Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #11

[flourish]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002516/


"People with this syndrome have difficulty interacting socially, repeat behaviors, and often are clumsy."
" There is no delay in their cognitive development, ability to take care of themselves, or curiosity about their environment."
"Their body language may be off."
"They have problems with eye contact, facial expressions, body postures, or gestures (nonverbal communication)."
"Are unable to respond emotionally in normal social interactions"

Right, and I had posted a link to an article last night that said it is often undiagnosed in girls (i.e., doctors may miss symptoms in girls, as they are more pronounced in boys)

Okay, so...maybe this is more of a big deal to me because I have a lot of education and experience in this area. Re: the above:

• "People with this syndrome have difficulty interacting socially, repeat behaviors, and often are clumsy."

The "difficulty interacting socially" is debatable, here, but usually manifests as much more social ineptness than we've seen in AK, and often results in noticeable isolation. AK does not appear to have "repeat behaviors" as in flapping her hands, repeated, compulsive twitches/mannerisms, etc. And, considering her athletic background, I don't think she qualifies as clumsy.

• " There is no delay in their cognitive development, ability to take care of themselves, or curiosity about their environment."

This just describes how autism differs from other disabilities, primarily developmental disabilities...typically developing children don't have delays in their cognitive development, self-care abilities, or curiosity, so I'm not really sure how this would apply to AK.

• "Their body language may be off."

From the very limited occasions that I've seen AK's body language, she gestures when she speaks, but nothing struck me as unusual, or "off."

• "They have problems with eye contact, facial expressions, body postures, or gestures (nonverbal communication)."

It's possible that AK has difficulty reading social cues/nonverbal communication, but that alone does not an Asperger's diagnosis make.

• "Are unable to respond emotionally in normal social interactions"

AK may present with "odd" or "absent" responses in normal social interactions. Many people have commented on her "oddness" and seeming inability to gauge situations and react in a "typical" manner.

From the diagnostic criteria:

]The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.[/QUOTE

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/hcp-dsm.html

For more information on the diagnostic and screening tools typically used for investigating autism spectrum disorders, this has a lot of great information:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/hcp-screening.html

Again, I must stress that we do not have enough information about AK to say that she Asperger's....these diagnoses are complicated, require screenings and tests and the ruling out of other possible causes of symptoms. A certain amount of specific criteria and presented symptoms must be met....for example:

Diagnostic Criteria for 299.80 Asperger's Disorder

1. Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

2. marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction.
3. a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)
4. lack of social or emotional reciprocity

AK would have to have "qualitative impairment" in at least TWO of the areas above, AND:

1. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:

1. encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity of focus

2. apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals

3. stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)

4. persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

AND:

The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.

So, while I appreciate and understand how people would want to look at that as an explanation for AK's "oddness," it really is highly unlikely that she indeed has Asperger's or any autism spectrum disorder.

 

[sherlockh]

Crystal clear! And I for one really hadn't thought much about this before. For one thing, I didn't realize the break-in wasn't discovered until AK returned with RS. That's a lot less suspicious than the pro-guilters make the morning sound.

FWIW the bidets I've seen are fairly shallow; really rather like drinking fountains but with the water spouts in the center. I think finding feces in a bidet would definitely be a sign of something wrong.

As for the design of toilet AK mentions, I can't picture it.

Bottom line, however, the story of the first trip back to the apartment really doesn't serve any purpose (assuming AK staged the burglary). And why not leave FR's door open if you wanted to draw attention to a break in?

If the break-in was discovered when AK returned with RS then who opened Filomena's door in the meantime?

This is Raffaele Sollecito’s version of next few moments: “She unlocked the door and I went in. I noticed that Filomena’s door was open. There was glass on the floor and the room was a mess.

http://www.corriere.it/english/articoli/2007/11_Novembre/07/perudia_murder.shtml

 

[SMK]

Who was going to make the discovery while they were on their trip? It was still a holiday. They waited till noon and nobody had come to the cottage. Why go on a day trip, come back and find that nobody has come home yet?

OK, when was everyone expected to return? (Filomina, Laura, the boys downstairs)? Wouldn't someone have come back in the afternoon or early evening?

 

[flourish]

Looking at AK's testimony, she MIGHT have meant the bidet or gotten it wrong herself, but look at how she explains what toilet the poo was in:

Then I went into the other bathroom to dry my hair, because there was no hair
dryer in my bathroom. So I went there, I took the hair dryer, I was drying my
hair, and then when I put the hair dryer back, I saw that in the toilet,
which was that kind of toilet that isn't really flat, it's like this, kind
of ew, that there were faeces on that upper part, and that for me was the
strangest thing of all. In fact [swallowing], of all the things I saw, in the
bathroom of Laura and Filomena who are very clean people, for me it was strange,
and I thought, "What? What could this be?" Okay, so I didn't know what to
think, but it was strange. Then I took this mop that was near my room that was
in a closet thing near my room, and I went to Raffaele's house, locking the door
behind me, because all the time I was doing these things, nobody had come back
to the house.

Same link as the other link I used to post her other testimony.

Any guesses as to if she trying trying to describe the bidet? I take for granted that she KNOWS what a regular toilet is, hence there wouldn't be a need to say more than toilet, right?

Here, I'd like to clarify that per her testimony, she did not leave the door wide open when she took a shower. She closed it, but didn't lock it in case another roommate had only gone outside for a brief time.

From what I understand, European toilets don't always look like the ones in the States. I did a google search for "European toilets" and checked out the images...there's a wider variety than I would have imagined...I can't post some of the pics, though, because I'm at work and IT has some stuff blocked...but...ya'll know how to google.

Speaking of that...the other week ago, someone mentioned that they didn't understand why AK would go back to her house to take a shower instead of taking one at RS's. After a quick google search, I found that it turns out European showers aren't always the same as the ones in the States, so perhaps the one at the cottage was more like what she was used to and the one at RS's was more of the "unusual" (to AK) European styles.

eta: not to mention that she maybe wanted to get a change of clothes, etc...her makeup and hair stuff was there....also, it occurred to me that she might not have wanted to poo at RS's house....that's something that as a young woman I always freaked out about early in relationships...(as if no one else ever poos or something LOL)

Ah the crazy things you learn about on WS

 

[sherlockh]

OK, when was everyone expected to return? (Filomina, Laura, the boys downstairs)? Wouldn't someone have come back in the afternoon or early evening?

I have no idea, but I guess they could have stayed away if they really had wanted to.

 

[wasnt_me]

Just wanted to point out that she states in this testimony she did lock the door

I'm sorry, Allusonz, it doesn't seem that I copied the part I was talking about regarding closing the door, but not locking it.

Anyway, I wanted to go see Gubbio.
So, I left his house, and when I got near my house, I saw that the door was
open. And I thought, strange, because usually we had to lock that door,
but I thought, if someone didn't close it properly, obviously it would open.
I thought maybe someone had gone out very quickly, or just downstairs to get
something, or to take out the trash, or something. When I went in, I
called out "Is anybody there?" and no one answered, so I closed the door, but
I didn't lock it, because I thought maybe someone would come, maybe they had just
gone out to get cigarettes or whatever.

This is the part where she FIRST enters the house. People had said she'd left the door wide open while showering, but according to this, she came in and closed it, but not locked it. On the way out, per above, she closed AND locked it.

Did I clear that up about what I meant? Thanks!

 

[SMK]

I was just reading a piece that was posted on TJFMK forum on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - entitled, "Fine-Tuning Of A Previous Post On Motive In The Meredith Kercher Case And Its Addressing By Massei". The author believes Massei did not get the motive right, and he takes pains to show what he believes it was. But what got me: His assertion that AK had been hit in the nose the night of the murder, and that copious blood was found in the bathroom which was from AK but could not have been menstrual or from her ear pierceings. Very odd. I find the scenario far-fetched, and the blood thing I was unaware of. Linked here. http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

 

[wasnt_me]

Respectively Snipped and BBM

One thing that has always perplexed me is why did anyone have to close this door? We know it was very windy that evening could this door simply have slammed shut as the window was open?

That's possible, I suppose. Thanks for offering another theory instead of picking the one I had apart. I really appreciate it.

 

[Nova]

...So, while I appreciate and understand how people would want to look at that as an explanation for AK's "oddness," it really is highly unlikely that she indeed has Asperger's or any autism spectrum disorder.

I realize that everyone involved knows this is just an idle conversation and nobody can diagnose Asberger's from a few TV appearances and trial testimony.

But I'd like to add that in addition to flourish's objections, there is such a thing as telegeneity and the lack thereof. Some people just don't come across as "comfortable" (i.e., "normal") on TV. Some people have speech patterns that seem odd in print. (I was horrified the first time a student taped one of my lectures and transcribed it verbatim for me!)

As jjenny, I believe, pointed out, AK moved to Italy, got herself enrolled in school, got a job, made friends, acquired a boyfriend, etc. Even the supposed frictions with her flatmates seem exaggerated (or invented in hindsight after AK was accused of murder); after all, AK was on the phone with FR when she (AK) was called in for the interrogation that produced her false statements. She also seems have close and warm relationships with her family members.

Amanda Knox may be rather free-spirited and even a little flaky, she may seem immature in ways and even self-involved; but IMO she demonstrates more social confidence than most kids her age. She hardly seems to have an "attachment" disorder.

I think some of the "oddness" attributed to her would be attributed to any of us under the spotlight of worldwide media coverage. And in fact if one looks at other cases where defendants were eventually exonerated, almost all of them were accused of "odd" behavior at some point or another.

 

[wasnt_me]

Crystal clear! And I for one really hadn't thought much about this before. For one thing, I didn't realize the break-in wasn't discovered until AK returned with RS. That's a lot less suspicious than the pro-guilters make the morning sound.

FWIW the bidets I've seen are fairly shallow; really rather like drinking fountains but with the water spouts in the center. I think finding feces in a bidet would definitely be a sign of something wrong.

As for the design of toilet AK mentions, I can't picture it.

Bottom line, however, the story of the first trip back to the apartment really doesn't serve any purpose (assuming AK staged the burglary). And why not leave FR's door open if you wanted to draw attention to a break in?

exactly, but you ought to be scared, because now you're thinking like me! LOL

Yeah, I was hoping you'd chime in on the toilet description, but I guess neither one of us can picture it.

What was bothering me was that AK had to pass FR's room to go to her room and to the bathroom. And I imagined that FR's door would be open because the burglar just left it that way. That's why I couldn't understand how she didn't know right away what was off. But if the door was closed, as she stated in her testimony, I see no reason for her to just look in FR's room. Know what I mean? But then FR gets AK worried, and it kind of seemed that AK wasn't too interested in going back to check for missing items, according to the testimony.

If I'm right, I don't blame her. i'd be scared to go back if my roommate started talking like that. It seemed normal for AK to brush it off, saying "Well, the TV's there. My laptop is there. It's fine." and maybe (guessing) FR is concerned about her own laptop (obviously from her testimony of knowing how she left it sitting), so she urged AK to go back and look.

Like I said, AK doesn't seem very "clued" in. That's probably why RS was protective of her. She's probably easily led around and does what other people suggest. Maybe she is flighty like this "amelie" or whatever, but FR is more responsible and knows this has to be investigated.

I imagine a mom asking a teenager what they found at the house when I imagine FR talking to AK about it. Does that make sense?

 

[Nova]

If the break-in was discovered when AK returned with RS then who opened Filomena's door in the meantime?



http://www.corriere.it/english/articoli/2007/11_Novembre/07/perudia_murder.shtml

Good question. So either AK or RS misremembers the position of FR's door.

And that is suspicious because...? What does either gain from lying about it?

The first time AK went home that morning, she found some things seemed odd but not really alarming. Maybe FR's door was open and AK wasn't paying attention. (In my house, we joke all the time about my partner "hiding things in plain sight." Leaving something out really is the best way to make it invisible to me.)

By the time she returned with RS, he had suggested to her that they should be concerned and both were looking for what was out of place. Maybe AK opened FR's door and RS forgot, or maybe they both just looked into the room for the first time.

If we're going to convict people over discrepancies such as this one, then we might as well all line up for the needle.

 

[wasnt_me]

From what I understand, European toilets don't always look like the ones in the States. I did a google search for "European toilets" and checked out the images...there's a wider variety than I would have imagined...I can't post some of the pics, though, because I'm at work and IT has some stuff blocked...but...ya'll know how to google.

Speaking of that...the other week ago, someone mentioned that they didn't understand why AK would go back to her house to take a shower instead of taking one at RS's. After a quick google search, I found that it turns out European showers aren't always the same as the ones in the States, so perhaps the one at the cottage was more like what she was used to and the one at RS's was more of the "unusual" (to AK) European styles.

eta: not to mention that she maybe wanted to get a change of clothes, etc...her makeup and hair stuff was there....also, it occurred to me that she might not have wanted to poo at RS's house....that's something that as a young woman I always freaked out about early in relationships...(as if no one else ever poos or something LOL)

Ah the crazy things you learn about on WS

Very estute and EXCELLENT sleuthing!

I hadn't thought about the poo thing, but you're right. We don't even want to break wind in front of each other early on. It's funny how poo is a recurring theme.

 

[wasnt_me]

Good question. So either AK or RS misremembers the position of FR's door.

And that is suspicious because...? What does either gain from lying about it?

The first time AK went home that morning, she found some things seemed odd but not really alarming. Maybe FR's door was open and AK wasn't paying attention. (In my house, we joke all the time about my partner "hiding things in plain sight." Leaving something out really is the best way to make it invisible to me.)

By the time she returned with RS, he had suggested to her that they should be concerned and both were looking for what was out of place. Maybe AK opened FR's door and RS forgot, or maybe they both just looked into the room for the first time.

If we're going to convict people over discrepancies such as this one, then we might as well all line up for the needle.

After reading RS's diary about how much he DOES NOT remember about stuff, I'm going with AK's version.

Maybe seeing FR's room crystalized the moment for him and he doesnt recall the door being opened first. I do acknowledge they have said different things, but I agree, there's nothing to gain from the descrepency. I tend to believe her, because if she'd seen RF's room right away, she would have been scared out of her mind and things would have unfolded differently than she'd said.

UNLESS--there's that crazy chance that she and RG acted together and RS didn't have anything to do with it.

It's worth noting that AK had to be reminded in her testimony that she dried her hair. She started to skip ahead in the story, but the lawyer backed her up to that point. So it's possible that RS forgot about the door in his nervousness.

to the bathroom because I thought well, by now...then I put the mat back
where it was supposed to go, then I dried myself, put my earrings back,
brushed my teeth, then I went back into my room to put on new clothes, I took
-- no!

LG: You dried your hair--

AK: Then I went into the other bathroom to dry my hair, because there was no hair
dryer in my bathroom. So I went there, I took the hair dryer, I was drying my
hair, and then when I put the hair dryer back, I saw that in the toilet,

I believe she had to go in that bathroom for something, or else how discover the poo? the poo has no real evidentiary value, except to shape where we think RG was when MK entered. I don't think that staging the crime scene entails pointing out the poo that RG just "happened" to leave. But give me your theories. My point is, she forgot about the hair drier thing innocently it seems, so RS could have forgotten about the door. In the testimony, it seems she was recalling it all in her mind and remembered herself drying her hair right when the lawyer prompts her.

 

[Nova]

exactly, but you ought to be scared, because now you're thinking like me! LOL

Yeah, I was hoping you'd chime in on the toilet description, but I guess neither one of us can picture it.

What was bothering me was that AK had to pass FR's room to go to her room and to the bathroom. And I imagined that FR's door would be open because the burglar just left it that way. That's why I couldn't understand how she didn't know right away what was off. But if the door was closed, as she stated in her testimony, I see no reason for her to just look in FR's room. Know what I mean? But then FR gets AK worried, and it kind of seemed that AK wasn't too interested in going back to check for missing items, according to the testimony.

If I'm right, I don't blame her. i'd be scared to go back if my roommate started talking like that. It seemed normal for AK to brush it off, saying "Well, the TV's there. My laptop is there. It's fine." and maybe (guessing) FR is concerned about her own laptop (obviously from her testimony of knowing how she left it sitting), so she urged AK to go back and look.

Like I said, AK doesn't seem very "clued" in. That's probably why RS was protective of her. She's probably easily led around and does what other people suggest. Maybe she is flighty like this "amelie" or whatever, but FR is more responsible and knows this has to be investigated.

I imagine a mom asking a teenager what they found at the house when I imagine FR talking to AK about it. Does that make sense?

Yes. If in fact AK was reluctant to call police (and that isn't just another piece of slander invented by ILE or the press), then I think language was the reason. I've studied Spanish longer than AK had studied Italian (though I don't have the advantage of spending the past month speaking it most of the time), but I would be very intimidated if I had to call police in a Spanish-speaking country. I just don't have the skills. I would certainly find a native-speaking friend to help me--and not because I was scared of the burglar.

In fact, if AK seemed "not clued in," language may have played a part. If one is in a country where most of the conversations around one are unintelligible, then I think one might very well tend to live in one's own head and ignore the "babble" all around. I realize that defeats the purpose of living in a country where a foreign language is spoken, but I know from experience how exhausting it can be trying to understand a new language all the time.

(BTW, the last time I was in Europe was 10 years ago and I was in Bosnia and Croatia. I think the toilet tanks were higher than they are in the U.S., but I don't remember the bowls being different.)

 

[wasnt_me]

OK, when was everyone expected to return? (Filomina, Laura, the boys downstairs)? Wouldn't someone have come back in the afternoon or early evening?

I don't know, but from AK's retelling, it didn't even seem like she knew LM and FR wouldn't be there or that Laura had taken a trip.

Which lends to the fact that she isn't as close to her roommates as she claims or would like to be. OR that she was oblivious that they didn't like her, therefore, told her as little as possible. I say that because I read somewhere that AK had expected to move wherever LM and FR were moving after the crime. but then we hear all this about how the roomies didn't like her. Makes me think AK was unliked behind her back. Seriously. The one thing the other 3 had in common was that they were at least European, so all three could find AK's American quirks strange.

then I think I called Filomena, and she
explained to me that Laura was in Rome, and

Here it is retold from the Movtivation report. Notice there's no mention of AK closing the door when she entered the house, either. I put in blue the part where it seems AK has no idea that her roommates wouldn't be around.

Upon returning home, she noticed that the door was wide open. She thought someone had gone to take the trash out or gone to the floor below, closing the door behind them but not locking it. She asked loudly whether anyone was at home, but no one answered. The door to Meredith’s room was closed, and this meant she was sleeping. She undressed in her own room and took a shower in the bathroom, (the one) nearest to (both) her room and to Meredith’s. When she got out of the shower, she realised that on the little bath mat where she had placed her feet, there was blood and also, there were drops of blood on the sink and the faucet. She left the bathroom and went to get dressed in her own room. Then, she went in the other bathroom to dry her hair, where there was a blow dryer. It was at this time that she noticed feces in the toilet, which surprised her. She then took the mop and returned to Raffaele’s home, locking the door (on the way out.)
She told Raffaele what she had seen and he suggested that she call one of her friends. She then called Filomena Romanelli, who said that she had been out with her boyfriend and that Laura Mezzetti was also away, in Rome with her family. She then realised that the only one to have spent the night in Via della Pergola was Meredith, about whom, however, nothing was known. Filomena seemed worried, so Amanda
6 a statement or recollection made by someone who was there
66
told her that she would call Meredith, who would then call her back.

 

[Nova]

After reading RS's diary about how much he DOES NOT remember about stuff, I'm going with AK's version.

Maybe seeing FR's room crystalized the moment for him and he doesnt recall the door being opened first. I do acknowledge they have said different things, but I agree, there's nothing to gain from the descrepency. I tend to believe her, because if she'd seen RF's room right away, she would have been scared out of her mind and things would have unfolded differently than she'd said.

UNLESS--there's that crazy chance that she and RG acted together and RS didn't have anything to do with it.

Actually, I believe linguists and trial attorneys would say we should be suspicious if there were NOT discrepancies between AK's and RS' accounts.

There's even a famous and true case of a lawyer discrediting a witness by asking her to tell her story three times in a row. She did and each time was exactly the same. The lawyer argued that she was reciting a lie she had memorized rather than remembering the event.

That's one of the problems with these internet discussion boards: we all pore over every detail of testimony looking for discrepancies and collecting them to confirm our biases, when in fact discrepancies in remembering trivial details (and sometimes even larger details) are the norm, not the exception.

(There's a trial going on in my home town at the moment where the defendant's alleged accomplice testified the defendant shot the victim three times in the face at point blank range. But the coroner only found two bullets in the victim's head. Memories simply aren't exact.)

 

[wasnt_me]

Yes. If in fact AK was reluctant to call police (and that isn't just another piece of slander invented by ILE or the press), then I think language was the reason. I've studied Spanish longer than AK had studied Italian (though I don't have the advantage of spending the past month speaking it most of the time), but I would be very intimidated if I had to call police in a Spanish-speaking country. I just don't have the skills. I would certainly find a native-speaking friend to help me--and not because I was scared of the burglar.

In fact, if AK seemed "not clued in," language may have played a part. If one is in a country where most of the conversations around one are unintelligible, then I think one might very well tend to live in one's own head and ignore the "babble" all around. I realize that defeats the purpose of living in a country where a foreign language is spoken, but I know from experience how exhausting it can be trying to understand a new language all the time.
(BTW, the last time I was in Europe was 10 years ago and I was in Bosnia and Croatia. I think the toilet tanks were higher than they are in the U.S., but I don't remember the bowls being different.)

I completely agree, and she thought she ahd a friend in the english speaking Meredith, AND MAYBE SHE DID. but that still doesn't mean she wasn't talked about when she wasn't around, since the roommates knew of MK's dislike of AK's quirks. AK seems to be oblivious about that. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't. She might act like she didn't know because it's embarrassing to have the world know the personal things MK wasn't fond of.

A month might seem like a long time to be in a language, but really, I don't know what basis for it she had going over to Italy. If you guys don't know it, our regular schools are NOT that great, especially for teaching foreign languages. depending on the language Accreditations of the college she came from, I don't know how really prepared she was to be imersed in the culture. Maybe her school was the top of the USA in Italian. I don't know. Just pointing out that it might not have been.

 

[Nova]

I don't know, but from AK's retelling, it didn't even seem like she knew LM and FR wouldn't be there. Which lends to the fact that she isn't as close to her roommates as she claims or would like to be. OR that she was oblivious that they didn't like her, therefore, told her as little as possible. I say that because I read somewhere that AK had expected to move wherever LM and FR were moving after the crime. but then we hear all this about how the roomies didn't like her. Makes me think AK was unliked behind her back. Seriously. The one thing the other 3 had in common was that they were at least European, so all three could find AK's American quirks strange....

You may be right that AK wasn't as close as she thought, but I think it's just as likely that the attitudes of the roommates hardened toward her after ILE convinced them that AK was responsible for MK's death. After the body is discovered and until AK is accused, she seems to be on the phone with FR half the time. I'm sure they were sharing updates each was hearing from ILE, but they sound like reasonably good friends to me (given they'd known one another for a matter of weeks).

As for not knowing the flatmates' plans, it has been reported that AK spent most of her time at RS' apartment once she met him, so maybe she just wasn't around when the other girls made their plans.

 

[Nova]

I completely agree, and she thought she ahd a friend in the english speaking Meredith, AND MAYBE SHE DID. but that still doesn't mean she wasn't talked about when she wasn't around, since the roommates knew of MK's dislike of AK's quirks. AK seems to be oblivious about that. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't. She might act like she didn't know because it's embarrassing to have the world know the personal things MK wasn't fond of.

A month might seem like a long time to be in a language, but really, I don't know what basis for it she had going over to Italy. If you guys don't know it, our regular schools are NOT that great, especially for teaching foreign languages. depending on the language Accreditations of the college she came from, I don't know how really prepared she was to be imersed in the culture. Maybe her school was the top of the USA in Italian. I don't know. Just pointing out that it might not have been.

I think the immersion is a substitute for our lousy language programs; one doesn't necessarily speak a lot before arriving in the host country. That's why my students used to spend their junior years in Italy, not because they got such good preparation here at home.

As for friction with the roommates, have there ever been four girls who shared such a small space without some conflict over chores, use of space, entertaining male guests, etc.? Add to that whatever language barriers existed and I'm sure there were conflicts. (I'm not saying four boys wouldn't also have conflicts. They just tend to work them out in different ways.)

But I promise you ILE started exploiting whatever frictions existed from the moment AK was first suspected. Maybe even before they focused on AK, since exploiting such conflicts tends to produce unexpected information.

 

[wasnt_me]

Actually, I believe linguists and trial attorneys would say we should be suspicious if there were NOT discrepancies between AK's and RS' accounts.

There's even a famous and true case of a lawyer discrediting a witness by asking her to tell her story three times in a row. She did and each time was exactly the same. The lawyer argued that she was reciting a lie she had memorized rather than remembering the event.

That's one of the problems with these internet discussion boards: we all pore over every detail of testimony looking for discrepancies and collecting them to confirm our biases, when in fact discrepancies in remembering trivial details (and sometimes even larger details) are the norm, not the exception.

(There's a trial going on in my home town at the moment where the defendant's alleged accomplice testified the defendant shot the victim three times in the face at point blank range. But the coroner only found two bullets in the victim's head. Memories simply aren't exact.)

Yes, you are I are really clicking tonight! These are the talks I LOVE LOVE LOVE to have! You seem to have experienced fascinating stuff in your lifetime.

I was about to point out, but I wanted to look it up first, that I think the motivation report took part of that account about that night from AK's diary or letter to her friends and NOT from her actual testimony. If you go back up and read the part about how she called FR. Read her testimony and then read the MR report part I highlighted. You'll see, she doesn't say exactly what the report says. But I'd have to find that letter and confirm that it says what the MR report says. Follow me?

If I'm right, I wonder how much the MR has to do with testimony and what's presented in court, versus the judges and jury just going over evidence. Am I making sense?