Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #6

[Nova]

That 2 hour time period is not mine alone, and is in fact the length of time that Amanda was questioned on the night that she falsely accused an innocent man of murder.

I believe you, otto, and I have never questioned your knowledge of the schedule. My point was that you choose to single out those 2 hours as the only relevant ones, when we don't know how long and how often AK had talked to the police during the previous week.

Let's say for the sake of argument that those were the 2 hours when LE really "turned up the heat." That doesn't prove they hadn't been disputing AK's memories for days and that she wasn't already extremely frustrated (not to mention tired) when the 2 hours began.

After all, the 2 hour session began very late at night. Supporters of the verdicts always claim AK was so callous she must have been sleeping like a baby all week, but that is not what she told her friends in the famous email. There, IIRC, she talked about how disturbed she was that a murder had been committed in the room next door to hers and how it might have been she who was the victim. Under those circumstances--even if you think AK is a hopeless narcissist--she may well have been unable to sleep all week, or at most, slept very little.

So back to the 2 hours: for all we know, AK began those hours frustrated and exhausted, and the pressure of those 2 hours were simply enough to push her over the edge.

 

[Nova]

The concept of sociopath is not obsolete, and is still used by both laypersons and professionals do describe people with sociopathic personalities. The newer term has only been used for a couple of years.

Amanda's absence of emotional reaction to the murder of her roommate most certainly raises the question of whether she is sociopathic. That point is reinforced by her cold, callous story telling about rape and murder.

Within about an hour after Meredith's body was found, Meredith's friends said that they hoped Meredith hadn't suffered (an expression of empathy). Amanda's response was "she f-ing bled to death" (complete absence of empathy and sympathy). That's a very cold comment.

The term sociopath is either outmoded or not. You yourself just posted that it has been superseded by another term. I don't care, but I don't appreciate you claiming one thing and then scolding me when I believe you and repeat what you write.

You weren't there when AK made that remark, you don't know how she meant it. She may have been annoyed at what she saw as sheer sentimental stupidity. Should she have been more tactful? Yes. But perhaps, unlike a sociopath, AK was actually under stress herself and barked at what she thought a stupid remark when applied to a stabbing victim.

Most, if not all, of the testimony regarding AK's supposed coldness dates from after she was accused of killing MK. People want to trust LE; it makes us feel safer. And once someone is identified as a suspect, that very labeling tends to dictate how others see a suspect and remembered her behavior. I'm not saying AK was Mother Teresa, but she probably wasn't Ma Barker either.

 

[Malkmus]

The questioning didn't change when her status changed to suspect, it stopped. She was a suspect, and entitled to a lawyer.

The questioning was stopped and Mignini was brought in and he questioned her more until 5:45AM. Because a lawyer wasn't brought in that additional statement wasn't allowed either. But the statements were used to arrest Patrick. They showed callous disregard for the law in order to get what they cared about, an arrest.

 

[otto]

I believe you, otto, and I have never questioned your knowledge of the schedule. My point was that you choose to single out those 2 hours as the only relevant ones, when we don't know how long and how often AK had talked to the police during the previous week.

Let's say for the sake of argument that those were the 2 hours when LE really "turned up the heat." That doesn't prove they hadn't been disputing AK's memories for days and that she wasn't already extremely frustrated (not to mention tired) when the 2 hours began.

After all, the 2 hour session began very late at night. Supporters of the verdicts always claim AK was so callous she must have been sleeping like a baby all week, but that is not what she told her friends in the famous email. There, IIRC, she talked about how disturbed she was that a murder had been committed in the room next door to hers and how it might have been she who was the victim. Under those circumstances--even if you think AK is a hopeless narcissist--she may well have been unable to sleep all week, or at most, slept very little.

So back to the 2 hours: for all we know, AK began those hours frustrated and exhausted, and the pressure of those 2 hours were simply enough to push her over the edge.

Being questioned on Wednesday, or stoned on Thursday, or drunk on Friday does not, in my opinion, have any bearing on something that happens on Saturday. Furthermore, Knox was not the only witness required to provide information ... but she is the only person that has been whining about it for 4 years.

And she didn't begin those hours frustrated and exhausted. She had just enjoyed a nice pizza date with Raffaele (while Meredith's memorial was taking place), and then ... we all know ... she was so energetic she was doing gymnastics at the police station.

 

[Nova]

The questioning didn't change when her status changed to suspect, it stopped. She was a suspect, and entitled to a lawyer.

Okay. Then for how long did it stop and when did it begin again? One post above says Mignini was called into take a "suspect statement", since the 1:45 "witness statement" could no longer be used.

And as Trillian points out, the later statement contains additional info, suggesting more questions were asked.

(ETA thanks for the correction, otto.)

 

[SleuthyGal]

I'm seeing a type of logic that makes no sense.

'AK is a sociopath because she murdered MK.' Well that may not be true. In fact AK may neither be a sociopath nor a murderer.

She may be a murderer but not a sociopath. She may be a sociopath but not a murderer.

I don't know how anyone, without benefit of more definitive information and proof, can label AK as such. It's like people don't realize there are a bunch of rumors out there floating around, and they believe everything they read, as long as it casts AK in a negative light.

Is AK a sociopath? I don't know. And neither can anyone else who hasn't met her. That doesn't stop people from thinking they know her, based on some tabloid journalists articles.

 

[otto]

The term sociopath is either outmoded or not. You yourself just posted that it has been superseded by another term. I don't care, but I don't appreciate you claiming one thing and then scolding me when I believe you and repeat what you write.

You weren't there when AK made that remark, you don't know how she meant it. She may have been annoyed at what she saw as sheer sentimental stupidity. Should she have been more tactful? Yes. But perhaps, unlike a sociopath, AK was actually under stress herself and barked at what she thought a stupid remark when applied to a stabbing victim.

Most, if not all, of the testimony regarding AK's supposed coldness dates from after she was accused of killing MK. People want to trust LE; it makes us feel safer. And once someone is identified as a suspect, that very labeling tends to dictate how others see a suspect and remembered her behavior. I'm not saying AK was Mother Teresa, but she probably wasn't Ma Barker either.

The term sociopath has been replaced, but it is not obsolete ... people that studied psychology 30 years ago (and earlier) will still use the terms psychopath and sociopath with specific different meanings, people that studied psychology 10-15 years ago will use the term sociopath with an understanding that psychopath is a subset of sociopath. People that are contemporary psychologists will use antisocial personality disorder with an understanding that sociopath and psychopath are subsets. I don't mean to scold, I mean to clarify that previous terms are still used and many still understand the differences ... but that psychology has been undergoing some sort of strange restructuring and reorganization of conditions, characteristics and symptoms.

I posted comments and a link to what Meredith's friends testified in court regarding Amanda's behavior and comments immediately after the murder was discovered. One of Meredith's friends thought that Amanda had "gone crazy" because of her abnormal behavior.

 

[Nova]

Being questioned on Wednesday, or stoned on Thursday, or drunk on Friday does not, in my opinion, have any bearing on something that happens on Saturday. Furthermore, Knox was not the only witness required to provide information ... but she is the only person that has been whining about it for 4 years.

And she didn't begin those hours frustrated and exhausted. She had just enjoyed a nice pizza date with Raffaele (while Meredith's memorial was taking place), and then ... we all know ... she was so energetic she was doing gymnastics at the police station.

The list of evidence you simply choose to disregard keeps growing, my friend.

Just saying...

But BTW, how do you know the pizza date was "nice"? AK and RS ate dinner. Unless you have specific proof beyond that, we're talking about yet another claim that was invented (by whom I do not know) merely to counter the claim that AK was under stress.

 

[Nova]

The term sociopath has been replaced, but it is not obsolete ... people that studied psychology 30 years ago (and earlier) will still use the terms psychopath and sociopath with specific different meanings, people that studied psychology 10-15 years ago will use the term sociopath with an understanding that psychopath is a subset of sociopath. People that are contemporary psychologists will use antisocial personality disorder with an understanding that sociopath and psychopath are subsets. I don't mean to scold, I mean to clarify that previous terms are still used and many still understand the differences ... but that psychology has been undergoing some sort of strange restructuring and reorganization of conditions, characteristics and symptoms.

I posted comments and a link to what Meredith's friends testified in court regarding Amanda's behavior and comments immediately after the murder was discovered. One of Meredith's friends thought that Amanda had "gone crazy" because of her abnormal behavior.

If a term has been replaced, then it is obsolete, otto. That's what those words mean. But no matter and no harm done. I have no quarrel with the use of the word per se, I merely mean to caution that the way it is used by the lay population is generally suspect.

Yes, MK's friends testified that they found AK's behavior odd. In the first place, weren't MK's friends English? There are considerable differences in what is considered appropriate behavior on either side of The Pond. These differences might only be magnified in a crisis.

In the second place, it's hard to know when these opinions crystalized. They may have been vague impressions at the time, only to become certain evidence of a problem after AK was charged.

But while we're on the subject, why isn't the testimony that AK seemed to have "gone crazy" considered evidence that she was genuinely disturbed by the murder of her friend? Why can unexpected behavior during a tragedy only mean uncaring and sociopathic?

 

[trillian]

The questioning didn't change when her status changed to suspect, it stopped. She was a suspect, and entitled to a lawyer.

So why was she still questioned overnight before getting her lawyer?

And why did they not get video or audio of it? After all, even at the early stages, this was a HUGE case in the media. You'd think they would be extra careful to do it right.

 

[otto]

The list of evidence you simply choose to disregard keeps growing, my friend.

Just saying...

But BTW, how do you know the pizza date was "nice"? AK and RS ate dinner. Unless you have specific proof beyond that, we're talking about yet another claim that was invented (by whom I do not know) merely to counter the claim that AK was under stress.

Amanda's drunken night 5 days prior to her witness interview is not evidence visa vie her lies, it is evidence in relation to the activities on the night of the murder. Being questioned as a witness, or doing a walkthrough of the cottage, is not evidence of anything.

Just saying ...

It was my assumption that the pizza date was nice ... Amanda appeared to be in good spirits immediately after the dinner ... doing cartwheels and so on.

 

[otto]

If a term has been replaced, then it is obsolete, otto. That's what those words mean. But no matter and no harm done. I have no quarrel with the use of the word per se, I merely mean to caution that the way it is used by the lay population is generally suspect.

Yes, MK's friends testified that they found AK's behavior odd. In the first place, weren't MK's friends English? There are considerable differences in what is considered appropriate behavior on either side of The Pond. These differences might only be magnified in a crisis.

In the second place, it's hard to know when these opinions crystalized. They may have been vague impressions at the time, only to become certain evidence of a problem after AK was charged.

But while we're on the subject, why isn't the testimony that AK seemed to have "gone crazy" considered evidence that she was genuinely disturbed by the murder of her friend? Why can unexpected behavior during a tragedy only mean uncaring and sociopathic?

So ... it's a cultural difference ... and in North America it's quite normal to make remarks like that to people that have just had a friend brutally murdered?

One friend wondered if Amanda had gone crazy because she was flirting with Raffaele and making crass remarks about Meredith while Meredith's friends, who had also only known Meredith for a short time, were deeply saddened.

 

[miley]

otto:
The questioning didn't change when her status changed to suspect, it stopped. She was a suspect, and entitled to a lawyer.

trillian:
So why was she still questioned overnight before getting her lawyer?

And why did they not get video or audio of it? After all, even at the early stages, this was a HUGE case in the media. You'd think they would be extra careful to do it right.

I agree Trillian - I read that the interpreter was actually a mediator first, which explains her strange line of questioning in my opinion. She basically ignores Amanda's answers.

This is the general sequence of what happened Nov. 5. as I understand it.
Eating pizza, she and Raffaele are asked to go to the police station, Amanda does homework in the waiting room, the station is empty because it's getting late, tense she starts stretching, a policeman walks by & asks if she can cartwheel, elevator doors open and Giobbi? sees Amanda stretching, the mean female officer walks by and scolds Amanda and asks her to sit in the interrogation room. Raffaele is still being questioned and has been since they arrived... (which was what time?)

Otto,
Do you know when the interpreter arrived? I believe this is an important detail... what time was Mignini called in and do you know what time they went to Raffaele's house for the inspection\ get his Nikes because this all happened at some point during the night too.

 

[otto]

I agree Trillian - I read that the interpreter was actually a mediator first, which explains her strange line of questioning in my opinion. She basically ignores Amanda's answers.

This is the general sequence of what happened Nov. 5. as I understand it.
Eating pizza, she and Raffaele are asked to go to the police station, Amanda does homework in the waiting room, the station is empty because it's getting late, tense she starts stretching, a policeman walks by & asks if she can cartwheel, elevator doors open and Giobbi? sees Amanda stretching, the mean female officer walks by and scolds Amanda and asks her to sit in the interrogation room. Raffaele is still being questioned and has been since they arrived... (which was what time?)

Otto,
Do you know when the interpreter arrived? I believe this is an important detail... what time was Mignini called in and do you know what time they went to Raffaele's house for the inspection\ get his Nikes because this all happened at some point during the night too.

I was actually surprised to see a reference to an interpreter ... as I either didn't know, or forgot. I read here that there was no translator, and assumed it was true.

It's an interesting point though. I think that Knox and Sollecito arrived at 10 or 10:30 because Raffaele was asked to come in to answer a couple of questions. Amanda went along because they were together when he was called in, or because she was staying with him and was waiting for him ... some reason. An hour or so later, she was taken in for questioning. It's interesting that there was an interpreter. If the interpreter was called in moments after investigators began questioning Amanda, then it makes sense that it was rather spontaneous, but if she was already there, then I have to wonder if Raffaele had already said something incriminating and instigators had called in an interpreter because they had more incriminating statements from Raffaele to use against her. I think that changes the playing field a bit ... in terms of the intentions at the beginning of the interview.

It's also possible that there was someone on staff who was fluent in English and who acted as a translator.

 

[otto]

There's something about this four year old case that keeps me interested, even though the crime has been solved, and the accused are convicted and in jail. Even though I can probably argue backwards and forwards that the verdict is correct ... I have to admit that there is some small part in the big picture, something that I can't put my finger on, that doesn't quite fit. It's like making a puzzle where one piece is left, but it doesn't fit into the empty space.

It would indeed be a magnificent series of coincidences if three people could be accused and convicted of a crime that they did not commit. When I mentally review the case, or question parts of the information, I keep coming back to guilty ... but I keep questioning it ... which makes me wonder why. Knox and Sollecito certainly aren't the first people to be convicted of a crime where there were divided opinions, or where the families adamantly defended the guilty ... I'm beginning to think that it is the innocent presentation or appearance of Raffaele and Amanda that makes me continue to question their guilt ... just a little. I suppose it's similar to how some people looked at the all american guy Scott Peterson and had difficulty believing he was a murderer, or how people have difficulty believing that white collar men murder their wives. Amanda and Raffaele don't seem the type to get twisted one night and murder a roommate ... but they certainly got twisted one night, and they certainly screwed up over and over again after that night.

If we remove the confession and false accusations, remove the knife with Meredith's DNA, remove the bra clasp, remove the footprint match, we are still left with the staged break in, the ever changing alibis, the evidence of a clean up, and the abnormal behavior. It seems to me that even if we remove some of the evidence, there's still enough that implies guilt ... or not?

 

[dgfred]

In addition to the links, which are clear, there's the simple fact that AK won her suit against the author and publisher. It doesn't make any sense that she would be awarded damages for the publication of something her own family had provided to the media.

What investigator gave it to the journalist?

 

[flourish]

Not surprised at the post indicating students fidgeting with prolonged exposure to what has to be excruciating lecturing.

I do have to correct this:

I posted that the lack of comparison to sociopathic and Satanism is self evident.

Those responding posts lack intellectual curiosity and at least faked contemplation and graciousness of give and take conversation.

I guess they are in order to have the classroom to oneself lecturing away to the audience put in its place the school master wielding his wooden ruler of intimidation over my knuckles on the keyboard.

This is a interesting board but anyone fooling themselves that they are in the position of having all the information and background on this case to the point that they seem to think they are in a court of law is ridiculous.

Please correct me if it is so but I haven’t seen where anyone has been vetted as an authority or an insider in this case.

The emperor has no clothes and the accused are where they belong.

IMO

:clap: :clap: wooden ruler ROTFL Awesome post, Jade I look forward to reading more of your posts :clap:

 

[dgfred]

LOLOL.

Pretty hard to miss those cited articles, considering they were in bold.

I am starting to think there is nothing, short of both Mignini and RG holding a press conference to announce that AK and RS were falsely accused, that will convince anyone who has made up their mind of 'guilt" of either AK's/RS's innocence or at the very least that there is some reasonable doubt about their guilt.

I certainly don't know if they're guilty or not, though I allow for it, but I also see the holes where there is room for doubt, leading to a 'not guilty' conclusion as well.

There may be no amount of article citing that will accomplish anything except tax the typing fingers of the researcher and maybe lead to carpal tunnel syndrome. ;-) Logic alone ain't going to get the job done.

I'm glad you think it was funny, but I didn't miss the bold part at all.

My point was (AND STILL IS) that someone from the family (or innocent side) gave the diary/journals information away. I don't believe the 'cited' article.

IMO from pm-ing several at PMF the information was from Candace and Frank... not an investigator. If someone can produce the 'investigator's' name, maybe I would change my mind. I also think it was a bad decision... but that doesn't mean the family/innocent side didn't release the info. They certainly have made a few doosies IMO... like the entire 'PR' campaign.

 

[dgfred]

Michael at PMF describes the details of the diary information (and disinformation) quite well if anyone is interested on page 11 (2-11-2011 post)in the forum.

 

[Nova]

So why was she still questioned overnight before getting her lawyer?

And why did they not get video or audio of it? After all, even at the early stages, this was a HUGE case in the media. You'd think they would be extra careful to do it right.

I am firmly convinced that interrogations are not taped because police do not want us to see what they do. And not just in this case.

At times and in some departments, taping does take place. So it seems to be done only at the discretion of the interrogators--which should make us all suspicious.