letters are you referring to: those written to her lawyer, or those given to police?
In the letters of November 6 and 7, Knox confirmed her accusations against Patrick (see trial transcripts). On November 10, police overheard a conversation Knox had with her mother where she made the first admission that she lied about Patrick. Neither Knox nor her mother reported this information to police, and Knox is questioned about this during trial. Her mother was also questioned about this during trial. The mother explained that because she did not speak Italian, she was unable to tell police that her daughter lied and an innocent man was in prison.
So ... are we thinking that police and witnesses were lying when they reported that broken glass was on top of the ransacked items ... a big conspiracy that involved Knox's roommates, their friends, the Postal Police, the Carabinieri and the prosecutor?
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL* #2
Here is a post I wrote to you a few months ago about the two notes. In them, she does not confirm her accusations against Patrick. The fact that Patrick's lawyer says she does is not proof that she does. I suggest you read them for yourself.
I don't see a link to the letter of November 7 in the above linked comment. We know the contents of the letter of Nov 6 as it was published by the Telegraph in 2007.
According to the trial transcripts, Knox confirmed her accusations against Patrick in her November 7 letter. The only way to refute that, at this point, is to produce the letter so we can see that what Knox stated during the trial is another lie.
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
They make sense in the context of the events of 7 November. Amanda talked with a religious sister and then her memory of 1 November came back to her quickly. Now if we only had a tape of the interrogation, we could gain a greater understanding of what had brought about the false accusation.
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
I realize that. However, it is good to have both pieces of information IMO.
To me, this is proof of the shoddy investigation done by police. We are talking about a crime scene. They have photographers capturing everything. Yet they miss the crucial evidence of glass on top of ransacked items?
Witnesses can misremember, be mistaken, lie, exaggerate, etc. Why would you rely on witnesses when you have the means and opportunity to document everything photographically?
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
I have already quoted portions of the letter. Some of the portions that Follain quotes look like what can be found elsewhere, such as PM Mignini's cross examination. The complete letter is in "Waiting to be Heard."
The letter is printed, in its entirety, in Amanda's book. I have never found it anywhere else. I did quote what I thought the most pertinent part was.
~n/t~
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2011
- Messages
- 17,670
- Reaction score
- 70
Agree wish we had the tape however I still think it's hogwash. Talking to a nun and suddenly remembers the most horrific day of anyone's life? That in itself is bizarre. What could the nun have told her that she suddenly remembers so quickly? 6 days later. I find that very suspicious.
There's no copyright violation to take a picture of the page and post it here. We're all curious. Perhaps someone that read Knox's story would like to post a photo of the page that contains the letter so we can all see for ourselves that Knox lied about the contents of the letter during the trial.
All we have at this point is her admission that she confirmed her accusations against Patrick in the letter of November 7.
The Massei Report addressed every aspect of the broken window and concludes, at the end of listening to all legal arguments, that the window was broken from inside the room.
http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...ttachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf pp 38-73
Chris_Halkides
Member
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 608
- Reaction score
- 12
I respectfully but strongly disagree with your characterization of these events. Amanda had said that she was at Raffaele's flat prior to her interrogation on the night of 5-6 November (this is confirmed in letter to her lawyer, but I don't think that anyone has claimed that Amanda said otherwise in the period between 2 and 4 November). As of 7 November she returned to that version of events. What had happened in between? An interrogation in which even the interpreter suggested that she had blocked out the memory. My view is when the police ask you to imagine what happened, you need to shut up immediately because you have been talking too long already. I seem to recall one or two cases in Ada, OK where something not entirely different happened, but the details have slipped away from me.
Drizin and Leo wrote, "Regretfully, most interrogation training manuals—including the widely used and influential manual by Fred Inbau, John Reid, Joseph Buckley, and Brian Jayne148— give no thought to how the methods they advocate communicate psychologically coercive messages and sometimes lead the innocent to confess. Instead, they assume, in the face of empirical evidence, that their methods will produce only voluntary confessions from the guilty and dismiss the well-established social science research on interrogation- induced false confession by mischaracterizing the authors of leadings studies as “opponents” or “critics” of interrogation.149"
Knox didn't make a false confession, so all related materials do not apply. Knox lied to police and told an elaborate, detailed story about Patrick murdering Meredith.
Witness statements are not normally video taped, and Knox was a witness when she told police that Patrick was a murderer.
I think that it is important to point out that when Knox lied to police about Patrick, she was not under any duress. In fact, she voluntarily went to the police station, even though she was not asked to be there. While she was there, she chose to speak with police. During that conversation, she introduced Patrick's name to police and proceeded to tell an elaborate lie about his involvement in the murder of Meredith.
She voluntarily wrote a letter on November 6 where she stated that she stood behind her statements about Patrick. On November 7, she again confirmed her statements about Patrick.
She voluntarily wrote a letter on November 6 where she stated that she stood behind her statements about Patrick. On November 7, she again confirmed her statements about Patrick.
- Status