Quite true. I think it's unfortunate that the parents chose to try the case in the media. On both sides of the pond, they attempted to propogate false information about Italian police. On one side, it was okay, on the other, it was not. If they had stayed out of it, and left the case in the courts, they wouldn't have his problem. Although they face a possible jail sentence of 3 years, it's more likely they will be fined if found guilty. Since they can afford a PR firm, they can probably afford a fine.
Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #7
- Thread starter Salem
- Start date
- Status
Quite true. I think it's unfortunate that the parents chose to try the case in the media. On both sides of the pond, they attempted to propogate false information about Italian police. On one side, it was okay, on the other, it was not. If they had stayed out of it, and left the case in the courts, they wouldn't have his problem. Although they face a possible jail sentence of 3 years, it's more likely they will be fined if found guilty. Since they can afford a PR firm, they can probably afford a fine.
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
WOW how does one get interrogated for 54 hours, be at her bf's for the night, and retract a statement. Last i was aware of there is only 24 hours in a day
This sounds like extremely poor reporting
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
My thoughts
I KNOW THAT IT IS A FACT that the Italian Supreme Court RULED that her STATEMENT was INADMISSABLE as she did not have LEGAL REPRESENTATION
What I have personally stated and BELIEVE TO BE THE TRUTH is that Amanda Knox was interrogated over 40 hours over a 4 - 5 DAY TIME SPAN which is more than MOST OF US WORK IN A WEEK
This was backed up by testimony by her own expert in the trial
IT IS MY BELIEF that unless the prosecution provides copies of the interrogation, which by ITALIAN LAW THEY MUST DO, that NO ONE can state with any certainty whether this did or did not happen
Like Malkmus stated, we have been over all of these points in approx a week. Please refer to my post and the others
As per the testimony of which i presented above she TESTIFIED that she was more of a MEDIATOR
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125994&page=28
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
:welcome:
When i first heard about this case i wondered wow, how horrendous, what drives individuals to do these things. I feel that when a prosecutor charges someone there is a solid foundation. What surprised me was the "Cased Closed" statement made by GM to the world. It surprised me as there had been insufficient time for much of the forensics to come back from testing. Still though, I believed ILE must have something and still thought her guilty. However, when any prosecutor states "Cased Closed" to a worldwide audience right after an arrest I will dig very deep. Then I found out that forensics collected for the most part was collected MUCH LATER. Everyone I am sure has seen the photo of the washroom that appears to be blood all over the entire area when in fact it was a forensic tool used to detect blood etc. Many accepted that picture as it was pesented and this is only one example. If not trained can you blame them? It sure looked bad.
I rarely question a prosecutor or LE as I have a great respect for the tasks they are assigned. The emotions they deal with on a daily basis.
As I delved more into the case I became perplexed. I was looking for the evidence that in its totallity showed their guilt. I was trying to find the truth beyond the innuendo, the media hype, conflicting stories, and outright improbabilities. Thus I became a fence sitter. I believed her to be guilty, but did not see that it was beyond a reasonable doubt. By that time it was very apparent that in the Court of Public Opinion they were guilty, and stated they would be found guilty at that time prior to the trial.
It is very difficult for anyone to convince me of something that in my mind I had come to accept to "be the truth". Thus i waited for the trial. I thought for sure they would present that "smoking gun". That coined phrase that was used so often throughout this case. When i make a decision I can be "MY OWN WORSE ENEMY". In my mind i must doubly make sure that I am changing my opinion based on facts. Not bias. I did not change my mind overnight. This was a gradual process over time over which I am oft ribbed by friends, collegues, and family. They know for me to concede i MIGHT be wrong is huge.
I then went to NOT GUILY compared to innocent. I cant define any particular piece/lack of evidence or time that I had subconsciously changed my opinion. I weighed carefully the opinions of many, and tried to see what each individual was trying to say and the position they were coming from.
I believe that for many it is hard to get past all the media inconsistencies. I have sat here and watched her labeled with "antisocial personality disorder " not based on any direct medical interaction (where they have been able to physically/mentally examine her). In fact, to be brutally honest it was posts right here against her that served only to solidify my "Not Guilty" belief. They simply could not come up with anything substantial whether it was the DNA, the theories, and the list can go on. I was amazed at how the Motivational Document selectively picked out testimony to support conclusions and in fact make up conclusions that were not even presented
Its a journey that only you can make and only you can ultimately make a dermination.
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
Maybe the tabloid is MISTAKEN with there information
I assumed Knox and Sollecito were uninvolved in the crime for a very long time ... and it wasn't until sometime around August/Sept 2009 (roughly) that I became convinced that they were involved in the murder.
Interesting that some assumed guilt and while others assumed innocence, and both assumptions were changed during the course of the investigation. It was the trial proceedings that convinced me of guilt.
Interesting that some assumed guilt and while others assumed innocence, and both assumptions were changed during the course of the investigation. It was the trial proceedings that convinced me of guilt.
I just realized this distinction: "that Amanda had not been assisted by an interpreter." This is quite different from not having access to an interpreter, having a professionally designated interpreter, or having an interpreter some of the time. The libel charge relates to not being assisted by an interpreter. Knox had an interpreter from 12:30 onward (surely she didn't confess in less than an hour) so she was assisted by an interpreter. She made a statement one hour after the interpreter arrived (1:30/1:45), and the interpreter remained with her until 5:45 AM.
It took Amanda an hour or so, after the interpreter arrived, to tell the police enough for them to charge her. I suppose that means in that first hour they physically and verbally abused her, starved her, deprived her of liquids and deprived her of an interpreter. After that, she was assisted by an interpreter, and presumably her starvation and thirst was addressed as well ... seems to me she ate around 10 PM Nov 5 ... couldn't have been starving too much by 1:30/1:45 AM Nov 6. Maybe she was first deprived of an interpreter, and later starved, perhaps 4 AM ... when most people's body's are in sleep, not eat, mode.
It took Amanda an hour or so, after the interpreter arrived, to tell the police enough for them to charge her. I suppose that means in that first hour they physically and verbally abused her, starved her, deprived her of liquids and deprived her of an interpreter. After that, she was assisted by an interpreter, and presumably her starvation and thirst was addressed as well ... seems to me she ate around 10 PM Nov 5 ... couldn't have been starving too much by 1:30/1:45 AM Nov 6. Maybe she was first deprived of an interpreter, and later starved, perhaps 4 AM ... when most people's body's are in sleep, not eat, mode.
One hour. It took Amanda one hour with an interpreter, from 12:30 when the interpreter arrived to 1:30, and she was ready to make a declaration. That's an awfully short time for someone to be coerced.
Apparently she didn't really speak Italian, so she couldn't have confessed to anything before the interpreter arrived.
After the interpreter arrived, Amanda could have reported that she was suffering abuse and needed protection from the police. I haven't heard any testimony to that effect.
How is it possible that from first being able to communicate with Italian police to declaration ... it was only an hour.
Funny when you think about it ... she was coerced, and falls into the category of the unfortunate false accuser; those who are tormented until they repeat what the police have told them to say. In record speed, Knox is reduced to the pitfalls of a man with the mental ability of a 7 year old ... it took him 9 hours to capitulate and then he misspelled his name (a clever move), it took Knox one hour. That suggests there was a different reason than coercion.
Apparently she didn't really speak Italian, so she couldn't have confessed to anything before the interpreter arrived.
After the interpreter arrived, Amanda could have reported that she was suffering abuse and needed protection from the police. I haven't heard any testimony to that effect.
How is it possible that from first being able to communicate with Italian police to declaration ... it was only an hour.
Funny when you think about it ... she was coerced, and falls into the category of the unfortunate false accuser; those who are tormented until they repeat what the police have told them to say. In record speed, Knox is reduced to the pitfalls of a man with the mental ability of a 7 year old ... it took him 9 hours to capitulate and then he misspelled his name (a clever move), it took Knox one hour. That suggests there was a different reason than coercion.
missyjane77
Inactive
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2009
- Messages
- 472
- Reaction score
- 0
We don't know that the abuse is or isn't true. There is no actual recording of the interrogation. Why automatically assume Amanda is the one lying? Because it is assumed she lied other times? There are two sides to every story...and then there is the truth.....
And how sad for Meredith such a dignified young woman with so much to offer the world.
IMO
Barbie Nadeau, author of Angel Face, comments on film
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-15/review-of-lifetimes-amanda-knox-movie/
" Lifetime also focuses a fair amount of attention on Meredith, painting a portrait of a bright and beautiful young woman who was far more serious than her American roommate, but who had an infectious sense of humor and enviable charm. That careful attention to her charisma makes her murder all the more tragic"
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-15/review-of-lifetimes-amanda-knox-movie/
" Lifetime also focuses a fair amount of attention on Meredith, painting a portrait of a bright and beautiful young woman who was far more serious than her American roommate, but who had an infectious sense of humor and enviable charm. That careful attention to her charisma makes her murder all the more tragic"
I can be pretty sure that Amanda Knox was not starved, or dying of thirst, before she confessed. I am also 100% certain that she was assisted by an interpreter. The physical abuse appears to be what she perceived to be a cuff on the head, but she also said people were moving around the room ... and given Knox's tendency to make things up, it's quite possible someone brushed against Knox and she decided it was physical abuse. As for yelling, maybe they did yell at her ... if that were happening, she wouldn have had little opportunity to speak - something that was to her advantage.
Regardless of whether this occurred, one hour is not long enough for Knox to be coerced to confess, so it's very likely she falsely accused an innocent man for different reasons.
missyjane77
Inactive
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2009
- Messages
- 472
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe...maybe not. We weren't there. There is no recording. There is no video tape. The only people who are 100% sure what really happened are the people who were in that room.
She had pizza with Raffaele at 10 PM. She was free to do as she pleased until 11:30. Could she really have been deprived of food and drink when she confessed at 1:30 in the morning? I don't have to be anywhere but at my computer to figure out that no one is starved to the point of coercion after 2 hours.
dgfred
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 4,560
- Reaction score
- 8,835
Why should this part be any different than what is done for EVERY piece of evidence against AK/RS?
Quite true, but this is one of those easy situations that can be made clear with little effort. Either she was assisted by an interpreter, or she wasn't.
Malkmus offered this (no link though) as the original context for the comments:
"On November 6, five days after Meredith’s murder, Knox was interrogated by police for nine hours until she signed a statement at 5.54am. Her family says that despite her good marks at university, Knox was not fluent in Italian, but no professional interpreter was present, only a police officer who could speak English and who was not always there. She was given no food and no water for all the nine hours. “I’ve never been so scared in my life,” Knox told Deanna later. Curt says: “Amanda was abused physically and verbally. She told us she was hit in the back of the head by a police officer with an open hand, at least twice. The police told her, ‘If you ask for a lawyer, things will get worse for you’ and ‘If you don’t give us some explanation for what happened, you’re going to go to jail for a very long time.’” Edda adds tearfully: “She was told she wouldn’t ever see her family again, and her family is everything to her.” Knox gave them a description of the officer who allegedly struck her, but it cannot be published for legal reasons. The Perugia police have denied striking her and have said she understood what she was signing."
Knox was not fluent in Italian, so she would not have been able to provide a statement without the assistance of an interpreter. Apparently the interpreter did a fine job of interpreting, as Knox reiterated her earlier declarations in her voluntary "gift" statement.
It's unbelievable that the family claims that Amanda was so abused, starved, etc. in the period of one hour, during which she was able to communicate with police, that she was forced to accuse Patrick. Did they not realize that eventually it would come out that Knox confessed in an hour, and that this starvation was a mere 3 hours after Knox ate a pizza?
Nova
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 19,648
- Reaction score
- 4,643
I still say no murderer voluntarily goes to hang out--yet again--at the police station while her co-conspirator is interrogated.
But setting that mystery aside, otto, the time of 1:30 a.m. is very important to you and I see you now have your "2 hours" whittled down to 1.
My question is what transcript or recording you are using to know exactly what AK said at that moment?
But setting that mystery aside, otto, the time of 1:30 a.m. is very important to you and I see you now have your "2 hours" whittled down to 1.
My question is what transcript or recording you are using to know exactly what AK said at that moment?
Allusonz
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2010
- Messages
- 4,679
- Reaction score
- 17
Then this means her interrogation started at 9pm thus it would be 9pm to 5:54 am
So much for the hour theory
Are you asking what transcript I'm using to know that Knox accused Patrick?
Knox was eating pizza until 10, arrived at the police station at about 10:30 with Raffaele, flipped cartwheels and fooled around for an hour, and was then asked to answer some questions at 11:30. At 1:45, her declaration had been was complete.
- Status