Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:25 pm
It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:25 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 - March 4, 10

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 13 of 15 [ 3716 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message

Offline mstev14420


User avatar


Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:23 am

Posts: 99

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:40 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The American media doesn't publish things without 2 sources is a load of rubbish. The tabloids here along with several major newspapers and television say all sorts of crap without proper verification. If there is any problem with the Italian justice system is that it's too lenient. AK47 should get more than 26 years for what she did.
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:38 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Hey,
i'm in the middle of painting my apartament, so my acces to the internet is limited.
Did i miss anything? How was Oprah?
Is there any way for me to see it? I tried Youtube, but no luck. The videos are removed.
Any word on how long till the report?
Donnie
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:54 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

A scathing review of the Oprah show in this update on the article by Bill Edelblute

http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... r-Cantwell?

Here's a journalist who really understands the case!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:06 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Assuming the verdict is not overturned on appeal, and that it may be reduced to match Rudy's, and assuming Knox is a well-behaved prisoner, I think it is safe to say that she will be back in the USA by the time she is 35. She will be able to start a family and a career if she wants to. Meredith Kercher never had the opportunity to do either. What a sad, brutal, painful and unnecessary end to a beautiful young life.


If her sentence will be reduced on the appeal to match Rudy's 16 years, then she can be out after serving something around 8 years in prison(for good behaviour etc) and she already is there for a little over 2 years, so they will count that into the sentence, which gives us 6 years in prison and she'll be out before she turns 30-this is what i heard some time ago. Is that possible?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline MikeMCSG


Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:14 am

Posts: 207

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:31 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

bilko wrote:
A scathing review of the Oprah show in this update on the article by Bill Edelblute

http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane ... r-Cantwell?

Here's a journalist who really understands the case!


Maybe he does but he doesn't write very well. And he repeatedly gets the family relationships wrong.
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:49 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Who are the 'extras' 'round the Mellas kitchen table on the Satuday morning video? I am not familiar with the various Aunts and uncles and who is related to Edda and who is related to Curt and who has found themselves married into this family.....

http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/The-Fami ... Call-Video
Top Profile 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:48 am   Post subject: Re: Oprah   

Michael wrote:
nicki wrote:
lector wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
lector wrote:
Three more notes on Oprah:

3) Ted Simon, when given the opportunity with a leading question from Oprah late in the show, backed away from an attack on the Italian legal system & instead said something diplomatic, on the order of, "It doesn't matter whether we're talking about the U.S. or the Italian system, we would hope that that wouldn't be enough evidence to convict Amanda anywhere." (I'm obviously paraphrasing.) That was pretty sharp of him, given his alloted task; that guy thinks ahead.
Not sure it's all that sharp these days - isn't it rather the very well plotted post-trial tactic now? Part of the standard MO for the legal team now to try and distinguish and downplay i) the "failures of the Italian system" - a line Curt 'n' Edda 'n' Chris couldn't / can't stop themselves falling across the line time and again and ii) criticising the apparent (to them) lack of sufficient evidence.


I think you mistook my intent, or perhaps I didn't express it clearly enough. Simon (in my view) changed the flow of the show, at least for a moment, with his divergent response to Oprah's leading question. I thought he showed a quick mind & an articulate tongue at that moment; that's what I mean by "sharp."

I am not sure what good this will do in an Italian court, unless he's as fluent in Italian as he is in English, but it made me understand that he can be effective in the American courts.

As far as I know this guy is not licenced to practice law in Italy so I doubt we we'll see him sitting in an Italian Court except as a spectator.Of course he could still "counsel" Knox's Italian defense team, but he will not be allowed to take an active role in the trial.



He's just a glorified, not to mention very expensive, PR man Nicki.

Actually, this case has been an eye opener for me on a variety of matters, but how those in the legal profession have behaved has certainly been a large one. I assumed each had their own profession and as such stick to the discipline...the priest would preach on the pulpit and christen babies...the fireman would put out fires and rescue cats from trees...the policeman would detect and arrest criminals...the PR man would do PR while the lawyer would practice law. However, in this case, we have seen many step from one field into another, while conning the public the new field is exactly the same as the one they actually work in. In this case, lawyers. We have Ted Simon, not practising any actual 'law' on behalf of Amanda, who is actually PR, Judge Heavey, again a lawyer, not practicing law for Amanda but PR and then on to Anne Bremner, yet another lawyer not lawyering, but running PR...and then private detective Paul Ciolino who is never detecting, but again doing PR. What is in common with all, is all are PR but using their credentials as lawyer or detective to bolster that PR and all the while, never admitting they are in fact PR, instead attempting to give the impression they are on the case AS a 'lawyer' or AS a 'detective'. In my book, that's deceit... the modern word for which is 'spin'.

Ted Simon and the family have never announced he will be representing Amanda in court. Why not? Because he won't be. But to say he won't be, will be to lessen his credibility so best to let the public think he will be and simply give the impression that he is actively working on the case in a professional legal capacity.

It's all a big con job.


Atty Ted Simon is like a Bidet here, he adds a touch of class but they don’t really know what to do with him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Examiner.com Bill Edelblute. (Updated)

Updates following airing of Oprah episode

Credit Oprah for the following:
Overall, Oprah, was fairly objective, she did not take a stance that Amanda is innocent
She did ask some hard questions which tended to deflect somewhat from the Knox family stance, such as "is it true your daughter was on drugs that night?" And, "did you ask your daughter if she was involved?" "Did she point at an innocent man?"
She also asked about the cartwheels at the police station and showed and asked about the video of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecitio engaging in extended kissing outside the cottage after the victim's body was found.
She aired a written statement by Lyle Kercher, brother of victim Meredith Kercher, who apparently was invited to appear or speak live, but declined. However, this was at the end of the segment when it probably belongs right smack in the middle. A photo of Meredith was flashed only very briefly.

Discredit Oprah for the following:
Oprah made a unequivocal statement that the jury was not sequestered, as it would have been in America. That is not true. Even in murder cases, juries are not routinely sequestered throughout the trial. It is possible a judge would grant such a request upon motion by attorneys. It is possible a jury might have been sequestered during deliberations, but not during the trial, or both, or neither. Washington State juries definitely are forbidden during trial from reading or watching anything about the case. Saying that juries are always sequestered in America is a flat out false statement.
Having her production crew film and interview 11 and 15 year old children about the impacts on them. They are not at fault, and are not, or should not, be involved at all. The Mellases are robbing their childhood away from them.
When Edda Mellas told Oprah that Amanda said in a phone call to "tell Oprah I love her" Ms. Winfrey displayed what was clearly a flattered smile. You are just told that someone who has been convicted of murder, albeit subject to appeal, likes you, and you react as though someone's puppy has taken an immediate liking to you, or have recieved a much sought after complement. We don't know what Meredith Kercher thinks of Oprah or her show, as her life was taken and she is not here to groom and manipulate others, as is Amanda Knox even from a prison cell. (Nor would Meredith need to do so.)
For the banal statement, while turning to the audience: "If you want to be tried - you want it to be in the U.S.A.!" Sure about that? Amanda will get two levels of appeal as a matter of right in Italy. In her home state of Washington, she would have only one. Her first Italian appeal will be review of the strength of the facts as well as legal error, in Washington State it would be for legal error only, the Court of Appeals will not review credibility, or the strength of the evidence if even one rational person could believe in guilt. The preliminary hearing process is much formal and more protracted in Italy, as to whether there probable cause to support the charges. In Washington State, it is often determined by the judge glancing at a police affidavit, and defense attorneys rarely demand an adversial probable cause hearing with live testimony. Oprah's statement clearly implies the Italian system is not fair compared to that of the U.S., when there is no evidence of that, and implies there are more procedural protections, when there is no evidence of that. As some have said, if you want to be tried in the U.S.A. don't do something in Italy. To condemn a country's entire system is the same problem as with the statements by Senator Maria Cantwell about this case. Oprah's statement is clearly generic, applying to the whole U.S system versus the Italian system. Are they unfair, or is she the culprit? Maybe Oprah meant that if you are tried in the U.S., the "Innocence Project" will clear you after you've done twenty years for a crime you did not commit. How many hundreds have they got released from the results of those trials in the U.S. that are so superior to those in Italy?

Discredit Elizabeth Vargas of ABC's 20/20 for the following:
Ms. Vargas clearly implies there is something wrong with the whole trial and conviction though not being able to really tell us just what it is. She is definitely not objective. She repeats the Curt Knox mantra that this was "trial my media." How original. She says the jurors had difficult explaining their decision when pressed. Then contradicts herself and says the jury had trouble with Amanda's statements that she was there, but she was not. Other reports said the jurors said the DNA was convincing. That is not trial by media. The media had nothing to do with the content of the statements. Ms. Vargas is loose with the facts. There is almost no value of any kind in what Ms. Vargas had to offer, and negative value, when it comes to attacking a legal result with nothing to back it up, murdering the truth.
Ms. Vargas cites as false evidence or media reporting that Amanda was buying "sexy lingerie" shortly after the murder, stating Vargas has been to the store in question which is like one of our "Target" stores in America, and therefore the portrayal of Amanda as sex-crazed was all false. Amanda merely had to purchase underwear because she could not enter the cottage after the police found Meredith's body. Vargas did not mention that the reports about that include Amanda saying while in the store she was going to take Raffale Sollectio home for some wild sex that night. It is a question of whether Amanda Knox, the typical young college girl, exhibited a normal demeanor in the days shortly after the discovery of her roommates raped and murdered body. To some of us, it is not a time of exuberance celebration of pleasure-seeking. Vargas makes a very serious material omission of relevant fact in conveniently not mentioning the part about Amanda being up for wild sex that night. Amanda chose to say it while buying underwear, not the media.

More here:
Examiner/Bill Edelbutle


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Oh, no, 411, that WAS NOT sarcasm. I just could not understand my comp., and I thought that was amazing that you picked up on the definition. AND it turned out that my comp was on automatic translation. So, mea culpa if it seemed that way. I love your posts.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Thank you, Bilko, for posting the edit to Bill's article. The fact that decades-old DNA stored in police lockers has been used to free innocent people is a great point for those who still harp on about contamination of the bra-clasp and that it sat for a certain number of days at the crime scene. I've no doubt that the Italian forensic science team bore this in mind and probably knew that items and evidence would be recovered over a period of time.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lisareik


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:42 pm

Posts: 62

Location: Israel

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
Earthling wrote:
Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox, a painful ending to a young life (VIDEO)

THE DAILY ENQUIRER

(It's not Meredith's life that's been ended, but Amanda's apparently)

Firstly, her life isn't over. She'll probably get out at some point and get her own reality show (or shows), and do really well. I just hope she gives her sister Deanna a bit part, after Deanna gave up her college career to take care of their parents while Curt ran around the country supporting his murderous daughter, instead of making a living like every other responsible father in the world.

Any bets on the title of the show? "Amanda Unfurled"? "Knox Your Sox Off"? Ah well, it hardly matters. We just know it will involve lots of wild, crazy parties, drugs and alcohol, and random sex. Just what Americans crave. Bleh.


But really, here's the question...who was the girl that was murdered here? To listen to some of these media idiots, one would think Amanda Knox was the murder victim.

As has been the case for over two years now, the erasure of the murder victim, Meredith Kercher, continues. There's a cuckoo in the nest and she has no right to be there. It's that simple.

I have come to the conclusion that the American people and the American media were bred in completely different cultures. The American people either see there is culpability on Amanda's part or simply don't care, having other important things to do, while the only culture the media have experienced is a petri dish. But, despite the outrage and objections from the US media I see hope. The US media see themselves as the de facto government of America, the people think what they 'damn well tell them to think', except in this case, something's gone wrong. Despite the media raised moral panic, Americans aren't marching through the streets demanding 'down with this sort of thing', the reaction has been at best, apathetic. Maybe this is a sign the media is losing power and maybe that's a good thing, because frankly, they've lost the way...soundbite instead of right, floss instead of quality all combined with a barely masked agenda based on ignorance. Maybe, that's the reason they're selling less copy and find themselves in trouble. They are not being supplanted by the digital age, rather it is simply exposing their BS. Credibilty will equate to copy...people will always depend on those they feel they can trust, but once it's gone you're shot. As supposedly very bright people, the media are rather slow to catch up with this reality.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Curt's face seems to be breaking out in some kind of rash. Bed bug bites, maybe?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... Oprah.html

http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/amanda-kno ... ce-3380984
They say Knox's bizarre behaviour in the days following the murder was due to the fact she was in
Inside the courtroom, there is not the evidence to come up with a guilty verdict," he told Oprah. shock.

http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=11&sid=287975
"I saw numerous people crying in the audience. Oprah's eyes filled with tears at some point in time. At the end, when we were leaving, they gave us a large applause and people yelled out 'Stay strong and hang in there,'" said Mellas.
As for future national attention, Knox's mom expects to make the morning show rounds. "All the major networks have asked us to probably do the big morning shows again as soon as we get the judge's motivation. That's what we're expecting next."

oh boy.. here we go....

but listen to the radio interview. This is Frank:
http://blatherwatch.blogs.com/talk_radi ... frank.html



btw.. anyone have a diagram of the knox/mellas/huff/whatever family tree?
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

From the Examiner article posted by Jools:
Quote:
She aired a written statement by Lyle Kercher, brother of victim Meredith Kercher, who apparently was invited to appear or speak live, but declined. However, this was at the end of the segment when it probably belongs right smack in the middle. A photo of Meredith was flashed only very briefly.


Oprah thus feels she has presented both sides. How could Lyle Kercher or any of the Kerchers possibly accept to be part of this kind of PR effort on behalf of one of the three people convicted of murdering Meredith? What was Oprah thinking? Of course, this is the same person who thought that interviewing two young girls who have nothing whatsoever to do with this would make for good television by tugging at the heartstrings of viewers.

Oprah must feel overjoyed knowing that Amanda Knox appreciates her efforts and even feels love for her. All you need is love!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

AK's Friends and Supporters merchandising. w-((
Some of the most fanatics supporters probably wear it! ie: Wilkens, Kelly 13, Frankie...


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline windfall


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:22 pm

Posts: 608

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
windfall wrote:
Another poor victim... "ASHLEY BEGGED: LET ME DO SEX REHAB"

DESPERATE Ashley Cole bombarded wife Cheryl with phone calls begging her to give their marriage another chance - and offering to go into rehab to tackle his sex problems.
The England footie ace, 29, left a string of increasingly emotional voicemails promising he would have therapy and counselling after Cheryl dumped him by text.

X Factor star Cheryl, 26, refused to answer any of her husband's calls.

Instead she chose to listen to his messages while spending seven hours with dancer Derek Hough in her Los Angeles hotel suite as she considered her next move.

Last night a close pal told The Sun: "Ashley was calling every ten minutes or so and leaving messages.

"He was very emotional and in distress.

"Ashley suggested they could go for counselling and that he could try therapy.

"He admitted for the first time that he has a problem.

"Cheryl refused to answer any of the calls and they went straight to voicemail.

"She was with Derek at the time talking about her future. Cheryl was talking constantly and thinking everything through.

"One minute she was really upbeat, feeling strong and positive about a new life on her own.

"Then she would come crashing down and feel sorry for Ashley and think how much she loves him.

"But in the end she decided that she has to stay strong and stick to her plan."

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... z0gSb21UMA


Behind this typically tabloid treatment, a familiar story emerges. I just hope that Cheryl gets some counseling from a trained professional. She does need to stick to her plan, if that plan is to end the relationship with this entitled narcissist. My advice for Elin, Tiger's trophy wife, would be the same. It is hard to end relationships with narcissists; they are very good at making others feel guilty.


Spot on, Skep: I've bolded your last sentence in view of today's tabloid headline. Ashley Cole now blaming Cheryl for the breakdown because there wasn't enough sex.

n-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tigerfish


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:54 am

Posts: 235

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Does anyone know what Deanna was studying at university?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

windfall wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
windfall wrote:
Another poor victim... "ASHLEY BEGGED: LET ME DO SEX REHAB"

DESPERATE Ashley Cole bombarded wife Cheryl with phone calls begging her to give their marriage another chance - and offering to go into rehab to tackle his sex problems.
The England footie ace, 29, left a string of increasingly emotional voicemails promising he would have therapy and counselling after Cheryl dumped him by text.

X Factor star Cheryl, 26, refused to answer any of her husband's calls.

Instead she chose to listen to his messages while spending seven hours with dancer Derek Hough in her Los Angeles hotel suite as she considered her next move.

Last night a close pal told The Sun: "Ashley was calling every ten minutes or so and leaving messages.

"He was very emotional and in distress.

"Ashley suggested they could go for counselling and that he could try therapy.

"He admitted for the first time that he has a problem.

"Cheryl refused to answer any of the calls and they went straight to voicemail.

"She was with Derek at the time talking about her future. Cheryl was talking constantly and thinking everything through.

"One minute she was really upbeat, feeling strong and positive about a new life on her own.

"Then she would come crashing down and feel sorry for Ashley and think how much she loves him.

"But in the end she decided that she has to stay strong and stick to her plan."

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... z0gSb21UMA


Behind this typically tabloid treatment, a familiar story emerges. I just hope that Cheryl gets some counseling from a trained professional. She does need to stick to her plan, if that plan is to end the relationship with this entitled narcissist. My advice for Elin, Tiger's trophy wife, would be the same. It is hard to end relationships with narcissists; they are very good at making others feel guilty.


Spot on, Skep: I've bolded your last sentence in view of today's tabloid headline. Ashley Cole now blaming Cheryl for the breakdown because there wasn't enough sex.

n-((


A sadly predictable development. Even sadder, I am sure he believes this to be true. In his mind, it is her fault that he cheats.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

tigerfish wrote:
Does anyone know what Deanna was studying at university?


According to Stefano Nazzi who interviewed her for the Italian gossip magazine, she was studying Biology.
http://lacronaca.myblog.it/archive/2009 ... -knox.html
Top Profile 

Offline windfall


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:22 pm

Posts: 608

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Not sure if this will resonate, but I'll put it out there.

In my line of work, I have to sit through quite a few horror movies, many of them deeply generic (if that's not an oxymoron). Anyhow, just watched SORORITY ROW and found some interesting resonances with the MK case.

The premise of the movie is that a bunch of sorority girls set up a guy to make it look like he's killed one of them by slipping her a few too many rohypnol. It's actually a gag to get back at him for being unfaithful to one of them. They drive out to dispose of the body, the women all the time keeping up the charade. Just before they are about to expose it all as a hoax, the guy kills the "dead" girl with a tyre iron (ostensibly to empty her lungs of air before they throw her down an abandoned mine shaft). From there, it's standard slasher fare: they dump the body; they all agree to keep quiet about what happened; someone or something starts to kill them off one by one a few months later.

Anyhow. There's some interesting things in there: a wild student party, a hazing that goes tragically, spectacularly wrong; lots of aggression between young women (mostly verbal, of course, but also some physical violence between women, including at least one head being slammed up against a wall); a cover-up ( with various discussions about guilt or lack of)... what struck me most was the moral tone of the thing. These teen horror movies of course have a tangential relationship to anything close to plausibility, but the "extreme" behaviour - one of the girls is a kind of Supergirl of promiscuity, there's the usual drink, drug, sex thing going on - the aggression, and above all the moral BLANKNESS of the young women, in particular the Queen Bitch, struck me as relevant.

Not sure I would recommend it as a worthwhile evening's viewing, though it passes the time entertainingly enough.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

tigerfish wrote:
Does anyone know what Deanna was studying at university?


I read (or heard on television?) that Deanna was "pre-med" at Western. I assume she was majoring in one of the hard sciences or hoping to. This is why I question the motive for her dropping out of school. If she was pre-med, there is no way she could do as much traveling and media appearances as she does and hope to pass a single class. And if she really did have to drop out of school in order to work full-time, then shame on her parents. However, I don't believe this. It's just one more whopper.

And why shouldn't the family continue to live in the home of the whopper and spin them out? The US media, like Oprah, just sits there with a big smile on its face, teary-eyed, holding their hands and passing the box of kleenex. Over here, we do our therapy on television, with a big audience. No tough questions, though. And thank goodness for those long commercial breaks, giving Oprah the opportunity to say what she really feels. According to Edda, anyway. She said Oprah was really touchy-feely off-camera.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
Who are the 'extras' 'round the Mellas kitchen table on the Satuday morning video? I am not familiar with the various Aunts and uncles and who is related to Edda and who is related to Curt and who has found themselves married into this family.....

http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/The-Fami ... Call-Video


H9,
Well...I reviewed the tape and I think I've spotted the MIA Chris Mellas!
He's hidden from view...
until he jumps up surp-)
to do refills on the coffee! drin-)

Also, to the right of the youngest Knox sisters, is Curt's wife, Cassandra.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

JMO

The AK Family is truly ENJOYING the notoriety and attention. It does nothing to help Amanda. Just the opposite. The ensuing press after these high profile appearances is never good. Even the obscure appearances (Vashon reunion, comedy benefit, ski trip) are negatively noted. Nobody forced those children to appear. Oprah would not have allowed it. They had wanted to. The parents had to sign releases.

Let's not forget the tasteless photos in front of the crime scene, published World-wide. Blatantly inappropriate behavior in court by the Family.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
From the Examiner article posted by Jools:
Quote:
She aired a written statement by Lyle Kercher, brother of victim Meredith Kercher, who apparently was invited to appear or speak live, but declined. However, this was at the end of the segment when it probably belongs right smack in the middle. A photo of Meredith was flashed only very briefly.


Oprah thus feels she has presented both sides. How could Lyle Kercher or any of the Kerchers possibly accept to be part of this kind of PR effort on behalf of one of the three people convicted of murdering Meredith? What was Oprah thinking? Of course, this is the same person who thought that interviewing two young girls who have nothing whatsoever to do with this would make for good television by tugging at the heartstrings of viewers.

Oprah must feel overjoyed knowing that Amanda Knox appreciates her efforts and even feels love for her. All you need is love!

I agree the Kerchers would not want to be part of this PR circus. But, Oprah should have asked Patrick Lumumba how it felt to be branded a rapist and a murderer by Amanda Knox. I'm sure Patrick wouldn't hesitate to appear in her show.


Last edited by Jools on Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:
h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
Who are the 'extras' 'round the Mellas kitchen table on the Satuday morning video? I am not familiar with the various Aunts and uncles and who is related to Edda and who is related to Curt and who has found themselves married into this family.....

http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/The-Fami ... Call-Video


H9,
Well...I reviewed the tape and I think I've spotted the MIA Chris Mellas!
He's hidden from view...
until he jumps up surp-)
to do refills on the coffee! drin-)

Also, to the right of the youngest Knox sisters, is Curt's wife, Cassandra.



Yup, I got them, but who are the others who joined in for the sleepover?
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

capealadin wrote:
Oh, no, 411, that WAS NOT sarcasm. I just could not understand my comp., and I thought that was amazing that you picked up on the definition. AND it turned out that my comp was on automatic translation. So, mea culpa if it seemed that way. I love your posts.


Thank you, Cape.
And sorry for misinterpreting your tone.

Speaking of misinterpreting, isn't it absurd when FOA can't think of a good lie to explain away Amanda's egregious behavior/lies, they continually remind us that there are a lot of things in this case that are "lost in translation."

As Curt and Edda are wont to say, lost in translation... "OVER THERE." That really foreign place.

I wonder if your computer's AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION would translate "cartwheels" into "stretching." You can see how eeeeeeeasily one could make that mistake. It's reallllllllllly hard to distinguish one term from the other.... :roll:
"fare la ruota" = do a cartwheel
"sgranchirsi le gambe"= stretch one's legs
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

From the 'Causes on facebook" site: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/234623

Please consider going to the 'Contact Us' button at Oprah.com and thanking them for treating Amanda and her family as real human beings instead of the fictional characters we've seen other places.
For those of you who are new to our Cause, welcome. One of the things we do here is collect e-mails for Amanda. Please put Amanda's name in the title, keep it to a half page or so, keep it upbeat, focused on reasons to be hopeful. The best messages are about your experiences of everyday life, especially if you live in Seattle. Although a great recent one that Amanda commented on regarded a walk on the beach in Oregon.
I’m asking all Cause members to send $50 if you haven’t done so yet. If everyone here donated at that level that would make a huge difference. Please also encourage your Facebook friends to join us.

Some of you have sent pictures to pass along to Amanda. So I'd like to encourage you all to do this, but let's have some boundaries. Please only one picture per week, make it a JPEG, and keep the subjects things that Amanda can relate to. PICs of your family, dog, or other personal items are less interesting than PICs of places or ordinary scenes of America. A good PIC might be of your local coffee shop accompanied by a story of what it smells and sounds like each morning, she needs to be reminded of such simple things. You get the idea; transport her away from where she is for a while without adding any baggage from your life.

Oprah transcript : http://media.causes.com/ribbon/744185
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mortytoad wrote:
Curt's face seems to be breaking out in some kind of rash. Bed bug bites, maybe?


My preliminary medical assessment?
I'd say Curt's got a case of "Acne Eruptus Solidaritus Familiarias Vulgaris "

Allow me to translate.
In short, Curt --and his skin-- (the largest organ of the body) are identifying and responding, in reactive solidarity with the rest of his "vulgar" family!) :lol:

Diagnostic Clues:
Note the irritation and inflammation and the pattern of Curt's outbreak--it's the same distinct area as Amanda's dermatological lesions (Someone, quick!---Where's that close-up of AK's skin lesions, in court???)

There is a plethora of literature in the field of psychosomatic medicine about the skin reflecting/expressing emotional states, transforming psychic conflict into a physical symptom.

Wwwwwwwait......!!!! CONFLICT, WHAT PSYCHIC CONFLICT could that be? I wonder...

For more information on Curt's condition, I'll have to dig into my back issues of "Psychoanalytic Quarterly."

The FFF*

*Fake Freudian 411" co-)
Top Profile 

Offline Geologist


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Posts: 83

Location: Leeds and Toronto

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
JMO

The AK Family is truly ENJOYING the notoriety and attention. It does nothing to help Amanda. Just the opposite. The ensuing press after these high profile appearances is never good. Even the obscure appearances (Vashon reunion, comedy benefit, ski trip) are negatively noted. Nobody forced those children to appear. Oprah would not have allowed it. They had wanted to. The parents had to sign releases.

Let's not forget the tasteless photos in front of the crime scene, published World-wide. Blatantly inappropriate behavior in court by the Family.


Absolutely, it's become their main source of income.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Geologist wrote:
Absolutely, it's become their main source of income.


It's impossible the AK Family can ignore the mostly negative press. There's just too much of it.

The press rounds after the report is released should be interesting. Some of those hosts will ask about the facts and evidence. Curt/Edda will not be able to spin anymore. Sure, they will try, but it will only make them look more idiotic.

Maybe it's just my imagination, but it seems there's more and more negative reaction to the AK Family media appearances. She's a convicted criminal. Not uncommon to react immediately after the verdict. Generally, the media tapers off. This has accelerated. The public is being forced to look at the evidence. Especially after the official report is released.
Top Profile 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I was unable to record the last few minutes of the Oprah show and was unaware that there was a statement from Lyle Kercher. Was it a new one or from the post-verdict conference? If it was new, what did he say?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Mortytoad, it was the statement by Lyle Kercher at the post-trial press conference. Agreed with the verdict. Not a day for rejoicing, because they had lost a beloved Sister/Daughter.

After those cold, stupid remarks by Curt Knox, the Lyle statement was the only thing that redeemed Oprah.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Hi Morty:

Not a new statement, but this was added to end of show:

[On the day that Amanda Knox was sentenced, Meredith Kercher's brother, Lyle, made this statement: "Ultimately, we are pleased with the decision, pleased that we've got a decision, but it's not a time for celebration. At the end of the day, we're all gathered here because our sister was brutally murdered and taken away from us."]

page 11 of transcript
http://media.causes.com/ribbon/744185
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


Hi DLW,

I've just read the article. It's another terrible one-sided article, containing numerous factual errors. It was no doubt arranged by David Marriott.

I hope posters take the time to report the errors and inaccuracies:

Report errors or inaccuracies: userhelp@guardian.co.uk

There is also a comments section, so people can make their feelings known there. It literally takes seconds to register with The Guardian.

It's outrageous that so many articles about the case are controlled and influenced by David Marriott.


Last edited by The Machine on Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

OT) This is another way in Italy to avoid jail for a crime you been found guilty of.

David Mills was found guilty on first degree court, that is Court of Assise (stage AK & RS are now) and given 4 years jail. Later at the Court of Appeals (stage RG is now) his conviction was reconfirmed and sent to prison.
Today on the third and last round of Appeal at Rome's supreme court his case was dropped because of "Reato Prescritto" statute of limitations.
"In a bizarre twist to a saga that has dragged on for a decade, the prosecutor said the charges against David Mills, the estranged husband of Olympics Minister Tessa Jowell, had expired under a 10-year statute of limitations.
Prosecutor Gianfranco Ciani said there was no doubt he had accepted a bribe but the case should be annulled because it had gone on too long."
Telegraph -UK-
Top Profile 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


Hi DLW,

I've just read the article. It's another terrible one-sided article, containing numerous factual errors. It was no doubt arranged by David Marriott.

I hope posters take the time to report the errors and inaccuracies:

Report errors or inaccuracies: userhelp@guardian.co.uk

Mathew Harwood
Profile

Matthew Harwood is a writer in Washington DC. His work has appeared in The Washington Monthly, The Huffington Post, The Columbia Journalism Review and elsewhere. He is currently working on a book about evangelical Christian rhetoric and aggressive US foreign policy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/matthewharwood
Top Profile 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 8:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

None dares call this prostitution.


Ted Simon

____________________
ONE YEAR AGO,......

Theodore Simon thinks the prosecutors evidence made public so far is daunting.

And that courthouse observers, including Theodore Simon, are predicting an uphill fight for the defense. www.truejustice.org
_____________________

THREE MONTHS AGO,...... Ted Simon is put on the Knox/Mellas payroll.

________________________

YESTERDAY,.......Amanda's attorney, Theodore Simon, says there's no question that Amanda's was a wrongful conviction. "You just heard Curt speak about the lack of evidence in the case—it's both profound and compelling," he says. www.oprahshow.com

__________________________

///


Last edited by fine on Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:39 am, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tigerfish


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:54 am

Posts: 235

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

SOME LIT. CRIT. of BABY BROTHER by Amanda Knox
The story has two mixed-up time-lines - in one of them, a sensitive eight-year-old Edgar stays after class and bonds with his teacher Sandra, who is unattractively portrayed as flabbily overweight, and coughing and wheezing. Edgar is troubled by the impending birth of a baby brother Kyle - he also has unexplained bruises and lacerations on his upper arms, most likely as the result of self-inflicted cutting - Sandra apparently dresses Edgar's wounds but takes no further action. When Edgar impulsively asks if Sandra loves him, she replies obliquely "How do you know?"
Some days later Edgar suddenly arrives at school well before dawn searching for Sandra whom he finds at her desk. He is seeking more reassurance, but she denies him, just as Edgar's father arrives and takes him to the hospital where he is held up to view his mother holding his newly-born baby brother Kyle, whose pudginess reminds Edgar of Sandra.

In the second time-line - apparently at least 15-20 years later, Edgar is apparently supporting Kyle - he returns to their untidy one-room apartment to find the dominating Kyle working on his calculus homework. He confronts Kyle with the news that a girl had informed him that Kyle had drugged and raped her. Kyle dismisses the accusation contemptuously, telling Edgar that girls don't know what they want. Edgar reacts by throwing Kyle's calculus textbook violently against the wall, and Kyle then punches the weaker Edgar in the face and fells him - the pain feeling like a razor cut. A bleeding Edgar orders Kyle to leave, and he does so. The story ends with Edgar lying on the bloodstained carpet, knowing Kyle will soon return "probably smelling like the inside of an alcoholic's mouth". Edgar knows that he will let him in, but seems to realize their empty relationship has been somehow broken - it's only remaining trace the bloody stain on the floor.

The prose reads as if it had been translated from another language by a clunky software tool such as Google Translate. Sometimes AK's powers of observation seem to have a hallucinogenic intensity, but she has no feeling for language and her contrived and self-conscious imagery usually gets in the way of the narrative flow.
This extremely bleak and disturbing little story - rather like a modern Grimm Fairy Tale - describes a severe case of an only-child's fear of being supplanted by a younger sibling resulting in a relationship of dangerous imbalance and hostility.
I don't think it's too speculative to suggest that these two male siblings are disguised versions of Amanda and Deanna - although sibling rivalry is fairly common, it would be taboo to publicly own to extreme feelings in that area, so it makes sense that Amanda would attempt to hide their identities by changing the sex and age difference of these two characters. One tell-tale sign that points to Kyle's true identity being Deanna is his science homework. A second is the stressing of Edgar's physical weakness. Another is the younger brother Kyle's sexual precociousness which mirrors Deanna's when compared to late-bloomer Amanda. Yet another detail which points to AK as Edgar is that self cutting is 4 times more likely amongst females, and can result from low self esteem and . . . wait for it, Emerald! - sexual abuse.

Self harm can also be a symptom of severe personality disorders - and what is particularly noticeable about AK's stories is the bottled-up rage. There are frequent references to the clenching of fists - and even toes - as characters struggle to repress anger. There are also instances of tears of rage, shaking limbs, bile swallowing and gagging when a principal character is in emotional extremis.

Edgar's father makes a brief appearance in 'Baby Brother' - he seems rather similar to the father David in 'The Model' - a stock paternal figure, but somehow emotionally disconnected.
Edgar's mother is reduced to a very passive role without a line of actual dialogue - her sole activities are calling upstairs for dinner, and mutely holding up the new-born baby brother - cliched female duties.
In the later time-line of the story, the parents' existence has been obliterated - there is no mention of them as Kyle and Edgar live in their decrepit studio apartment.
The overweight Sandra resembles AK's stepmother, Cassandra - one reads her role as sympathetic but emotionally detached.

On a subconscious level the two siblings Kyle and Edgar could also be interpreted as two aspects of Amanda herself at war with each other - one of them a psychopathic, violent sexual predator - the other one: sensitive, searching for love, supportive but disrespected weakling. In the following passage Amanda seems to mix up her characters' roles and identities, but it might also be her confused writing style:
"What's up?" said Kyle, looking up from his textbook. He was both protective and authoritative towards Edgar, even though he was eight years younger.
"In all other things besides financial, he provided for Edgar persistent counsel. In return, there was a constant quiet respect that Edgar paid his younger brother in his allowance of Kyle's worldly lifestyle. It was because of Edgar that Kyle needn't suffer from rent dues, work responsibilities, and grocery shopping. But Edgar also always questioned Kyle about his daily offenses and when he was silent it made Kyle immediately perk up and set aside his calculus homework. "What's your problem?""

As one surveys Amanda's two stories of toxic rage, one's heart begins to bleed anew for that bright-faced, beautiful, optimistic young woman from Coulsdon. When the Italian prosecutors used terms like 'furies' to describe Meredith's attackers, they were absolutely NOT using hyperbole. They had done their homework and knew what they were talking about - when the anger expressed in Amanda's writing finally became unleashed, it must have been a truly hellish scene.
Perhaps the Knoxes would be best advised to rethink their campaign to return this poisonous capsule to their hearth and home.
If I were Deanna (or even Edda) I'd be having nightmares about it - but they might get lucky and dodge the bullet . . . there's always transference. If she were with us still, they could ask Meredith - her absence should speak louder than words.


Last edited by tigerfish on Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
Hi Morty:

Not a new statement, but this was added to end of show:

[On the day that Amanda Knox was sentenced, Meredith Kercher's brother, Lyle, made this statement: "Ultimately, we are pleased with the decision, pleased that we've got a decision, but it's not a time for celebration. At the end of the day, we're all gathered here because our sister was brutally murdered and taken away from us."]

page 11 of transcript
http://media.causes.com/ribbon/744185



Thank you, Stint7! Very much appreciated!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


In that case, he has no right to call himself a journalist.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Really good post, tigerfish. :)
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Hi TM/ Jools/Skep: I don’t see anything in Matthew Harwood’s qualifications for how he would have any insight on this case. I see he’s written for the Huffington Post , and their previous work on this case regardless of who submitted it has been nearsighted and dismal. He’s gotten some real raspberry comments on his article, particularly from that little mouse that writes big.

An interesting article written for the National Review. Something I would not normally link to, but a pretty mainstream conservative think tank and publication. They get into many different political and cultural matters. Also they don’t get in to tabloidization, and this writer give’s a broad account of some of the factors that led up to this murder, as she see’s them.

Murder Abroad
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mortytoad wrote:
stint7 wrote:
Hi Morty:

Not a new statement, but this was added to end of show:

[On the day that Amanda Knox was sentenced, Meredith Kercher's brother, Lyle, made this statement: "Ultimately, we are pleased with the decision, pleased that we've got a decision, but it's not a time for celebration. At the end of the day, we're all gathered here because our sister was brutally murdered and taken away from us."]

page 11 of transcript
http://media.causes.com/ribbon/744185



Thank you, Stint7! Very much appreciated!



In fact, here is what Lyle actually read post-verdict. Is Oprah cherry-picking or what? (Source: BBC):

Quote:
In a statement read to a press conference in Perugia, Miss Kercher's brother Lyle said: "Ultimately we are pleased with the verdict. It's not a time for celebration. It's not a moment of triumph. We are all gathered here because our sister was brutally murdered and taken away from us. Of course, there were two very young people who have been sentenced yesterday to a very long time behind bars."
He also said, of the money award, that it was made to reflect the "severity and gravity of the case".

Miss Kercher's mother Arline told reporters: "At the end of the day you have to go on the evidence because there's nothing else."

In addition, reports the BBC (and others): The family praised the efforts of police, prosecutors, and jurors during the two years since Miss Kercher's death, with sister Stephanie thanking the public for their messages of support.



I can't imagine why Oprah did not provide the entire statement. It isn't as if the Kerchers were hogging air time on the show or anything.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The American Academy of Forensic Sciences is holding its annual conference in Seattle this week. A friend of mine is attending. Apparently, the FOA is busy trying to get conference delegates to sign that wretched letter.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

DLW wrote:
Hi TM/ Jools/Skep: I don’t see anything in Matthew Harwood’s qualifications for how he would have any insight on this case. I see he’s written for the Huffington Post , and their previous work on this case regardless of who submitted it has been nearsighted and dismal. He’s gotten some real raspberry comments on his article, particularly from that little mouse that writes big.

An interesting article written for the National Review. Something I would not normally link to, but a pretty mainstream conservative think tank and publication. They get into many different political and cultural matters. Also they don’t get in to tabloidization, and this writer give’s a broad account of some of the factors that led up to this murder, as she see’s them.

Murder Abroad



The National Review piece is interesting. Not something I would normally read. The author makes valid points about supervised versus unsupervised study abroad. As for Harwood, just one more Doug Preston inspired acolyte. You have to understand that Doug Preston is probably worried that Tom Cruise will film on location in Italy without him. Having told the world he can't go back because of Mignini (he's mistaken or deluded about that), he needs to get Mignini out of the way so he can sit with the big guy ON LOCATION IN ITALY. This is Doug's big moment, and he doesn't want anything to stand in the way of that!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The American Academy of Forensic Sciences is holding its annual conference in Seattle this week. A friend of mine is attending. Apparently, the FOA is busy trying to get conference delegates to sign that wretched letter.


They may well be able to find a paranoid fingerprint expert or two to sign up. lol It'll be interesting to see how that works out for them. They'd be wasting their time talking to Brits.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

tigerfish wrote:
SOME LIT. CRIT. of BIG BROTHER by A. Knox
The story has two mixed-up time-lines - in one of them, a sensitive eight-year-old Edgar stays after class and bonds with his teacher Sandra, who is unattractively portrayed as flabbily overweight, and coughing and wheezing. Edgar is troubled by the impending birth of a baby brother Kyle - he also has bruises and lacerations on his upper arms, most likely as the result of self-inflicted cutting - Sandra apparently dresses Edgar's wounds but takes no further action. When Edgar impulsively asks if Sandra loves him, she replies obliquely "How do you know?"
Some days later Edgar suddenly arrives at school well before dawn searching for Sandra whom he finds at her desk. He is seeking more reassurance, but she denies him, just as Edgar's father arrives and takes him to the hospital where he is held up to view his mother holding his newly-born baby brother Kyle, whose pudginess reminds Edgar of Sandra.

In the second time-line - apparently at least 15-20 years later, Edgar is apparently supporting Kyle - he returns to their untidy one-room apartment to find the dominating Kyle working on his calculus homework. He confronts Kyle with the news that a girl had informed him that Kyle had drugged and raped her. Kyle dismisses the accusation contemptuously, telling Edgar that girls don't know what they want. Edgar reacts by throwing Kyle's calculus textbook violently against the wall, and Kyle then punches the weaker Edgar in the face and fells him - the pain feeling like a razor cut. A bleeding Edgar orders Kyle to leave, and he does so. The story ends with Edgar lying on the bloodstained carpet, knowing Kyle will soon return "probably smelling like the inside of an alcoholic's mouth". Edgar knows that he will let him in, but seems to realize their empty relationship has been somehow broken - it's only remaining trace the bloody stain on the floor.

The prose reads as if it had been translated from another language by a clunky software tool such as Google Translate. Sometimes AK's powers of observation seem to have a hallucinogenic intensity, but she has no feeling for language and her contrived and self-conscious imagery usually gets in the way of the narrative flow.
This extremely bleak and disturbing little story - rather like a modern Grimm Fairy Tale - describes a severe case of an only-child's fear of being supplanted by a younger sibling resulting in a relationship of dangerous hostility.
I don't think it's too speculative to suggest that these two male siblings are disguised versions of Amanda and Deanna - although sibling rivalry is fairly common, it would be taboo to publicly own to extreme feelings in that area, so it makes sense that Amanda would attempt to hide their identities by changing the sex and age difference of these two characters. One small tell-tale sign that points to Deanna's identity as Kyle is his science homework. Another is the younger brother Kyle's sexual precociousness which mirrors Deanna's when compared to late-bloomer Amanda. Another detail that points to an autobiographical source is that self cutting is 4 times more likely amongst females, and can result from low self esteem and . . . wait for it, Emerald! - sexual abuse.

Self harm can also be a symptom of severe personality disorders - and what is particularly noticeable about AK's stories is the bottled-up rage. There are frequent references to the clenching of fists - and even toes - as characters struggle to repress anger. There are also instances of tears of rage, bile swallowing and gagging when a principal character is in emotional extremis.
Edgar's father makes a brief appearance in 'Baby Brother' - he seems rather similar to the father David in 'The Model' - calm, protective, but somehow emotionally disconnected. In the later time-line of the story, the parents' existence has been obliterated - there is no mention of them as Kyle and Edgar live in their decrepit studio apartment.

On a subconscious level the two siblings Kyle and Edgar could also be interpreted as two aspects of Amanda herself at war with each other - one of them a psychopathic, violent sexual predator - the other one: sensitive, searching for love, supportive but disrespected weakling. In the following passage Amanda seems to mix up her characters' roles and identities, but it might also be her confused writing style:
"What's up?" said Kyle, looking up from his textbook. He was both protective and authoritative towards Edgar, even though he was eight years younger.
"In all other things besides financial, he provided for Edgar persistent counsel. In return, there was a constant quiet respect that Edgar paid his younger brother in his allowance of Kyle's worldly lifestyle. It was because of Edgar that Kyle needn't suffer from rent dues, work responsibilities, and grocery shopping. But Edgar also always questioned Kyle about his daily offenses and when he was silent it made Kyle immediately perk up and set aside his calculus homework. "What's your problem?""

As one surveys Amanda's two stories of toxic rage, one's heart begins to bleed anew for that bright-faced, beautiful, optimistic young woman from Coulsdon. When the Italian prosecutors used terms like 'furies' to describe Meredith's attackers, they were absolutely NOT using hyperbole. They had done their homework and knew what they were talking about - when the anger expressed in Amanda's writing finally became unleashed, it must have been a truly hellish scene.
Perhaps the Knoxes would be best advised to rethink their campaign to return this poisonous capsule to their hearth and home.
If I were Deanna (or even Edda) I'd be having nightmares about it - but they might get lucky and dodge the bullet . . . there's always transference. If she were with us still, they could ask Meredith - her absence should speak louder than words.


I just saw "Crumb," a documentary about the cartoonist Robert Crumb. He grew up in a really disfunctional family. His younger brother lies on beds of nails and sits cross-legged most of the time; his older brother lives at home with mom, never goes out and says he bathes about once every six weeks. I believe him. He is on some kind of medication. Bob and the older brother are in their 60's; the younger brother looks like he is in his late 40's. It's hard to say. He lives in some kind of flop house/crappy hotel in downtown SF. Anyway, at one point the older brother is talking about the dad, who was a real monster. A really violent and sadistic man. He describes him as a narcissist, and says when a narcissist is wounded, he feels he has to strike out and crush the source of the wound.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

It gets worse. The Kercher family to visit Amanda in jail.

From the ebay bumpersticker guy...

"Window stickers in support of Amanda Knox - money earned will be placed in a eBay bank account until a sum of $2,500 minimum is raised; preferably $5,000. I will then offer to pay one of Meridith Kercher's family members to visit with Amanda Knox, with an open mind of obtaining answers void of tabloid press and media trash, to determine their opinion if Amanda actually murdered their sister/daughter as the surreal Italian prosecutors insist. * * *

The money should be adequate to cover their travel and living expenses abroad in Perugia, Italy for several weeks/months. No one wants to wrongly send someone to jail for a crime they did not commit. Honesty and openness is the best solution for this terrible tradegy of justice; and most likely only Meridith Kercher's family can assist Amanda Knox." www.cgi.ebay.com

///
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
Really good post, tigerfish. :)

I agree. More evidence of the twists within Amanda's mind.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

fine wrote:
It gets worse. The Kercher family to visit Amanda in jail.

From the ebay bumpersticker guy...

"Window stickers in support of Amanda Knox - money earned will be placed in a eBay bank account until a sum of $2,500 minimum is raised; preferably $5,000. I will then offer to pay one of Meridith Kercher's family members to visit with Amanda Knox, with an open mind of obtaining answers void of tabloid press and media trash, to determine their opinion if Amanda actually murdered their sister/daughter as the surreal Italian prosecutors insist. * * *

The money should be adequate to cover their travel and living expenses abroad in Perugia, Italy for several weeks/months. No one wants to wrongly send someone to jail for a crime they did not commit. Honesty and openness is the best solution for this terrible tradegy of justice; and most likely only Meridith Kercher's family can assist Amanda Knox." www.cgi.ebay.com

///



Huh?
This is beyond ludicrous. I hope this depraved individual does not attempt to approach the Kerchers. It seems to me that they have suffered more than enough. Even if they try their best to tune out the noise, I bet it is hard to ignore. My heart goes out to them.
Next week, when the sentencing report comes out, expect more noise. The idea is to shift the focus from the evidence by creating a distraction. Edda has already warned that she will be appearing on the morning shows.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

It seems Candace Dempsey is "moderating" the comments about Matthew Harwoods' article on The Guardian website:


harryrag08
25 Feb 2010, 8:01PM

This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.

harryrag08
25 Feb 2010, 10:20PM

This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:44 pm   Post subject: ABOUT TED SIMON...   

Hammerite wrote:
nicki wrote:
lector wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
lector wrote:
Three more notes on Oprah:

3) Ted Simon, when given the opportunity with a leading question from Oprah late in the show, backed away from an attack on the Italian legal system & instead said something diplomatic, on the order of, "It doesn't matter whether we're talking about the U.S. or the Italian system, we would hope that that wouldn't be enough evidence to convict Amanda anywhere." (I'm obviously paraphrasing.) That was pretty sharp of him, given his alloted task; that guy thinks ahead.
Not sure it's all that sharp these days - isn't it rather the very well plotted post-trial tactic now? Part of the standard MO for the legal team now to try and distinguish and downplay i) the "failures of the Italian system" - a line Curt 'n' Edda 'n' Chris couldn't / can't stop themselves falling across the line time and again and ii) criticising the apparent (to them) lack of sufficient evidence.


I think you mistook my intent, or perhaps I didn't express it clearly enough. Simon (in my view) changed the flow of the show, at least for a moment, with his divergent response to Oprah's leading question. I thought he showed a quick mind & an articulate tongue at that moment; that's what I mean by "sharp."

I am not sure what good this will do in an Italian court, unless he's as fluent in Italian as he is in English, but it made me understand that he can be effective in the American courts.

As far as I know this guy is not licenced to practice law in Italy so I doubt we we'll see him sitting in an Italian Court except as a spectator.Of course he could still "counsel" Knox's Italian defense team, but he will not be allowed to take an active role in the trial.



He's just a glorified, not to mention very expensive, PR man Nicki.

Actually, this case has been an eye opener for me on a variety of matters, but how those in the legal profession have behaved has certainly been a large one. I assumed each had their own profession and as such stick to the discipline...the priest would preach on the pulpit and christen babies...the fireman would put out fires and rescue cats from trees...the policeman would detect and arrest criminals...the PR man would do PR while the lawyer would practice law. However, in this case, we have seen many step from one field into another, while conning the public the new field is exactly the same as the one they actually work in. In this case, lawyers. We have Ted Simon, not practising any actual 'law' on behalf of Amanda, who is actually PR, Judge Heavey, again a lawyer, not practicing law for Amanda but PR and then on to Anne Bremner, yet another lawyer not lawyering, but running PR...and then private detective Paul Ciolino who is never detecting, but again doing PR. What is in common with all, is all are PR but using their credentials as lawyer or detective to bolster that PR and all the while, never admitting they are in fact PR, instead attempting to give the impression they are on the case AS a 'lawyer' or AS a 'detective'. In my book, that's deceit... the modern word for which is 'spin'.

Ted Simon and the family have never announced he will be representing Amanda in court. Why not? Because he won't be. But to say he won't be, will be to lessen his credibility so best to let the public think he will be and simply give the impression that he is actively working on the case in a professional legal capacity.

It's all a big con job.



HAMMERITE WROTE:
Atty Ted Simon is like a Bidet here, he adds a touch of class but they don’t really know what to do with him.[/quote]
_________________________________________________________________________
A TOUCH OF CLASS??? I think you are being far too charitable, here, Hammerite!!

Just take a look at one of his former"celebrity" clients. tu-))

This is not the first time Ted Simon has represented a contemptible narcissistic murderer, masquerading-- as a peace-loving free-lovin' hippie— just like Amanda Knox!!

Years ago Simon’s client was Ira Einhorn, the notorious American“Unicorn killer” who killed his beautiful girlfriend, Bryn Mawr College graduate Holly Maddux.

In the '70's in Philadelphia, Einhorn could be tremendously charismatic and was able to con a lot of well-known people in his day. People like wealthy socialites and Arlen Spector, his defense attorney at the time, now a long-time US Senator (the state of Pennsylvania).

When Holly Maddux mysteriously disappeared in 1977, Einhorn claimed he knew nothing about his missing girlfriend. Detectives, however soon learned that Holly was on the verge of leaving Einhorn for good, who was by all accounts, a very (and older) controlling boyfriend.

It took a year and a half after the disappearance of Holly….but…finally (after yes, 18 LONG MONTHS!!) the police obtained a search warrant (his neighbors kept complaining of the wretched stench). When they entered his appartment and found Holly’s decomposing corpse in Einhorn’s closet, stuffed in a trunk, Einhorn looked at them and stated: “You found what you found.”
He might easily have said "Shit happens." st-))


The Einhorn case is a long, complicated but absolutely fascinating crime and legal story—involving Einhorn fleeing to France and living the good life, on the lam, for years.

He might have even crossed paths with our SKEP, who also living the good life en France, during the same years!! (Just put that sentence in to see if y'all were paying attention!)

Einhorn was tried in absentia in the US (Philadelphia) in 1993 and was found guilty. Even though his whereabouts were unknown at the time.

When eventually found in France, Einhorn retained Ted Simon to help him beat the extradition. nin-)

“Ted Simon was a brilliant lawyer and an expert in international law.

Simon found a loophole in the prosecution's extradition case. According to established rules of the European Convention on Human Rights, no alleged criminal was ever to be tried in absentia, that is, without his or her actual presence in court.

In 1993, the Philadelphian judicial system had conducted such a trial, an acceptable American procedure after a suspect flees the country and refuses to return after an ordained period of time. The trial was held as a normal murder trial, with a judge, a full jury, witnesses, evidence and a legal team, but without the suspect or a defense counsel.

From:
http://www.funtrivia.com/en/subtopics/T ... 59111.html

On July 20, 2001, Einhorn, despite Simon’s legal efforts, was extradited to the United States. cl-)

“Taking the stand in his own defense, Einhorn claimed that Maddux was murdered by CIA agents who attempted to frame Einhorn for the crime, due to Einhorn's investigations on the Cold War and "psychotronics." :shock: la-)

However, after only two hours of deliberation, the jury did not find his testimony credible and affirmed his conviction on October 17, 2002.

Einhorn is currently serving his sentence of life without the possibility of parole in the state prison at Houtzdale in central Pennsylvania.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_Einhorn

For more about Simon’s role in Einhorn’s extradition, check out the movie made about this case or this article.
“The Hunt for the Unicorn Killer”
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/noto ... lib_4.html
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:21 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:26 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:

Quote:
He might have even crossed paths with our SKEP, who also living the good life en France, during the same years!! (Just put that sentence in to see if y'all were paying attention!)


I swear we never crossed paths! In fact, when he was arrested I had never heard of him or this case. But his bullshit about being the hapless victim of a plot hatched by the CIA was actually believed by some politicians in fairly high places. He even got this one television star, Karl Zéro, to plead his cause.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:28 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Macport wrote:
Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?


It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Hammerite


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:46 pm

Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:22 am   Post subject: Re: ABOUT TED SIMON...   

[Quote]
HAMMERITE WROTE:
Atty Ted Simon is like a Bidet here, he adds a touch of class but they don’t really know what to do with him. [Quote]
_________________________________________________________________________
[Quote]
411 WROTE
A TOUCH OF CLASS??? I think you are being far too charitable, here, Hammerite!!
Just take a look at one of his former"celebrity" clients. [Quote]



"You are of course correct 411, a poor attempt at humour on my part".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:30 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.


OMG! Edda must be busy--busy--busy. New spring wardrobe to buy before the big round of interviews start after the report.
Top Profile 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:59 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

THERE IS NO QUESTION


The 411,
Thanks. Lucid information about that Einhold Case. Ted Simon trying to obstruct the extradition of a known, and convicted, murderer.

A footnote. Ted Simon was on the Larry King Show in 1998, representing Einhorn---while Einhorn was still in France---when Ted told Larry and his American audience:

"SIMON: ... there is no question, if he came back, he wouldn't get a new trial." www.amgot.org

But we know that when Einhorn came back he DID get a new trial. Convicted, sentenced to life in jail.

///


Last edited by fine on Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:03 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Macport wrote:
Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?


It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.


Peter Quennell made this comment today below his post on the Knox Campaign:

"We are hearing that the judges sentencing report due out next Tuesday and appearing here on TJMK in English shortly thereafter will be a pretty formidable document. The slight possibility of Knox’s transfer may all that is left to them and perhaps Simon is not even boning up on the case any more. It sounded like it. "

So according to Pete it will be out on March 2.


Last edited by Rebel on Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:06 am   Post subject: Unicorn Ira Einhorn   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The 411 wrote:

Quote:
He might have even crossed paths with our SKEP, who also living the good life en France, during the same years!! (Just put that sentence in to see if y'all were paying attention!)


I swear we never crossed paths! In fact, when he was arrested I had never heard of him or this case. But his bullshit about being the hapless victim of a plot hatched by the CIA was actually believed by some politicians in fairly high places. He even got this one television star, Karl Zéro, to plead his cause.


Skep:

Call my naive, but I was actually taken aback to see that Ira Einhorn has even one supporter left. Someone named J. Nayer Hardin has a blog dedicated to freeing the "wrongly convicted" Unicorn. :roll:

Gee...I suppose if the Unicorn still has his followers after all these years, we certainly can expect Foxy Knoxy to have her devoted delusional fans ranting on about her "Italian railroad job from hell"...for decades to come. eee-)

Here's a sample of Hardin's blog:
"I keep this blog up for Ira. Above is a video reading from his book "Prelude To Intimacy", about his years on the run from the US government before his wrongful imprisonment.

All these decades later, there is still no scientific evidence that Ira Einhorn had anything to do with the death of Holly Maddux. There was no evidence of Holly's body in Ira's apartment, only in his multi exterior access back porch. Not a shred of scientific evidence connecting Ira with Holly when she died.

The kangaroo court's actions are those of a corrupt government ruling in favor of big business over the environment one more time. It's like the legal levels of pollution that are contributing to global warming.

Why frame Ira Einhorn? Ira was key to the first Earth Day. His work regarding the environment in the 60's and 70's, legendary. A great thinker of the era. Along comes the decision to make more money on toxic energy, and folks like Einhorn, free energy inventor Bruce DePalma and others had to be silenced, discredited, turned away from informing the masses that our energy is killing us.

'There is money to be made' is the responding mantra.

Free the Unicorn. Ira Einhorn.

posted by Nayer | 3:50 PM"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a shred of evidence, mind you. Nothing to tie him to the murder of Holly Maddux.

The rotting corpse of the victim in his locked closet...was............. planted?
The neighbors complaining about the horrid stench...were colluding against Einhorn???

It seems to me I've heard this song before: it's from an old familiar score from another show about another narcissist.......
Here are the lyrics; sing along now! band-)
IT'S A CONSPIRACY! A KANGAROO COURT! FRAMING AN INNOCENT! GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION--( in this case, it's the US government, though, not the Italian one!!)

Wonder if Ted Simon still keeps in touch with the Unicorn.
Or is he too busy advising the Marriott PR team these days to remember his old client?
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:12 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Jools wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
From the Examiner article posted by Jools:
Quote:
She aired a written statement by Lyle Kercher, brother of victim Meredith Kercher, who apparently was invited to appear or speak live, but declined. However, this was at the end of the segment when it probably belongs right smack in the middle. A photo of Meredith was flashed only very briefly.


Oprah thus feels she has presented both sides. How could Lyle Kercher or any of the Kerchers possibly accept to be part of this kind of PR effort on behalf of one of the three people convicted of murdering Meredith? What was Oprah thinking? Of course, this is the same person who thought that interviewing two young girls who have nothing whatsoever to do with this would make for good television by tugging at the heartstrings of viewers.

Oprah must feel overjoyed knowing that Amanda Knox appreciates her efforts and even feels love for her. All you need is love!

I agree the Kerchers would not want to be part of this PR circus. But, Oprah should have asked Patrick Lumumba how it felt to be branded a rapist and a murderer by Amanda Knox. I'm sure Patrick wouldn't hesitate to appear in her show.

There may be something to this idea. There is at present no one offsetting this media onslaught of the Knox/Mellas clan. Patrick has sustained a great deal of personal and financial damage. There has to be media outlets that want to give voice to the truth. There may be no person better positioned to do that than Patrick. What a beautiful way to give voice to Meredith. And that is what is getting drowned out by them - Meredith.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:12 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Rebel wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Macport wrote:
Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?


It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.


Peter Quennell made this comment today below his post on the Knox Campaign:

"We are hearing that the judges sentencing report due out next Tuesday and appearing here on TJMK in English shortly thereafter will be a pretty formidable document. The slight possibility of Knox’s transfer may all that is left to them and perhaps Simon is not even boning up on the case any more. It sounded like it. "

So according to Pete it will be out on March 2.

Thank you both.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:22 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The media outlets that would broadcast Patrick's story would have to be small and not controlled by Marriot tentacles. In time larger outlets would perhaps grow a spine and book him. What about fund raising to support the opposing view and see if Patrick is interested in presenting who he truly is, not who he's been painted to be. A Meredith PR campaign. Realize this crap with the Knox/Mellas clan isn't going to stop anytime soon. Look at how long the Natalie Holloway story went on.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:55 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Marriot is playing all his cards right now. There are lots more held by more powerful 'players'.
Top Profile 

Offline tigerfish


Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:54 am

Posts: 235

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:56 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skep wrote:
Quote:
I just saw "Crumb," a documentary about the cartoonist Robert Crumb. He grew up in a really disfunctional family. His younger brother lies on beds of nails and sits cross-legged most of the time; his older brother lives at home with mom, never goes out and says he bathes about once every six weeks. I believe him. He is on some kind of medication. Bob and the older brother are in their 60's; the younger brother looks like he is in his late 40's. It's hard to say. He lives in some kind of flop house/crappy hotel in downtown SF. Anyway, at one point the older brother is talking about the dad, who was a real monster. A really violent and sadistic man. He describes him as a narcissist, and says when a narcissist is wounded, he feels he has to strike out and crush the source of the wound.

Robert Crumb's older brother sadly died during post-production of the film - I believe he committed suicide. I don't know what happened to the younger one - I wish him well, but he didn't look like he was on the fast track to anywhere sane. Robert Crumb managed to make great art from his childhood traumas but the other two appear to be casualties of a cruel parent.
The director Terry Zwigoff's next film was 'Ghost World' which was a beautiful film about an alienated young woman after high school. I wonder if Amanda ever saw it - she might have identified with the main character and learned something. It was graced with excellent performances from Thora Birch, Scarlett Johanson and Steve Buscemi.
'Crumb' showed that art never comes from a vacuum. I wouldn't call Amanda's short stories art, but they are very revealing documents. After reading them more carefully I gained some sympathy for her - the world of her imagination seems to be a place of unremitting pain and self-loathing. But I also gained an even deeper sympathy for Meredith - it seems such outrageous misfortune that she should have spent her last moments in the company of such primordial rage. Unfortunately she's not alone in that kind of suffering - human beings keep doing unbelievably cruel things to all their fellow creatures.
But it's my belief that love, unlike hatred, is never wasted - and I trust that the love and strength that Meredith accrued during her too short life will have accompanied her on her continuing journey.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:06 am   Post subject: Re: ABOUT TED SIMON...   

Hammerite wrote:
Quote:
HAMMERITE WROTE:
Atty Ted Simon is like a Bidet here, he adds a touch of class but they don’t really know what to do with him.
Quote:
_________________________________________________________________________
Quote:
411 WROTE
A TOUCH OF CLASS??? I think you are being far too charitable, here, Hammerite!!
Just take a look at one of his former"celebrity" clients.
Quote:




"You are of course correct 411, a poor attempt at humour on my part".


Au contraire!
Hammerite humor highly honored here! :lol:
It was just THAT your amusing simile doesn't work for Ted Simon.
Top Profile 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:37 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
The American Academy of Forensic Sciences is holding its annual conference in Seattle this week. A friend of mine is attending. Apparently, the FOA is busy trying to get conference delegates to sign that wretched letter.


dang.. too bad I'm not there.. i'd like to really entertain a real conversation with them..

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:51 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Marriot is playing all his cards right now. There are lots more held by more powerful 'players'.

Doesn't it fuel the David in us against the Goliath in them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:54 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


I did a blog post that i've been twittering to people: The stuff you didn't hear about on Oprah.

Cheers
Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:02 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

pataz1 wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


I did a blog post that i've been twittering to people: The stuff you didn't hear about on Oprah.

Cheers
Pat



Nice job, Pat. I'll read it more thoroughly and make a comment; perhaps link it from my blog.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:34 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Um, Edda, when you told Oprah that Amanda had*admitted* smoking pot last night, I guess you thought everyone would think what an honest person Amanda is. Hellooo. That is supposed to be her alibi, why she was so *confused*. She rushed that statement out lickity split. I,m still trying to figure out your AHA! at Amanda's explanation. I think it should have been OH NO!And saying how she said she spent the night at Raff's. Are you smoking something? Raff said she left for 4 hours.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline windfall


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:22 pm

Posts: 608

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:04 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

In relation to recent raunch debate....

Children 'over-exposed to sexual imagery'


By Dominic Casciani
BBC News

Children are being increasingly exposed to sexual imagery and their parents have limited opportunities to stop it, a report for the Home Office warns.

The report calls for tougher regulation of sexual imagery in adverts and a ban on selling "lads' mags" to under-16s.

It also recommends selling mobile phones and games consoles with parental controls automatically switched on.

Author Dr Linda Papadopoulos said there was a clear link between sexualised imagery and violence towards females.

Her report said the material children were being exposed to included the growth of lads' mags and pornography on mobile phones, through to big-name fashion brands using sexual imagery to advertise clothes targeted at young teenagers.

'Distorting perceptions'

The report said this "drip-drip" exposure was distorting young people's perceptions of themselves, encouraging boys to become fixated on being macho and dominant, while girls in turn presented themselves as sexually available and permissive.

One outcome had been the rise of sexual bullying in which girls felt compelled to post topless or naked pictures on social networks, it added.
“ Both the images we consume and the way we consume them are lending credence to the idea that women are there to be used and that men are there to use them ”
Linda Papadopoulos

"Unless sexualisation is accepted as harmful, we will miss an important opportunity … to broaden young people's beliefs about where their value lies," said Dr Papadopoulos, a psychologist.

The report's 36 recommendations include calling for games consoles, mobile phones and some computers to be sold with parental controls already switched on.

This would allow families to automatically filter which on-demand services and online material their children can use.

Other recommendations include:

* A ban on "sexualised" music videos before the TV watershed
* A ban on Jobcentres advertising positions in lap-dancing clubs and massage parlours
* Internet service providers to block access to pro-bulimia and pro-anorexia websites
* The creation of a website where parents can report any "irresponsible marketing" they believe sexualises young children.

Dr Papadopoulos said there should also be symbols to show when a published photograph had been digitally altered - such as pictures of celebrities manipulated to make them appear thinner.

She also recommends giving the Advertising Standards Authority the power to act against sexualised imagery appearing within commercial websites, such as provocative photo-shoots used by clothing chains targeting teenagers.

Dr Papadopoulos said: "The evidence gathered in the review suggests a clear link between consumption of sexualised images, tendency to view women as objects and the acceptance of aggressive attitudes and behaviour as the norm.

"Both the images we consume and the way we consume them are lending credence to the idea that women are there to be used and that men are there to use them."

The review forms part of the Home Office's broader attempts to have a louder public debate about how to combat violence against women and girls.

Both Labour and the Conservatives are examining the issues. Tory leader David Cameron said earlier this month that he would clamp down on irresponsible advertising targeted at children.

He also mooted the idea that parents should be able to complain about offensive marketing tactics used by companies, via a specially set-up website.

Such moves were needed to stop children being "bombarded" with inappropriate material, he said.

Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: "We know that parents are concerned about the pressures their children are under at a much younger age, which is why we have already committed to a number of the recommendations in this report.

"Changing attitudes will take time but it is essential if we are going to stop the sexualisation which contributes to violence against women and girls."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk/8537734.stm

Published: 2010/02/26 03:53:49 GMT

© BBC MMX
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:28 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

DLW wrote:
An interesting article written for the National Review. Something I would not normally link to, but a pretty mainstream conservative think tank and publication. They get into many different political and cultural matters. Also they don’t get in to tabloidization, and this writer give’s a broad account of some of the factors that led up to this murder, as she see’s them.

Murder Abroad


There's certainly some truth to that. But some young adults have thrived in unsupervised settings. I have a nephew who completed a year-long music programme at a college in New York City, thousands of km from his family, and revelled in the experience. AK's difficulties began before she left for Italy, too.

Something on a little different topic:

When entering or exiting the courtroom, there are a lot of still pictures capturing her smile or other gestures. But I spent some time watching her behaviour in the videos, where there is movement to go along with it. There is something very odd about the way AK moves and gestures and I can't quite put my finger on it. It's almost flirtatious.

When she is smiling, too, she's not just smiling at her family but almost for her family. It's really quite unusual. It's almost the way you see a guest on a late-night talk show smile and gesture not only for the host but for the audience, who is largely unknown to them.

Does anyone else get that sense of distinction between the stills and the videos?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mistercrunch


Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:43 pm

Posts: 160

Location: Germany

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:47 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Here´s a very good comment i found on the Oprah.com comment section

Quote:
14. Re: From College Student to Convicted Killer: The Family of Amanda Knox Speaks Out
Feb 22, 2010 6:08 AM | In response to: harpobear

Miss Knox's parents through multiple newspaper articles, numerous spokes people and television news interviews are trying to garner US support from Mr and Mrs America; our daughter could be your daughter or son this could happen to you if you send your children to Europe. What is far more important and never mentioned by Miss Knox's parents is that Mr and Mrs America daughter or son could easily have been the victim they could have been senselessly, heinously, brutally murdered this connection to Meredith Kercher is never made by Miss Knox's parents.


We are left with this bizarre notion that Miss Knox and her family are the real victims that Miss Knox's current situation is somehow worse than being brutally murdered; that visiting your daughter in prison is far worse than visiting your daughters grave.


Harpobear how do you think Meredith Kercher's Mother and Father are coping? How do you think Meredith's Brothers and Sister carry on with their day to day lives since their sister was murdered?; will there be a show covering this aspect of the Meredith Kercher Murder Case?


How can it be right to present one side of this case?


Oprah community section
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:20 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Stilicho: I had the same feeling watching AK. Especially her hand movements. Very contrived, and she seems to be trying to use her hands like an italian. Just doesn't work. Also, when she gave her testimony, her :italian mannerisms: On the video of her english teacher, Amanda's hand mannerisms are exactly like the teacher's. I doubt anyone knows who the real Amanda is, least of all herself. Like a true pshycopath she mirrors who ever she is with, and takes on the persona she thinks the other person wants or needs. I imagine she dropped her guard with Meredith, who wasn't buying. IMO, anyway

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:25 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stilicho wrote:
Something on a little different topic:

When entering or exiting the courtroom, there are a lot of still pictures capturing her smile or other gestures. But I spent some time watching her behaviour in the videos, where there is movement to go along with it. There is something very odd about the way AK moves and gestures and I can't quite put my finger on it. It's almost flirtatious.

When she is smiling, too, she's not just smiling at her family but almost for her family. It's really quite unusual. It's almost the way you see a guest on a late-night talk show smile and gesture not only for the host but for the audience, who is largely unknown to them.

Does anyone else get that sense of distinction between the stills and the videos?


No, not really.
I've also paid alot of attention to her behaviour in the courtroom. I don't find it that odd. Even the smiles. Misjudgement took place i guess, at least in my opinion. THE ONLY time that i found Knox's behaviour really bad in the court was when she made the stabbing gesture. The picture is in the gallery here.
So no, no flirting or waving to the audience at least to me. I've seen pictures where she looks absolutelely devastated while being in the court(i bet it was when she realized that this is serious and that she got a good chance to spend some quality time in jail), i've seen pictures where she's smiling. With all due respect, in my opinion only people who were in the court most of the time could tell us something about her behaviour etc. Our short videos or pictures aren't the best sources to establish if she was "flirting".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:25 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Mistercrunch: Thanks for posting the comment. It IS very good, and most welcome to read. Offa, I am so over Oprah. Didn't watch her much, but always had the impression she was warm, and passionate. Fun to hang with, ya know? She so obviously just catered to what was a completely one sided, pro Amanda forum. I have no respect for her at all now. Although, I happily read that her shows are stopping soon.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:06 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
It seems Candace Dempsey is "moderating" the comments about Matthew Harwoods' article on The Guardian website:


harryrag08
25 Feb 2010, 8:01PM

This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.

harryrag08
25 Feb 2010, 10:20PM

This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments


Oh, Machine that's so annoying. I've written to the Readers' Editor @ The Guardian. Shocking!!!
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Guardian is supposed to be one of the UK's quality papers. This reads more like an opinion piece from a tabloid. Standards are really dropping. I've posted a comment and others should join in if you can. Very bad piece for such a supposedly reputable paper.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Murder Abroad [Carol Iannone]

NATIONAL REVIEW

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Rebel wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Macport wrote:
Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?


It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.


Peter Quennell made this comment today below his post on the Knox Campaign:

"We are hearing that the judges sentencing report due out next Tuesday and appearing here on TJMK in English shortly thereafter will be a pretty formidable document. The slight possibility of Knox’s transfer may all that is left to them and perhaps Simon is not even boning up on the case any more. It sounded like it. "

So according to Pete it will be out on March 2.



I'd better just clarify this. It won't be appearing here or anywhere in English, the document will simply be too large to render a word for word translation. Instead, there will be a translation of the key aspects and these then will be summarised and these will appear part by part in instalments. I thought I'd better say this in case some were given the impression by the post on Pete's that they would have access to a full English rendering.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

donnie wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Something on a little different topic:

When entering or exiting the courtroom, there are a lot of still pictures capturing her smile or other gestures. But I spent some time watching her behaviour in the videos, where there is movement to go along with it. There is something very odd about the way AK moves and gestures and I can't quite put my finger on it. It's almost flirtatious.

When she is smiling, too, she's not just smiling at her family but almost for her family. It's really quite unusual. It's almost the way you see a guest on a late-night talk show smile and gesture not only for the host but for the audience, who is largely unknown to them.

Does anyone else get that sense of distinction between the stills and the videos?


No, not really.
I've also paid alot of attention to her behaviour in the courtroom. I don't find it that odd. Even the smiles. Misjudgement took place i guess, at least in my opinion. THE ONLY time that i found Knox's behaviour really bad in the court was when she made the stabbing gesture. The picture is in the gallery here.
So no, no flirting or waving to the audience at least to me. I've seen pictures where she looks absolutelely devastated while being in the court(i bet it was when she realized that this is serious and that she got a good chance to spend some quality time in jail), i've seen pictures where she's smiling. With all due respect, in my opinion only people who were in the court most of the time could tell us something about her behaviour etc. Our short videos or pictures aren't the best sources to establish if she was "flirting".



Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Macport wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Marriot is playing all his cards right now. There are lots more held by more powerful 'players'.

Doesn't it fuel the David in us against the Goliath in them.



It's always been that way. Of course, they have always tried to pretend that it's the other way around, that it is they who are the David.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

(( OT OT ))

Woman from Teesside jailed after sex with 12-year-old

A Teesside woman who had sex almost 200 times with a 12-year-old boy has been jailed for nine years.

Angela Sullivan gave the boy a pair of trainers as a reward when he slept with her for the 100th time.

The 36-year-old of Cavendish Road, Middlesbrough, admitted 10 specimen charges of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.

The court heard she corrupted her victim after getting him drunk and performing a sex act on him.

Acting Det Insp John Wrintmore said: "Angela Sullivan has clearly preyed on, and taken complete advantage of a vulnerable young boy, and exploited the situation of having extended contact with him as he was a friend of her own son.

"Sexual offences of any type, particularly where children are the victims, are treated extremely seriously by the police and courts and this sentence clearly demonstrates the consequences of such actions."

He praised the "courage and strength" of character of the victim throughout the case.



BBC NEWS


A pair of traners as a reward for 100 times??? Talk about exploitation!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

From Windfall's article:

Quote:
Dr Papadopoulos said: "The evidence gathered in the review suggests a clear link between consumption of sexualised images, tendency to view women as objects and the acceptance of aggressive attitudes and behaviour as the norm.


This is just a rehashing of a nonsense. Certain feminist groups have, since the 70's, attempted to have pornography banned under the claim that it fosters violence against women. It wasn't banned because they were never able to prove the claim. It was just another moral panic, much like the whole 'video nasty' panic in the 80's where various horror films were added to a censorship blacklist because it was believed they world 'corrupt vulnerable minds'. But, there was never any proven link between horror films and it inspiring people to commit violence.

It seems now, this Dr Papadopoulos has gone...'Okay, we can't win on the banning pornography debate because we can't prove it, so what we'll do is make the same argument but just change the demographic we make the panic about'. It's exactly the same argument that's been made about pornography by some for decades, they are now simply switching it from saying it corrupts 'men' in general, to teenagers, or primarily, teenage males. Only, the argument is flawed this time round just as much as it was the first time round. It's crafty really...since adults are rather easy to get into a panic over their kids.

Banning things isn't the answer, it doesn't work anyway. It's about raising kids with 'wisdom', not just knowledge. Having government step in for lacking parenting skills is not the answer and the very fact that is considered necessary points right there to what is wrong with our society and where it's sick. Banning this and that and raising the age on this and that is simply akin to the little Dutch boy sticking his finger in the dyke. Legislation isn't parenting.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.


Well, i don't think that i'm making any excuses. Not at all.
I'm not judging her behaviour simply beacuse i wasn't there and all i have seen was few minutes of footage showing Amanda waving to her family or friends(?) and putting on a smile. Now, why she was smiling all the time isn't exactly established. Maybe she's so lost and confused that she don't realize how serious this is and so, she smiles all the time. Maybe she's so sure that her lies will get her out of there, that she's confident enough to smile and act like a star in the courtroom. Maybe, maybe and maybe.

I just don't think that we have enough footage to say if she was or wasn't flirting with anyone in the court. Simple as that.
Also, you must notice, that i'm not saying she was acting perfectly good. She wasn't.
But at the same time i saw her acting just the way she should act in the courtroom.

I'm far away from judging someone in real life, not to mention that judgin another person just by a short footage is something
that i simply don't do. Please, respect that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline nowo


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:35 pm

Posts: 186

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Somewhat OT

Michael, on the subject of 'corrupting vulnerable minds' and banning things, there's an excellent O'Reilly interview with Marilyn Manson out on the web. Recommended!
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
donnie wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Something on a little different topic:

When entering or exiting the courtroom, there are a lot of still pictures capturing her smile or other gestures. But I spent some time watching her behaviour in the videos, where there is movement to go along with it. There is something very odd about the way AK moves and gestures and I can't quite put my finger on it. It's almost flirtatious.

When she is smiling, too, she's not just smiling at her family but almost for her family. It's really quite unusual. It's almost the way you see a guest on a late-night talk show smile and gesture not only for the host but for the audience, who is largely unknown to them.

Does anyone else get that sense of distinction between the stills and the videos?


No, not really.
I've also paid alot of attention to her behaviour in the courtroom. I don't find it that odd. Even the smiles. Misjudgement took place i guess, at least in my opinion. THE ONLY time that i found Knox's behaviour really bad in the court was when she made the stabbing gesture. The picture is in the gallery here.
So no, no flirting or waving to the audience at least to me. I've seen pictures where she looks absolutelely devastated while being in the court(i bet it was when she realized that this is serious and that she got a good chance to spend some quality time in jail), i've seen pictures where she's smiling. With all due respect, in my opinion only people who were in the court most of the time could tell us something about her behaviour etc. Our short videos or pictures aren't the best sources to establish if she was "flirting".



Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.


Stilicho is right. Knox does have a "glow" she carries everywhere. Her sister Deanna also has it but not as marked. Watch video where Deanna appears- and your eyes will follow her and notice only her. Amanda has a "cinematic" prescence, meaning the TV camera loves her.

Much has been said about Knox images outside the cottage on Nov. 2. They mean nothing, other that she is there with her boyfriend, kissing him and him kissing her back. They are not "making out" but comforting each other and waiting for police to tell them what to do next or where to go.

Do I think Knox is hiding something just by looking at her photos? Yes, I do.

Do I think her photos reveal she is cooperating to clear this case up? No, her face tells me she has built up a wall to protect what she knows, whatever it is she knows.

Do I conclude "she did it" by looking at Knox photos? No.

I am certain she knows more than she is letting on. All faces tell a story. Knox's story is locked up behind that undeniable glow.

When Knox spoke before the judges on Dec. 3, you could tell it was a really bad performance. She did not believe what she was reading. She did not sound convincing at all. She sounded like she was reading out loud what she wanted her audience to hear, not what she really did or did not do at Pergola 7 the night of the murder. Knox is concerned about Knox, she is not concerned about the truth and that she cannot hide.

Watch this video with Deanna:

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/AmandaKnox/a ... id=9255726


Last edited by piktor on Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

capealadin wrote:
Stilicho: I had the same feeling watching AK. Especially her hand movements. Very contrived, and she seems to be trying to use her hands like an italian. Just doesn't work. Also, when she gave her testimony, her :italian mannerisms: On the video of her english teacher, Amanda's hand mannerisms are exactly like the teacher's. I doubt anyone knows who the real Amanda is, least of all herself. Like a true pshycopath she mirrors who ever she is with, and takes on the persona she thinks the other person wants or needs. I imagine she dropped her guard with Meredith, who wasn't buying. IMO, anyway


Testimony: I thought it looked like she was playing air piano.

Thanks to all the translators who will be working on the report. th-)
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Part 3 posted now by FOA

http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... html?cat=9
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

donnie wrote:
Michael wrote:
Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.


Well, i don't think that i'm making any excuses. Not at all.
I'm not judging her behaviour simply beacuse i wasn't there and all i have seen was few minutes of footage showing Amanda waving to her family or friends(?) and putting on a smile. Now, why she was smiling all the time isn't exactly established. Maybe she's so lost and confused that she don't realize how serious this is and so, she smiles all the time. Maybe she's so sure that her lies will get her out of there, that she's confident enough to smile and act like a star in the courtroom. Maybe, maybe and maybe.

I just don't think that we have enough footage to say if she was or wasn't flirting with anyone in the court. Simple as that.
Also, you must notice, that i'm not saying she was acting perfectly good. She wasn't.
But at the same time i saw her acting just the way she should act in the courtroom.

I'm far away from judging someone in real life, not to mention that judgin another person just by a short footage is something
that i simply don't do. Please, respect that.


Well Donnie, had you been following the trial from when it first began, looking at all the photos and videos from each hearing as they came out, your perception of there 'not being enough footage' may be rather different.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

nowo wrote:
Somewhat OT

Michael, on the subject of 'corrupting vulnerable minds' and banning things, there's an excellent O'Reilly interview with Marilyn Manson out on the web. Recommended!


Thanks Nowo, I'll try, if I can get 5 minutes. Although, I think one campaign is enough for me :(

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
donnie wrote:

I just don't think that we have enough footage to say if she was or wasn't flirting with anyone in the court. Simple as that.
Also, you must notice, that i'm not saying she was acting perfectly good. She wasn't.
But at the same time i saw her acting just the way she should act in the courtroom.

.


.


Hey Donnie:

You *are* joking right ?? or maybe trolling ??
Surely you are not serious.

Also, Not sure about the thought you are attempting to convey with "should" and "perfectly good".


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Last edited by stint7 on Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Geologist wrote:
Absolutely, it's become their main source of income.


It's impossible the AK Family can ignore the mostly negative press. There's just too much of it.

The press rounds after the report is released should be interesting. Some of those hosts will ask about the facts and evidence. Curt/Edda will not be able to spin anymore. Sure, they will try, but it will only make them look more idiotic.



As they have already started spreading the seeds of doubt with regards to translation what's the betting that they will hire their own translator and publish their own 'Knox' English version of the report?

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

fine wrote:
It gets worse. The Kercher family to visit Amanda in jail.

From the ebay bumpersticker guy...

"Window stickers in support of Amanda Knox - money earned will be placed in a eBay bank account until a sum of $2,500 minimum is raised; preferably $5,000. I will then offer to pay one of Meridith Kercher's family members to visit with Amanda Knox, with an open mind of obtaining answers void of tabloid press and media trash, to determine their opinion if Amanda actually murdered their sister/daughter as the surreal Italian prosecutors insist. * * *

The money should be adequate to cover their travel and living expenses abroad in Perugia, Italy for several weeks/months. No one wants to wrongly send someone to jail for a crime they did not commit. Honesty and openness is the best solution for this terrible tradegy of justice; and most likely only Meridith Kercher's family can assist Amanda Knox." www.cgi.ebay.com

///


This sounds more like a scam to extort money from concerned people. Sick.

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 869

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Hi Y'all

Posting right now on TJMK two sharply contrasting YouTubes of Knox lawyer Theodore Simon.

1) As the objective commenter on the very tough case back in December 2008

2) As the shrill lawyer on Oprah last Tuesday "this case makes no legal sense"

Peter Quennell
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

tigerfish wrote:
Skep wrote:
Quote:
I just saw "Crumb," a documentary about the cartoonist Robert Crumb. He grew up in a really disfunctional family. His younger brother lies on beds of nails and sits cross-legged most of the time; his older brother lives at home with mom, never goes out and says he bathes about once every six weeks. I believe him. He is on some kind of medication. Bob and the older brother are in their 60's; the younger brother looks like he is in his late 40's. It's hard to say. He lives in some kind of flop house/crappy hotel in downtown SF. Anyway, at one point the older brother is talking about the dad, who was a real monster. A really violent and sadistic man. He describes him as a narcissist, and says when a narcissist is wounded, he feels he has to strike out and crush the source of the wound.

Robert Crumb's older brother sadly died during post-production of the film - I believe he committed suicide. I don't know what happened to the younger one - I wish him well, but he didn't look like he was on the fast track to anywhere sane. Robert Crumb managed to make great art from his childhood traumas but the other two appear to be casualties of a cruel parent.
The director Terry Zwigoff's next film was 'Ghost World' which was a beautiful film about an alienated young woman after high school. I wonder if Amanda ever saw it - she might have identified with the main character and learned something. It was graced with excellent performances from Thora Birch, Scarlett Johanson and Steve Buscemi.
'Crumb' showed that art never comes from a vacuum. I wouldn't call Amanda's short stories art, but they are very revealing documents. After reading them more carefully I gained some sympathy for her - the world of her imagination seems to be a place of unremitting pain and self-loathing. But I also gained an even deeper sympathy for Meredith - it seems such outrageous misfortune that she should have spent her last moments in the company of such primordial rage. Unfortunately she's not alone in that kind of suffering - human beings keep doing unbelievably cruel things to all their fellow creatures.
But it's my belief that love, unlike hatred, is never wasted - and I trust that the love and strength that Meredith accrued during her too short life will have accompanied her on her continuing journey.


Yes, Charles Crumb committed suicide when the film was in post-production. In fact, it is dedicated to him. The part I described, about narcisissism is quite interesting. He was a very self-aware and articulate crazy man. When he makes the comment about narcissism, it is in connection with homicidal rage. He is asked off-camera what the connection is between narcissism and homicidal rage, and the answer he gives is that when the narcissist feels wounded, he or she needs to strike out against the perceived source of the wound -- and that is the homicidal rage. It is chilling to hear in light of this case.

The difference between Robert and Charles Crumb is that Robert was saved by his art. It is possible that Amanda Knox was seeking salvation through art, or maybe escape from her world.

In response to the comments about courtroom demeanor, I agree it is dificult to tell from a few photos. But we also have video footage and I have talked to people who were in the courtroom. When I listened to the performance of Knox on the stand, I was surprised by the flashes of flippancy and arrogance -- toward the prosecutors, toward the judge even. I have been told by people who were in the courtroom that this came across visually as well, quite strongly.

Some of the attire (the all you need is love t-shirt, for example) was also perceived as flippant, or at least as suggesting a lack of respect for or understanding of the solemnity of the proceedings. Those who pointed this out were criticized by the innocentisti, of course. Apparently, they think no one should ever be judged on the basis of such things. I guess the innocentisti want to pretend we live in a Roussean state of nature, where all is bliss and no one judges anyone else; they just have random sexual encounters and move on. Of course, in this world, clothese themselves are superfluous. Had AK chosen to sit naked in the courtroom, anyone who raised an eyebrow would be criticized by the FOA as an Amanda Hater.

Jesse Crow, who is on trial in Californai for killing his wife and disposing of her body, has asked through his lawyers to be allowed to wear a suit rather than his prison uni in the courtroom. The argument is that the jurors will be swayed by his attire. One of his lawyers has even objected to video footage showing him in handcuffs and orange jumpsuit, saying this could prejudice the jury. So I guess it does matter what one wears in court, even in the US. It is also interesting to note in this case that no body or weapon has been found, yet a man has been charged with murder. How can this be, FOA? One of the legal analysts on Nancy Grace explained that the prosecution was trying to find proof of Jesse's relationship with a girlfriend in order to show motive. The analyst explained that motive is important in cases where no body is found. Lots of crimes are committed without an identifiable or readily identifiable motive.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tigger3498


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:49 pm

Posts: 158

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fortunately, I don't watch Oprah, haven't in years. I am afraid I am not in her target audience of middle aged housewives, although I am middle aged. she has been a constant source of misinformation for many years and i have always considered her tabloid journalism. Aside from the respect I have for her and her ability to make herself into one of the most respected, rich and most recognized celebs within the U.S., perhaps the world, I cannot say that I have respect for her daytime fodder that is supposed to be believed just because she says it is so. I have no knowledge of her educational background only the poor, sexually abused child that she was. Either way, what does education give you in this instance? Nothing but an opinion. I would say that everyone is born with some sense of right and wrong, even when that sense takes a wrong turn. The point I am trying to make is that no one here, regardless of where they live, is free from tabloid journalism. There will be people in every country who believe the Knoxes and those who will look further to come to heir own conclusions. Because you have an American family that has dedicated themselves to screaming over everyone with an opinion, does not mean they represent the U.S. as a whole or how many of us feel. Remember, Amanda Knox burst onto the "map" the day she made the front page of Yahoo, otherwise, I believe most Americans would never have heard of her plight. I laud the Kerchers for not joining in on the Oprah debacle. I could not spend one minute in that small studio with those vile people who continue to say they will apologize after the Kerchers know that Amanda is innocent. Perhaps The Knoxes should have had an interpreter in the courtroom so they could have better understood the evidence against their daughter. Seems like if it ain't in English, then it just ain't so...........I hope they wake up one day and realize that they are not just destroying the victims memory but that of their own children that still live with them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

tigger3498 wrote:
Fortunately, I don't watch Oprah, haven't in years. I am afraid I am not in her target audience of middle aged housewives, although I am middle aged. she has been a constant source of misinformation for many years and i have always considered her tabloid journalism. Aside from the respect I have for her and her ability to make herself into one of the most respected, rich and most recognized celebs within the U.S., perhaps the world, I cannot say that I have respect for her daytime fodder that is supposed to be believed just because she says it is so. I have no knowledge of her educational background only the poor, sexually abused child that she was. Either way, what does education give you in this instance? Nothing but an opinion. I would say that everyone is born with some sense of right and wrong, even when that sense takes a wrong turn. The point I am trying to make is that no one here, regardless of where they live, is free from tabloid journalism. There will be people in every country who believe the Knoxes and those who will look further to come to heir own conclusions. Because you have an American family that has dedicated themselves to screaming over everyone with an opinion, does not mean they represent the U.S. as a whole or how many of us feel. Remember, Amanda Knox burst onto the "map" the day she made the front page of Yahoo, otherwise, I believe most Americans would never have heard of her plight. I laud the Kerchers for not joining in on the Oprah debacle. I could not spend one minute in that small studio with those vile people who continue to say they will apologize after the Kerchers know that Amanda is innocent. Perhaps The Knoxes should have had an interpreter in the courtroom so they could have better understood the evidence against their daughter. Seems like if it ain't in English, then it just ain't so...........I hope they wake up one day and realize that they are not just destroying the victims memory but that of their own children that still live with them.


I too feel that Oprah is mainly a source of misinformation, presented as gospel truth with the O seal of approval. Her show on Tuesday was no exception. Amanda Knox is innocent because Oprah says so; that's all you need to know. This spring's hot fashion item is a purple pashmina because Oprah says so; that's all you need to know. This year's best book is XXXXX (sorry, Candace, you didn't even make the short list) because Oprah says so; that's all you need to know.

And now, for something intelligent and thought-provoking, I bring you button from the eclectic chapbook:


Quote:
Thursday, February 25
Mez: In A Moving Light -
Meredith Kercher Murder Case -

Amanda Knox's family appeared
on Oprah's TV show Tuesday afternoon.

Advocating on her behalf: her biological parents,
her siblings, and an American criminal defense lawyer.

Curt Knox kicked off the session by claiming that there was nothing of hers in the room, meaning that there was nothing of his daughter's found within Meredith Kercher's bedroom.

Although I have been relying on secondhand sources and reading some material from translation, it is my understanding that Amanda Knox's desk lamp was found by the police within Meredith Kercher's locked bedroom.

Couldn't Rudy Guede have put it there? That's not very likely because the murder took place in the dark of night and Guede had no way of knowing that there was a small desk lamp in Amanda Knox's bedroom. Unless he came equipped with special night vision goggles, he would not be able to see the lamp in Knox's dark bedroom.

Did this issue come up during the trial proceedings? I believe the desk lamp did come up. When Prosecution confronted Knox about her desk lamp, it appeared that Knox tried to disown it.

Could she succeed in accomplishing that? Probably not, because it was not Amanda who originally leased the cottage on Pergola St.

It was one or both of the Italian gals who leased the cottage from a rental agent or the representative of the owner. And since their name(s) were on the lease, they were largely responsible for the furnishings which were included in the rental agreement for the cottage.

Laura and/or Filomena would take careful inventory of which furnishings were being supplied in each bedroom. Thus, they would know that the desk lamp which was usually in Amanda's bedroom was missing and not in its normal location. Instead, it was found by the police in Meredith's locked bedroom. And the Italian housemates would be able to identify it.

We are currently awaiting the Italian court's written treatise on the case, expected in early March, which will include elaborate explanations. The Devil is often in the details, as illustrated in the issue of Amanda Knox's desk lamp.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

jhansigirl wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Geologist wrote:
Absolutely, it's become their main source of income.


It's impossible the AK Family can ignore the mostly negative press. There's just too much of it.

The press rounds after the report is released should be interesting. Some of those hosts will ask about the facts and evidence. Curt/Edda will not be able to spin anymore. Sure, they will try, but it will only make them look more idiotic.



As they have already started spreading the seeds of doubt with regards to translation what's the betting that they will hire their own translator and publish their own 'Knox' English version of the report?


Naw, that would require time, effort and literacy.
Top Profile 

Offline tigger3498


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 7:49 pm

Posts: 158

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Love Button! So right on the money! The problem was "there was so much nothing" left by Amanda the slob, it would have been hard to even believe that she lived there! For once, she cleaned up way too well. I also wanted to add that I am sure sooner or later they are going to come up with a scenario where Meredith actually put Amanda's lamp in her room and locked the door........Hmmmmm, how to explain Meredith's missing keys.......so many pieces to the puzzle and none seem to fit the FOA puzzle......
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fast Pete wrote:
Hi Y'all

Posting right now on TJMK two sharply contrasting YouTubes of Knox lawyer Theodore Simon.

1) As the objective commenter on the very tough case back in December 2008

2) As the shrill lawyer on Oprah last Tuesday "this case makes no legal sense"

Peter Quennell


Actually, here is something we can thank Oprah for. She provided a platform from which Ted Simon contradicted his earlier assessment. The difference between then and now? Money. He is now in the employ of Knox Mellas Inc. Not only did Oprah provide a platform for Ted to contradict himself, she also provided one for Curt and Edda to continue their increasingly convoluted spin. And they certainly delivered. So thanks Oprah!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tommi


User avatar


Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:21 pm

Posts: 18

Location: Finland

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

nicki wrote:
La Repubblica Translation Part Three

"...even if I'll be locked in here until I am 46, I'll still have a big chunk of life ahead"


Did Amanda really wrote that in a letter? Thats certainly not the way I would handle the situation if I was locked in a prison being innocent. No way. I would do everything to get my voice heard. I would even try to escape. I would do everything to get away. If I was innocent, that is.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Shirley


Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:48 pm

Posts: 376

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

OTish:

Drew Peterson is in jail pending trial for the murder of his third wife. His fourth wife is still missing ( he’s the only suspect but not yet charged). There is no physical evidence tying him to either case.

But there are motives: Kathleen Savio died a couple weeks before their divorce would’ve been finalized; there is “hearsay” evidence that his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, knew that Drew killed Kathleen, thus needed to be silenced, this time making sure a body would not be found. Both women told people if they were found dead, it would be because of Drew.

A bill was passed in the fall of 2008 (signed by Blagojevich*) to allow hearsay evidence (aka “Drew’s Law”). A judge, who recently heard over 60 witnesses, will decide which of these hearsay statements will be allowed in the main trial. (Legally complicated I’d say.)

Ironically, trials for Blagojevich and Drew Peterson will both begin in June.

*Blagojevich is the former Governor of IL, infamous, amongst other things, for his hair and trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat.

P.S. Before Drew was arrested he nearly conducted a “Win a date with Drew” contest on a local radio station before radio execs wisely pulled it.

This may be why, despite Oprah, Chicago is Amanda who?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Tommi wrote:
nicki wrote:
La Repubblica Translation Part Three

"...even if I'll be locked in here until I am 46, I'll still have a big chunk of life ahead"


Did Amanda really wrote that in a letter? Thats certainly not the way I would handle the situation if I was locked in a prison being innocent. No way. I would do everything to get my voice heard. I would even try to escape. I would do everything to get away. If I was innocent, that is.



Hi Tommi and welcome to PMF. Indeed she did.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
donnie wrote:
Michael wrote:
Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.


Well, i don't think that i'm making any excuses. Not at all.
I'm not judging her behaviour simply beacuse i wasn't there and all i have seen was few minutes of footage showing Amanda waving to her family or friends(?) and putting on a smile. Now, why she was smiling all the time isn't exactly established. Maybe she's so lost and confused that she don't realize how serious this is and so, she smiles all the time. Maybe she's so sure that her lies will get her out of there, that she's confident enough to smile and act like a star in the courtroom. Maybe, maybe and maybe.

I just don't think that we have enough footage to say if she was or wasn't flirting with anyone in the court. Simple as that.
Also, you must notice, that i'm not saying she was acting perfectly good. She wasn't.
But at the same time i saw her acting just the way she should act in the courtroom.

I'm far away from judging someone in real life, not to mention that judgin another person just by a short footage is something
that i simply don't do. Please, respect that.


Well Donnie, had you been following the trial from when it first began, looking at all the photos and videos from each hearing as they came out, your perception of there 'not being enough footage' may be rather different.

Absolutely true. I recall a video shown by the Italian TV showing Amanda's first "grand entrance" in the courtroom last year, they chose a background music the kind you hear at a fashion show. Indeed she looked like she was walking down a runway, not to her own trial for murder and sexual assault. Everybody noticed how she was flirting with the camera and the photographers,including the Italian TV commentator.

_________________
"A pensare male si fa peccato, ma molto spesso ci si azzecca" mike
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
Michael wrote:

Hey Donnie:

You *are* joking right ?? or maybe trolling ??
Surely you are not serious.

Also, Not sure about the thought you are attempting to convey with "should" and "perfectly good".


Stint,

You know me.
Well at least i think you do.
You posted this Amanda esque pictures, fine with me. However, i don't find them disturbing or inappropriate. She was smiling alot -yes, but don't tell me that you believe that she was like that all the time (and that it is fair to say she's this or that just by looking at few pictures), giggling and chatting randomly(is this even English?). I'm just not that kind of a person who believe in judging another person by hers or his camera apperence. I honestly believe that she, APART from lying, behaved well in front of the judge. Remember when we had this pms exchange where we talked about how Amanda lost it during the testimony? Now this is something what i call innappropriate. You can't be arrogant and unpatient when you're trying to save your life, testifying on the stand. That's how Amanda acted in that situation and that to me is ALOT worse and telling than few of her pictures where she's smiling or waving to her family.

Michael, fair enough. Though i believe i saw most of the coverage there is.
And i can't believe she said that about her life when she's 46. Is there anything left to say for Amanda? This kind of thoughts are very self implicting, but it's not a shocker. She's done it before.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

life is unfair the socialists will have us know there is only so much capital circumstance or perceived value

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olqvPg3GL1M
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

donnie wrote:
stint7 wrote:
Michael wrote:

Hey Donnie:

You *are* joking right ?? or maybe trolling ??
Surely you are not serious.

Also, Not sure about the thought you are attempting to convey with "should" and "perfectly good".


Stint,

You know me.
Well at least i think you do.
You posted this Amanda esque pictures, fine with me. However, i don't find them disturbing or inappropriate. She was smiling alot -yes, but don't tell me that you believe that she was like that all the time (and that it is fair to say she's this or that just by looking at few pictures), giggling and chatting randomly(is this even English?). I'm just not that kind of a person who believe in judging another person by hers or his camera apperence. I honestly believe that she, APART from lying, behaved well in front of the judge. Remember when we had this pms exchange where we talked about how Amanda lost it during the testimony? Now this is something what i call innappropriate. You can't be arrogant and unpatient when you're trying to save your life, testifying on the stand. That's how Amanda acted in that situation and that to me is ALOT worse and telling than few of her pictures where she's smiling or waving to her family.

Michael, fair enough. Though i believe i saw most of the coverage there is.
And i can't believe she said that about her life when she's 46. Is there anything left to say for Amanda? This kind of thoughts are very self implicting, but it's not a shocker. She's done it before.



If I'm not mistaken, the words were spoken by Knox's best friend Madison Paxton and appeared in the La Repubblica article or accompanying video. It was part of an effort to portray Amanda Knox as a saint and an optimist, an inspiration to her entourage. Why Madison Paxton? Because she is an approved Amanda Knox brand spokesperson.

As for Knox's demeanor and behavior in the courtroom, as I recall she used the familiar form of address with the judge more than once. As I posted above, people who attended the entire trial have spoken about the arrogance and flippancy of Knox in her public statements to the court. There were also eye witness reports of flirtation with Raffaele, passing chocolates and so on.

As Curt Knox might say, what do you expect? She's just a kid. She doesn't understand. Leave her be. Let it be. Let her go. All you need is love.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

donnie wrote:
I honestly believe that she, APART from lying, behaved well in front of the judge.


Hi Donnie,

Barbie Nadeau wrote the following about Amanda Knox's conduct in the courtroom:

"Evidence: Courtroom behavior
Who it hurts: Knox
Italian courts are respectable institutions where rules of decorum are strictly followed. But Knox behaved boorishly throughout the trial, and the jury will have noticed. She enters the courtroom like a beauty queen, pandering to the cameras and sometimes answering journalists' questions with a coy smile. She also wore a "Let It Be" T shirt on Valentine's Day, and has been spotted passing around chocolates, winking at Sollecito, and laying her head down on the defense table. The Italian press has had a ball with Knox's courtroom antics (and those of her family). The jury is not sequestered, and the members are free to read about the case, which means they will certainly have been exposed to rampant criticism of her conduct."

The Italian Supreme Court to Amanda Knox:

“The restrictive measure cannot be denied due to the gravity of the crimes; your negative personality, which we have deducted from the investigation and from your behavior during investigation and court hearings.”
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
donnie wrote:
I honestly believe that she, APART from lying, behaved well in front of the judge.


Hi Donnie,

Barbie Nadeau wrote the following about Amanda Knox's conduct in the courtroom:

"Evidence: Courtroom behavior
Who it hurts: Knox
Italian courts are respectable institutions where rules of decorum are strictly followed. But Knox behaved boorishly throughout the trial, and the jury will have noticed. She enters the courtroom like a beauty queen, pandering to the cameras and sometimes answering journalists' questions with a coy smile. She also wore a "Let It Be" T shirt on Valentine's Day, and has been spotted passing around chocolates, winking at Sollecito, and laying her head down on the defense table. The Italian press has had a ball with Knox's courtroom antics (and those of her family). The jury is not sequestered, and the members are free to read about the case, which means they will certainly have been exposed to rampant criticism of her conduct."

The Italian Supreme Court to Amanda Knox:

“The restrictive measure cannot be denied due to the gravity of the crimes; your negative personality, which we have deducted from the investigation and from your behavior during investigation and court hearings.”


Thanks Skep and The Machine.
Good posts from both of You.
Thank you.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

This is a throwback to the very beginning, but it just occurred to ME.

Amanda spent lots of money on party supplies and lingerie. She could not spend $20 on a hair dryer of her own? Laura was not there for Amanda to ask permission to use the hair dryer. Amanda assumed she had the privilege to use it. NO BOUNDARIES

It's interesting all the people who lived with Amanda at the scene of the crime, immediately KNEW. They had absolutely no doubt who at least one of the perpetrators was.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Donnie, my good friend, you bring up some interesting *discussion stimulating* points again.

1) A few pictures does not a personality portray; you are infallible there.
BUT there are a lot more than "a few" pictures, and they just illustrate personal traits.

2)Several people who witnessed start to stop coverage express their (subjective) opinions that the overall demeanor was *very highly* inappropriate.
THEREFORE, can we agree that the pictures are reflective of personality (at least the Courtroom for public consumption personality), and the behavior was abhorrent.

3) Your statement that she behaved appropriately in front of the Judge is subjectively offered, but also easily objectively proven incorrect by the following facts:
a) All you need is love shirts would disrespect even a municipal traffic Court Judge just out of law school
b) Calling a judge by his first name needs no exemplification or additional clarification of correctness
c Arrogance, visible irritation, and snippy snide, snarky statements to the Court provided Interpreter as well as the Prosecutor are also pretty basic no-nos
Hardly what any rational person would should consider 'good behavior', agree Donnie?

4) Your statement about the smiles places you in close conformity with another (objective) observer who stated (with a straight face) that criticism of Amanda's smiles was invalid because....."she only smiled at her family".
>>>>>>>>DrumRoll>>>>>> enter the incredibly loyal, DJ.
(Some one said DJ read that obvious mega mis-statement from a Marriott provided cue card.)

DJ said this despite *hundreds* of visual evidences showing recorded come hither grins with lowered eyes, etcccc to innumerable non related male individuals happening daily.
Remember the My Space profile self stated *main* interest.....MEN.
May I suggest the pictures are merely the personification of what she wrote about herself.

Best Regards, Donnie
Also, wondering did you paint your Apartment that lovely Rose Color of the Beetle Shirt ?


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Quote:
b) Calling a judge by his first name needs no exemplification or additional clarification of correctness


Wow! I didn't know that.

eee-)
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Quote:
b) Calling a judge by his first name needs no exemplification or additional clarification of correctness


Wow! I didn't know that.

eee-)



I don't think she called him by his first name; she used the familiar form of "you" instead of the polite form.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

nicki wrote:
Michael wrote:
donnie wrote:
Michael wrote:
Donnie, I think you need a common frame of reference. You need to look at other trials and at how people behave in the court room. If you look at Amanda's trial in a vacuum, of course one can then make all sorts of excuses for it.


Well, i don't think that i'm making any excuses. Not at all.
I'm not judging her behaviour simply beacuse i wasn't there and all i have seen was few minutes of footage showing Amanda waving to her family or friends(?) and putting on a smile. Now, why she was smiling all the time isn't exactly established. Maybe she's so lost and confused that she don't realize how serious this is and so, she smiles all the time. Maybe she's so sure that her lies will get her out of there, that she's confident enough to smile and act like a star in the courtroom. Maybe, maybe and maybe.

I just don't think that we have enough footage to say if she was or wasn't flirting with anyone in the court. Simple as that.
Also, you must notice, that i'm not saying she was acting perfectly good. She wasn't.
But at the same time i saw her acting just the way she should act in the courtroom.

I'm far away from judging someone in real life, not to mention that judgin another person just by a short footage is something
that i simply don't do. Please, respect that.


Well Donnie, had you been following the trial from when it first began, looking at all the photos and videos from each hearing as they came out, your perception of there 'not being enough footage' may be rather different.

Absolutely true. I recall a video shown by the Italian TV showing Amanda's first "grand entrance" in the courtroom last year, they chose a background music the kind you hear at a fashion show. Indeed she looked like she was walking down a runway, not to her own trial for murder and sexual assault. Everybody noticed how she was flirting with the camera and the photographers,including the Italian TV commentator.


Thanks for all the comments on this. I suppose there's some solace in knowing that I am not just imagining things. And, in all fairness to donnie, I was unsettled by the nature of AK's movements and flourishes in the videos which are not captured in still pictures or simple text. That was the distinction I was trying to make.

What's that old song? "It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it...and that's what gets results!" band-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
I don't think she called him by his first name; she used the familiar form of "you" instead of the polite form.


An attorney's job includes the 'staging' of their side. There were some very elementary mistakes made by the Family and Amanda.

Wouldn't Ghirga verse them on the proper dress? That Amanda's sister was too young to be in court? Did he not see the way his client dressed before she entered the courtroom? Seems he would have sent an office assistant with the Family to purchase the proper attire. Would not have been very expensive.

I question if the attorney didn't care, because it was a hopeless case.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
I don't think she called him by his first name; she used the familiar form of "you" instead of the polite form.


An attorney's job includes the 'staging' of their side. There were some very elementary mistakes made by the Family and Amanda.

Wouldn't Ghirga verse them on the proper dress? That Amanda's sister was too young to be in court? Did he not see the way his client dressed before she entered the courtroom? Seems he would have sent an office assistant with the Family to purchase the proper attire. Would not have been very expensive.

I question if the attorney didn't care, because it was a hopeless case.



It's important to remember who is paying whom. Also, it's quite clear that in addition to not having a clue, this family doesn't have a clue about its own ignorance and doesn't trust the opinion of its own experts. As a result, it keeps shooting itself in the foot. I'm sure that anyone who comes bearing bad news or criticism or even a suggestion is quickly sent away.

Plus -- and I think this is key -- it is quite clear that Curt Knox and Chris Mellas cannot stand one another. Curt Knox = Dave Marriott and the big happy family routine. Chris Mellas = FOA and its shady elements, the ones who make anonymous posts trashing Meredith Kercher and her family. Janet Huff is clearly part of the Chris Mellas team; she sees no problem with the likes of Harry Wilkens, Strange Dave, Charlie Wilkes, Funnycat, Candace Dempsey, Frank Sfarzo, Turtledove, Kelly 13 and other assorted nuts.

Many more names could be added to the wall of the Hall of Shame. This is not to say that the Curt/Marriott team is respectable, only that it takes pains to appear more respectable than the Mellas/Goofy team. Television oblige and all that.

And there is some overlap, of course; some of the FOA background lurkers (Tom Wright, Doug Preston) certainly have ties to Marriott and the TV people.

The end result is a large and unruly constellation of egos. Ghirgha would need an even bigger team to maintain any kind of control over these people.

Let's not forget: the few Italians on the team know better than to tell the family anything whatsoever. They don't dare suggest that the young ones refrain from wearing so much makeup or dressing like they're going to the beach while in Italy. As for the others, the Anne Bremners and Judge Heaveys, they believe in American supremacy in all things and are adept at turning any legitimate criticism against whoever utters it.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mstev14420


User avatar


Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:23 am

Posts: 99

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Amanda and her sister look fat to me.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
Amanda and her sister look fat to me.


What has this got to do with anything?

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:04 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
Amanda and her sister look fat to me.


huh-)
Help me understand--why is your perception about their weight relevant?
This is one aspect (of both sisters) that seems perfectly normal and healthy.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:08 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:
mstev14420 wrote:
Amanda and her sister look fat to me.


huh-)
Help me understand--why is your perception about their weight relevant?
This is one aspect (of both sisters) that seems perfectly normal and healthy.


'Normal and healthy' sounds spot on to me. It is totally irrelevant.

OT Funnily enough I have just got back from dinner with one of my old Profs and he was saying how incredibly strange he finds the whole body fascism thing. He's 57. He was saying how in his day it was enough for a woman just to turn up! And why do women these days seem to hate their bodies, when most men are just more than happy not to be with a skeleton? He finds it really bewildering. But I guess when women like Deanna and Amanda are considered 'fat' it is not surprising!

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:14 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
I question if the attorney didn't care, because it was a hopeless case.


. pp-( You hit the nail in the head pp-(
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline nowo


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:35 pm

Posts: 186

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:42 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

jhansigirl said:
"As they have already started spreading the seeds of doubt with regards to translation what's the betting that they will hire their own translator and publish their own 'Knox' English version of the report?"

Are you not aware that 'they' have done that previously? I spy with my little eye something begining with"T" :)
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:46 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I don't believe Gigha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:46 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
Amanda and her sister look fat to me.


lolwut?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:49 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

nowo wrote:
jhansigirl said:
"As they have already started spreading the seeds of doubt with regards to translation what's the betting that they will hire their own translator and publish their own 'Knox' English version of the report?"

Are you not aware that 'they' have done that previously? I spy with my little eye something begining with"T" :)


I'm not so good with riddles right now. Can you translate please?

Have they seen the report?
Top Profile 

Offline nowo


Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:35 pm

Posts: 186

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:54 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I wasn't aware it was a riddle.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:03 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
I don't believe Gigha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?


I can understand the Family ignoring Ghirga's directive on proper behavior/dress. Didn't he see his client before court? Why allow her to dress and act that way? I also understand that Ghirga did the best he could do in those circumstances.

There were definite signs Ghirga was resigned jto the probable outcome. For instance, when Amanda was giving her statement. Raffaele's attorney had to step in to object to the rambling tale Amanda wove. The 'facts' changed from sentence to sentence.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:37 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
nowo wrote:
jhansigirl said:
"As they have already started spreading the seeds of doubt with regards to translation what's the betting that they will hire their own translator and publish their own 'Knox' English version of the report?"

Are you not aware that 'they' have done that previously? I spy with my little eye something begining with"T" :)


I'm not so good with riddles right now. Can you translate please?


Don't worry Emerald, I don't get it either.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mstev14420


User avatar


Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:23 am

Posts: 99

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:30 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I think that calling Amanda fat would bother her more than calling her a murderer. I just threw Deanna in there for good measure.
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:38 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Is everyone getting wacky or am I just missing something? Must be impatience waiting for the judge's report. LOL
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Rebel


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 3:25 am

Posts: 129

Location: Bellingham WA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:15 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Michael wrote:
Rebel wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Macport wrote:
Do we know the date of when the judge's report comes out?


It has to be out by March 5 (90 days after the verdict). I think that's when it will come out.


Peter Quennell made this comment today below his post on the Knox Campaign:

"We are hearing that the judges sentencing report due out next Tuesday and appearing here on TJMK in English shortly thereafter will be a pretty formidable document. The slight possibility of Knox’s transfer may all that is left to them and perhaps Simon is not even boning up on the case any more. It sounded like it. "

So according to Pete it will be out on March 2.


I'd better just clarify this. It won't be appearing here or anywhere in English, the document will simply be too large to render a word for word translation. Instead, there will be a translation of the key aspects and these then will be summarised and these will appear part by part in instalments. I thought I'd better say this in case some were given the impression by the post on Pete's that they would have access to a full English rendering.


Michael, thanks for the clarification. I just looked into the Google translator toolkit. If the judges sentencing report is less than 1MB in size (the Micheli report is 1/3 of that) it will do a quick machine translation from Italian to English of the whole report in one easy operation. All that is required is a Google account. But I do know that a lot of meanings/nuances are lost in machine translation so summaries of human translation of key aspects will be highly appreciated.
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:22 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Fiona wrote:
I don't believe Gigha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?


I can understand the Family ignoring Ghirga's directive on proper behavior/dress. Didn't he see his client before court? Why allow her to dress and act that way? I also understand that Ghirga did the best he could do in those circumstances.

There were definite signs Ghirga was resigned jto the probable outcome. For instance, when Amanda was giving her statement. Raffaele's attorney had to step in to object to the rambling tale Amanda wove. The 'facts' changed from sentence to sentence.


I've wondered about this, as well. If the photographs of the AK with Ghirga in court are any indication...

Is it possible that Ghirga, although already quite the seasoned trial attorney, just became a bit too emotionally attached to his client?

As a result, was his judgment a bit clouded when it came to AK's "eccentricities"? Is it possible that he was taken in by that fake confidence and pseudo-charm of AK--and let her sorta "do her thing."(as her family does) failing to reflect on how it would impact normal people, like the judges, who didn't fall under her spell?

There's such a pattern with AK expecting absolute entitlement--it defies credulity. She's special, she can do what she wants, "that's just Amanda." We've heard that over and over. She's just misunderstood, that's all, the truth has been "lost in translation." Ordinarily her counsel would/should advise her to rein it in, if only for the impression on the jury. But, her family seems to tolerate, even encourage this belief that "the rules don't apply to Amanda."

Amanda who knew she should do her share in the housekeeping, but simply didn't bother to do it. She certainly didn't seem like a "lazy"or distracted person. Not as far as sports, studies and seducing (the three S's) were concerned anyway. I think she just decided, on her own, that cleaning, at least while in Italy, was not something she should have to do. The rules don't apply to AK. It just doesn't matter to AK how this affected Meredith, not then, not now--because Amanda has no empathy.

Using the FORMAL form of Italian while addressing Judge Massei? It may be a sign of respect, custom and protocol in Italy, but nah, that "just wasn't Amanda." She's a more casual sort of girl, you know. She loves everybody and treats them like a casual friend. That's her "way." Doesn't matter how others see it.
The Rules According to Amanda. rul-)

Seems like Ted Simon has fallen under the spell, too. (i.e., "Did implicating an innocent man (Lumumba) show a lack of integrity on AK's part?" asked Oprah.
"QUITE THE CONTRARY" replied Simon. huh-)

So.....as Simon sees it, when AMANDA's lies end up destroying an innocent man's life and reputation...IT'S ACTUALLY A NOBLE THING.

Amanda can do no wrong. n-((

Even when it's painfully obvious she did something wrong, the FOA give it a little spin, a little twist, make up a justification, and turn it inside out--- to make it a virtue.
Top Profile 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:28 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Reasonable doubt that justice was done’ by Matthew Harwood

I think the Oprah show sealed the deal for him.

Guardian


I did a blog post that i've been twittering to people: The stuff you didn't hear about on Oprah.

Cheers
Pat



Nice job, Pat. I'll read it more thoroughly and make a comment; perhaps link it from my blog.


Thanks! High praise coming from you! :)

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:50 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
I don't believe Gigha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?


I agree he was working hard for his client, Fiona. There are plenty of entries in JAN and FEB of last year in the archives, here, where he's publicly frustrated at the entourage.

As for the Family's attitude and the AK flourishes I was finally noticing--(I am notoriously unobservant and prefer not to rely on videos for any information if it may be avoided)--it's nothing short of baffling. I am no super-conservative button-down type but they might as well have dressed and behaved like the Gumbys in a Python skit. That's what I finally noticed.

How does a lawyer with the experience and pedigree of a Ghirga deal with this? Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall at the cocktail bar where they all gather to talk about this show once it's all finished?

Anyhow, back to our regularly-scheduled evidence-based discussions. Can't wait for the court report next week!

co-) Yay-) b-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:19 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Maybe Ghirga (is that spelled correctly?) allowed Amanda's behavior/dress in court to make allowance for the improper way she acted at the scene of her crime and in the police station?

If she had acted with the proper reserve in front of the tribunal, it would have highlighted the inappropriateness of the behavior elsewhere.

Maybe?
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:37 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

As the official Dublin launch of the Innocence Project takes place, law students are already reviewing possible miscarriages of justice

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 60550.html

A forensic genetics expert, Dr Hampikian’s expertise is called on by the Innocence Project all over the US and further afield. He is currently working with the family of Amanda Knox, the American student jailed in Italy last year for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:45 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
Amanda and her sister look fat to me.


Both perfectly healthy and normal looking.
Then you stated that Amanda would be more bothered when called fat...alright, maybe she would be. But that doesn't explain why did you feel the need to say something like that. Yeah, waiting for the report is literally killing us.

Skep, in one of your recent posts you put together in the line names like Strange Dave and Frank. While i am aware that Frank isn't exactly the best source of knowledge, i still think that Strange Dave is the worst, the lowest in the hierarchy of FOA, not even sure if he can be called FOA, since he's really the biggest douche i've ever seen, the most pathetic one. Way worst than Frank, at least to me. The way Dave spoke to You left me in shock for several hours.

I also wondered how much impact on Amanda's court presence her lawyers had. But as Skep explained, it apparently wasn't that easy to instruct her or any other member of the family to dress or behave in an appropriate way. I do wonder though if Ghirga gave any suggestions to Amanda how she should act, behave or whatever and what was her reaction about it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:46 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Maybe Ghirga (is that spelled correctly?) allowed Amanda's behavior/dress in court to make allowance for the improper way she acted at the scene of her crime and in the police station?

If she had acted with the proper reserve in front of the tribunal, it would have highlighted the inappropriateness of the behavior elsewhere.

Maybe?


Maybe.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:05 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
I don't believe Gigha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?


Believe me, they will have thought long and hard what to wear in court, and that includes not only Amanda but all the women. In their minds they have a plan and it starts with getting attention, whether it is from a false sense of importance and influence or from a point of a deep need for recognition and self worth from the attention itself. The care given to hair and makeup ( or lack of, when they wish to convey another message), the choice of clothes, footwear, all of this is thought through. The big 'gap' for them is not having a clue how they are perceived, or if the message does get back to them, that this may not be appropriate or suitable, then we see the outrage and the claims of being vilified. They may actually be telling themselves the people reporting negatively are jealous (a common mantra for Americans, I am sad to say).
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:32 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

You mean that as a general comment on women; or american women; or these particular women?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:38 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I think the women in general and in court, the journalists etc, anyone not in uniform would have given thought to their appearance to varying degree. I think for the family concerned, they will be coming from their specific perspective of what is 'right' for them and 'who they are' and would have 'chosen' to make their debut appearances in court looking as they did.


Last edited by H9 on Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:40 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
DJ said this despite *hundreds* of visual evidences showing recorded come hither grins with lowered eyes, etcccc to innumerable non related male individuals happening daily.
Remember the My Space profile self stated *main* interest.....MEN.
May I suggest the pictures are merely the personification of what she wrote about herself.

Best Regards, Donnie
Also, wondering did you paint your Apartment that lovely Rose Color of the Beetle Shirt ?


As far as i can remember we discussed the pictures issues previously(i mean me and you) and you know that i'm not quite sure about judging anyone or anything by a snapshot. I would rather say that the pictures are fullfiling the whole image of Amanda. I showed her pictures while in the court to few of my friends. The ones where she was laughing and the ones where she was serious. They said that the t shirt with All You Need Is Love writing was a little bit odd, but they didn't notice anything that bad. Now, that was beacuse i've never told them who this young woman is, only that she's on trial for murder and that she's sure she's innocent.

And no, Rose isn't my favourite. I prefer chocolate.
Kudos stint for another great post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:14 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Donnie: I agree that people should not (indeed cannot) be judged by appearance etc. But it seems to me that we live in a society which currently makes precisely such judgements more than has every been done in the past. I do not appreciate that. In ordinary life I can avoid the issue to some extent. But there is no doubt that this pressure is in the ascendant and when it matters I conform. There is no other reasonable option at present. Not to do so is at best profoundly stupid: at worst it is an indication that one has little idea how the world wags: and that is odd for a member of a social species
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:41 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
Donnie: I agree that people should not (indeed cannot) be judged by appearance etc. But it seems to me that we live in a society which currently makes precisely such judgements more than has every been done in the past. I do not appreciate that. In ordinary life I can avoid the issue to some extent. But there is no doubt that this pressure is in the ascendant and when it matters I conform. There is no other reasonable option at present. Not to do so is at best profoundly stupid: at worst it is an indication that one has little idea how the world wags: and that is odd for a member of a social species


Hey Fiona,
i'm kind of a rebel when it comes to putting up with everything that modern society gives us.
I'm a young person, very young for some of the folks here, but i still try to live my life in a way that is good for me, even if sometimes my efforts drive people to a conclusion that i'm weird or unusal.

I have my beliefs and i stand by them and it's good to know that you (kinda) agree with me.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:06 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I do, Donnie. I am going to be a bit naughty here though:I am going to put it to you that you did indeed judge Knox by her appearance at the outset. I am not criticising you for that: it is the water you swim in just as it is for all of us. The power of the society around is not always obvious in its impact on our own behaviour: but we are all more similar than we are different and despite the mantra of choice and freedom there is only so much we can choose between: a lot less than we like to imagine

I also want to ask you about this rejection of the impositions of the society we live in. We all try to live as is good for us. One of the things that is good for us is to accept reality however much we dislike it. It is a reality that our presentation in court can have at least some impact on the outcome. It is not fair but it is a fact. We have a joke here:

Q:What do you call a Glaswegian who is wearing a tie?
A:The accused

It is a telling little joke, don't you think? So let me ask you? What would you wear to court if you were the accused? would you make any concession to arbitrary but quite important aspects of the situation? or would you hold wholly to your views on the insignificance of those matter?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:12 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
Donnie: I agree that people should not (indeed cannot) be judged by appearance etc. But it seems to me that we live in a society which currently makes precisely such judgements more than has every been done in the past.


That actually might be a fairly unkind assessment of the modern world. I enjoy reading historical, cultural, and political books either written in or about what happened one hundred years ago. It's just a hobby. I would have to say that people are judged far less by appearances now, at least in North America, than ever before. A hundred years ago, Henry Ford wouldn't even sell you an automobile in any colour other than black. Women could be arrested on the beach for showing too much leg. The comparisons with what we'd call repressive regimes today are extremely close. There wasn't even a "casual Friday" in offices!

Fiona wrote:
In ordinary life I can avoid the issue to some extent. But there is no doubt that this pressure is in the ascendant and when it matters I conform. There is no other reasonable option at present. Not to do so is at best profoundly stupid: at worst it is an indication that one has little idea how the world wags: and that is odd for a member of a social species


The only time I really have to conform is when the bankers show up and we have to. Our corporate president usually wears something like a turtleneck and corduroys and when I met the company founder (who sold out most of his stake about seven years ago) he looked like he'd just flown in from the ranch.

But a courtroom isn't really the same place as our company is. I wouldn't attend the symphony in cowboy boots. I wouldn't accept an invitation to speak at Parliament in a clown suit. I don't think that's unreasonable and it's even a worthwhile exercise in socialising with people who, at heart, are no better or worse than me.

If you're young, Donnie, think about how you dress or behave on a first date. Do you show up in beaten up clothes or a big pink fedora? (Don't answer that if you actually do!) My guess is that you think primarily about how your date will perceive you rather than pummeling their senses with gaudy gewgaws.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:46 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stilicho wrote:

That actually might be a fairly unkind assessment of the modern world. I enjoy reading historical, cultural, and political books either written in or about what happened one hundred years ago. It's just a hobby. I would have to say that people are judged far less by appearances now, at least in North America, than ever before. A hundred years ago, Henry Ford wouldn't even sell you an automobile in any colour other than black. Women could be arrested on the beach for showing too much leg. The comparisons with what we'd call repressive regimes today are extremely close. There wasn't even a "casual Friday" in offices!


Well obviously I disagree: but I do not think we can get into a discussion about that here, really. It is very far off topic, and judging from the rest of your post the substantive point about the situation as it obtains in courts is a point of agreement at least :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:53 am   Post subject: Full Moon   

Macport wrote:
Is everyone getting wacky or am I just missing something? Must be impatience waiting for the judge's report. LOL



Hi Macport,

Coincidentally, it is a Full Moon again. :)

Very serene, she is, sailing through the skies.
"The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", says the song (and Heinlein's science fiction story).

The Ancient Egyptians called her "the boat of millions of years".
I can well imagine that, especially when she is a slim young crescent on the horizon.

"Older than Adam, if Adam were still alive.
Just four weeks old, and never shall be five."


Now she is as fat and healthy as a grape on the vine.
A big silver mirror.

And moonshine is in the air.
Top Profile 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

For you Guardian readers: There is a post on the recent blog that suggests that Amanda is in jail because of the behaviour of the Kercher family. I am lost for words and almost in tears at the disgusting nature of this post.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments

"It is correct, just, and not abusive to point out the vengeance driven behavior of Meredith Kercher's Mother which deliberately contributed to the unjust imprisonment of Amanda Knox.
Anyone who lets an innocent person be convicted for a crime they didn't commit is morally depraved. To seek vengeance in such an indiscriminate fashion that it permits the seeker to approve of and accept the use of an innocent scapegoat is no better......... etc. etc. etc."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
I don't believe Girgha did not care: he appears to have been working hard for his client. There is only so much a lawyer can do. In any case it is truly odd if Knox and her family had no idea how to dress for court: how hard can it be?


For Team Knox it was hard enough. It was noted by everyone reporting.

The more I think about it, it becomes a bigger factor than it would appear. Knox is daring everyone to notice her and her choice of clothes.

Her problem is it works against her. She is, again, performing a wardrobe cartwheel and we're supposed to have a great laugh at the nuttiness of it all.


Last edited by piktor on Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

bilko wrote:
For you Guardian readers: There is a post on the recent blog that suggests that Amanda is in jail because of the behaviour of the Kercher family. I am lost for words and almost in tears at the disgusting nature of this post.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments

"It is correct, just, and not abusive to point out the vengeance driven behavior of Meredith Kercher's Mother which deliberately contributed to the unjust imprisonment of Amanda Knox.
Anyone who lets an innocent person be convicted for a crime they didn't commit is morally depraved. To seek vengeance in such an indiscriminate fashion that it permits the seeker to approve of and accept the use of an innocent scapegoat is no better......... etc. etc. etc."


Hi Bilko,

I saw these disgusting comments this morning. I hope posters complain to The Guardian about the terrible article and register, so they can make their feelings known. It literally takes seconds to register with The Guardian.
Top Profile 

Offline bilko


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 7:25 pm

Posts: 198

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The comments appear to have been removed in record time, thanks to those who reported the poster for abuse. I don't know why I get so upset by remarks like this. I am not an over emotional person, but I just cannot fathom the minds of some people. I find it really sad that there are those who are so wrapped up in this case that they can resort to such tactics.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

It's totally appropriate to be upset by those disgusting posts. It's not on.
Top Profile 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
As the official Dublin launch of the Innocence Project takes place, law students are already reviewing possible miscarriages of justice

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 60550.html

A forensic genetics expert, Dr Hampikian’s expertise is called on by the Innocence Project all over the US and further afield. He is currently working with the family of Amanda Knox, the American student jailed in Italy last year for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.


Huh. How about that. DNA testing 30 years later. It would seem to me that that is beyond the 45 days that the bra clasp was collected. Of course, the FOA would probably tell me I'm wrong, since its blindingly obvious that 30 is less then 45.

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

pataz1 wrote:
h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
As the official Dublin launch of the Innocence Project takes place, law students are already reviewing possible miscarriages of justice

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 60550.html

A forensic genetics expert, Dr Hampikian’s expertise is called on by the Innocence Project all over the US and further afield. He is currently working with the family of Amanda Knox, the American student jailed in Italy last year for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.


Huh. How about that. DNA testing 30 years later. It would seem to me that that is beyond the 45 days that the bra clasp was collected. Of course, the FOA would probably tell me I'm wrong, since its blindingly obvious that 30 is less then 45.

Pat


Hi Pat,

It doesn't matter whether the bra clasp was collected immediately or some weeks later. The crime scene was sealed the whole time and DNA doesn't fly around, which makes contamination impossible.

The fact that Sollecito left an an abundant amount of his DNA (over 200 cells) on a small piece of Meredith's underwear is in itself highly incriminating because Meredith was murdered in a sex attack.

Furthermore, DNA evidence has been used to convict people years after the crime was committed.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:
I've wondered about this, as well. If the photographs of the AK with Ghirga in court are any indication...

Is it possible that Ghirga, although already quite the seasoned trial attorney, just became a bit too emotionally attached to his client?

.


Personally, I accept as legitimate, and as such, possibly detrimental to objective analysis, Donnie's and other well phrased criticisms of over interpretation and unwarranted inferences with resultant vulnerable conclusions from an (over?) analysis of a few photographs.

However, having said that, the photo series of Counsellor Ghirga's repeated overt outward affectionate actions toward his client in full view of Court, IMHO certainly demonstrate the possibility that just maybe he was a "bit too emotionally attached" as you point out.

Additionally, I felt his emotions, to include tears during his summation was genuine, and another non photo based strong indication of the extraordinary personal attachment to his client.

Finally, his personal visit to Amanda's cell the morning after the verdict to me showed not a cold attorney client relationship, but conversely a genuine warm personal concern for her welfare.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
As the official Dublin launch of the Innocence Project takes place, law students are already reviewing possible miscarriages of justice

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 60550.html

A forensic genetics expert, Dr Hampikian’s expertise is called on by the Innocence Project all over the US and further afield. He is currently working with the family of Amanda Knox, the American student jailed in Italy last year for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher.


Huh. How about that. DNA testing 30 years later. It would seem to me that that is beyond the 45 days that the bra clasp was collected. Of course, the FOA would probably tell me I'm wrong, since its blindingly obvious that 30 is less then 45.

Pat


Hi Pat,

It doesn't matter whether the bra clasp was collected immediately or some weeks later. The crime scene was sealed the whole time and DNA doesn't fly around, which makes contamination impossible.

The fact that Sollecito left an an abundant amount of his DNA (over 200 cells) on a small piece of Meredith's underwear is in itself highly incriminating because Meredith was murdered in a sex attack.

Furthermore, DNA evidence has been used to convict people years after the crime was committed.


I don't disagree.. I was pointing out that if you presented the FOA with reports that in other cases DNA had been collected and tested months and years beyond the actual crime, they'd respond with some completely unrealistic blather about how you were wrong because the number was smaller.

I do want to clarify, unlike many others here, I don't really fault Knox's family and friends for publicly coming across as believing in her innocence and trying to secure her release. I will agree their actions towards Meredith's family are reprehensible. They have not yet understood how to show compassion while still being able to fight for their daughter; perhaps they never will; true compassion, a compassion not connected to a personal belief or a PR image, is not a lesson widely taught or believed in in america. But as far as hating Amanda's parents or engaging in character assassination of them, you won't see that from me. I'll sarcastically shoot up their responses, as above, but that's about the extent of it.

I do fault them for some of their responses; i.e. not having a consistent response ("there is no evidence" in one statement, then "the evidence is tainted" in another), for blowing things out of proportion ("her human rights were violated"), for stoking unwarranted xenophobia, and for other borderline dishonest presentations of the case (presenting Sollectio's and Guede's footprints as the same size on the FOA website). But you could just as likely lay those issues at the doorstep of the PR firm.

I also think its tragic that the parents haven't allowed and encouraged their other daughters to get on with their lives; I think that they should be parents of all of their children, not just amanda, and be concerned about the future of all of their children. It will be at least another year for the first round of appeals, and I highly doubt they'll win. Amanda has been in jail 2 years now, and doesn't require the daily hand holding she would have initially. There's not much that can be done other then continue to garner public support and funding, which I imagine they'll continue to do, but their other daughters should be able to start buiding their own futures.

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Maybe Ghirga (is that spelled correctly?) allowed Amanda's behavior/dress in court to make allowance for the improper way she acted at the scene of her crime and in the police station?

If she had acted with the proper reserve in front of the tribunal, it would have highlighted the inappropriateness of the behavior elsewhere.

Maybe?


Exactly, Emerald. Just keepin' it consistent---with her pre-trial strangeness and odd coldness with respect to this savage murder.

To paraphrase the Beatles, "Let her be--" Let her be. . . inappropriate.

FOA wants us to believe: Amanda is NOT a sociopathic narcissistic with no conscience, and no remorse.

She has simply been misunderstood! She's just wacky that way--"that's just Amanda."

See for yourselves!

She's "different", alright, we'll grant ya that....But she's NOT deviant.

The APA (American Psychiatric Association) highlights seven characteristics that point to a clinical diagnosis of having an "antisocial personality disorder." Even possessing just three of the following seven characteristics may cause a mental health expert suspect an individual has such a disorder. How many do we see in AK?

1. Failure to conform to social norms
2. Deceitfulness, manipulativeness
3. Impulsivity
4. Irritability, aggressiveness
5. Reckless disregard for the safety of self or others
6. Consistent irresponsibility
7. Lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated or stolen from another person.

When you add "superficial charm" to the mix, you come up with a sociopath--one that's able to enlist people to undertake high-risk/dangerous activities with them.

And then if someone like that is involved in a murder, there will be no remorse, no conscience, no accountability, NO FEELINGS!

Not all sociopaths are murderers, of course.

But, after observing her in court, hearing her testimony, and listening to ALL the trial evidence, they figured out that Amanda was hardly some misunderstood "innocent abroad." la_)

"On the contrary!"
(as Ted Simon might exclaim.)
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

pataz1 wrote:
I do fault them for some of their responses; i.e. not having a consistent response ("there is no evidence" in one statement, then "the evidence is tainted" in another), for blowing things out of proportion ("her human rights were violated"), for stoking unwarranted xenophobia, and for other borderline dishonest presentations of the case (presenting Sollectio's and Guede's footprints as the same size on the FOA website). But you could just as likely lay those issues at the doorstep of the PR firm.


There has been a deliberate attempt to mislead the general public with numerous one-sided articles that are riddled with factual errors. You can trace these articles back to the same source: Curt Knox and Edda Mellas.

They have both made dishonest claims, which have been subsequently repeated in magazine and newspaper articles, and on television e.g. Amanda Knox hasn't lied or only lied once, Knox wasn't provided with an interpreter, Knox was questioned continuously all night or 14 hours, and the DNA on the blade of the double DNA knife could match half the population of Italy.

Curt Knox and Edda Mellas have attempted to exert a stranglehold of the media in order to influence and control what is written and to silence the voices of people who think that Knox and Sollecito are guilty. A number of journalists have been bullied and threatened by Curt, Edda and Chris Mellas, and Knox's friends and supporters.

Chris Mellas, like Edda, has been caught out lying on number of occasions.

Barbie Nadeau pointed out one instance of this:

And despite his advice to Amanda, Mellas has had his own issues with shifting truths. Two weeks ago, he told the West Seattle Herald that what police testimony described as “cartwheels ” at the station had actually been yoga stretches. In a press release by the Friends of Amanda organization, he elaborated, “The tabloid press further sensationalized her statement by changing ‘the splits’ to ‘cartwheels’ and the mainstream press ran with that.”

This week, when asked to clarify that point, he offered a different version of events, saying, “When she was in the room waiting, one of the police commented on how flexible she was,” he said. “He asked her what kind of gymnastics she did and he actually asked her to do those things, to do the cartwheels for him.

Chris Mellas also claimed on Candace Dempsey's blog that he had never spoken to Raffaele Sollecito after claiming that he had spoken to him on the phone.

I think it's disturbing that Chris Mellas has repeatedly made taunts of a sexual nature and I wonder whether he modelled this unsavoury behaviour in front of Amanda Knox, who turned made similar taunts to Meredith.

I've been reliably informed that both Edda and Chris Mellas have vicious tempers and have unleashed their fury on a number of journalists. Of course, such instances will never be mentioned by the journalists, writers and authors recruited by David Marriott.

Curt, Edda and Chris Mellas are dishonest and obnoxious bullies. I'm not surprised there isn't much sympathy for them on PMF or TJMK.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

RE: 'Let her be inappropriate' by 411.

mul-)

Great research, analysis, conclusions and 'closer' for Mr Simon, esq.
AKA the *half* Million Dollar Man
Top Profile 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I just saw on the KOMO4 (ABC) Seattle morning news a preview of a feature to be aired this coming Monday night at 11:00pm.

Kathi Goertzen went to Trump Tower to interview the Donald himself about his thoughts on Amanda Knox.

Stay tuned... :roll:

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

OMG They can't be serious.....
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: Full Moon   

Catnip wrote:
Macport wrote:
Is everyone getting wacky or am I just missing something? Must be impatience waiting for the judge's report. LOL



Hi Macport,

Coincidentally, it is a Full Moon again. :)

Very serene, she is, sailing through the skies.
"The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", says the song (and Heinlein's science fiction story).

The Ancient Egyptians called her "the boat of millions of years".
I can well imagine that, especially when she is a slim young crescent on the horizon.

"Older than Adam, if Adam were still alive.
Just four weeks old, and never shall be five."


Now she is as fat and healthy as a grape on the vine.
A big silver mirror.

And moonshine is in the air.

Nice post. I read that book years ago. I was wondering what my next read might be. Perhaps this has suggested it . . . or maybe an Ursula Le Guin classic. Did you ever read "The Word For World Is Forest". Mmmmmmmmm
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
This thread will be devoted to helping Donnie write his master's thesis on athletic murderers and sociopaths. I'm joking.:)


I've never seen this post :) It amazes me how fast time flies...

There have been questions asked, i will answer them later today.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:18 pm   Post subject: Deleted for redundancy   

Just deleted my double post
only to receive this message:
"Your message contains too few characters."

Duly noted by The 411.
I'll try to work on adding and developing characters, in my future posts!!


Last edited by The 411 on Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I like that we're talking sociopath and antisocial personality disorder again. Like The 411 wrote - "one that's able to enlist people to undertake high-risk/dangerous activities with them." I always think it is the "glue" in the mix of "the three".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:27 pm   Post subject: It's been a hard (dazed) night....   

The 411 wrote:
The Machine wrote:

There has been a deliberate attempt to mislead the general public with numerous one-sided articles that are riddled with factual errors. You can trace these articles back to the same source: Curt Knox and Edda Mellas...

... Knox was questioned continuously all night or 14 hours,



Re: "A Hard, Dazed Night"...of the interrogation...

Machine:
As you know, it's a full-time job keeping up with all the lies, distortions, and misrepresentations presented to the media, by Amanda's supporters.

THAT'S BECAUSE it's part of the Marriott strategy for Curt and Edda not only to lie, but
to continually adjust and change their lies.
After all, it's a lot harder to fight a moving/changing target.

To cite just one example of the changing lies, on Oprah's recent show, Curt and Edda claimed that Amanda's interrogation period actually LASTED (GASP!!) 91 HOURS!! eee-) And that Amanda "cracked" under the pressure/hunger/intimidation at the 54th hour!!



It's now gone from being an (unsubstantiated) case of police brutality to....
A HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITY!! stup-)

Oddly, the US Embassy in Italy, and all the humanitarian organizations in the world don't see it that way, but, hey, are they any way near as credible... as Curt and Edda? ss-)
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Just got a book in that I put a hold on at my local library "Understanding Narcissism in Clinical Practice" by Hazel Robinson & Victoria Graham Fuller. I guess I have my next read now. We'll see if there's any gems in there.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Tara wrote:
I just saw on the KOMO4 (ABC) Seattle morning news a preview of a feature to be aired this coming Monday night at 11:00pm.

Kathi Goertzen went to Trump Tower to interview the Donald himself about his thoughts on Amanda Knox.

Stay tuned... :roll:



I hope she makes the most of her mission and interviews Rachel Ray and Martha Stewart as well. I am sure their insights will help all of us.:)

Actually, perhaps Kathi could unravel a mystery for us. Curt Knox alluded to Amanda Knox's pursuit of her degree at the UW from Capanne Prison. He mentioned a few really kind professors at the UW and "funneling" work out of the prison. I would like to know what this means exactly. Is AK enrolled at the UW as a regular student or is she enrolled in the distance learning program? Have officials at Capanne Prison specifically stated she is not allowed to pursue her studies (hence the need to funnel work out)? Are the professors at the UW working outside the normal enrollment procedures to help out AK? Does she sign up for classes each quarter and, if so, how? I'm confused because the UW said she was no longer enrolled shortly after she was arrested.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Tara wrote:
I just saw on the KOMO4 (ABC) Seattle morning news a preview of a feature to be aired this coming Monday night at 11:00pm.

Kathi Goertzen went to Trump Tower to interview the Donald himself about his thoughts on Amanda Knox.

Stay tuned... :roll:



I hope she makes the most of her mission and interviews Rachel Ray and Martha Stewart as well. I am sure their insights will help all of us.:)

Actually, perhaps Kathi could unravel a mystery for us. Curt Knox alluded to Amanda Knox's pursuit of her degree at the UW from Capanne Prison. He mentioned a few really kind professors at the UW and "funneling" work out of the prison. I would like to know what this means exactly. Is AK enrolled at the UW as a regular student or is she enrolled in the distance learning program? Have officials at Capanne Prison specifically stated she is not allowed to pursue her studies (hence the need to funnel work out)? Are the professors at the UW working outside the normal enrollment procedures to help out AK? Does she sign up for classes each quarter and, if so, how? I'm confused because the UW said she was no longer enrolled shortly after she was arrested.

. . . and can she be shut down if that is what is going on? I'm all for rehabilitation but Meredith isn't getting her degree.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Macport wrote:
. . . and can she be shut down if that is what is going on? I'm all for rehabilitation but Meredith isn't getting her degree.


Can Amanda Knox be rehabilitated?
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
Macport wrote:
. . . and can she be shut down if that is what is going on? I'm all for rehabilitation but Meredith isn't getting her degree.


Can Amanda Knox be rehabilitated?

The million dollar question.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I hope so
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
Can Amanda Knox be rehabilitated?



No one can be rehabilitated unless they admit there is some reason to rehabilitate.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

That is true Emerald. I hope that once the appeals are all done and she is away from the influence of her family and facing the reality of her sentence she will be able to face up to this and maybe get where she needs to be to make that possible
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Let's hope so because when ever she gets out she'll have a lot of years left in her life.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

What was the official reason Raffaele's sister lost her job?
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
What was the official reason Raffaele's sister lost her job?



According to the reconstruction by the Perugia prosecutor, the father and sister of Raphael Sollecito had legitimately obtained the scientific survey of the police, and had then illegally provided it to Telemundo

Ex-Carabinieri-Lieutenant Vanessa seems to have been bugged while seeking a political favor for brother Raff.

“One of the complexities against me came from an intercepted wiretap in which I was talking to a politician who according to my superiors I was trying to entrust the fate of my brother Raffaele with in the proceedings. But it will be enough to listen carefully to the recordings, I only spoke about a member of his family that I had as a student, never, never about Raffaele.”

“We do not speak of interceptions,” said Dr. Francesco Sollecito inserting himself (during daughters questions by the journalist) and sitting next to his wife Mara who took notes on a little notepad.
.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
The Machine wrote:
Can Amanda Knox be rehabilitated?



No one can be rehabilitated unless they admit there is some reason to rehabilitate.


Although I agree with you, there's much more to it than that just Knox admitting there is some reason for her to be rehabilitated.

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are not two normal, well-balanced kids who had a bad day at the office when they under the influence of drink and drugs. They both have serious personality defects and are extremely dangerous individuals who could reoffend.

The posters who argue that there might be an innocent explanation for Knox and Sollecito taking the double DNA knife to the cottage don't seem to acknowledge that Knox and Sollecito have serious personality defects. They also don't seem to fully understand how cruel and sadistic Meredith's murder actually was. Pete hasn't posted all the details of Meredith's injuries on TJMK because they are so horrific.
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
Emerald wrote:
The Machine wrote:
Can Amanda Knox be rehabilitated?



No one can be rehabilitated unless they admit there is some reason to rehabilitate.

two well-balanced kids who had a bad day at the office

I needed some humor today. A good post that reminds us of what they did and what the world may face when they get out.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Other "Foxys"

Matthew Fox
Matthew, known by his friends as Foxy, played football for Columbia University during a long losing streak, which was ended during Matthew's senior year when they won two games at the end of the season. He is a Philadelphia Eagles fanatic. "Foxy" is a jock and hard-core tattooed dude, and he's sensitive, and he's a dad.

Sergeant Paul Fox, 34, from 28 Engineer Regiment, attached to the Brigade Reconnaissance Force, died after being caught in a blast near a check point in Nad-e-Ali, Helmand. Sgt Fox, known as Foxy, was born in Manchester and joined in Army in 1994. "Sergeant Paul Fox was above all else a quite outstanding man. A tremendous soldier, impressive leader, fine engineer, good friend, cracking Senior Non-Commissioned Officer but principally just a great man. His quick wit, committed sense of purpose, dedication and capacity was beyond doubt."

Local media personality Raymond "Foxy" Gagnon has admitted to receiving child porn and will get at least five years behind bars. The maximum he could be sentenced to is 20 years and a $250,000 fine.
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:
Emerald wrote:
Maybe Ghirga (is that spelled correctly?) allowed Amanda's behavior/dress in court to make allowance for the improper way she acted at the scene of her crime and in the police station?

If she had acted with the proper reserve in front of the tribunal, it would have highlighted the inappropriateness of the behavior elsewhere.

Maybe?


Exactly, Emerald. Just keepin' it consistent---with her pre-trial strangeness and odd coldness with respect to this savage murder.

To paraphrase the Beatles, "Let her be--" Let her be. . . inappropriate.

FOA wants us to believe: Amanda is NOT a sociopathic narcissistic with no conscience, and no remorse.

She has simply been misunderstood! She's just wacky that way--"that's just Amanda."

See for yourselves!

She's "different", alright, we'll grant ya that....But she's NOT deviant.

"On the contrary!"
(as Ted Simon might exclaim.)


If Knox's tactic was to present a wa-)) "clueless Amanda" tableaux br-)) to the judges, it worked... against her.

A Supreme Court judge denied bail and wrote Knox had a "negative personality" and showed a lack of seriousness in court.


Last edited by piktor on Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

O/T

I'm glued to CNN for the tsunami warning in Hawaii after the Chile earthquake. Nobody knows for sure, but cautious.

Love love love the information age.

ETA.... A tsunami has been reported in New Zealand (no reports of size). That's the 10 hour mark. Hawaii is 12 hour mark. Reports of discoloration in Hawaii surf and receding of water.
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:29 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Okay, no tsunami. Noticeable water rise and discoloration throughout the Pacific rim. I absolutely adore natural disasters. Don't like people losing life or stuff, but otherwise......


You know, if the Oprah appearance had reaped positive response, there would have been a flood of immediate appearances. Knox/Mellas/FOA would have done it for the monetary gain; media would have done it for the monetary gain, too.
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:34 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
The 411 wrote:
I've wondered about this, as well. If the photographs of the AK with Ghirga in court are any indication...

Is it possible that Ghirga, although already quite the seasoned trial attorney, just became a bit too emotionally attached to his client?

.


Personally, I accept as legitimate, and as such, possibly detrimental to objective analysis, Donnie's and other well phrased criticisms of over interpretation and unwarranted inferences with resultant vulnerable conclusions from an (over?) analysis of a few photographs.

However, having said that, the photo series of Counsellor Ghirga's repeated overt outward affectionate actions toward his client in full view of Court, IMHO certainly demonstrate the possibility that just maybe he was a "bit too emotionally attached" as you point out.

Additionally, I felt his emotions, to include tears during his summation was genuine, and another non photo based strong indication of the extraordinary personal attachment to his client.

Finally, his personal visit to Amanda's cell the morning after the verdict to me showed not a cold attorney client relationship, but conversely a genuine warm personal concern for her welfare.


It is called the "Abramson hold". Leslie Abramson invented it for her client Erik Menendez.

Apparently criminal trial lawyers had never shown physical affection for their clients until Abramson patted her client's back and threw her arm around him at time of verdict and sentencing.

The late Johnnie Cochran did likewise with his beloved O.J. Simpson at verdict time. It is now routine for lawyers to pat and cuddle their beloved defendants.

Leslie Abramson started it all. Ghirga is a good disciple of this courtroom charade. v-)) cu-))

Regardless, Ghirga knows his client is toast. s-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:03 am   Post subject: Ghirga the Stoic   

piktor wrote:
Regardless, Ghirga knows his client is toast. s-((


Ghirga's stoicism came through in his remark to reporters that Amanda was going to present, or intended to present, "her version of the truth".

There's nothing more that he could have done in addition to what he already did.

If someone thinks 3 + 4 = 12, how can a lawyer persuade them otherwise?
There would be a whole lifetime of learning to unravel, and then to "re-knit", so to speak.

(And, of course, complicating matters even further, in base 5 arithmetic, 3 + 4 does indeed equal 12. :) )
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:13 am   Post subject: Garofano (Geranium)   

(A) The dictionary on the floor



Rumpole wrote:
Jester wrote:
If that were on the floor, I would have to go with ... it was already on the floor.

That's what Garofano also seems to think in his crime scene reconstruction: that the dictionary was on the floor under the desk and kicked towards the wardrobe during the fight. There is also a chair, of course, next to the desk (actually under the desk) and under one of its legs there is a copy of Corriere della Sera that's sligh[t]y torn, it's probably been placed there to balance the chair.

So yes, I would also place the book under the chair when the fight started. It sounds more plausible than the alternative scenario where she would have been attacked when sitting at her desk studying.

– 06 February 2010 [ link ] XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 [2010]-, page 6




I came across Garofano’s reconstruction:



There’s a small, cleanish square shape that was protected from the blood, and that might be where the Collins dictionary was at first and that was moved afterwards. What is a pocket dictionary doing on the floor? Where might it have been before? There – look under the desk, the chair’s leg is resting on a Corriere della Sera newspaper, which has been torn. The dictionary would have been there, under the desk, and kicked towards the wardrobe during the fight.

The indication is that the fight was fast. …

– Garofano, in Darkness Descending, p381




– I must admit, I do not follow the logic of his reasoning.

Ordinarily in such cases of hard-to-follow logic and phrasings (in plain language, non-sequiturs), I would suspect that a line or two has been chopped off the fax. Next to consider would be some kind of mis-sense in the translation (if any).


I have been unsuccessful so far in tracking down the original (if any).

Garofano is apparently a good presenter and speaker, and has recently been doing the chat-show circuit to promote his book “Imperfect Crimes”, so I am doubly perplexed as to his dictionary-reconstruction logic.



Chat show example:
The Passion and the Future - Garofano and the RIS of Parma (pdf)
– from [ Coneriana Cult ], a type of culture-promotion club, centred on the province of Ancona


(B) The Call

In the roundabout way of post hoc logic, because Stefanoni ended up doing the lab work instead of Garofano, we can say, by inference, that the State Police (=Postal Police) were on the scene first, before the Federal Police (=the Carabinieri) arrived. So Raffaele’s story of calling the police is, at best, a bit muddled; and, at worst, a muddled attempt at alibi-building and laying down a red-herring trail.

Either way, the befuddlement is consistent with being up all night (or staying up till late), so that part of his story sounds sort of plausible.

(Also, partially supporting this is other evidence that indicates he is, usually, not normally so muddled. On the other hand, though, that photo of him in the lecture hall shows another “morning-after” view of him – one begins to suspect, in a kindly way, that the thesis he was working on was taking too much out of him, draining him. Or perhaps, speculatively, his thyroid was reacting adversely to cannabinoid exposure in the general environs.)


Quote:

“If Raffaele Sollecito had called the Carabinieri first, and his [=Garofano’s] officers had arrived at the scene before the Postal Police, then he [Garofano] would have been on the case officially.”

Darkness Descending, p365
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:35 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
According to the reconstruction by the Perugia prosecutor, the father and sister of Raphael Sollecito had legitimately obtained the scientific survey of the police, and had then illegally provided it to Telemundo

Ex-Carabinieri-Lieutenant Vanessa seems to have been bugged while seeking a political favor for brother Raff.

“One of the complexities against me came from an intercepted wiretap in which I was talking to a politician who according to my superiors I was trying to entrust the fate of my brother Raffaele with in the proceedings. But it will be enough to listen carefully to the recordings, I only spoke about a member of his family that I had as a student, never, never about Raffaele.”

“We do not speak of interceptions,” said Dr. Francesco Sollecito inserting himself (during daughters questions by the journalist) and sitting next to his wife Mara who took notes on a little notepad.
.


Thanks, stint7. I have not given much attention to that faction of the case.
Top Profile 

Offline mstev14420


User avatar


Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:23 am

Posts: 99

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:51 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Chris and Edda are lucky Amanda and some anonymous male didn't blow their heads off with a high-powered rifle in the middle of the night.
Top Profile 

Offline mstev14420


User avatar


Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:23 am

Posts: 99

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:01 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Anyone think Rafaelle's broken pipe was a coincidence? From the picture (gallery/image.php?album_id=16&image_id=296) it would appear it is a U shape pipe. Water would collect at the bottom after the tap is shutoff. There would be blood evidence in that pipe if AK and RS did indeed wash the knife at RS's house. This would fit into their knowledge of CSI, apparent from Knox's statement about Merideth's death from having her throat cut and turning off the phones before the crime.

I know this is macabre, but what's up with Amanda talking about pounding sounds in her interrogation (in addition to the scream)? MK was manually strangled and maybe she unexpectably regains consciousness after 30-60 seconds because RS let up on her too soon, thinking she was dead. MK wakes up pounds on the walls (or her locked door and causes the crack). AK goes to the kitchen pulls out the knife, enters the room, Merideth let's out the scream and RS wrestles her to the ground, AK stabs her fatally. Rudy was out of the room taking a crap because he thought it was over and that MK was dead when she lost conciousness originally. It explains why Amanda freaks out at the knife drawer.
Top Profile 

Offline Corrina


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 4:20 pm

Posts: 625

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:15 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
I know this is macabre, but what's up with Amanda talking about pounding sounds in her interrogation (in addition to the scream)? MK was manually strangled and maybe she unexpectably regains consciousness after 30-60 seconds because RS let up on her too soon, thinking she was dead. MK wakes up pounds on the walls (or her locked door and causes the crack). AK goes to the kitchen pulls out the knife, enters the room, Merideth let's out the scream and RS wrestles her to the ground, AK stabs her fatally. Rudy was out of the room taking a crap because he thought it was over and that MK was dead when she lost conciousness originally. It explains why Amanda freaks out at the knife drawer.


But the double dna knife was from Raffaele's flat, so why would it be in the drawer at the cottage? Unless, of course, one of the other knives used in the murder of Meredith Kercher was from that drawer. I wonder if all the knives were tested. I wonder if perhaps one of them was missing and Filomena and Laura just didn't notice it. Myself, I have a few knives that I use repeatedly and several that I only use if I absolutely have to. Would do better to just get rid of them actually. Off the top of my head, I couldn't tell you how many there are. Amanda's freak out at the knife drawer is interesting, although it could just be yet another performance from the artist or just "Amanda being Amanda".
Top Profile 

Offline Emerald


User avatar


Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:53 am

Posts: 1706

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:18 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The bedroom door was not locked until turned that next morning, IMO.

Meredith in the crime scene was supposed to be 'discovered' and reported by someone other than Amanda. She made no attempt to open the bedroom door because of knowing what was behind the door. Amanda was an athlete. Strong legs. If she was really wanting to open the door, Amanda would have KICKED with her back braced against the wall. Instead she pretended to let weakling Raffaele try by using his shoulder. If he really did try, his shoulder would have been badly bruised. No reports said it was.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:34 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Emerald wrote:
Okay, no tsunami. Noticeable water rise and discoloration throughout the Pacific rim. I absolutely adore natural disasters. Don't like people losing life or stuff, but otherwise......



I'm currently in Honolulu and I have to say...things were extremely tense this morning. They were calling it a slow motion disaster - tsunami sirens running on the hour starting at 6am and everyone heading to higher ground. We watched the extreme 20-minute-period tidal fluctuations live on television via traffic cameras now aimed at the sea not knowing if the big-one was next or still on the way.

It didn't materialize, but it was an excellent practice run for how emergency preparedness ought to be handled. High compliments for Governor Lingle and the State of Hawaii - if it would have hit we would have been as prepared as possible.

I wound up spending the afternoon way out at the remote nature reserve of Kaena point watching monk seals sunbathe, seasonal albatros commune, and countless humback whales blowing spray and launching into the air offshore as the sun set on yet another beautiful day. We dodged a live bullet this time - life goes on...
Top Profile 

Offline jfk1191


Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:46 am

Posts: 286

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:57 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

mstev14420 wrote:
Anyone think Rafaelle's broken pipe was a coincidence? From the picture (gallery/image.php?album_id=16&image_id=296) it would appear it is a U shape pipe. Water would collect at the bottom after the tap is shutoff. There would be blood evidence in that pipe if AK and RS did indeed wash the knife at RS's house. This would fit into their knowledge of CSI, apparent from Knox's statement about Merideth's death from having her throat cut and turning off the phones before the crime.

I know this is macabre, but what's up with Amanda talking about pounding sounds in her interrogation (in addition to the scream)? MK was manually strangled and maybe she unexpectably regains consciousness after 30-60 seconds because RS let up on her too soon, thinking she was dead. MK wakes up pounds on the walls (or her locked door and causes the crack). AK goes to the kitchen pulls out the knife, enters the room, Merideth let's out the scream and RS wrestles her to the ground, AK stabs her fatally. Rudy was out of the room taking a crap because he thought it was over and that MK was dead when she lost conciousness originally. It explains why Amanda freaks out at the knife drawer.


I highly doubt the high level of Forensic work done would miss the trap/elbow for testing.

Can you reference this "pounding sound" article? I'd like to read that one.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:06 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

jfk1191 wrote:
Can you reference this "pounding sound" article? I'd like to read that one.


Since you don't acknowledge the existence of Kokomani you wouldn't know about this.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:13 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

jfk1191 wrote:
Can you reference this "pounding sound" article? I'd like to read that one.


From the Daily Telegraph, Nov. 8th 2007:

Police said that Knox, when confronted by police with her boyfriend's evidence, admitted she had lied in previous interviews.

She maintains she played a "minimal role" in what happened, Corriere della Sera reported.

The newspaper said Knox appeared "confused" in interviews, repeatedly putting her head in her hands and shaking it, and that detectives believe she is still not telling the whole truth.

She reportedly told them during interviews on Tuesday: "I want to talk about what happened because the incident has left me really upset and I am really scared of Patrick (Lumumba), the African man who owns the pub Le Chic where I work sometimes.

"I met him on the evening of November 1 after having replied to a message he sent me, with the words 'Let's meet up'.

"We met at around 9.00pm at a basketball court in Piazza Grimana and we went to my house. I don't remember if my friend Meredith was already at home or if she came in later. All I can say is that they went off together.

"Patrick and Meredith went off into Meredith's room while I stayed in the kitchen. I can't remember how long they were in there together - I can only say that at one point I heard Meredith screaming and I was so frightened I blocked my ears.

"I don't remember anything after that - my head's all confused. I don't remember if Meredith screamed and I heard thuds too because I was upset, but I guessed what might have happened.

"I found Patrick this morning (Nov 5) in front of the language school and he asked me some questions. He wanted to know what the police had been asking me. I think he also asked me if I wanted to meet some journalists, maybe to find out if I know anything about Meredith's death.”

Of Sollecito, she said: "I don’t know for sure if Raffaele was there that night, but I do remember very well waking up at my boyfriend's house, in his bed, and I went back to my house in the morning where I found the door open."
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:14 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldne ... Oprah.html
Amanda's parents also revealed how she was continuing with her studies while serving her sentence.

The University of Washington has allowed the 22-year-old to carry out an independent studies programme in German and Italian.

'It keeps the light at the end of the tunnel, that this isn't wasted time for her. She's working towards her graduation of college and she is going to get out of there,' Mr Knox said.

http://ministeroservizio.blogspot.com/2 ... nfrey.html
Top Profile 

Offline Salamander


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 7:49 pm

Posts: 23

Highscores: 3

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:05 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
"I don't remember anything after that - my head's all confused. I don't remember if Meredith screamed and I heard thuds too because I was upset, but I guessed what might have happened."

In the interests of clarity, the English version posted on Corriere's own site says: "I can't remember if Meredith was screaming or if I heard any thuds because I was in shock but I could imagine what was going on".

Perhaps a somewhat liberal translation by the Telegraph, there? (or maybe they used a Google translation of the original Italian article?) Corriere's version makes a bit more sense.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:50 am   Post subject: Trifecta   

I'm not sure if being confused "because I was in shock" counts as something that makes sense as a narrative description by a witness. (i.e., what would an innocent alibi-giver have to be in shock about? Perhaps post-traumatic stress disorder, maybe?)

However, it does count as making sense by someone who was helping the police by way of "I could imagine was going on"".




In any case, here is some more potential reading for Macport and others, by way of the SMH this weekend and a Google:


There may have been a storm brewing that day.


Amanda and Raffaele claiming to have smoked marijuana all day may not have been a wise move, in hindsight.


The central nervous system of youngsters seems to be more easily short-circuited than grown-ups.


“long-term users were also four times more likely to have psychotic-like experiences.”

“Those in the study were interviewed at the ages of 14 and 21, so the symptoms emerged between those two study periods”

“among 228 sibling pairs, those who didn't use marijuana reported fewer psychotic-like delusions compared with those who used cannabis. That difference was statistically significant and reduces the likelihood that the psychotic problems were caused by genetics or environment, the authors said.”

Nicole Ostrow, “Wake-up call for teen pot smokers”
– [ Sydney Morning Herald ] 28 February 2010

“Long-time cannabis use linked to psychosis: study”
– [ GoogleNews ]
– [ PhysOrg ] 27 Feb 2010








Cannabis seems to block the built-in inhibition circuitry to some extent, and reduces one’s empathic response to others.

“…THC reduced activation in the part of the prefrontal cortex that is normally critical for this ‘response inhibition’ process.”

“administration of CBD reduced the response of the amygdale to fearful faces”


“New research reveals how cannabis alters brain function”
– [ King’s College, London ] 20 Jan 2009




Completing the trifecta,

Childhood adversity affects mental health in a measurable way:

James Scott; Daniel Varghese; John McGrath
“As the Twig Is Bent, the Tree Inclines: Adult Mental Health Consequences of Childhood Adversity”
– [ Arch Gen Psychiatry ], Feb 2010; 67: 111 - 112.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:54 am   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/foxy_kn ... 7bGsEmTVXK

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

capealadin wrote:
http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/foxy_knoxy_bias_victim_7ZKEqKbZxzRs7bGsEmTVXK



but no one can keep a straight face and say the Italians had solid proof that Amanda Knox did what they say she did," Burleigh told us. "That said, Amanda Knox is an odd duck, seems to have a rather loose grip on reality, and the Italians didn't know what to make of her. And I think American cops would have been suspicious at first, too."

Burleigh, who hopes to interview Knox and Sollecito in jail, said of Italian perceptions of crime in general, "[They] also seem to have no concept of 'robbery gone wrong.' I can't tell you how many Italian 'dottores' of law and criminology said to me that thieves simply do not kill. Obviously, they've missed the news about all the poor bodega owners and 7-Eleven clerks in early graves over here."



Is this the first 'odd duck' description we have seen?


Last edited by H9 on Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Thank youH9. I was so excited to do my first successful link (thanks to Stint7) I forgot to do an intro:)

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
but no one can keep a straight face and say the Italians had solid proof that Amanda Knox did what they say she did," Burleigh told us. "That said, Amanda Knox is an odd duck, seems to have a rather loose grip on reality, and the Italians didn't know what to make of her. And I think American cops would have been suspicious at first, too."


Nina Burleigh should try living in the real world. If Amanda Knox were innocent, she would have told the truth from the beginning, she would have had one credible alibi that could be verified, she wouldn't have admitted that she was at the cottage and was involved in Meredith's murder, her blood wouldn't have been found co-mingled with Meredith's blood in three different places in the bathroom etc, etc.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

And how many books does this make?

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
her blood wouldn't have been found co-mingled with Meredith's blood in three different places in the bathroom etc, etc.


I was sure it was Amanda's DNA(not blood) mixed with Meredith's blood.
What was the explanation provided by the defense? Do i remember correctly that it had something to do with Amanda's piercings?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

"The most surprising thing for me was the level of anti-Americanism this case brought out in the open," Burleigh told Page Six. "The Knox family was attacked on issues of class because of what they wore and how they behaved, and were accused of American arrogance based on a rather pathetic and ineffectual p.r. effort."

Ouch. Marriott's efforts rather pathetic and ineffectual? Professionally, he has to swallow that. ROFL
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

I wonder what US court officials and reporters would make of the way they dressed if they did the same there. Tee shirts and shorts?
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Anyone think she will be allowed to interview the convicts?
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

capealadin wrote:
And how many books does this make?


Including Nina Burleigh's book, there will be at least seven.

Darkness Descending by Paul Russell, Graham Johnson and Luciano Garofano.

The Murder of Meredith Kercher by Gary King.

Angel Face: The Real Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox by Barbie Nadeau.

Meredith: Lights and Shadows in Perugia by Vincenzo Maria Mastronardi and Giuseppe Castellini.

Death in Perugia: The definitive account of the killing of British student Meredith Kercher by John Follain.

Murder in Italy: The Shocking Slaying of a British Student, the Accused American Girl, and an International Scandal by Candace Dempsey.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
capealadin wrote:
http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/foxy_knoxy_bias_victim_7ZKEqKbZxzRs7bGsEmTVXK



but no one can keep a straight face and say the Italians had solid proof that Amanda Knox did what they say she did," Burleigh told us. "That said, Amanda Knox is an odd duck, seems to have a rather loose grip on reality, and the Italians didn't know what to make of her. And I think American cops would have been suspicious at first, too."

Burleigh, who hopes to interview Knox and Sollecito in jail, said of Italian perceptions of crime in general, "[They] also seem to have no concept of 'robbery gone wrong.' I can't tell you how many Italian 'dottores' of law and criminology said to me that thieves simply do not kill. Obviously, they've missed the news about all the poor bodega owners and 7-Eleven clerks in early graves over here."



Is this the first 'odd duck' description we have seen?


That is a very curious statement. The american police would have been "suspicious at first, too". What does this person think happened afterwards that would have tended to dissipate that suspicion, then? Would it have been the changing alibi, I wonder? Perhaps the false accusation of an innocent man? I really don't know what happened which would have led them to believe in her innocence.

Then there is the "no concept of robbery gone wrong" Does this person, whose first paragraph is hinting at cultural differences which do not exist, have no concept of ones that do exist? Murder in the course of "robbery gone wrong" may be common in the USA: it is very rare indeed in this country and we are closer to the american situation than the Italians are: or at least that is my impression. I am not sure what a bodega owner is but 7-Eleven clerks who get killed in the course of a robbery have literally no relevance to the norm in this country. This is mind bogglingly stupid
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

And I think American cops would have been suspicious at first, too."

Is she suggesting that American cops would have let her go as soon as they had an African "American"in custody?
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Hi Donnie,

I've checked this and double checked it with different reliable sources. Amanda Knox's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood in three different places in the bathroom.

"But mixed blood samples were found as well. Specifically, mixed blood of Knox and Kercher was found on the drain of the bidet, on a box of Q-tips sitting on the sink and the sink ledge." (Andrea Vogt, THe Seattle Post-Intelligencer).

Meredith's blood was found on the toilet lid and on the light switch, and Amanda Knox's blood was found on the tap of the basin.

The defence did not explain why Knox was bleeding.

"The defense did not contest any of the lab results, provide a counter scenario to the staged break-in, or offer testimony to explain why Knox may also have been bleeding (except to say that it is common to find mixed DNA from two people who shared a house). Knox originally told police that her pierced ears were infected. Her mother, Edda Mellas, told NEWSWEEK that she was menstruating, though neither scenario was presented to the jury. Knox supporters suggest that Kercher's blood had been dropped by Guede on a spot where Knox's dried blood or DNA already existed, even though Guede's DNA profile was not identified in any of the five spots." (Barbie Nadeau).

The mixed blood evidence is most the damning evidence against Amanda Knox:

"The attorney for the Kercher family, Francesco Maresca, said after the sentence that he believed this mixed blood evidence was "the most damning" piece of evidence against Knox."

"The most damaging forensic evidence against Amanda was what the prosecution's expert said was mixed blood DNA of Amanda and Meredith found on the drain of the bidet.

Barbie Nadeau: She was convinced that it showed that Amanda Knox was involved in this crime." (NBC Dateline, The Trial of Amanda Knox).

I've been reliably informed that Knox's DNA wasn't outlier DNA that had been left weeks earlier. Meredith and Knox were both bleeding on the night of the murder. The mixed sample in Filomena's room was the clincher.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
Hi Donnie,

I've checked this and double checked it with different reliable sources. Amanda Knox's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood in three different places in the bathroom.

"But mixed blood samples were found as well. Specifically, mixed blood of Knox and Kercher was found on the drain of the bidet, on a box of Q-tips sitting on the sink and the sink ledge." (Andrea Vogt, THe Seattle Post-Intelligencer).

Meredith's blood was found on the toilet lid and on the light switch, and Amanda Knox's blood was found on the tap of the basin.

The defence did not explain why Knox was bleeding.

"The defense did not contest any of the lab results, provide a counter scenario to the staged break-in, or offer testimony to explain why Knox may also have been bleeding (except to say that it is common to find mixed DNA from two people who shared a house). Knox originally told police that her pierced ears were infected. Her mother, Edda Mellas, told NEWSWEEK that she was menstruating, though neither scenario was presented to the jury. Knox supporters suggest that Kercher's blood had been dropped by Guede on a spot where Knox's dried blood or DNA already existed, even though Guede's DNA profile was not identified in any of the five spots." (Barbie Nadeau).

The mixed blood evidence is most the damning evidence against Amanda Knox:

"The attorney for the Kercher family, Francesco Maresca, said after the sentence that he believed this mixed blood evidence was "the most damning" piece of evidence against Knox."

"The most damaging forensic evidence against Amanda was what the prosecution's expert said was mixed blood DNA of Amanda and Meredith found on the drain of the bidet.

Barbie Nadeau: She was convinced that it showed that Amanda Knox was involved in this crime." (NBC Dateline, The Trial of Amanda Knox).

I've been reliably informed that Knox's DNA wasn't outlier DNA that had been left weeks earlier. Meredith and Knox were both bleeding on the night of the murder. The mixed sample in Filomena's room was the clincher.


Thanks, The Machine.
If that's the case, that it was Amanda's blood, then i think that there is no need to show any other evidence against her. It's damaging, indeed. What is the possibility to mix your blood with the victims blood on the day that the victim got killed and not be involved in the killing? Possible, yes...but is it POSSIBLE? That's absolutely devastating for Knox's defense.
I'm still amazed that all this time i thought that it was just her DNA mixed with Meredith's blood.


Last edited by donnie on Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Machine: Wow. Excellent.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Bodega I think


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Quote:
"[They] also seem to have no concept of 'robbery gone wrong.' I can't tell you how many Italian 'dottores' of law and criminology said to me that thieves simply do not kill. Obviously, they've missed the news about all the poor bodega owners and 7-Eleven clerks in early graves over here."


Yes, at a certain point in the booke there must be the anthropologic revelation: they said this, ya see for this the cavemen don't have the concept...
Top Profile 

Offline Yummi


User avatar


Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:29 pm

Posts: 975

Location: Bunga-Bunga Republic

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

'bottega', not bodega.

Raffaele speaking with this unremovable Pugliese accent - recall when he says "Non ero in quella caSa" with the Lati/Southern 'S' instead of the Italian /z/ - looks GERMAN?
Top Profile 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:48 pm   Post subject: Re: Ghirga the Stoic   

Catnip wrote:
piktor wrote:
Regardless, Ghirga knows his client is toast. s-((


Ghirga's stoicism came through in his remark to reporters that Amanda was going to present, or intended to present, "her version of the truth".

There's nothing more that he could have done in addition to what he already did.


This is why the defence is defenceless. Their clients are not credible.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tommi


User avatar


Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:21 pm

Posts: 18

Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Does anyone know if those wooden panels outside Merediths window were open or closed when police first went to a crime scene? I checked the police video recorded on november 2nd 2007 about 3.21 pm and it seems like panels were open, letting the daylight in.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 2:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Yummi wrote:
'bottega', not bodega.

Raffaele speaking with this unremovable Pugliese accent - recall when he says "Non ero in quella caSa" with the Lati/Southern 'S' instead of the Italian /z/ - looks GERMAN?

:lol: cl-) cl-) cl-) :lol:
Top Profile 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"

Burleigh should also get an award like "most stupid writer or the year" and "most ignorant xenophobe of the year" . She looks to me like a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

And btw, yes, burglars don't usually kill their victims. Jeez this woman is absolutely one of the worst example of Knox supporter I have seen so far-and I thought I had seen it all!

_________________
"A pensare male si fa peccato, ma molto spesso ci si azzecca" mike
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

There's a new piece by Finn on TJMK:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

If only Perugia had been equipped with cameras to Dubai standard. :D
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

About a month ago I (re)started a discussion on the arrival time of the Postal Police which I could not continue in the past weeks.
Now I have more time but I think that the motivation of the sentencing will be out in about a week so it is wiser now to read it before any further discussion.
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

OT) Umberto Rib, was the 31 yr old ex boyfriend of Sonia Marra who went missing in Perugia Nov. 16 in 2006. Umberto was recently arrested and charged with murder in that case, and spent about two weeks in jail. He was subsequently released on Feb 6, but the charges weren’t dropped. He mysteriously left his parents home last night and can’t be found. He left a four page note expressing his innocence, and drove off. The police are currently searching for him. TJMK has followed this case.
It's nice to see FinnMacCool back.

Youreporter.it

Update: Well they found him in the woods today after going missing. His car got stuck in the mud. He’s not under any restrictive measures. There’s a hearing set for March 12, where the prosecutor is objecting to his release. Should be interesting.


Last edited by DLW on Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

But it is interesting to note a thing, just for the record.
We all heard Raffaele's recorded call to the police. The record was about 45 seconds and the length of the second call was about 52 seconds so we considered the recording to be the second call.
Now, however, as I was reading the Italian newspaper reports of the trial day when the recordings were played it turns out that it must be cut from the two calls.
http://wwwstage.affaritaliani.it/cronac ... 40209.html

So Amanda is with Raffaele during the first call, whatever that means.
Top Profile 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Tommi wrote:
Does anyone know if those wooden panels outside Merediths window were open or closed when police first went to a crime scene? I checked the police video recorded on november 2nd 2007 about 3.21 pm and it seems like panels were open, letting the daylight in.


I doubt that two hours after the discovery of the body someone would have altered the scene by walking through the room to open those shutters... i just found the section in Guede's sentencing report that cites Guede claiming he left the body elsewhere in the room "especially emphasizing" that he was half-naked; the report posits that he would have been seen if he had been where the body was found implying the outer shutters were open to the inside.

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

bucketoftea wrote:
I wonder what US court officials and reporters would make of the way they dressed if they did the same there. Tee shirts and shorts?


Anybody remember the part in "My Cousin Vinny" where Judge Haller exclaims, "When you come into my court looking like you do, you're not only insulting me, but you insult the integrity of this court."
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

nicki wrote:
Fiona wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"

Burleigh should also get an award like "most stupid writer or the year" and "most ignorant xenophobe of the year" . She looks to me like a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

And btw, yes, burglars don't usually kill their victims. Jeez this woman is absolutely one of the worst example of Knox supporter I have seen so far-and I thought I had seen it all!


Anti-Americanism, eh?

The only way that argument works is if we first conclude that the behavior of Knox and the Entourage represents typical American behavior - something that all American's can relate to and identify with. But, for starters, that claim can't apply because everyone, family included, keeps talking about how quirky Amanda Knox is.

Then there's the whole Marriott thing and outlandish claims by the Entourage that go way beyond lawyers taking liberties with facts - its outright defamation most of the time.

Apparently claiming "Anti-Americanism" is the only thing they have left for a defense strategy.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
There's a new piece by Finn on TJMK:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php



The article by Finn that Machine references above was indeed excellent.

I found these points particularly interesting:

Finn notes that Knox Supporters keep endlessly repeating:
1) that Amanda had no motive
2) That the real killer, Rudy Guede was already tried and convicted.
Although I had read many very convincing articles about why the lone wolf theory was rubbish, Finn points out if Amanda has no motive, and Rudy is indeed the only killer, and motive is so important to FOA.......... what was *his* motive?
Great question, never answered.

Additionally, I had never read that glass slivers from the staged break in window left a trial to, and only to the exit door.
No slivers were found anywhere in Meredith's room, the scene of the horrific crime.

His examination of the terminology 'drifter' is also a classic.

Finally, the inclusion of Amanda's own writings about how she almost immediately went AWOL, and shamelessly abused and abandoned the privileged and coveted Bundestag job her Uncle has gone to such great lengths to obtain for her is very revealing.
This callous disregard and selfish insult to a Relative speaks volumes to me about the personal personality defects so obvious to, and commented on so endlessly by many of the people she interacted with.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
Additionally, I had never read that glass slivers from the staged break in window left a trial to, and only to the exit door. No slivers were found anywhere in Meredith's room, the scene of the horrific crime.


Hi Stint,

Mignini emphasised the importance of the staged break-in when he was summing up:

"The key to this mystery lies in the bedroom of Filomena Romanelli,” another tenant in the house, he told the jury. “The window was broken from the inside, not the outside. The glass was on top of the clothes that had been strewn around the room, not under them. The break-in was staged and Knox is the one who did it.” (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast).

There is no doubt that the break-in was staged in. The defence lawyers didn't even attempt to provide an alternative scenario. The fact there was so much glass on top of Filomena's clothes and computer proves that the window was broken after the room had been ransacked.

"Prosecutors showed photographs of shattered glass on top of scattered clothes, in an attempt to convince the jury that the room had been turned upside down first, then that a rock had been thrown through the window." (Andrea Vogt, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer).

Filomena said there was glass on top of the pile of clothes. Her laptop was among the clothes:

"I remember that in lifting the computer I realised that I was picking up bits of glass because there were bits of glass on top and it was all covered with glass.”

At the trial, Gioia Brocci, of the Perugia forensic police, explained how she photographed the crime scene starting from the outside of the house. She claimed that there were no traces of someone attempting to climb up the outer wall to get in through the broken window.

As Finn pointed out in his excellent piece, there was no evidence that Rudy Guede was ever in Filomena's room, but there was a mix of Amanda Knox's DNA and Meredith's blood.

Barbie Nadeau pointed out that this evidence was possibly more incriminating than the double DNA knife:

“But perhaps more damning even than the knife was Stefanoni’s testimony that a mix of Knox’s DNA and Kercher’s blood was found on the floor in the bedroom of a third roommate, Filomena Romanelli.”
Top Profile 

Offline donnie

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:43 am

Posts: 627

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php
Quote:
Some of the “scant” evidence against Amanda Knox includes Knox’s DNA, some of it mixed with the victim’s blood


So i have read the piece by Finn and there are some inconsistencies. Well, there is only one. Me and The Machine chatted a little bit about the blood/DNA from Knox earlier today. He provided quotes that this was in fact blood of Amanda Knox, however Finn never says anything about Knox's blood. So which one is it? Blood or DNA?

Plus, the cocaine line...i just find it not that great. Are there any evidence that they took cocaine? I mean, like real evidence, not asumptions.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

donnie wrote:
So i have read the piece by Finn and there are some inconsistencies. Well, there is only one. Me and The Machine chatted a little bit about the blood/DNA from Knox earlier today. He provided quotes that this was in fact blood of Amanda Knox, however Finn never says anything about Knox's blood. So which one is it? Blood or DNA?

Plus, the cocaine line...i just find it not that great. Are there any evidence that they took cocaine? I mean, like real evidence, not asumptions.


Firstly, there were no inconsistencies. What Finn wrote about Amanda Knox's DNA being mixed with Meredith's blood is factually correct and doesn't contradict what Andrea Vogt wrote. Andrea Vogt was being more specific and pointing out that the DNA came from Knox's blood and not any other source like saliva, sweat or skin.

Secondly, Pete may have added the line about the cocaine. He often edits the pieces and adds his own thoughts. Mignini hinted that Knox and Sollecito may have been under the influence of a drug like cocaine or acid:

"He also hinted that Knox and Sollecito might have been in a drug-fueled frenzy when they allegedly killed Kercher. He outlined the effects of cocaine and acid, and told the judges and jury how Knox and Sollecito ran with a crowd that often used these “stupificante,” or stupefying drugs." (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast).
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

fine wrote:
It gets worse. The Kercher family to visit Amanda in jail.

From the ebay bumpersticker guy...

"Window stickers in support of Amanda Knox - money earned will be placed in a eBay bank account until a sum of $2,500 minimum is raised; preferably $5,000. I will then offer to pay one of Meridith Kercher's family members to visit with Amanda Knox, with an open mind of obtaining answers void of tabloid press and media trash, to determine their opinion if Amanda actually murdered their sister/daughter as the surreal Italian prosecutors insist. * * *

The money should be adequate to cover their travel and living expenses abroad in Perugia, Italy for several weeks/months. No one wants to wrongly send someone to jail for a crime they did not commit. Honesty and openness is the best solution for this terrible tradegy of justice; and most likely only Meridith Kercher's family can assist Amanda Knox." www.cgi.ebay.com

///


Fortunately, the item got ZERO bids, but he's put a nearly identical listing up today: http://cgi.ebay.com/Amanda-Knox-Perugia ... 439da4cda7

I reprted the new listing to ebay based on the fact that a) he intends to use the proceeds (not that there will be many, if any) to harass a murder victim's family and b) it's filled with xenophobic rantings.
Top Profile 

Offline H9


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:37 am

Posts: 1716

Highscores: 161

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

http://www.questionsandanswersonline.co ... ment-43594

did-the-italians-convict-amanda-knox-of-murder-just-because-she-is-an-american?

Room for people to respond if they would like
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:13 pm   Post subject: REPUBBLICA Stagliano video   

Here's the continuation of the VIDEO's audio transcript, transcribed into English from the recent Stagliano "Repubblica" report done in Seattle.

Note that "Quick Nicki" has already finished the text translation, which accompanied this video. co-)

In earlier posts, I've provided the first half of the audio of the video, divided into one-minute chunks.

It's always a bit challenging to go from English into Italian, back into English, because you have no assurance that you're LITERALLY faithful to the original.


FROM about THE 4: 26 mark of the audio from the video:
Ladies and Gentlemen: Let's have a big round of PMF applause for our FOA-despised co-moderator!
Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere's Skeppie!!! cl-)
_______________________________________________________________________
VOICE OVER:
Not all of Seattle, however is so united in their outraged defense of their famous fellow citizen.

Among the despised critics of the family, there’s Peggy Ganong, graduate student in French at the University, who moderates the blog, “Perugia Murder File” where information is gathered about leading stories.

“One of the things that aroused my suspicions was that the family issued a press release the day after the arrest. I found it strange and interesting. And then I discovered that a Public Relations firm was recruited to manage the Amanda image—a firm known to use techniques—I don’t want to say unethical—but let’s say, unconventional, in order to reach their objective.”

“I think that the incredibly one-sided coverage of the case in the American media is the result of this massive PR activity that cost more than a million dollars. What Marriott and the family have done was to say from the moment that the tabloids demonized Amanda, we’ve painted her as an angel. That’s why they’ve constructed an image of a typical American girl, which is probably just as false as the demonized image of her, which the tabloids have perpetuated.”
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The Machine wrote:
donnie wrote:
So i have read the piece by Finn and there are some inconsistencies. Well, there is only one. Me and The Machine chatted a little bit about the blood/DNA from Knox earlier today. He provided quotes that this was in fact blood of Amanda Knox, however Finn never says anything about Knox's blood. So which one is it? Blood or DNA?

Plus, the cocaine line...i just find it not that great. Are there any evidence that they took cocaine? I mean, like real evidence, not asumptions.


Firstly, there were no inconsistencies. What Finn wrote about Amanda Knox's DNA being mixed with Meredith's blood is factually correct and doesn't contradict what Andrea Vogt wrote. Andrea Vogt was being more specific and pointing out that the DNA came from Knox's blood and not any other source like saliva, sweat or skin.

Secondly, Pete may have added the line about the cocaine. He often edits the pieces and adds his own thoughts. Mignini hinted that Knox and Sollecito may have been under the influence of a drug like cocaine or acid:

"He also hinted that Knox and Sollecito might have been in a drug-fueled frenzy when they allegedly killed Kercher. He outlined the effects of cocaine and acid, and told the judges and jury how Knox and Sollecito ran with a crowd that often used these “stupificante,” or stupefying drugs." (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast).


In Perugia, there are people who think concaine was involved. Adjusted for popuation, Perugia leads Italy for number of deaths annually due to cocaine overdose.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

The 411 wrote:

Seems like Ted Simon has fallen under the spell, too. (i.e., "Did implicating an innocent man (Lumumba) show a lack of integrity on AK's part?" asked Oprah.
"QUITE THE CONTRARY" replied Simon. huh-)


And Oprah just him say that without challenge? (I didn't see the broadcast)
Top Profile 

Offline Bea


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:18 pm

Posts: 267

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

stint7 wrote:
The 411 wrote:
I've wondered about this, as well. If the photographs of the AK with Ghirga in court are any indication...

Is it possible that Ghirga, although already quite the seasoned trial attorney, just became a bit too emotionally attached to his client?

.


Personally, I accept as legitimate, and as such, possibly detrimental to objective analysis, Donnie's and other well phrased criticisms of over interpretation and unwarranted inferences with resultant vulnerable conclusions from an (over?) analysis of a few photographs.

However, having said that, the photo series of Counsellor Ghirga's repeated overt outward affectionate actions toward his client in full view of Court, IMHO certainly demonstrate the possibility that just maybe he was a "bit too emotionally attached" as you point out.

Additionally, I felt his emotions, to include tears during his summation was genuine, and another non photo based strong indication of the extraordinary personal attachment to his client.

Finally, his personal visit to Amanda's cell the morning after the verdict to me showed not a cold attorney client relationship, but conversely a genuine warm personal concern for her welfare.


IIRK, Edda gave at least one interview where she claimed Ghirga "loves Amanda." tu-))
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:12 pm   Post subject: Re: REPUBBLICA Stagliano video   

CONTINUATION of the English transcipt.

Skep, please check out the last sentence. It sounds like what I heard, but it that what you said?????
Also: Mudede's words sound a bit strange, don't they? The part about the typical American girl and the "versante Cristiano???" huh-) Nicki, Thoughtful, Yummi, Catnip anyone feel free to correct/enlighten. Am I mishearing something?


FROM the 5:38 point...

_____________________________________________________________________
Ms. Ganong is not the only one to think that way and to say it publicly. Among the skeptics, there’s Charles Mudede who’s in charge of the cultural pages of “The Stranger’ a popular weekly newspaper.

We meet him at the Quarter Lounge, near his workplace. “She didn’t grow up as the classic American girl. She played soccer, which isn’t a national sport here. In fact, it’s fairly non-traditional. And then, yoga, which speaks of a Far Eastern influence, rather than of praying.

While you’d expect from a classic American girl that she’d be very focused on the Christian horizon—instead, she did a mixture of different things, typical of liberal cosmopolitan girls of Seattle.”

“The reason why many of our well-known local people have mobilized in her defense, organizing fund-raising dinners, putting together groups of people on her behalf all goes back to Seattle Prep.” according to Gangong.

“People who pay thirteen thousand ($13,000) a year to send their children to high school so they can prepare them to go to the best colleges do not want to see the value of that investment go down, because of that type of scandal. Seattle Prep was the school where Judge Mike Heavey’s daughter went,(a girl) who was quite friendly with Amanda. As were the children of Tom Wright’s, (both being) ????two of the main powers of the three groups of the Friends of Amanda.”


“I believe the worry of saving the good name of the school is a good part of the 'Innocentisti Movement' in Seattle.
__________________________________________________________________________

More to follow---later today!
411


Last edited by The 411 on Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
nicki wrote:
Fiona wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"

Burleigh should also get an award like "most stupid writer or the year" and "most ignorant xenophobe of the year" . She looks to me like a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

And btw, yes, burglars don't usually kill their victims. Jeez this woman is absolutely one of the worst example of Knox supporter I have seen so far-and I thought I had seen it all!


Anti-Americanism, eh?

The only way that argument works is if we first conclude that the behavior of Knox and the Entourage represents typical American behavior - something that all American's can relate to and identify with. But, for starters, that claim can't apply because everyone, family included, keeps talking about how quirky Amanda Knox is.

Then there's the whole Marriott thing and outlandish claims by the Entourage that go way beyond lawyers taking liberties with facts - its outright defamation most of the time.

Apparently claiming "Anti-Americanism" is the only thing they have left for a defense strategy.


Nina Burleigh appears to have taken the easy path to writing this book. Perhaps her lack of familiarity with Italy and Italian makes her more dependent on others and less likely to do the hard work and thinking for herself.

I think she is handicapped by her late arrival on the scene. And, naturally, the editorial line she has taken -- that Anti-Americanism played a role -- is pretty consistent with that of her publisher, Time. Yawn. Yet another book I won't bother with.

Speaking of bad books, does anyone know if Candace plans to update the title of hers? As far as I am aware, Amanda Knox was convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:22 pm   Post subject: Re: REPUBBLICA Stagliano video   

The 411 wrote:
CONTINUATION of the English transcipt.

Skep, please check out the last sentence. It sounds like what I heard, but it that what you said?????
Also: Mudede's words sound a bit strange, don't they? The part about the typical American girl and the "versante Cristiano???" huh-) Nicki, Thoughtful, Yummi, Catnip anyone feel free to correct/enlighten. Am I mishearing something?


FROM the 5:38 point...

_____________________________________________________________________
Ms. Ganong is not the only one to think that way and to say it publicly. Among the skeptics, there’s Charles Mudede who’s in charge of the cultural pages of “The Stranger’ a popular weekly newspaper.

We meet him at the Quarter Lounge, near his workplace. “She didn’t grow up as the classic American girl. She played soccer, which isn’t a national sport here. In fact, it’s fairly non-traditional. And then, yoga, which speaks of a Far Eastern influence, rather than of praying.

While you’d expect from a classic American girl that she’d be very focused on the Christian horizon—instead, she did a mixture of different things, typical of liberal cosmopolitan girls of Seattle.”

“The reason why many of our well-known local people have mobilized in her defense, organizing fund-raising dinners, putting together groups of people on her behalf all goes back to Seattle Prep.” according to Gangong.

“People who pay three thousand a year to send their children to high school so they can prepare them to go to the best colleges do not want to see the value of that investment go down, because of that type of scandal. Seattle Prep was the school where Judge Mike Heavey’s daughter went,(a girl) who was quite friendly with Amanda. As were the children of Tom Wright’s, (both being) ????two of the main powers of the three groups of the Friends of Amanda.”


“I believe the worry of saving the good name of the school is a good part of the 'Innocentisti Movement' in Seattle.
__________________________________________________________________________

More to follow---later today!
411


Hi 411. Actually, I think I said (or meant) that both Mike Heavey and Tom Wright have daughters who were students at Prep when Knox was. Also, tuition is much higher than three thousand dollars a year. I must have said thirteen or twenty-three thousand. I don't remember exactly!

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jools


User avatar


Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:38 pm

Posts: 2241

Location: Spain

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Fly by Night wrote:
nicki wrote:
Fiona wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"

Burleigh should also get an award like "most stupid writer or the year" and "most ignorant xenophobe of the year" . She looks to me like a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

And btw, yes, burglars don't usually kill their victims. Jeez this woman is absolutely one of the worst example of Knox supporter I have seen so far-and I thought I had seen it all!


Anti-Americanism, eh?

The only way that argument works is if we first conclude that the behavior of Knox and the Entourage represents typical American behavior - something that all American's can relate to and identify with. But, for starters, that claim can't apply because everyone, family included, keeps talking about how quirky Amanda Knox is.

Then there's the whole Marriott thing and outlandish claims by the Entourage that go way beyond lawyers taking liberties with facts - its outright defamation most of the time.

Apparently claiming "Anti-Americanism" is the only thing they have left for a defense strategy.


Nina Burleigh appears to have taken the easy path to writing this book. Perhaps her lack of familiarity with Italy and Italian makes her more dependent on others and less likely to do the hard work and thinking for herself.

I think she is handicapped by her late arrival on the scene. And, naturally, the editorial line she has taken -- that Anti-Americanism played a role -- is pretty consistent with that of her publisher, Time. Yawn. Yet another book I won't bother with.

Speaking of bad books, does anyone know if Candace plans to update the title of hers? As far as I am aware, Amanda Knox was convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher.


Also Nina Burleigh has Giulia Alagna as an assistant for her book. GA is the same 'Fixer, Interpreter' the Knox/Mellases and King5 had. Oops, I forgot, also worked with Paul Ciolino on his 'fantastic' show 48 hours.
http://it.linkedin.com/pub/giulia-alagna/15/320/a0b


Last edited by Jools on Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fiona wrote:
h9A7wa9i1K wrote:
capealadin wrote:
http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/foxy_knoxy_bias_victim_7ZKEqKbZxzRs7bGsEmTVXK



but no one can keep a straight face and say the Italians had solid proof that Amanda Knox did what they say she did," Burleigh told us. "That said, Amanda Knox is an odd duck, seems to have a rather loose grip on reality, and the Italians didn't know what to make of her. And I think American cops would have been suspicious at first, too."

Burleigh, who hopes to interview Knox and Sollecito in jail, said of Italian perceptions of crime in general, "[They] also seem to have no concept of 'robbery gone wrong.' I can't tell you how many Italian 'dottores' of law and criminology said to me that thieves simply do not kill. Obviously, they've missed the news about all the poor bodega owners and 7-Eleven clerks in early graves over here."



Is this the first 'odd duck' description we have seen?


That is a very curious statement. The american police would have been "suspicious at first, too". What does this person think happened afterwards that would have tended to dissipate that suspicion, then? Would it have been the changing alibi, I wonder? Perhaps the false accusation of an innocent man? I really don't know what happened which would have led them to believe in her innocence.

Then there is the "no concept of robbery gone wrong" Does this person, whose first paragraph is hinting at cultural differences which do not exist, have no concept of ones that do exist? Murder in the course of "robbery gone wrong" may be common in the USA: it is very rare indeed in this country and we are closer to the american situation than the Italians are: or at least that is my impression. I am not sure what a bodega owner is but 7-Eleven clerks who get killed in the course of a robbery have literally no relevance to the norm in this country. This is mind bogglingly stupid



Burleigh knows that if she wants to interview RS and AK in jail, she must play her cards right. Just sayin'.

She doesn't seem to realize that in most convenience store hold-ups in the US resulting in death, the perp is carrying a gun. Often, the store owner also has one stashed behind the counter, just in case. This easy access to guns explains the difference. You don't hear about many convenience store robberies "gone wrong" in France either -- for the same reason. It's called the right to bear arms and it's a constitutional right in the US. Unfortunately, lots of people in the US who should not have them nonetheless get ahold of guns. This only encourages gun proponents to say silly things like "if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns".

I don't think Burleigh's dottores and criminologists are unaware of the existence of this phenomenon in the United States, nor are they unaware of the place of the pistol in US culture and history. Burleigh's comment, which is intended to make the Italians look stupid, instead makes her look clueless. I'm sorry, Nina, but you really come off as someone whose blinders are made out of little American flags.

If I'm not mistaken, Nina made her comments to the New York Post. It's kind of like a tabloid, only worse.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline piktor


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:30 pm

Posts: 1081

PostPosted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XV. MAIN DISCUSSION, Jan 25 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
nicki wrote:
Fiona wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Burleigh goes on to say that *Oprah basically* said the prosecutors should be shamed of themselves. One of the comments says the italians have made Raff the sacrificial lamb, as he doesn't look italian. He looks like a german. Huh?


Is there an award you can get like "best xenophobe of the year?"

Burleigh should also get an award like "most stupid writer or the year" and "most ignorant xenophobe of the year" . She looks to me like a pathetic excuse for a journalist.

And btw, yes, burglars don't usually kill their victims. Jeez this woman is absolutely one of the worst example of Knox supporter I have seen so far-and I thought I had seen it all!


Anti-Americanism, eh?

The only way that argument works is if we first conclude that the behavior of Knox and the Entourage represents typical American behavior - something that all American's can relate to and identify with. But, for starters, that claim can't apply because everyone, family included, keeps talking about how quirky Amanda Knox is.

Then there's the whole Marriott thing and outlandish claims by the Entourage that go way beyond lawyers taking liberties with facts - its outright defamation most of the time.

Apparently claiming "Anti-Americanism" is the only thing they have left for a defense strategy.

I read this quip on British insularity:

. huff-)) "Only Americans are more ignorant of the world than the British" huff-))
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 13 of 15 [ 3716 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,448,274 Views