Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Amanda Knox

So I've been reading with some horror about the Amanda Knox case. This isn't a church discipline case, its a real court case. Up until the judges report was available in English there wasn't much that could be said. The report (link) falls far far short of establishing anything remotely like a murder conviction. It essentially provides some evidence (and IMHO not enough to convict) for either a conspiracy after the fact or obstruction of justice. In particular it never presents clear specific acts that Amanda Knox engaged in to kill Meredith Kercher. The standard of evidence seems to be whether the police can find evidence to definitely contradict their theories, rather than to find a theory which is provable beyond a reasonable doubt. The report makes detailed allegations regarding conspiracy after the fact and almost none about the murder itself. Further if you believe the prosecutions case you see people aggressively acting to clean up a murder scene but not having prepared for the murder in any way, meaning that malice aforethought seems to be missing. I have trouble seeing how you convict for murder.

The key evidence is are inconsistencies in testimony that the defendant has off and on alleged resulted from beating a suspect up. I'm from the North East, its not unknown for a cop to "tune up" a suspect, though it is rare. Its almost never used with a first time offender who is so obviously terrified, or high, she's acting erratically already. And what Knox describes, strikes to the back of the head, are very dangerous and used primarily to avoid bruising. I don't have good statistics but using these sorts of methods would seem to imply a nonchalance about whether the suspect suffers brain damage. These sorts of hits cause the brain stem to separate from the brain with the degree of force and exact type of hit determining the degree of separation. They are called "rabbit punches" because this type of blow was traditionally how hunters killed rabbits. If true, her life was quite literally in danger and confusion from head trauma isn't totally unreasonable.

In reading her statements even if we assume she was not being hit or sleep deprived, she clearly was being denied council and repeatedly expressed confusion. Drugs, which the prosecution obviously suspects could also make her unfit to give testimony. Her early testimony is worthless and should have been thrown out, and some has been. And that's not even counting the fact that she was obviously a suspect yet still being interrogated like a witness a clear violation of Italian law. And even if it weren't the lies provide more evidence for the obstruction charge they prove nothing about the murder. What we are left with after that is some circumstantial evidence that points to her probably being involved in some way, particularly after the fact. Which is far short of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that she was a primary.

What is absolutely beyond the pale though is the slander charge. Essentially the court ruled that because the police all agree they didn't hit there therefore they want her to do an extra 6 years. Italy doesn't have a notion of perjury for a defendant and this seems like an attempt to get around that. What's even worse is going after her parents with the slander charge, which is both blatant censorship and witness intimidation. This is where IMHO this case went from a young woman overcharged and over-convicted to pure injustice.

This injustice is especially bad because one of the primary points of dispute was the prosecution making up all sorts of elaborate stories and distributed these stories to the media to taint the jury with claims that it wouldn't matter in Italy. For all my complaints about the USA its nonsense like that gives me pride to be an American. This case is getting lots of attention though the Italians seem intent on stealing this woman's (and really at the time of the murder, girl's) life away from her.

I'd like to send her a message that she is not forgotten, so I gave a donation to her defense fund.
______

See also:

Pro Knox/Sollecito:
Anti Knox/Sollecito
Neutral:
Related
  • Imam rapito affair, a case of 22 Americans being tried and convicted in absentia at the same time. It provides a political context for those alleging anti-Americanism in the judiciary. There are no allegations by either side that Knox had any involvement with Abu Omar.
  • Statement by Senator Cantwell on the verdict. This is extraordinarily rare and serious. The Italians and Kercher supporters are blowing this off as irrelevant, but an attack on the verdict in a purely criminal case by a sitting US Senator is almost unheard of and implies very series misgivings in Cantwell's mind.
  • Blog wars article about the domestic factions pro and con.http://amandaknoxappealforum.blogspot.com/

52 comments:

Harry Rag said...

The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming. They gave completely different accounts of where they were, who they were with and what they were doing on the night of the murder. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis despite three attempts each. All the other people who were questioned had one credible alibi that could be verified. Innocent people don't give multiple conflicting alibis and lie repeatedly to the police.

The DNA didn't miraculously deposit itself in the most incriminating of places.

An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito's DNA was found on Meredith's bra clasp. Judge Massei pointed to the extremely clear RFU peaks associated with the DNA test, the lowest of which was 30% higher than the RFU test widely used for minimum reliability and the highest of which was more than 200% higher. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito's profile matched 17 out of 17. Dr. Torricelli for the Kerchers affirmed that the alleles (peaks) in the sample constituted the biological profile of Raffaele Sollecito.

According to Sollecito's forensic expert, Professor Vinci, Knox's DNA was on Meredith's bra.

Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the handle of the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli - categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

There were five instances of Knox's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood in three different locations in the cottage.

Knox tracked Meredith's blood into the bathroom, the hallway, her room and Filomena's room, where the break-in was staged. Knox's DNA and Meredith's blood was found mixed together in Filomena's room, in a bare bloody footprint in the hallway and in three places in the bathroom.

Rudy Guede's bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith's room and out of the house. This means that he didn't stage the break-in in Filomena's room or go into the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed.

Sollecito left a visible bloody footprint on the blue bathmat in the bathroom. Knox's and Sollecito's bare bloody footprints were revealed by luminol in the hallway.

It's not a coincidence that the three people - Knox, Sollecito and Guede - who kept telling the police a pack of lies are all implicated by the DNA and forensic evidence.

Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007.

CD-Host said...

Hi Harry welcome to the blog!

As an aside to lurkers Harry is a regular on HuffingtonPost about this case.

I don't want to get into the details of the case, there are 200 blogs that do that. But you totally incorrect, absolutely innocent people give conflicting reports all the time. When you ask people questions about almost anything you will get conflicting details. When you interrogate people, especially people under a great deal of stress you almost never get correct details.

Now Amanda was showing obvious signs of very high stress. The prosecution mentioned her doing gymnastics, getting suddenly physically affectionate, wild mood swings during those first few days. She simply wasn't emotionally fit to give detailed testimony. Further she repeatedly indicates she is confused. Why would you expect her in that state to be able to give correct details?

However, except for one incident where she claims she was repeatedly hit, her story has been consistent.

As for DNA, Amanda lived in the house. Which means she shed skin, menstruated, defecated, sneezed, released spittle, possibly cut herself in that apartment. You would expect to find her DNA.

Or she if was part of the conspiracy after the fact. There you have a much better case. Further that doesn't address the slander charge which is where Italy's system really, IMHO crossed the line.

Harry Rag said...

Hi CD-Host,

Do you know of one murder case where the defendants gave three different alibis and were found not guilty?

Amanda Knox lied before 5 November 2007. She lied to Filomena and the postal police on 2 November 2007 and she lied to her friends in an e-mail on 4 November 2007.

Sollecito also lied before 5 November 2007 and admitted doing so in his witness statement:

“In my former statement I told you a load of rubbish because I believed Amanda’s version of what happened and did not think about the inconsistencies.”

Please note that he blamed Knox for his lies.

Rudy Guede's bloody footprints led straight out of Meredith's room and out of the cottage. This means he didn't go into Filomena's room or the blood-spattered bathroom after Meredith had been stabbed. There is no physical evidence of Guede in either room. However, Knox's DNA was found mixed with Meredith's blood in both rooms. Furthermore, the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito's foot, but couldn't possibly belong to Rudy Guede.

How would you account for the abundant amount of Sollecito's DNA on a small piece of Meredith's underwear?

Sollecito's DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests.

The slander charges were brought by the police officers and interpreters who were involved in Knox's questioning on 5 November 2007. They have nothing do with the Italian legal system. Amanda Knox made her false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba on at least four separate occasions. She didn't recant the allegation the whole time he was in prison despite the fact that she knew he was innocent.

It seems you have been manipulated and misinformed by the dishonest PR campaign.

CD-Host said...

The slander charges were brought by the police officers and interpreters who were involved in Knox's questioning on 5 November 2007. They have nothing do with the Italian legal system. Amanda Knox made her false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba on at least four separate occasions. She didn't recant the allegation the whole time he was in prison despite the fact that she knew he was innocent.

You are intermixing two things. The 6 year slander charge was added for asserting she was hit in the back of the head. That has nothing to do with Diya Lumumba.

What the accusation was regarding Diya Lumumba, depends on whether you believe her or the prosecution.
In the prosecutions version of events she gives his name up, comes in the next day to recant but they keep him in jail for several weeks anyway.
In the defense version of events under duress (being hit) she gives up his name and issues a written retraction the next day.

What's interesting though is that Patrick Diya Lumumba does support her view of an overly aggressive prosecutor, ""The worst thing is that they never tried to find out a motive. Couldn't they have asked me, before handcuffing me, where I had been that evening or that night? Couldn't they have carried out a little bit more investigation?" he said." (from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570101/Freed-Meredith-suspect-will-never-forgive-Knox.html)

Do you know of one murder case where the defendants gave three different alibis and were found not guilty?

She's given one alibi she was with her boyfriend except under duress. But in terms of a suspect who gave a false alibi and was found not guilty anyway, Bromfield. He was a suspect who had given a false alibi essentially saying he was with Laing at A. He really was at B and Laing had been busy committing the murder.

Another one that is similar is Duncan Smith he was alibi his drug dealer and became a suspect.

I can't think of any examples as confused as hers of either guilty or innocent people. Which is why I consider the early statement worthless and just go with her current defense.

Harry Rag said...

All the witnesses who were present when Amanda Knox was questioned on 5 November 2007, including her interpreter, testified under oath that she was treated well and wasn’t hit.

The judges and jury had to decide whether to believe the corroborative testimony of numerous upstanding witnesses or the word of a compulsive liar who has lied repeatedly. It would have been a very easy decision to make.

Amanda Knox didn't recant her false and malicious allegation against Diya Lumumba the next day at all. She said she stood by her accusatory statements.

Judge Micheli specifically spoke about Knox's and Sollecito's triple alibis. Sollecito is still refusing to corroborate Knox's alibi that she was with him on the night of the murder. In his last alibi, Sollecito claimed that Knox went out at about 9.00pm and returned at around 1.00am.

CD-Host said...

All the witnesses who were present when Amanda Knox was questioned on 5 November 2007, including her interpreter, testified under oath that she was treated well and wasn’t hit.

I understand that. And all 7 officers testified to a made up story in the Danziger Bridge Shootings. The fact that the police agree they didn't hit her doesn't mean anything. If they are willing to beat suspects they are willing to lie about beating suspects. There is no evidence confirming their story. People who commit crimes usually say they didn't do it, so what?

And even if she were lying, the 25 years for murder is how you address not believing her defense. This is classic witness intimidation. Her defense depends on prosecutorial misconduct hence alleging it is within the bounds of the court and should be protected. If you think she purged herself that's a very serious charge and the burden should be much higher than the accused saying "we didn't do it".

This is the single worst aspect of this case and the conviction is what knocked me off the fence regarding it. Its just an appalling part of Italian law. Even if I saw a vide of Amanda Knox killing Kercher she should never do those 6 years. She is entitled to fully defend herself.

That is further compounded by reading her diary right after which shows obvious signs of duress "maybe the police are right that I saw Meredith's death and don't remember". The only kind of person who would write that with a fully functioning memory is someone who has been psychologically (at least) abused. There is no question violence and the threat of violence are facilitators for brainwashing.

Did they hit her? I don't know. Was she competent to be answering questions at that point? Absolutely not.

Harry Rag said...

Amanda Knox herself doesn't claim she was beaten. She said she was clipped over the head twice by someone she couldn't identify.

It's not just the police officers who claim that Knox was treated well and wasn't hit. Knox's own interpreter also confirmed this. There is no evidence that Knox was mistreated.

Knox hasn't been convicted of slandering the police. The police officers and interpreters are entitled to defend themselves against false and malicious accusations.

Knox had been questioned for less than three hours when she made her false and malicious accusation against Diya Lumumba.

Knox admitted that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed because she had been informed that Sollecito had admitted lying to the police and was claiming that she had left his apartment for four hours. Sollecito is still refusing to corroborate Knox's alibi.

The next day Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith's murder in her handwritten note to the police. She even asked for a pen and paper to write this confession.

Have you thought about the rights of Meredith Kercher - the victim of this terrible murder?

DUDE said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
CD-Host said...

Amanda Knox herself doesn't claim she was beaten. She said she was clipped over the head twice by someone she couldn't identify.

I've seen the video she claims she was hit in the back of the head not on top. That's an entirely different type of strike. Top of the head hurts a lot because the scalp tends to split open. Back of the head causes tremendous damage. The term "rabbit punch" comes from the fact that striking the back of the head is how hunters kill rabbits. You hit the cervical vertebrae which are weak and connect to the brain stem, the blow always causes trauma because it separates the brain from the brain stem to some degree (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Gray305.png ). OTOH its an area of the body that doesn't bruise easily so if they wanted to beat on her didn't mind the risk of killing or crippling her, but didn't want an incident.... The police hitting with a phone book used to be done there.

Severe mental confusion, i.e. a concussion of micro stroke is fully consistent with that type of blow. I know you don't believer her but her mental state makes sense she could very well have been bleeding internally after a few strikes. I still lean towards drugs being the source of the confusion but her version of events is consistent with the evidence unlike theirs which doesn't explain her erratic behavior at all.

I understand she hasn't been convicted of the slander. I don't think the concept should exist. No I do not believe the police get to defend themselves against charges made during a defense by adding additional charges. Like I said this is where I drew the line between a case that was structurally weak and one that's crossed over to outright tyranny. We keep going around on this, so let me make it clear. I absolutely 100% totally unequivocally reject the notion that the adding additional charges constitutes a defense for the police and that they are entitled to do so. It is no different than using any other form of force (like torture) when a defendant says something you don't like. A defendant is fully entitled to mount a defense without fear of further charges unless they want to prove perjury. And I understand Italian law allows for this, and I think it is downright evil in allowing for this.

Knox admitted that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed because she had been informed that Sollecito had admitted lying to the police and was claiming that she had left his apartment for four hours. Sollecito is still refusing to corroborate Knox's alibi.

She has not confirmed that admission and at this point she denies it. This is why hearsay shouldn't be admissible you cannot assert Knox was there based on statements that Knox has sworn under oath are false.

Have you thought about the rights of Meredith Kercher - the victim of this terrible murder?

I don't see how taking a friends life away wrongly does anything good for Meredith Kercher. Heck we probably could go to England and kill a bunch of Meredith's friends of her's randomly in what way would that make things better?

We have 2 people who have in some sense confessed to involvement. We have another who everyone is sure did it. And we have a prosecution which has shown some evidence that Amanda Knox engaged in obstruction of justice and conspiracy after the fact. Where they have fallen well short is murder. And the slander charge is obscene even if she were guilty of the murder.

CD-Host said...

It's not just the police officers who claim that Knox was treated well and wasn't hit. Knox's own interpreter also confirmed this. There is no evidence that Knox was mistreated.

I agree there isn't. Amanda Knox failed to prove that element of the case. And that's where it should have ended.

But if they want to prove perjury then the burden isn't on Amanda anymore. They need multiple independent witnesses, evidence.... that the beating did not occur. Which means they have to prove:

1) That the statement is definitely false
2) That Amanda Knox knew it to be false, she is not suffering from poor recollection and she fully intended to make them.

Further as far as I understand it defendants are supposed to be immune from perjury at all in Inquisitor systems. In America you don't have to answer question in their systems since you do....

Finally as far as Patrick. Either she is telling the truth that it was coerced or she was lying. But you are trying to use Patrick to prove she's dishonest. That's a circular argument. You start with the assumption she's telling the truth and work with the evidence until you are forced to conclude otherwise, the presumption of innocence.

CD-Host said...

DUDE --

Hello and welcome to the blog! I don't allow personal attacks against other posters. You are free to comment on the case but not on other people here.

Charlie Wilkes said...

Hi CD-Host, thanks for speaking out for Amanda and Raffaele and for donating to the defense fund. This case turned into an obsession for me long ago. How do we get these innocent young people out from under a system that does not want to admit its own incompetence? I think the answer is found in a Dr. Seuss book called "Horton Hears A Who." Everyone has to shout at the top of their lungs, for as long as it takes.

DUDE said...

I don't see how it is possible to have any confidence in the DNA test results on the knife or the bra clasp because the person that performed the test was in-fact caught making false statements to the court. In judge Massei's report he acknowledges the incident occurred but that is all. It appears the authorities in Perugia routinely make false statements to the court because when it happens nothing is done about it and it is not identified as what it actually is, PERJURY.

(page 64 hearing Sept. 26, 2009). "Dr. Stefanoni confirmed that to prove that blood is present, you have to test for it. Dr. Stefanoni claimed that no testing was done. In July 2009 the test records revealed otherwise. The luminol findings were tested using tetramethylbenzidine, and the tests were negative for all tracks. The luminol findings tested negative for blood."

Massei report page 256-257: “With respect to the Luminol-positive traces found in Romanelli's room, in Knox's room and in the corridor, she [Dr Stefanoni] stated that by analysing the SAL cards "we learn, in contradiction to what was presented in the technical report deposited by the Scientific Police, and also to what was said in Court, that not only was the Luminol test performed on these traces, but also the generic diagnosis for the presence of blood, using tetramethylbenzidine, and this test, gave a negative result on all the items of evidence from which it was possible to obtain a genetic profile" (page 64 hearing Sept. 26, 2009).”

The above quote from Judge Massei’s report (motivation document) page 256-257, means there were no bloody foot prints compatible with Amanda or Raffaele and there were no bloody foot prints at all except for the print on the bath mat belonging to the only person that left evidence that he was in Meredith's bedroom and murdered her there. That person is Rudy Guede who's sentence was cut almost in half and currently he is appealing to have his sentence further reduced. Who loves Rudy Guede so much to help him escape the penalty for murder followed by rape?

CD-Host said...

Hi Charlie --

Welcome to the blog! You have a neat blog on the case that summarizes the problems well. I'll add to my links on this case. The idea of taking these two's 20s, 30s and 40s from them.... It is a sad sad case.

There is so much hatred and bloodlust for this girl coming from the "Kercher supporters". I can't understand why they are indifferent to the guy who raped their daughter and slit her throat being out in about 8 years (13 year sentence) while wanting these two to lose their 20s, 30s and 40s.

DUDE said...

I don't know who these so called Kercher supporters are or what their motivations are. They appear to have ties to a publication known as The Daily Beast. This Harry Rag character was promoting a book wrote by Barbie Nadeau who was employed by the Daily Beast, book title: Angel Face: The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox, Beast Books, 15 May 2010, ISBN 0984295135, 978-0984295135.

It appears members of the anti-Amanda group have control of the wikipedia article: "Murder of Meredith Kercher". The article currently contains the following statement:
"Luminol revealed footprints made in blood in the flat, compatible with the feet of Knox and Sollecito" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Meredith_Kercher

I tried to get the information included in the article, about the the fact that there were no bloody footprints and that Dr. Stefanoni gave false testimony in court. My efforts to get the truth included and protesting them blocking other editors that tried to get the truth into the article resulted in me being blocked from editing on wikipedia. We were not blocked by an employee of wikipedia. We were blocked by amateur administrator editors that made enough edits to articles to qualify as an administrator. They qualified as administrators by making many minute edits to many articles.

CD-Host said...

Since there has been discussion of the issue of slander I thought I would post this translation of the charges against the parents.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/more_on_investigation_of_famiy_for_possible_defaming_of_perugia/

DUDE said...

The Truth Justice for Meredith Kercher site is disgusting. It contains many pages of people speculating about how Amanda murdered Meredith. The site is designed to sway public opinion with fiction. The sister site is called Perugia Murder Files. Both sites appear to be managed by Peter Quennell. Peggy Ganong was an administrator / key employee / who resigned last week from her position as administrator of Perugia Murder files. Apparently the word is out that likely Amanda and Raffaele will be acquitted so apparently who ever was funding this project cut off the money supply. This is the impression I have of this organization.

CD-Host said...

Dude I know the Daily Beast has an anti-Knox reporter Barbie Latza Nadeau who wrote the book Angel Face: http://www.thedailybeast.com/author/barbie-latza-nadeau/

I'm not sure she is a the leader of the anti-Knox faction though she is very critical of how the media was played by a PR system in this case. She's a good reporter, and she has valid concerns about the effects of PR on US coverage. Knox's US coverage has been far more generous than your typical murder suspect, or even convicted murderer; heck its been more generous than some acquitted suspects.

DUDE said...

I have the impression that you did not understand my comment.

Also in my opinion Barbie Nadeau is not a good reporter. She continued to discuss the bloody footprints in her articles after it was known there were no bloody footprints with the exception of Guede's left foot print on the bath mat. She made reference to Amanda's vibrator numerous times. How would you feel about if you was Amanda. Barbie made sport and money from humiliating Amanda and she echoed all the phony stuff Mignini was putting out. She is disgusting.

CD-Host said...

In addition to the link of the Senator, David Wu (OR-1) wrote the following letter from WU. This sort of questioning of a verdict is unprecedented. I can think of multiple times the US has complained about overly harsh punishments: executions and corporal punishment. But I'm hard pressed to think of this kind of support regarding a verdict.

Italy is going to need to be ready for exceptional scrutiny on this one. I can't see from a political standpoint how it can possibly be worth it for them.

CD-Host said...

Well I tried to have a dialogue with the FOM crowd. You can see the start of the discussion here (they didn't notify me) link.

Anyway, personal insults, censorship, misinformation about Italian policy. No real attempt at dialogue. Pretty much what I figured an anti-Knox hate site. At least I put fourth a good faith effort.

But this establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the criticism from the FOA crowd are legitimate. As the old saying goes:
If the facts are on your side argue the facts
If the law is on your side argue the law
Otherwise bang the table

The fact that they needed a constant stream of petty persona attacks and respond so quickly with censorship I think indicates where the respective cases lie. They know there are huge holes in the conviction, they know that the Americans are going to accept this verdict less and less as they learn more about what happened.

Well then I can do something productive with my time I was likely going to end up wasting a ton of it on that silly site trying to vet a reasoned defense with intelligent and knowledge people opposed to my POV to check myself. Pity I can't find them.

CD-Host said...

Since there seems to be a whole stream of questions and responses which would normally demand a response below the ban threat. Here is a direct link to the censorship:

As for the comments:

1) On the issue of Europe and its opposition to the death penalty: link to EU site

In terms of Italy playing a leading role I'm not sure how much of a point of contention this is since my intent was reversed based on the response

2) In terms of evidence of premeditation being missing. Premeditation is key for a US charge of murder. I don't know Italian law. But the question is whether the US accepts that she is a murderer. I understand different legal systems have different terms and this may be a translation issue. If so that probably deserves to be brought up.

3) In terms of the claim that it is sufficient for her to have opened the door. Only if she was opening the door with the intent to commit a crime. Which again goes to premeditation and intent.

4) I'm aware that the Italian system does't offer quite the same pleas system. In this middle of this year the Taliban had a full trial for and executed 8 Americans and Germans. No one even denied they were carrying Persian language bibles so their "guilt" was not in question. And no in America or Germany considers them anything but martyrs. The trial lacked legitimacy in America and Germany. It is my assumption that Italy is trying to avoid Knox being seen in a similar way. That's been Kercher's objection that this girl should be treated like a murderer not a martyr and that means a trial that meets US standards and bring closure to the people in America.

5) As for the knife
a) Its unclear that was the murder weapon. The defense seems to be disputing it.
b) That's a terrible knife for a murder. I like to bring my sister's cooking knives to my parent's house, does that prove my intent?

6) As for the cell phone shut off, that doesn't prove intent to murder. Again aggravated sexual assault comes to mind.

Peggy Ganong said...

Your characterization of your visit to the board I co-moderate is not really neutral or accurate. But at least you offer the members of your rather narrow public the opportunity to take a look for themselves and perhaps come to different conclusions about the tragic death of Meredith Kercher.
When one joins a community in progress, the best approach if one is looking for authentic connection and honest discussion is to respect the community and adapt to its style and ethos of debate. The PMF board is a collaborative effort and its members are interested in looking past the spin on this case, most of it created by the PR firm (hired by Amanda Knox's family shortly after she was taken into custody) and then communicated amply by the FOA (Friends of Amanda). Over time, people on PMF have shown a willingness to revise their views based on the facts, and a group of volunteers spent countless hours translating the 427 page Massei sentencing report so that we could all understand what his court based its unanimous verdict on. We did this as a public service and also in the service of the truth not the spin. Winston Churchill once said that lies spread halfway around the world before the Truth even gets its pants on. He was so right!
It seems that you have already made up your mind about the Meredith Kercher murder, and your position seems to be rather dogmatic and set in stone. Having looked at your blog and made some educated guesses about your own history, I would say that this dogmatism may be one of the residual effects of your own experience with church discipline. But judging from the way you burst onto our board and into our community, waving your guns in the air and spoiling for a fight, I would say that maybe your experience with church discipline is partly the result of your own personality traits.
In any case, to the extent that your goal is to help others whose lives have been damaged by church discipline, I wish you luck and support your endeavor. Organized religions have a way of messing with people, whether they worship the Catholic God or the God of Scientology.

CD-Host said...

Hello Peggy. Let me start by indicating to lurkers this is the admin who did threaten, link.

When one joins a community in progress, the best approach if one is looking for authentic connection and honest discussion is to respect the community and adapt to its style and ethos of debate.

I wasn't joining your community. You all were engaging in all sorts of false, misleading and downright hateful comments about me prior to my involvement. You all linked to me not vice versa. I think given the tone of the attacks I was remarkably constrained. I showed up responded in one post to some rather nasty comments and then started raising substantial issues. The early responses were more personal insults. Most of the responses have been personal insults with a few good points that I responded to here. You responded by outright censorship. That's what happened.

You engaged me, you used force during a debate.

Now in terms of being propaganda free, and looking past the spin. As far as I understand the FOA "marketing spin" their position is that Amanda wasn't even in the house at the time of the murder or was asleep. Their argument is that the physical evidence proves their daughter's total innocence. I have not taken that position here, and I didn't argue it on your board. So in terms of getting beyond spin I'd say you have the problem there.

As for my description no longer being neutral. Its not. I've gotten to know the community you speak of which confirmed the general character of a hate blog. You may not like the fact you are running a hate blog, people who run hate blogs generally don't. For example if you go to Christian Identity blogs (white supremacist, religious presbyterian) they would strongly argue they are preaching God's love not racism. Books like "A Defense of Virginia" (pro slavery apologetic from 1867) are instructive about their biblical message....

I think we got off on the wrong foot. I was trying to correct that. You weren't. The reason you weren't is because you aren't really trying to address the actual substantial arguments against the Knox / Sollecito verdict but rather are trying to construct straw men and defeat those.

As for my own history with Church disciple I don't have one. I was never disciplined. In the same way I don't know Amanda personally. Personal passion is an enemy of truth. So yet again maybe you should stop trying to psychoanalyze and address the fact that the reason I don't think Amanda Knox is guilty of murder is because after having looked at the facts of the case they don't prove murder.

The same reason thousands of others have reached the same conclusion. She should have been tried on lesser charges where things could have been resolved fairly, she should be getting psychiatric services and rehabilitation not prison. And now you are stuck with a verdict that is being rejected for substantial fact based reasons.

And reading your translation several weeks ago incidentally is one of the things that convinced me of that.

Dr. Kathy said...

Hello. I have been following TJMK and PMF for the past few years.

My only interest in this case is that I hope justice be served for Meredith Kercher and her family. I have no affiliations or agendas with anyone.

On the positive side, your site lists both pro-guilt and pro-innocent websites on this murder case. This helps people figure out what they believe to be true or false.

On the other hand, many things you write are mis-informed. Sites like TJMK and PMF are not hate blogs at all. They are people who have read the court evidence and have agreed with the ruling of the Italian court and believe in the guilt of the murderers. Most posts that I have read on these sites holds all three murderers equally responsible.

If your sister, daughter, friend or wife was found brutally murdered, and the forensic evidence clearly showed the guilt of the persons responsible, and these people continued to deny their roles in the crime - I think your tune would significantly change regarding your views of the websites you criticize.

What I find fascinating, is that we both read the same translated court report, and for me, guilt is the obvious conclusion, and for you, you write:

"She (AK) should have been tried on lesser charges where things could have been resolved fairly, she should be getting psychiatric services and rehabilitation not prison. And now you are stuck with a verdict that is being rejected for substantial fact based reasons. "

Lesser charges? So you do think AK was involved in Meredith's murder? Psychiatric services for narcissistic personality disorder (psychosis) or drug addiction or both? You must believe there is a staged-in break-in correct ? (i.e. after reading the report) Who would stage a break in if they didn't have a direct role in the crime?

It seems to me, that any lack of sympathy and compassion for AK, RS and RG stem from the idea that these three people - who are obviously guilty - have expressed no responsibility, no remorse, but only vehement denial. It is challenging to show compassion for people who do not accept responsibility for crimes they commit.

This is a sad case for everyone: For the Kercher Family that can no longer hug and kiss their daughter and sister. For Meredith, who's opportunities and future dreams have been cut short. For the 3 criminals who are too frightened to stand up and accept responsibility for their reckless drug-fuelled behaviour that has devastated so many families. And for the families of the murderers who continue to fight the battle of vehement denial, that will leave their children emotionally and spiritually imprisoned for life.

This is so sad for everyone. My prayers go out to them all.

CD-Host said...

Hi Dr Kathy welcome to the blog!

Sites like TJMK and PMF are not hate blogs at all. They are people who have read the court evidence and have agreed with the ruling of the Italian court and believe in the guilt of the murderers. Most posts that I have read on these sites holds all three murderers equally responsible.

That's a point I would dispute. My 2nd article is on how the focus is on Amanda and has always been on Amanda.

As I commented on PMF if the focus hadn't been on Amanda the prosecutor would have been relating to her like a "typical" rape / murder couple:

-- sexually submissive woman with gender identity issues and displaced rage
-- sexually dominant psychopathic male

instead we have Amanda being the driver with all sorts of crazy theories emerging which distracted everyone.

Lesser charges? So you do think AK was involved in Meredith's murder?

Yes. The problem was she was never tried for her actual role but on too strong a charge. Had things like aggravated sexual assault and obstruction of justice been the charges the prosecutor might very well have gotten a confession. But who would ever confess to premeditated murder with a life sentence?

He didn't have enough evidence to play it this way. And his interviews, at least with Amanda, were terrible. Given how confused Rudy Guede's statements are my guess is a bad prosecutor, or really the problem is that there isn't the separation between DA and detective we have in the Anglo system.

Psychiatric services for narcissistic personality disorder or drug addiction or both?

Its hard to do a diagnosis from the limited contact we've had recorded. But I think she has a full blown dissociative disorder. Her descriptions of the murder are so expressionistic. I don't think she's faking that. And whatever problems she had are likely getting worse in prison.

You must believe there is a staged-in break-in correct (after reading the report)? Who would stage a break in if they didn't have a direct role in the crime?


Yes I believe there was a staged break in. Assuming the DNA faking / railroading isn't true (which I have no particular opinion on but see as unlikely) then the people who faked the break in were AK and RS and they both had a direct role in the crime.

It seems to me, that any lack of sympathy and compassion for AK, RS and RG stem from the idea that these three people - who are obviously guilty - have expressed no responsibility, no remorse, but only vehement denial. It is challenging to show compassion for people who do not accept responsibility for crimes they commit.

I think it stems from minimizing what prison is like. I gotta tell you, 25 years is unthinkably horrible. Dieing in a night of pain (what Meredith went through) is at least in the realm of the conceivable. I give those kids tremendous credit for holding up the way they have.

And Amanda has shown remorse. Think at her inability to look at the pictures. Why is she so reluctant go go in Meredith's room? Why is she so insistent she's not the sort to do this?

(part 2 to follow)

CD-Host said...

(part 2)
Think about how loving description of Raffaele washing the blood out of her ear (sublimated). Why do you think the strongest memory she has of the murder is the blood and the ears?

Just try and get inside her head for a moment putting the pieces together. Meredith gives out a huge awful pain scream unlike anything Amanda has ever heard. It suddenly dawns on Amanda what she doing. She slams her hands into her ears and feels Meredith's blood pushed into her ear canal.

That is her most vivid memory of the memory. She was freaked. You can feel the emotion when you read her disjointed statements about this image.

She's even admitted most of the charges, "Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly. "

Not when "they didn't think I remembered a fact correctly. She's not going to confess because she is firmly convinced the she didn't commit murder, “My only certainty is that I did not kill Meredith” but if murder were off the table...?

“I don’t think Raffaele killed Meredith, but I think he’s terrified like me. And now he’s trying to find a way out by distancing himself from me”

We'd be getting the story of how Raffaele killed Meredith and what she was doing (helping from our POV, something else from hers). Amanda is not evil because the Italians are too proud to bring in an American to debrief an American suspect. When we are interrogating Afghans and they start to disassociate we don't send in a blue eyed blond haired chick from Georgia just to make sure we get nothing but bad lies.

This is a tragic mess. This case is likely unfixable. Amanda (and more importantly Raffaele) are not getting the psychological help they need. But at least at this point we don't have 4 people so screwed up that we might as well put a bullet in the other 3.

Again I'm assuming the FOM evidence for now. But the prosecution and the trial are a mess.

Dr. Kathy said...

CD-Host, you write: "And Amanda has shown remorse". Just because a murderer covers the victim with a duvet or turns away from disturbing pictures of the victim does not mean that any remorse has been shown.

Remorse is a heartfelt introspective state where a criminal acknowledges the wrong she/he has done and has some rudimentary understanding of how her/his actions have affected the lives of those she/he has harmed. This is remorse. Remorse cannot happen until denial is set aside. Remorse cannot happen until the murderers have the courage to stand up and say: "I did it. I didn't mean to. I was fucked up on drugs. I'm sorry I have done this to the Kercher family and to Meredith."

Remorse and denial cannot coexist. They are contradictory concepts.

I'm just guessing, but I doubt that you have children of your own. Some of your comments about comparing Meredith's torture and death to the challenge of spending 25 years in prison - to me is inconceivable, especially if one is a parent.

The Kercher Family will never be able to share anymore experiences with their child. The families of the murderers on the other hand, will see their children again (especially with possible early prison releases). Even if AK served her full sentence, she could study anything she wanted to in prison, and still have a reasonably full life after getting out of prison in her 40s - marriage, career, children, fulfilling personal dreams. I hope she makes good use of those 26 years and comes to a place of remorse for herself, for her family, and for the memory of Meredith.

CD-Host said...

Dr Kathy --

You know the FOM people
a) constantly use ad-homonym attacks
b) are generally wrong

No I have an 11 year old. And the reason it isn't conceivable to you is you don't understand how horrible prison is.

she could study anything she wanted to in prison, and still have a reasonably full life after getting out of prison in her 40s - marriage, career, children, fulfilling personal dreams.

That's not what happens. The woman who comes out of prison is a hardened criminal. She can't eat a meal normally because of the fear and stress. She's stay hunched over her food to guard against other prisoner's stealing it.

Talk to some X-prisoners. You have a fantasy about prison, like its a hotel with bars. Its more like being in a war zone with no R&R. She would have ferocious PTSD if she left now. But that isn't going to begin to describe how completely dead her soul will be at the end of a quarter century.

The Amanda 25 years in prison would have no problem looking at those photos. She's seen and done worse many many times. Delusions, total dissatisfaction with life, phobias, depression, overwhelming feeling of panic, and since Amanda is walking in with a weakened psyche most likely a full blown psychosis.

She's not going to suffer 1 rape, a girl her size is likely to be raped on the order of a 1000 times. She's not going study and have children. In any meaningful sense she is going to die in there.

Just to pick a show that runs pretty regularly: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27118605/

Get some idea of what you are advocating for this young woman. As for my answer, I was answering for myself which I would prefer to go through. Probably I'd prefer that my child do the prison, I really don't want to think about it. But I'm pretty sure I'm picking the prison time out of my own selfishness.

So we just fundamentally disagree. I assume you are ignoring the rest of the content about the incompetence of the Italian prosecutor?

CD-Host said...

I didn't respond to the comment about remorse I got so focused on the prison comment.

I don't think she is actually in as much denial as you do. She's lying to the court because they are trying to kill her effectively. I don't care what emotion you are feeling, survival comes first. Once you start talking sentences like that "deserves got nothing to do with it".

She could have done what Rudy Guede did, but the prosecutor wanted her head. She had good reason to believe she'd get life, and he's still trying for it. She owes it to herself to fight this every step of the way, there can't be an apology as long as she staring down the barrel of a quarter century.

I've never killed anyone, I have had to steel myself for it. But if a killing is that what it took to avoid doing a quarter century ... that's just survival, and I wouldn't feel any guilt. Much less deny family an apology when I have a DA trying to kill me.

She's done the best she can under the circumstances.

The opposite of remorse is pride. Here is the opposite of remorse from Dick Cheney on his involvement in the US torture program

I supported it, I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared, as the agency in effect came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn't do, And they talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do. And I supported it.

It's been a remarkably successful effort, and I think the results speak for themselves


As for your sample statement assuming she could speak freely, that statement IMHO wouldn't be genuine. Its just another form of denial, blaming it on the drugs. The drugs lowered inhibitions but assuming they are guilty the rage (AK), lust (RG) and sadism (RS) didn't come from the drugs.

CD-Host said...

At PMF there was a good answer given to one of the key points I raised which addresses the distinction between US and Italian law in terms of the definition of murder. Yummi's post Anyway thanks Yummi for a real answer!

The idea is that its unclear who did what. Given a situation where I don't know if A or B shot X, even if A and B both know who shot X I can't just convict both. What Yummi is arguing is that under Italian law I can. I have to confirm that, but if Italian law says that obstructing an investigation into a murder makes one murderer their law doesn't meet their criteria for internally acceptability but at least the courts are ruling properly in this case. It converts the debate from one of law into one of justice.

If the DNA evidence falls apart this will become key to the defense.

Dr. Kathy said...

CD-host. I completely agree with your statement:

"As for your sample statement assuming she could speak freely, that statement IMHO wouldn't be genuine. Its just another form of denial, blaming it on the drugs. The drugs lowered inhibitions but assuming they are guilty the rage (AK), lust (RG) and sadism (RS) didn't come from the drugs."

I think you have that one bang on.

I am no expert, but the incredible quality of experts that they have on TJMK and PMF, from what I have read by these intelligent people over the past few years, say that the Italian justice system is one of the most rehabilitative and fair systems in the world. I would concur with these experts.

And while I have no experience in any penal system in any country, I doubt very much the potential scenario you paint regarding AK's possible incarceration. I doubt this only because of the information (that I believe to be factual) that has been discussed by legal experts familiar with Italian law on these websites.

I was surprised that you are a parent. Forgive my previous assumption.

Let me ask you. As a parent. You acknowledge that AK has some psychological problem. You acknowledge that she is involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher. And you acknowledge that she is lying.

As a parent, where does honesty and truth and teaching children the importance of those lessons, along with respect for human life - when do those trump any possible consequences for harm done to others?

For me, it starts at birth. If these attributes and ideals don't trump consequences, then why have a justice system in the first place? (read: rehabilitative system in Italy).

Forgive me if it just seems odd to me, that you would donate money to a defense fund for AK after all that you believe. A defense that continues to encourage this young woman's denial, instead of donating to the rehabilitative program in Italy where she is being imprisoned to encourage her to speak the truth. (I once read that she could get a much reduced prison term while in prison by admitting her crime to the judge in private. I don't know if this is true, but Italy appears to be a country that is committed to rehabilitation).

And regarding the prosecutor (I believe there are 2 or 3) - the final verdict and explanation of the evidence in a report is not produced by him (them). It is made by a few judges and jurors in collaboration with each other. So the idea of an "incompetent" prosecutor, whether one chooses to believe this or not, is a moot point. In fact, my own personal belief is that everyone I have read about so far: the prosecutors, the defense attorneys, the judges, the jurors, the police, the forensic people - they are all quite competent and intelligent people.

Dr. Kathy said...

CD-host. I completely agree with your statement:

"As for your sample statement assuming she could speak freely, that statement IMHO wouldn't be genuine. Its just another form of denial, blaming it on the drugs. The drugs lowered inhibitions but assuming they are guilty the rage (AK), lust (RG) and sadism (RS) didn't come from the drugs."

I think you have that one bang on.

I am no expert, but the incredible quality of experts that they have on TJMK and PMF, from what I have read by these intelligent people over the past few years, say that the Italian justice system is one of the most rehabilitative and fair systems in the world. I would concur with these experts.

And while I have no experience in any penal system in any country, I doubt very much the potential scenario you paint regarding AK's possible incarceration. I doubt this only because of the information (that I believe to be factual) that has been discussed by legal experts familiar with Italian law on these websites.

I was surprised that you are a parent. Forgive my previous assumption.

Let me ask you. As a parent. You acknowledge that AK has some psychological problem. You acknowledge that she is involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher. And you acknowledge that she is lying.

As a parent, where does honesty and truth and teaching children the importance of those lessons, along with respect for human life - when do those trump any possible consequences for harm done to others?

For me, it starts at birth. If these attributes and ideals don't trump consequences, then why have a justice system in the first place? (read: rehabilitative system in Italy).

Forgive me if it just seems odd to me, that you would donate money to a defense fund for AK after all that you believe. A defense that continues to encourage this young woman's denial, instead of donating to the rehabilitative program in Italy where she is being imprisoned to encourage her to speak the truth. (I once read that she could get a much reduced prison term while in prison by admitting her crime to the judge in private. I don't know if this is true, but Italy appears to be a country that is committed to rehabilitation).

And regarding the prosecutor (I believe there are 2 or 3) - the final verdict and explanation of the evidence in a report is not produced by him (them). It is made by a few judges and jurors in collaboration with each other. So the idea of an "incompetent" prosecutor, whether one chooses to believe this or not, is a moot point. In fact, my own personal belief is that everyone I have read about so far: the prosecutors, the defense attorneys, the judges, the jurors, the police, the forensic people - they are all quite competent and intelligent people.

Dr. Kathy said...

One other thing I wanted to mention.

You describe a very bleak picture of prison life and the possible aftermath upon release for AK. I don't know if this is the norm, or if this is just a possible experience in America. However I can tell you that this is not the case in all countries.

In Canada, Karla Homolka was incarcerated for only 12 years. She assisted her husband with the murder, torture and rape of her sister and 2 other teenage girls. The 12 years was a plea bargin that was later called "the deal with the devil".

This woman served her entire sentence. During her prison term, she had attended parties in prison, had lesbian relationships and also had a heterosexual relationship with another serial killer.

Today she is married to a model/porn star, lives somewhere in the Caribbean (she was shunned from living in Canada - I wonder why) and has a son. She was released from prison in her mid - late 30s.

Pretty sweet life for someone who has never expressed remorse or responsibility for her crimes.

Now where is the justice in that?

That is why I read True Justice MK. Because someone cares about this topic.

(And I hear that Italy is even more lenient and "softer" in it's penal system than Canada).

CD-Host said...

Happy New Years Kathy.

You are absolutely right I don't know Italian prisons and US prisons are known for being hideous. So for example in 1983 there were 1.5 suicides for every death by natural causes in US jails and prisons. They've gotten a lot better at suicide prevention so that number came down, but conditions have not improved much.

But we don't have to talk in general here, since we are talking about the case of Amanda Knox, she is mentally disassociating herself and going insane. Since you seem to respect PMF let me give you a post where someone agrees and is quite joyful about the effects of imprisonment shattering her mind, The Bard's comment.

I actually would use Karla Homolka as a good example. She did a reasonable amount of time, and was able to be function. And BTW she was convicted of manslaughter.

Pretty sweet life for someone who has never expressed remorse or responsibility for her [Karla's] crimes.

Now where is the justice in that?


Well first off I doubt that's how she sees it. She lost a few years of her life in a trial and her marriage. She then spent a dozen years in prison. She then suffered harassment for another 5 years. If you weren't going to just execute her, why isn't that enough? If you think she should be dead then kill her, if you think she should have a life what Canada did seems a pretty miserable experience.

There is no justice in the "criminal justice system". Its just creating new brutalities on top of old ones. I guess in some vague sense, justice would have been to rape murder Karla. Another form of justice would have been to have Karla work for an international agency putting her life at risk to save lives, which IMHO would be a lot better than locking her in a box. What's justice? I think they got a decent amount of revenge, which seems to be what you really mean by "justice".

And if you want justice the real incompetents were the Niagara Regional Police. Had they bothered to do a halfway decent investigation into Tammy Homolka even when they knew Bernardo was lying Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French live. I think its a bit much to ask for moral accountability from someone like Karla, but certainly not from the police offers involved.

But instead of getting more revenge what they got was her testimony against Paul Bernardo. Without that (assuming the later discovery of the movies neve happened) they could have easily had a trial with no one quite sure who did what. Then you end up with conflicting opinions and no sense to the public that the right people are doing the right amount of time. Some people would believe Bernardo that Homolka was a psychopath and he was just going along other would have believed her that she was forced into it.

Now you could just "hang 'em both" and move on. But I don't see how locking people in a box for decades makes anything better.

Further, why do you consider the fake apology so important? Karla sorry she got caught. Karla likely won't do it again and wouldn't if a bunch of random events hadn't lined up starting in 1987 she wouldn't have done it in the first place. Paul Bernardo's a tougher case since its going to be hard to know how deep his demons are. But the most likely case is that he had dormant fantasies and Karla's own rape fantasies turned them into a raging inferno.

So what are we asking for justice for, the fact that these two rolled snake eyes by meeting up?

CD-Host said...

I think you have that one bang on.

Well I'm glad we agree on something.

I am no expert, but the incredible quality of experts that they have on TJMK and PMF, from what I have read by these intelligent people over the past few years, say that the Italian justice system is one of the most rehabilitative and fair systems in the world. I would concur with these experts.

Let me just comment what I think you mean is you "acquiesce" you don't have an independent opinion. I consider the people on those blogs knowledgeable but tremendously biased.

A good example is the slander charge against the parents or newspapers. Maybe this is cultural conflict, but as American the idea of restricting political speech is unthinkable. I don't see any difference from what Italy is attempting and what Iran does. Once Amanda says something as sworn testimony in court, it ceases to be a libelous statement for anyone forever, period. And a criminal penalty for libel not civil? Going after newspapers and authors critiquing the government.

It shockingly offensive. That is Italy attempting to export European speech codes to America. Completely unacceptable.

There is a lot I object to in this case. But for the same reason that I don't support Pakistani's who try and impose Islamic speech codes on the US via. terrorist retaliation in Pakistan and Afghanistan I think Mignini needs to be stopped. Even if every crazy idea about Knox as an evil Svengali were absolutely 100% true, he is still the far greater threat.

And frankly that's support for the ideology of the 1st amendment is something that binds all Americans together. George Bush who had no problem reintroducing torture, or Barack Obama who has made heavier use of assassination than all other presidents put together never considered banning criticism of government officials by 3rd parties. It is completely beyond the pale. And I refuse to believe the Americans on those boards don't share my opinion in that deep down.

So when they excuse Mignini, I think they are lying. And if they are willing to lie then you need to be very careful in taking information from them. So I look at there boards as being an excellent source of information intermixed with propaganda.

Now let me be clear I don't think Italians see it the same way. Europeans really do seem to by into things like "speech codes" which make hate speech a crime. I have a tough time understanding Canadians or Brits on this since they seem to have some sort of middle position.

(continued in next post)

CD-Host said...

As a parent, where does honesty and truth and teaching children the importance of those lessons, along with respect for human life - when do those trump any possible consequences for harm done to others?

Fair question. Well lets simply any possible consequence to death. So the real question is what truths are worth dying for? I'd say a truth which substantially advances a good cause, things that you see as seeing many lives or making the world far better for humanity. Agree or disagree Bradley Manning is a good example of someone not throwing their life away for a truth. If you want a trial example Martin Luther's, "I am persuaded by means of the passages I have quoted, and unless they thus render my conscience bound by the word of God, I cannot and I will not retract, for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me". Agree or disagree that's standing up to the court with truth.

Now as the consequences drop one can do it for more and more petty reasons. And moreover one should show some loyalty to their society as part of a social contract. That doesn't apply in Amanda's case because Italy is not her society.

Mexicans (citizens not race) in US courts are a good example in the other direction. I don't think Mexicans owe our courts any loyalty. And at the same time our courts don't have a long term interest in the welfare of the accused. Which is why deportation is used so heavily as a punishment for Mexicans while exile is almost never used for Americans.

If these attributes and ideals don't trump consequences, then why have a justice system in the first place? (read: rehabilitative system in Italy).

I'll object to the read. I don't see any evidence that any kids are getting rehabilitation. And if they were the sentences would be rehabilitative not punitive. The sentences themselves are of the form
Do X crime do Y time. That's not rehabilitative it is punitive.

As for why have a justice system. To preserve public order. Violence and force trumps property and personal safety. The society needs to have a system to employ protective violence: externally via. the military and internally via. the judicial system. Those are 2 of the 4 legitimate functions of government. Citizens should generally assist the justice system in carrying out its goals, but... that's not a requirement for suicide.

Forgive me if it just seems odd to me, that you would donate money to a defense fund for AK after all that you believe. A defense that continues to encourage this young woman's denial, instead of donating to the rehabilitative program in Italy where she is being imprisoned to encourage her to speak the truth.

I think she is trying to be as ethical as she can given her situation as far as truth. Sometimes she panics like the thing with Patrick but she's tried to put out feelers for a confession. I don't expect anyone to commit suicide and Mignini wants her destroyed. Why would you expect anyone to assist their own destruction? If he got pulled and a prosecutor got assigned who was looking for a healthy way out we could have a much better result all around. But I don't see her doing anything wrong in fighting for her life. Rocco Girlanda would have been a perfect person if we were interested in truth. With Mignini I cheer her on chewing through the straps and hope she gets out of the trap before she is skinned.

CD-Host said...

(final part)

(I once read that she could get a much reduced prison term while in prison by admitting her crime to the judge in private. I don't know if this is true, but Italy appears to be a country that is committed to rehabilitation).

I think Italy is going to want to get her the hell out of the country assuming she can keep the pressure up. The next time an Italian national comes up on death row, the Italians try and intervene and governor looks at the ambassador with a blank stare when he brings up international standards or maybe a "What you are kidding? With you holding Amanda Knox" and they suddenly get treated like the North Korean ambassador. Or if/when Seattle severs it relationship with Perugia as a sister city. Or the next the International Criminal Court comes up and Amanda Knox is given as a perfect example as to why George Bush's / Donald Rumsfeld's concerns are justified.

Even though they think she's guilty and dangerous why woud the Italians want to take a political hit to keep a serial killer off the streets of Seattle?

And regarding the prosecutor (I believe there are 2 or 3) - the final verdict and explanation of the evidence in a report is not produced by him (them). It is made by a few judges and jurors in collaboration with each other. So the idea of an "incompetent" prosecutor, whether one chooses to believe this or not, is a moot point.

I don't think it is moot at all. He conducts the investigation and conducts the negotiations. He's the one who put this trial on this track. He put the judges in an impossible position where they had to acquit her or crucify her. Unless they were going to turn on Mignini hard (which they weren't) they couldn't indicate how he had polluted the case. They weren't willing to acquit. Mignini wouldn't be "monster" he is without a friendly group of judges that enable him. The same way that in the 1950s American sheriffs who were part of the Klan were enabled in their abuses by friendly judges who were part of the "white citizens councils".

Hopefully the appeals court can see what happened and intervenes. But I doubt it.


In fact, my own personal belief is that everyone I have read about so far: the prosecutors, the defense attorneys, the judges, the jurors, the police, the forensic people - they are all quite competent and intelligent people.

OK then you tell me why we don't have basic facts about this case at this point? Why haven't they been able to get a reconstruction? Why have they allowed this case to be so controversial? Why have they done things to further inflame opinion against them, like the slander charge against the parents or going after newspapers?

Why have they been unable to accomplish in 3 years and with phenomenal resources what American (or Canadian) DAs do in this sort of situation in a few interviews. Rudy Guede and Amanda Knox are both begging to talk, you just have to read their statements. How much easier does it get?

Dr. Kathy said...

Well, I've read your responses, and I have to say we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Many of the questions you ask and statements you make have me wonder if you actually read the entire multiple hundred page document of the court report. Everything is there - complete and comprehensive.

I was curious that you did not respond to my question: "as a parent". I was trying to read in between the lines in your response, and what I came up with, is that if AK was your child, I believe you would not encourage her to speak the truth and take responsibility for her actions.

Anyhow, the only positive thing that I got from your responses that I agree with, is this idea for punishment: "Another form of justice would have been to have Karla work for an international agency putting her life at risk to save lives".

I think that is one of the best "justice" ideas I have ever heard of. Justice for me involves balance. When someone like Knox plays a direct hand in brutally snuffing out a life, even though it will never bring that precious life back, if Knox's life could be used to save others in conditions that are dangerous - maybe this could do some good in the world.

The only caveat to that, is that people who already do this as a personal choice in their lives (not as a rehabilitative/punitive experience), are people who are incredibly self-responsible, selfless, and have their "heart" in to it. I don't know how that would work with people with personality disorders that continue proclaiming and crying that "I'm innocent, I'm innocent".

Anyway, have a Happy New Year. This will be my last posting. It's been interesting to see how different people around the world think and what they believe in.

CD-Host said...

Many of the questions you ask and statements you make have me wonder if you actually read the entire multiple hundred page document of the court report. Everything is there - complete and comprehensive.

Yes I read it. I haven't memorized it. And no I didn't find it complete and comprehensive. If there are clear answers then point them out to me.

What lethal acts do we know for certain that Amanda Knox did?
What lethal acts do we know for certain that Raffaele Sollecito do?
What lethal acts do we know for certain that Rudy Guede did?

We don't have a single clear cut statement like "Rudy Guede stabbed Meredith Kercher 11 times in the locations marked in yellow, while Raffaele Sollecito stabbed her 16 times in the locations marked in purple..."

These are reasonable questions that a report on a murder whose facts have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt supposedly should be able to answer.

That being said, I think its pretty cool that the judges had to create such a report and I'd like that to become US law.

I was curious that you did not respond to my question: "as a parent". I was trying to read in between the lines in your response, and what I came up with, is that if AK was your child, I believe you would not encourage her to speak the truth and take responsibility for her actions.

Well its a weird question because the last 4 years of Amanda's life would have played out differently as well. We would have to flush out this hypothetical a bit. For example am I married to Edda Mellas with her baggage or do I have my wife as Amanda's mother?

But in short, absolutely I would encourage my child to speak the truth and take responsibility at the proper time. And given where Amanda is, this time ain't it. I would discourage suicide. That means she would have my blessing, my assistance and my active encouragement to thwart the Italian court. I didn't raise her to engage in masochistic martyrdom and throw her life away for nothing.

Anyhow, the only positive thing that I got from your responses that I agree with, is this idea for punishment: "Another form of justice would have been to have Karla work for an international agency putting her life at risk to save lives".

Glad we agree on that. As you can tell I'm not a big fan of long prison sentences and I love the idea of rehabilitation through public service.

I think that is one of the best "justice" ideas I have ever heard of....
The only caveat to that, is that people who already do this as a personal choice in their lives (not as a rehabilitative/punitive experience), are people who are incredibly self-responsible, selfless, and have their "heart" in to it. I don't know how that would work with people with personality disorders that continue proclaiming and crying that "I'm innocent, I'm innocent".


People go into dangerous jobs and sacrifice themselves all the time to atone for past sins. You can meet plenty of missionaries that have ugliness in their past. Accomplishment is what gives you the ability to freely admit mistakes and failings. It is the insecure who can't admit their errors.

The best analogy is the military. The US military used to offer an alternative to prison for kids who got in trouble. The case would be suspended while she was "abroad" and if they had an honorable discharge it would get dropped and closed. In 2006 we were running short of people because of Iraq and that door opened again and lots of gang members got a way out of gangs by joining the marines. I bet you many that joined had done some pretty hideous stuff. We had some problem like them stealing and shipping guns back but it in the end they were tough fighters who won some impressive battles.

They were rehabilitated.

Happy New Year to you too.

CD-Host said...

Kathy I don't know if you are still reading or not. But over the vacation I read Rocco's book. So rather than speculate here is how she is doing in prison:

1) Her Italian has gotten much stronger. She is able to converse while before she wasn't.

2) Most of the other prisoners have high school or less in terms of education and come from lower class backgrounds. A huge percentage are foreign but mostly from Eastern Europe. Under the best cases she would be socially isolated.

3) But this isn't the best case, the other prisoners resent her fame and the outside support she gets. She is subject to attacks and is treated hostilely based on jealousy. This gets particularly bad anytime anything happens with her case because of the extensive news coverage.
The situation is worse for the boys: Rudy has been subjected to violence and Italy believes Raffaele will probably have to do his sentence in solitary confinement to protect his life.

4) So Amanda ends up spending most of her time alone reading. She does participate in other activities when she can without it

5a) She desires to become an interpreter and is not receiving any vocational training.

5b) She is not receiving any psychological services.

6) She has not been tortured or mistreated by the guards.

CD-Host said...

#4 should read something like

4) So Amanda ends up spending most of her time alone reading. She does participate in other activities when she can but that's not often.

Logan said...

Hi CD-host:

I've been reading your take on the Amanda Knox case with great interest. I call it the Amanda Knox (AK) case because I believe true justice for Meredith Kercher has long been a casualty of a protracted witch hunt. As you correctly pointed out, the prosecutor in this case seems singularly focused on Amanda Knox, who defies all criminal profiles for this type of crime.

There are a wide range of opinions on this case surrounding the murder of Meredith Kercher. Your opinions are interesting to me because you appear new to the case and seem relatively open to the question of guilt or innocence. My opinions have solidified to a consistent view that Amanda and Rafaelle are completely innocent, with no involvement whatsoever except as the first persons to happen along the crime scene, and victims of an overzealous prosecution. I realize that you are closer to the view that she and Rafaelle must have somehow been involved, perhaps even after the fact.

First off, let me admit some my biases. Like you, I am an American, and view the case through the lens of the american juris prudence in terms of what is acceptable and unacceptable as evidence. I have visited Seattle numerous times, and have seen up close the cultural quirkiness expressed by Amanda Knox that doesn't seem to translate very well internationally. I also became aware of the case framed in terms of Amanda's innocence, not guilt. I accept these biases as things I have to fight through when looking at this case.

When I think about what drives my belief in the defendants' innocence, it comes down to some basic facts that I will attempt to articulate here (please bear with me).

1. It is clear that theory about the crime, and not forensic evidence, at the scene drove this case. The case was closed before the forensic evidence came back. Originally, the prosecutor advocated a theory of crime as being a satanic ritual gone wrong on All Soul's Day, with Amanda Knox playing a central role as a "Luciferina". http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/masonic-theory-that-put-knox-in-the-dock-981759.html

2. Apart from behavior possibly indicative of post-traumatic stress, Amanda Knox exhibited none of the traits commonly associated with guilty parties. She did not attempt to flee the scene/country. She went to the police station several times and voluntarily subjected herself to interrogation over several days without seeing the need to avail herself of legal counsel, even as things were clearly moving against her.

(continued in next post)

CD-Host said...

Hello Logan welcome to the blog!

I agree with both your points (1) and (2) and await further comments.

Logan said...

3. From what we understand of that final overnight interrogation, Amanda was subjected to an intense interrogation, and told that Rafaelle could not account for her whereabouts on the night of the murder, forced to defend a text message to Patrick Lamumba saying, "see you later", and asked to reconcile those apparent contradictions and imagine what could have possibly happened - all without legal counsel, in a foreign language where she could only express herself fully through an interpreter. All without the videotape recording required by Italian law when interrogating suspects. There were more than 12 officers present. No one remembered to record the interrogation?
4. The forensic evidence in the bedroom where Meredith was brutally murdered shows no evidence of an attempt to clean up the blood after the fact, and shows no evidence that Amanda was ever in the room. There are no fingerprints, no footprints, no hair, fibers, and other DNA evidence belonging to Amanda in the room where Meredith Kercher struggled violently for her life.
5. The forensic evidence overwhelming shows that another defendant, Rudy Guede, was present in the room where Meredith was murder, interacted with her, left footprints in her blood and feces in the toilet. His defense is that he was present but not involved in the murder, had consensual sex with the victim but not in a group setting. Elements of his story have changed over time to include the possibility that someone looking like Rafaelle Sollecito was the real assailant, but the core elements of his defense remains the same, and to my sensibilities, extremely unlikely given what we know about the victim. Although I could be wrong, I believe that Rudy Guede has never directly implicated Amanda Knox.
6. We are asked to believe that Amanda Knox planned and executed a murder with individuals she had only known for a few weeks, and a boyfriend she had known for less than 2 weeks, with a large kitchen knife that she fortuitously had in her purse for protection and kept as a trophy while disposing of a second murder weapon and bloody clothes, thus exhibiting profound psychosis not evident at any other time in her life, but she was too intoxicated to remember all the details. And for what reason? Satanic ritual…robbery….jealousy? No reason at all. She was just an American girl gone wild in Perugia.
Like all humans beings, I view the available evidence, testimony, and the resulting Massei report from my biased point of view. There are many good people on both sides of the issue. I viewed the people on the other side as zealots, but Dr. Kathy's attempt to reach out to you without vitriol has done much to alter that view. There are good people on both sides of the issue. I am wedded to the truth more than I am to Amanda's innocence. If there is incontrovertible evidence pointing to her guilt I would like to think I would accept it. But so far I haven't seen it, and in the last three years, it hasn't appeared. I feel confirmed in my view that this case represent a rush to judgement, and two innocent people are caught in vicious undertow of injustice.

CD-Host said...

3) Absolutely. And lets not forget she has stood by those statements made in the interrogation as being accurate. The fact is whether she was hit, pressured or just thrown off balance the interrogation went way over the line and just got garbage from her. The fact that there is a magical missing tape leads me to believe her version of events is far more true than the police version. I'm going to talk a lot more about the interrogations and how lousy they were in my 4th post.

In short: they used too much pressure to get accurate statements from her and so they got lies.

4) Agreed the "murder" scene was not cleaned. The shared bathroom was cleaned though.

5) Rudy has off and on implicated both of them. He's given a wide range of stories. A lot of the elements in his story do agree with independent elements of Amanda's however. In general he's a negative for Amanda, but it isn't purely clear cut.

6) There is no question the prosecution never presented a reasonable theory of the murder. What they presented was some some suspicious evidence. They didn't have enough for a murder trial. They just weren't able to put together a theory that made sense. They had enough for an obstruction trial. That's a result of them having overcharged everyone involved so instead of getting decent pleas they ended up having to get BS convictions or excessive charges.

To exaggerate a bit, Its like if I got pulled over while speeding and got charged with vehicular homicide. Asking who the victim was they indicate they don't have one. But my speeding is definite proof I'm a criminal and I did it. I can't plead to a speeding violation because they aren't letting me give my story.

Overcharging prevents the justice system from working. Amanda should not be doing a quarter century because the Italians did a lousy job putting this case together.

Margarite said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Margarite said...

I am Mike, not Margarite
Harry Rag made several forensic assertions which should be refuted, and elsewhere, they have been refuted. Celebrity which is obtained by attacking Amanda Knox should be considered a personal attack just as much or more than if a person states their opinion that Harry Rag has again, as elsewhere, made claims here which are very inaccurate and should not influence anyone. Like the coming Lifetime movie, those comments are an attempt to brand the false version into the minds of as many innocent persons as possible, as part of the campaign.

Margarite said...

I am Mike, not Margarite
Harry Rag made several forensic assertions which should be refuted, and elsewhere, they have been refuted. Celebrity which is obtained by attacking Amanda Knox should be considered a personal attack just as much or more than if a person states their opinion that Harry Rag has again, as elsewhere, made claims here which are very inaccurate and should not influence anyone. Like the coming Lifetime movie, those comments are an attempt to brand the false version into the minds of as many innocent persons as possible, as part of the campaign.

Margarite said...

Thanks for providing Your thoughts and this web site. Your blog contains much depth of thought. I'm glad we seem to agree; anyway, because you're not writing mean-spiritedly, it helps restore some of my faith in goodness.
I would also like to say Your list of websites is a very great service. Whether or not You may want to delete my other messages today has no effect on this statement.

EarThinsPace said...

That was I, Mike, again... not Margarite.

CD-Host said...

Hi Mike, welcome to the blog. Feel free to refute Harry's comments or debate them. There is a slew of articles here on the Knox case for you to explore. And yes Harry has been refuted.

My thing with most of the DNA evidence is that it is what you would expect from living in the same house. If there was a dead person's blood in my bathroom my DNA would likely be found mixed with it. My DNA would likely show up in places my wife has been and I haven't via. secondary transfer, etc... Assume all the DNA were true, it wouldn't prove much. But yes there are excellent sites which address the DNA evidence.