Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL* #2

[Linda7NJ]

How often has a false confession been extracted from an intelligent, well-educated woman in one hour and fifteen minutes, from beginning of extraction to signed statement?

I'm gonna guess.... Ummm

NEVER!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[sherlockh]

The evidence actually supports Knox's alibi. An eyewitness placed her ad Raffaele at his place at about 8:45 pm. Detailed analysis of Raffaele's computer shows the movie Amalie being manually closed at 9:10 pm and a 24 minute anime short being started at 9:26 pm. The screensaver log shows intermittent activity all during that night. The longest time the screensaver kicked in was for 6 minutes. At 6:22 am, the screensaver kicked in and operated until mid day.

Meredith returned home a few minutes after 9 pm that night and was attacked by Rudy Geude almost immediately. At a time when Amanda and Raffaele were a half kilometer away.

A movie stops all by itself. No manual interaction needed. Aren't you curious that after both of them wrote books neither of them have brought up this mysterious 24 minute anime? No judge has ever accepted this 'evidence'. I always have to laugh about the screensaver theory. So despite their own claims of sleeping, talking and having sex in the bedroom, he was on the computer? No matter what they claim themselves? You realize this makes both of them liars right? Or was it just 6 minutes sex?

 

[Nova]

That's probably better than my attempts to communicate with the landscapers by putting an "a" or an "o" at the end of English words while waving my hands and pointing.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Probably so. My biggest problem is vocabulary: I've read DON QUIXOTE in Spanish (no easy feat), but Cervantes says nothing about pool filters!

Any interrogation over a period of time is eventually going to become aggressive. (Since we have conflicting testimony, I'll set aside the alleged "head slap", though it wouldn't surprise me.)

Whether a single translator could even keep up with a team of interrogators speaking Italian is doubtful. Whether that translator could do so in a way that made sense to AK is highly unlikely.

 

[Nova]

What evidence? Her behavior after the murder, and the testimonies of the people present during her questioning don't indicate any duress whatsoever. Only Knox herself claims that 'she imagined they wanted her to imagine something'.

The testimony of the interpreter, Anna Donnino, that was present when Knox threw out her false confession was recently translated into English and gives an exact account of what happened. She arrived at 12:30am and the false confession was written down at 1:45am. First Knox was informed that Sollecito no longer supported her alibi, then very suddenly when the text message is shown Knox changes her behavior.
<modsnip>
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Anna_Donnino's_Testimony_(English)

Yes, Knox was a non-Italian speaker alone in a foreign country. And she was barely out of her teens.

When her one remaining friend was said to turn on her, she panicked and tried to curry favor with her interrogators by agreeing with them.

We have hundreds of such examples in THIS country with all-English speakers, much less a young woman in a country where she wasn't fluent in the language.

 

[otto]

Yes, Knox was a non-Italian speaker alone in a foreign country. And she was barely out of her teens.

When her one remaining friend was said to turn on her, she panicked and tried to curry favor with her interrogators by agreeing with them.

We have hundreds of such examples in THIS country with all-English speakers, much less a young woman in a country where she wasn't fluent in the language.

bbm

Would you happen to have the name of one of the examples where an educated adult gave a false confession, in writing, in one hour and fifteen minutes?

 

[Nova]

IMO There seem to be a lot of parallels with the following cases:



http://iilab.utep.edu/reprints/Sci.Am.Mind_6.01.05.pdf

The Norfolk Four- who not only confessed but pointed the finger at several other innocent men who in turn confessed....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Norfolk-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

warning: graphic crime scene photos

http://video.pbs.org/video/1637166286/

Michael Krowe

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/coerced_confessions/6.html

Just a small quibble: AK never actually confessed. She was told by her interrogators that they KNEW Lumumba had been involved and, under duress, she agreed.

It's a common interrogation technique: "we already know so you might as well agree; then we'll let you go home". Lots of people decide that accusing a guilty (per LE) party is a white lie under that pressure and those circumstances.

Thanks for the research, BTW. There is so much research at this point, I don't know why anyone--poster or juror--accepts any confession without a good deal of corroborating evidence. I know I wouldn't.

 

[Nova]

Or, on the other hand, it could be that her changing stories were because she was/is guilty and thus feeling pressure because of her fear of being caught, she was also getting her stories mixed up and throwing things around to see whatever stuck. Regarding the interrogation, we will never know because we can never know what was going on in her head.

Just like you say how can I know because I have never endured an antagonistic questioning through a third party, I can say how you know what goes on in the head of a guilty person under questioning? And have you ever been guilty of a crime and then questioned about that crime? Can you understand my point of view...that one can reason that that would be a stressful and pressure-filled interrogation, just as you can reason that being interrogated in a foreign country would be stressful and pressure-filled.

I have not, but there is copious research on the subject. Harmony just posted several shocking examples. You can find numerous more, plus studies and statistics in earlier posts.

I'm paraphrasing but the numbers are something like 1/3 of convicts exonerated by the Innocence Project were falsely convicted on the basis of coerced confessions. Such errors are NOT rare!

 

[Nova]

Knox is anything but innocent.

I was always taught not to falsely blame others to escape consequences. But that's exactly what she did. IMO
I was also taught an apology and sincere regret not only consists of mere words but actions. She doesn't even have remorse for what she did to an innocent man! She's not attempted in any way shape or form tried to make amends.

She's the last person IMO that gets to play the victim card.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I'm not excusing AK, but we know the idea that Lumumba was involved originated with Perugia LE.

Why are you and others so hard on a young, non-professional, but seemingly willing to give a pass to professionals who should know better?

 

[Nova]

That all fine well and good. I understand that... Im talking about her behavior afterwards right up through until today.

That not the point of my post. She didn't care! She isn't sorry! She didn't attempt to make amends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Her trial is still ongoing. Surely you know her attorneys are advising her against making statements of admission until her own case is resolved.

 

[Nova]

We also know that she voluntarily went to the police station, that she wasn't questioned until after 11 PM. Presumably she couldn't give any answers because apparently she didn't speak Italian. At 12:30 she was finally able to understand the questions with the aid of a translator and an hour later, with everything being said twice (once in Italian and once in English), she provided a signed statement in English implicating Patrick. I fail to understand how an intelligent, educated woman could be coerced into providing a detailed lie in just over an hour.

The fact that you "fail to understand" it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. You've been given countless examples and statistics.

I dare say coerced testimony is far more common than murder conspiracies between college students who have only known each other for a week. Perhaps you'd like to present some statistics on the frequency of the latter?

 

[Nova]

How often has a false confession been extracted from an intelligent, well-educated woman in one hour and fifteen minutes, from beginning of extraction to signed statement?

1. That 75 minutes was only the latest interrogation of many.

2. She had just been told that her only friend in Italy had turned on her.

3. She was depending on one translator to translate the questions of a team of interrogators.

You know all this. You simply choose to ignore it.

 

[otto]

I'm not excusing AK, but we know the idea that Lumumba was involved originated with Perugia LE.

Why are you and others so hard on a young, non-professional, but seemingly willing to give a pass to professionals who should know better?

Knox introduced Patrick to the conversation with police.

http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...tachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf; pp 388-9

 

[Nova]

bbm

Would you happen to have the name of one of the examples where an educated adult gave a false confession, in writing, in one hour and fifteen minutes?

AK's interrogation continued on and off for what--four days? The 75 minutes you isolate was merely the last period.

And it doesn't count the time she spent cooling her heels (and stretching! Horrors!) in the police department.

 

[otto]

The fact that you "fail to understand" it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. You've been given countless examples and statistics.

I dare say coerced testimony is far more common than murder conspiracies between college students who have only known each other for a week. Perhaps you'd like to present some statistics on the frequency of the latter?

Please provide the name of any one of the "hundreds of examples" of false confessions where an educated adult provided a written false accusation after one hour and fifteen minutes of questioning ... just one example will suffice.

 

[Nova]

Knox introduced Patrick to the conversation with police.

http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...tachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf; pp 388-9

Your link doesn't work for me and your claim contradicts everything we have heard about LE's misunderstanding of the text from PL to AK.

Make no mistake: I know AK was wrong to implicate PL. I'm just saying her actions weren't uncommon under the circumstances.

And after all, PL knew the victim, AK had been at Raffaele's that night. For all she knew the police were right and PL was the killer!

She still shouldn't have offered a confirmation, but she didn't pull PL's name out of a hat.

 

[otto]

1. That 75 minutes was only the latest interrogation of many.

2. She had just been told that her only friend in Italy had turned on her.

3. She was depending on one translator to translate the questions of a team of interrogators.

You know all this. You simply choose to ignore it.

Everyone that had a relationship to Meredith was repeatedly questioned over several days. That is neither here nor there. On the night that Knox introduced Patrick's name and accused him of murder, she was not required to go to the police station, but chose to go there with Sollecito. Clearly she had no objection to being there.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting with the "only friend in Italy had turned on her." Do you mean that Patrick was not her friend? She certainly turned on him. What about the downstairs hook-up a week or two before the murder? Was he not her friend? Laura? Filomina? It seems that she had many friends.

How many translators does it take to translate one question at a time? Courtrooms seem to manage quite well with one.

 

[otto]

Your link doesn't work for me and your claim contradicts everything we have heard about LE's misunderstanding of the text from PL to AK.

Make no mistake: I know AK was wrong to implicate PL. I'm just saying her actions weren't uncommon under the circumstances.

And after all, PL knew the victim, AK had been at Raffaele's that night. For all she knew the police were right and PL was the killer!

She still shouldn't have offered a confirmation, but she didn't pull PL's name out of a hat.

Try the link without the semicolon at the end

http://www.westseattleherald.com/si...ttachments/MasseiReportEnglishTranslation.pdf

Is it actually common for educated adults to falsely accuse innocent people of murder after an hour and fifteen minutes? I've never heard that before. Would you happen to have a link?

Knox didn't pull Patrick's name out of a hat, but she most definitely introduced his name to police and then accused him of murder. She said that she met him near the basketball court, he murdered Meredith, she heard Meredith scream ... it's a very big story that she tells. If we swap out Patrick and insert Guede, we might have the truth.

 

[aa9511]

This isn't a complicated case when it comes to knowing what happened to Meredith and who did it, but because the prosecutor was a lunatic and delusional fantasist assisted by keystone cops & kangaroo courts, it still remains this crazy absurd conspiracy theory after 6 years even though all the "evidence" was debunked long ago. People still insist for some bizarre reason on believing two students dating a week teamed up somewhere with an unemployed criminal & burglar one of them didn't even know to commit a murder/rape on a friend in under an hour after watching a chick flick for no plausible reason whatsoever and then if it's not stupid enough, we're suppose to believe the students "cleaned & staged" the crime scene to look like the very MO of the burglar after he left and went out dancing. Who in their right mind would fall for such baloney?

Guede broke into the cottage via the window and was sitting on the toilet when Meredith walked in the door. He attacked her within minutes as she settled into her room for the evening and then raped her as she lay dying. He stole her cash, keys, phones and credit cards and then went dancing to establish an alibi and then fled to Germany. That's what the evidence proves and what common sense says. It's that simple (and horrible).

Well based on your theory of simple crimes, all savage murders are done by random people.

I'm sure if there were no pictures Jodi Arias left implicating her of the crime, or her palmprint on the wall, no one would have also believed that she could have done something so horrible. We would have believed that some random person came and brutally murdered Travis in a most horrific manner.

And yet in her case, we KNOW that she did it.

My point is that we shouldn't go with our gut instinct that a pretty little young thing like Amanda could not have done something so horrible. Just like some are saying we shouldn't go with a gut instinct that she did do it. It goes both ways. We should just look at the evidence and go from there.

I learned from Jodi Arias case NEVER to judge based on appearances or what we THINK a person is capable of, especially when said people are good actors/manipulators.

 

[aa9511]

The evidence actually supports Knox's alibi. An eyewitness placed her ad Raffaele at his place at about 8:45 pm. Detailed analysis of Raffaele's computer shows the movie Amalie being manually closed at 9:10 pm and a 24 minute anime short being started at 9:26 pm. The screensaver log shows intermittent activity all during that night. The longest time the screensaver kicked in was for 6 minutes. At 6:22 am, the screensaver kicked in and operated until mid day.

Meredith returned home a few minutes after 9 pm that night and was attacked by Rudy Geude almost immediately. At a time when Amanda and Raffaele were a half kilometer away.

Footwarrior, I believe the posts from Otto and Linda dispute this very well.

Also, I have trouble taking what is in Raffaelo or Amanda's appeals as fact. From the trials I've watched so far, it seems to be that the defense will put up an expert witness who will sometimes sit up there and quote from one obscure article claiming to support some aspect of the defendan't theory, and they say it with a straight face to the jury like as if the jury just isn't "getting" it. When in fact what they are saying is so far out there, but they want to make the jury believe that it's true.

For example, in Jodi Arias case where Dr. Samuels read from that one article about some kind of memory lapse - transient memory something or other. And what he had done was probably gone on Google and found ONE ARTICLE out of thousands which supported what the defense wanted.

It's like if you Google "the Earth is flat," you will probably find a conspiracy theory article which tries to prove it!! (I haven't actually googled that!). Nowadays, you can find stuff out there to "support" anything, no matter how far "out there" it is!

I'm sure that even though there is hard evidence about what time the computer was MANUALLY used, the defense was able to find some expert who found some way to get some other information out there to confuse things.

 

[aa9511]

Yes, Knox was a non-Italian speaker alone in a foreign country. And she was barely out of her teens.

When her one remaining friend was said to turn on her, she panicked and tried to curry favor with her interrogators by agreeing with them.

We have hundreds of such examples in THIS country with all-English speakers, much less a young woman in a country where she wasn't fluent in the language.

I'm sure most of those examples are of suspects of a certain color and gender, who the investigators racially profiled and thought it was ok to pressure them and probably used vulgur language and physical force. That is REAL pressure.

I have a VERY hard time believing this was the type of pressure Amanda Knox was facing.