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: Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:53 pm
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:53 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 - OCT 28, 10

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 1 of 32 [ 7802 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 32  Next
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 9:38 pm   Post subject: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 - OCT 28, 10   

XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 - OCT 28, 2010






This is the main discussion thread regarding the achievment of truth and justice for Meredith Kercher and her family. Meredith, barely 21 years old, was brutally murdered in her own home on the 1st November 2007 whilst studying in Perugia, Italy.

To read the previous main discussion thread, please view XVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, JULY 22 - August 19, 10

Michael (Co-Administrator/Moderator of Perugia Murder File)

_________________
"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 ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

RS in railing against the police in his "diary" says they accused him of sabotaging his computer at least:

"Those of the squadra mobile, that god would strike with
lightning! ... No joke, but it is difficult to be sympathetic after
all that I went through. They want to paint me as the genius of
computer crime ..
. But, ah ah ah, a certain genius that you find in
the police station with the shoes with which he committed the crime
and with the knife with which he cut the throat of the victim in his
pocket ... A genius! Not to say a true Einstein! (Raffaele curses
against police). And should I strain to help them? Enough, better to
stay calm."
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Carried over from last main discussion page:

Quote:
bolint wrote:
"Show me a creditable source describing how the drives were destroyed and we can move forward with a dialogue about it."

Massei Report (p21):

"an expert report on the computers of the accused was requested, the memories of which were found to have been damaged at the time of the analysis of the supports carried out by the Postal Police, such that the hard drives could not be duplicated/cloned for subsequent examination."


Quote:
SomeAlibi wrote:

This is a fact of the case - it was a serious procedural screw up and we should mark it as so and there's no other extra issues around it. However, it is not material to the prosecution case because of the ISP data and the MAC. The defence's case is that Amanda's computer would have had lots of happy smiley pictures of her and Meredith on it. This is about 0.001% relevant to the case and wouldn't change the evidence on which guilt has been predicated. Total fluff.

However *someone* got an alimighty bollocking for wrecking the drives and quite rightly so. That could have materially screwed up the application of justice on a case and is incompetent hardware handling. Just remember dear FOA that the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele is based on software analysis done by completely different people so the one has no relevance to the other as much as it is a highly prevelant meme in certain advocates of the pro-defence side to suggest that when X screws up that it means that unconnected party Y is more likely to also. In legal circles we call this form of argument "specious bollocks".


Quote:
stilicho wrote:

It is and it isn't, SomeAlibi. If it's been reported that the manufacturer has the technology to recover data but the Italian police don't then that's not the same thing as stating unequivocally that the police "fried" the computer components and then refused to do anything about it. For this to be a "procedural screw up", we'd have to know the procedures which were to be followed and the whether they were ignored except in the case of Raffaele's significant machine.

The facts are that we don't have enough information to make that judgement. It's possible that none of the machines originally were able to be accessed with the software and the procedures employed by the police but that the MACBOOKPRO was accessible only after additional work.

As always in this case, the groupies leap all over what's essentially a one-liner in the report, combine it with some assertion made by a lawyer with absolutely no technical expertise, and arrive at a grand conclusion about something that they add to the agenda. Anyone who's worked with IT departments knows that you can propose a project only to hear that it's "impossible". Unfortunately, "impossible" usually means something like call the Senior VP of Information Systems, set up a scope document, apply budgeting and diligence (disaster recovery is a big one these days) and suddenly "impossible" actually means not only "very possible" but also much easier than anyone had thought.

I don't know how many times I've heard an IT professional say "impossible" only to find out they really meant they were too busy even to look at it until the project was scoped out.


Exactly. I can easily read that as: an expert report requested to review and summarize how the computers were examined by the Postal Police's team concluded that at the time of the drives analysis they were determined to be damaged. I think the way this has been worded is why it has been seized upon. Bolint read that the drives were damaged at the time they were analysed. I read that when the drives were analysed they were found to be damaged. Semantics of this level tells me that the K/M clan did have the Italian version of the report translated to find statements that seem to translate ambiguously and ran with them. Is every Italian sentence in a 400 page document going to come out exactly as meant in English? Why wouldn't this sentence be fed back to Anne Bremner for her to blather about. Where are her sources cited for what she has written. Barbie or anyone else write about this or just Anne and CW?


Last edited by Macport on Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Originally posted by Catnip:

Quote:
"Suck suck" is a translation error.

It actually is: "the hoo-ha phenomemon: my stream-of-consciousness technique is better than your stream-of-consciousness technique, remember? I'll suck your memories out the long way, if you don't behave..."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following on from the “total fluff” observation about fried drives, does using fried translations count as incompetence, or is that just another case of invisible irony?

What made me think of that was the part of the Mignini trial “motivations” stored at DocStocs.

It's a little bit cute: The "known spices, yes, yes, yes! no, no, no, no" is straight out of a Dario Fo play.


I hope everyone had a chance to read the fried translations, Catnip. They made me LOL. It's interesting to apply one set of standards to the police, who actually have written P&P for their activities, and the sloppy--almost random--translations and assertions set up by the groupies.

What purpose can be served by calling the case against Sollecito and Knox "ridiculous"? It's a fiery attempt to dumb down his site and to create a jocular mood over the tragic slaying of a beautiful young woman and the unforgivable and desperate accusation of murder against Patrick.

To those who see in Amanda's alibi email of 04 NOV 2007 her true feelings towards Meredith, I agree wholeheartedly. I found it senseless and appalling that the "innocent" Knox would include details that cast aspersions on the character of the victim. She broadcast those very personal assessments of Meredith to her spam list. There's absolutely no question that she expected all those friends, family, and school contacts, to understand that whatever happened to Meredith was justified by her dirty and risky behaviour.

That the groupies typically hand-wave Knox's cynical, invented, and self-serving details about Meredith says a lot about what they, too, really think about the victim and her family.
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: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Where's Bard got to?

_________________
"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: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:
Where's Bard got to?


She was her usual bubbly self yesterday.
Discussed two neat you tube vids of Mungo in his youth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UivE6xV8vIU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q7J2X7X ... ure=relate
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:43 am   Post subject: Stats   

What's the going rate for coed murder these days, or more specifically, the uninhibited index in the Northwest?

On a scale of: innocuous, innocent, rowdy, dangerous, high-spirited, reckless, deadly.


I mean, if I were a student selecting a place for study, I'd factor in exactly what Meredith did:

  • university (automatically assume to be safe)
  • university (courses available, faculty, academic strength and reputation)
  • preferably not a big (unfriendly) city
  • convenient location (airport, trains, lodging)
  • costs (rent, fees, food, entertainment)
  • ambience and referrals (recommendations from friends)
  • opportunity

But would I also have to factor in:
  • probability of encountering a person of uninhibited degree X personality, or of morality-code Y inconsistent with my well-being?

In terms of the factors known to assessors when determining insurance premiums, such factors ought to be quantifiable.


In other words, was this murder a one-off, or is it the tip of an iceberg for the future?
What are the stats?


That American art-student on school excursion murdering the old man (in Florence, was it?) suggests that there is a potentially wide-spread underlying behaviour pattern (perhaps a socially-accepted willingness to lower inhibitions via drugs; perhaps a morally lower value placed on the lives of people belonging to certain specific classes; perhaps a combination of these).

If it's drugs and morality, then girls as well as boys will be vulnerable to becoming perpetrators, perhaps even more so, as girls aren't usually bound in their upbringing and networking by the male macho-chivalrous behaviour code of posturing-restraint.*

I'm interested in the numbers, because it could be a potential public health and safety issue for the community that senators and others might need to focus on.




* School-girl fights here (the ones filmed on phones, which then make it on the news) are all-out, no-holds-barred events, really vicious. And they look so sweet waiting at the bus-stop beforehand! And when girls murder girls, the reasons always seem to be utterly and completely trivial.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:47 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Hi, Catnip. When girls murder girls, it's almost always because of jealousy, involving a love interest. And, usually, the murderer has at least a couple of friends involved.

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

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:13 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Quote:
stilicho wrote:

It is and it isn't, SomeAlibi. If it's been reported that the manufacturer has the technology to recover data but the Italian police don't then that's not the same thing as stating unequivocally that the police "fried" the computer components and then refused to do anything about it. For this to be a "procedural screw up", we'd have to know the procedures which were to be followed and the whether they were ignored except in the case of Raffaele's significant machine.

The facts are that we don't have enough information to make that judgement. It's possible that none of the machines originally were able to be accessed with the software and the procedures employed by the police but that the MACBOOKPRO was accessible only after additional work.



We'd also have to know about the nature of the "damage".

Just to be clear, everything I had written about was hardware replacements; the failure of any one of those components can (and likely will) render the drive contents inaccessible to almost any software method used. If its a circuit board issue, the data doesn't flow properly through from the heads to the computer. If its a head crash or other significant defect on the platters it won't be accessible till swapped with functioning hardware. I did however find out today that at least one company can now pull out the platters and read the data completely independent of the drive they came from.

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:08 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

pataz1 wrote:
Quote:
stilicho wrote:

It is and it isn't, SomeAlibi. If it's been reported that the manufacturer has the technology to recover data but the Italian police don't then that's not the same thing as stating unequivocally that the police "fried" the computer components and then refused to do anything about it. For this to be a "procedural screw up", we'd have to know the procedures which were to be followed and the whether they were ignored except in the case of Raffaele's significant machine.

The facts are that we don't have enough information to make that judgement. It's possible that none of the machines originally were able to be accessed with the software and the procedures employed by the police but that the MACBOOKPRO was accessible only after additional work.



We'd also have to know about the nature of the "damage".

Just to be clear, everything I had written about was hardware replacements; the failure of any one of those components can (and likely will) render the drive contents inaccessible to almost any software method used. If its a circuit board issue, the data doesn't flow properly through from the heads to the computer. If its a head crash or other significant defect on the platters it won't be accessible till swapped with functioning hardware. I did however find out today that at least one company can now pull out the platters and read the data completely independent of the drive they came from.

Pat


RS could have completely encrypted the drives with a long private key kept separate to the machine. Just a suggestion.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:15 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

capealadin wrote:
Hi, Catnip. When girls murder girls, it's almost always because of jealousy, involving a love interest. And, usually, the murderer has at least a couple of friends involved.


Two teenages in Perth murdered their roommate because they were "annoyed" at her (as fas as they were able to work out why they did it).

In England, a younger sister had an argument with her older sister, and the mother did not realise that there had been a stabbing, or how serious it was, until too late. Presumably the driving emotion was anger.

I expect a full statistical sweep will reveal a range of emotions will be involved, so emotion will not necessarily be the common factor.

The frequency of reports of the jealousy/boyfriend territorial dispute, escalating to feud/murder, may be because the newspapers like to report that type of story more than "accidental" deaths like lashings out, drug overdoses, drunken hijinks, unintended killing during sex, and so on.

Though, what is reported on the news becomes part of the moral environment and is incorporated into the standard of behaviour of the upcoming generation.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:18 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

pataz1 wrote:
We'd also have to know about the nature of the "damage".


I once put the DIP switch on an upgrade slave drive in the wrong position.

Grr aargh!
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:21 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
pataz1 wrote:
We'd also have to know about the nature of the "damage".


I once put the DIP switch on an upgrade slave drive in the wrong position.

Grr aargh!

No meanness intended because the same happened to me once but I always thought then after - DIP switch arrrrrrgh.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:24 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:

RS could have completely encrypted the drives with a long private key kept separate to the machine. Just a suggestion.



He could have.

Weight that against:
  • he's a lazy sod (meant in all kindness)
  • why would he?
  • he was stoned a lot (most?) of the time
  • he likes doing things to show off, and there'd be no-one for this private key business; basically a loner, until Amanda showed up (and still a loner of sorts, even after that)
  • if he did, he'd likely forget what it was, or where he put it (see all above)

It's possible; I think it would be too much effort to climb out of the traditional Lazy-Student Well and actually do something (not without the help of a joint or two, anyway).
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:29 am   Post subject: Re: Stats   

Catnip wrote:
What's the going rate for coed murder these days, or more specifically, the uninhibited index in the Northwest?

On a scale of: innocuous, innocent, rowdy, dangerous, high-spirited, reckless, deadly.


Here are some statistics on the murder rate in US states:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder- ... tate#MRord

Washington State has the death penalty and ranks low among US states in murder rate.

Knox is the product of a broken home with no authoritative figure to provide guidance. In this respect, she had a lot more in common with Sollecito and Guede than with a typical young adult from the Pacific Northwest. All three of them found themselves in much the same situation in Perugia.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:34 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip said:
"ttrroonniicc wrote:
RS could have completely encrypted the drives with a long private key kept separate to the machine. Just a suggestion.

He could have.
Weight that against:
* he's a lazy sod (meant in all kindness)
* why would he?
* he was stoned a lot (most?) of the time
* he likes doing things to show off, and there'd be no-one for this private key business; basically a loner, until Amanda showed up (and still a loner of sorts, even after that)
* if he did, he'd likely forget what it was, or where he put it (see all above)

It's possible; I think it would be too much effort to climb out of the traditional Lazy-Student Well and actually do something (not without the help of a joint or two, anyway)."

Yes, but also consider his online browsing choices and vigilant and concerned father.
That may have been his entertainment computer.
And he may have, understandably, wanted some privacy.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:47 am   Post subject: Re: Stats   

stilicho wrote:
she had a lot more in common with Sollecito and Guede than with a typical young adult from the Pacific Northwest.


Rudy positioned himself on the margins (almost as if he felt that was his lot in life after he had been castoff) and he didn't want to commit; Raffaele seems to have been standoffish, aloof, entitled, uncommittal, in a drug haze, drifting in his life; Amanda's self-admitted inability to read emotion in other people's faces wouldn't have helped with social interaction skills (and explains her almost-obsessive need to write-things-out in order to retrospectively understand what might have happened in social situations), plus a yearning for acceptance that comes through (as with all young people).


Rudderless: by circumstance, by choice, by lack of skill and ability, by a combination of these.

The tribe finds itself.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:07 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
Yes, but also consider his online browsing choices and vigilant and concerned father.
That may have been his entertainment computer.
And he may have, understandably, wanted some privacy.



Just pulling on the rope to test that idea: :)

Privacy can be logical as well as physical.

Father easily handled:
Son: "I'm working on the computer." (doing my thesis)
Real translation: "I'm working on the computer." (downloading a torrrent of porn)

Son: "Amanda's come over for dinner. We're just doing the washing up".
Father's unspoken response: "I hear you. (wink wink say no more)" (I won't call you tonight as usual, then :) ).

The teachers/guardians at the boarding place did nothing, and there was no private key there; so the incentive to get and apply one after that remains low. No punishment, no punishment avoiding behaviour.

Maybe there was nothing on the hard drive to protect (from his point of view and/or the investigators). { The Garlasco murderer* had child pornogaphy on his thesis computer, and at one point the investigators hypothesized his girlfriend was killed because she had found it and confronted him about it.)

We can build him up to be a super-sophisticated super-spy clone, and then have to tear that building down again to match the behaviour in the clean-up and staging at the cottage. One joint, or two: the basic underlying behaviour pattern wouldn't shift that dramatically, I expect (barring substantial brain injury, which wouldn't be all that easily reversible if there were any).

A default password on the computer would have been enough for a person like that. And in fact, it was a default password (combination of family names).


At the beginning, would it have been likely that the father thought, "Ah, a girlfriend! Maybe he'll be able to settle down now and get on with his life. Some responsibility. Perhaps even a rudder." ?



Edited to add:
* I should "murderer-accused" or "alleged": Stasi was acquitted because the case against him was not strong enough.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:07 am   Post subject: Prosecution appeal grounds: A very brief summary   

Thanks to RoseMontague.

PROSECUTION APPEAL TIMELINE


4-5 December 2009
Court of Assizes in Perugia hands down its verdict
“una vera e propria doccia fredda a Seattle” (a real and true cold shower in Seattle) – [ TuttOggi ] Perugia - 05/12/2009 00:10

The public prosecutors. “Our submissions have been accepted, the Court in substance has adopted the prosecutorial framework,” was the comment of public prosecutor Giuliano Mignini. “It’s a sentence that the defence will surely appeal,” he added. “The judges have upheld the concession of general mitigating circumstances but, however, our theses have been accepted.” “We will read the sentence motivations,” he concluded. “In any case, at this point, we’re exiting the scene.”
“The sentencing, with such a severe penalty, of two young people always leaves a taste of bitterness in the mouth, but I believe that justice was done for a very grave crime, the killing of a very young student,” added public prosecutor Manuela Comodi.
– [ Repubblica ] 05 December 2009



4 March 2010
The Court reasons (motivazioni) are handed down.

13 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document signed and initialled.

?15 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document lodged.
The [prosecution] appeal in particular contests the granting of general mitigation and the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons [futili motivi].

The magistrates [public prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi] have defined the reasoning by which the Court of Assize granted general mitigation to the two accused as “not convincing”.
– [ IrisPress ] 15 April 2010

Prosecution appeal document scanned into Word.


15 April 2010 06:05:24 PM
PDF document produced from Word 2007

12 July 2010
PDF document loaded onto Docstocs, into RoseMontague’s library [ here ].




** SUMARY ONLY ** SUMMARY ONLY **
A full translation will follow.


PROECUTION APPEAL SYNOPSIS

There are two reasons why the prosecution is appealing against the Court’s sentence:

  • the Court resolves the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons in one line – on page 419
  • and on page 420, the Court reflects on general mitigation, which it held, with unconvincing arguments, to be grantable to the accused




FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL
Denial of aggravating circumstances
{ The appeal point revolves around legal definitions, formal logic, and the Court’s somewhat self-contradictory reasoning regarding the applicability of the aggravating circumstances: a full translation will follow, but basically it boils down to: if it was done for trivial reasons by Rudy, then it would be the same for the other two. }




SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL

General Mitigation
{A full translation will follow, but the gist is as follows, with the prosecution challenging the Court’s reasoning (shown in bold) for granting the general mitigation (and so knocking years off the sentencing). The prosecution challenge is shown underneath the Court’s thinking. }

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the clean record of the accused
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: a clean record carries weight when an offender is of advanced age; with the offenders here being barely out of the age of minority, a clean record has little or no significance in terms of mitigation

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the confirmed absence, besides drug use, of unseemly and disagreeable behaviour harmful to others
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: as above; plus their chosen lifestyle is not totally without a shadow side: Raffaele always carried a knife with him (Knox’s mother raised this and the daughter confirmed it) – hardly a reassuring and usual circumstance; Knox, on her side, was fined $269 as a result of an episode that was not, in fact, able to be ignored: both conducts either having the potentiality, or the likelihood, of harming others. And even if these circumstances have no negative weight, they do place a hurdle in front of the idea of the “strait-laced” behaviour that the Court bases its reasons on.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: diligent behaviour in study and towards others, e.g. Sollecito offering a lift to Popovič, Amanda working for Lumumba, even though studying and attending lessons
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: these arguments are so facile that they hardly require commenting on: study success is tied to qualities of intelligence and memory, which the two accused certainly possess, but this is neither here nor there at the ethical level – which is where the mitigation operates. The Court emphasized Sollecito’s availability to help Popovič, to give her a lift to the bus station that night. Yet the same Popovič testified that Raffaele was not exactly happy at the prospect, so much so that he replied “in a cold tone”, and in any case not his normal one. And the fact that Amanda was working for Lumumba is also neutral with respect to the mitigation. Obviously, the accused had the economic need to do so, and that job, while not onerous, provided the opportunity for meeting people and avoiding the routine of study.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the inexperience and immaturity of the accused, long distance from their families, and their attachment to each other
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: inexperience and immaturity: the calunnia against Lumumba, its continuation during his unjust imprisonment and further calunnia against the Flying Squad during the trial, so opening up another case, – speak to a coldness and determination, and not a docile disposition and inexperience. And on the other hand, the intervention of the respective families never addressed themselves to undoing the initial calunnia against Lumumba even when Knox’s mother received her daughter’s confidences about Patrick’s innocence, and, notwithstanding that, there was no advice, from mother to daughter, to retract that accusation. No positive influence would have come from the presence of the families, at least to judge from the behaviour after the murder. The Court would have had to have considered this in conjunction with the staged burglary and the shared desire of both accused to mislead the investigation.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the events of that night being merely the accidental confluence of various factors in combination, with “no other plans, without any animosity or rancorous feeling against the victim that could by any means be seen as preparation/predisposition for the crime”
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: in terms of mitigation, the Court spent little time on this, and did so in contradictory ways: if, as the Court affirms, the two accused were totally impassive, as if killing someone their own age was the same as going to the pub, the club, consuming stupefactants, or having sex, or, more simply, just going to sleep, how could this “accidental contingency” be used to lessen the offence? How could it possible to hold, of all the options that presented themselves on that unexpectedly free evening, that the murder and sexual violence against the young English girl be one of them? And if the Court held them to be capable of such coldness, of extreme criminal acts, solely because they had a free evening and the two didn’t know what else to do, this certainly goes to worrying psychology for the pair, because both have been glacial in this case, more so than Rudy who, at least, expressed sadness and grief for the victim.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the post-crime conduct, that is covering Meredith’s body, and distancing themselves from the room when the door was forced open (i.e., as signs of conscience)

    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: it is not reasonable to consider this as an expression of pity and a psychological rejection of the crime. The two types of behaviour are completely different and are expressions of different states of mind. It’s true that the covering of Meredith’s body expresses some form of pity towards the victim, but this gesture appears attributable solely to Amanda and as an instinctive expression of “feminine solidarity” which often characterises the murderous behaviour of women as against other women – rather than a conscience choice susceptible to ethical-legal evaluation. Both Amanda and Raffaele demonstrated a striking coldness, especially on the evening and night of 2 November.
      As for being distant from the door when it was broken open, it is evident that the two accused had no need to go and look at the murder scene. They knew well what lay behind the locked door.


---
Edited to make the Court reasons and the prosecution appeal challenging a bit clearer:
i.e., added the tags:
"In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: "
and
"The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: ".

Michael, amongst the posts below, has correctly detected the "softness" of the Court in regards to the sentencing phase. The lawyers would describe the Massei Court as a "lenient" one, in this sense. There is some merit and argument in leniency, and also some in being strict. Wiser minds at appeal level will weigh this in the balance and come to a decision (but it interlocks with how well the evidence stacks up, and so will logically be decided after the evidence is looked at).


Last edited by Catnip on Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:52 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:
Where's Bard got to?


Still alive! But been buzzing around helping someone move (I know, I am nuts...) and following up various book info. Have been having fascinating discussions about the nature of translation funnily enough, with Linguistics Prof. He reminded me of a quote about translation, which was (I can't remember the French) basically 'Translation is like a woman. If she's beautiful she's not faithful; if she's faithful, she's not beautiful'. So far so sexist, but it makes an interesting point. I have learned sooooo much about the ART of translation through this board, and from reading the translators thread. I urge the board to make this thread open so that people can see the rigour and professionalism of those who worked on the report. It's astonishing and extremely interesting for anyone with a remote interest in language.

Plus, I have been catching UP! Reading back over discussion I have missed, laughing one minute, engaging brain till it hurts the next...it struck me what a bloody good READ this board is. So lively and engaging. Some truly beautiful and diverse prose. It is an absolute joy. A few highlights were SomeAlibi's letter to Earl Grey, which made me roar and his evidence explanation posts ; his prose just glides effortlessly. Catnip makes my head hurt, but in a good way. I always have some left over questions at the end of his posts, which I LOVE. Fiona's writing, always spare and absolutely devastating. Very dry. Love it. Piktor's perfectly timed injections of satire are sheer genius. What a great board, with so many wonderful contributors, of which these are just a few!

p.s Also noticeable how much smoother discussion runs without pesky trolls trolling. Am now a firmly Zero Tolerance Trollwise - yes, another 360 degree turnaround.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline RoseMontag


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:18 pm

Posts: 280

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:01 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:05 am   Post subject: Re: Prosecution appeal grounds: A very brief summary   

Catnip wrote:
Thanks to RoseMontague.

PROSECUTION APPEAL TIMELINE


4-5 December 2009
Court of Assizes in Perugia hands down its verdict
“una vera e propria doccia fredda a Seattle” (a real and true cold shower in Seattle) – [ TuttOggi ] Perugia - 05/12/2009 00:10

The public prosecutors. “Our submissions have been accepted, the Court in substance has adopted the prosecutorial framework,” was the comment of public prosecutor Giuliano Mignini. “It’s a sentence that the defence will surely appeal,” he added. “The judges have upheld the concession of general mitigating circumstances but, however, our theses have been accepted.” “We will read the sentence motivations,” he concluded. “In any case, at this point, we’re exiting the scene.”
“The sentencing, with such a severe penalty, of two young people always leaves a taste of bitterness in the mouth, but I believe that justice was done for a very grave crime, the killing of a very young student,” added public prosecutor Manuela Comodi.
– [ Repubblica ] 05 December 2009



4 March 2010
The Court reasons (motivazioni) are handed down.

13 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document signed and initialled.

?15 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document lodged.
The [prosecution] appeal in particular contests the granting of general mitigation and the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons [futili motivi].

The magistrates [public prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi] have defined the reasoning by which the Court of Assize granted general mitigation to the two accused as “not convincing”.
– [ IrisPress ] 15 April 2010

Prosecution appeal document scanned into Word.


15 April 2010 06:05:24 PM
PDF document produced from Word 2007

12 July 2010
PDF document loaded onto Docstocs, into RoseMontague’s library [ here ].




** SUMARY ONLY ** SUMMARY ONLY **
A full translation will follow.


PROECUTION APPEAL SYNOPSIS

There are two reasons why the prosecution is appealing against the Court’s sentence:

  • the Court resolves the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons in one line – on page 419
  • and on page 420, the Court reflects on general mitigation, which it held, with unconvincing arguments, to be grantable to the accused




FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL
Denial of aggravating circumstances
{ The appeal point revolves around legal definitions, formal logic, and the Court’s somewhat self-contradictory reasoning regarding the applicability of the aggravating circumstances: a full translation will follow, but basically it boils down to: if it was done for trivial reasons by Rudy, then it would be the same for the other two. }




SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL

General Mitigation
{A full translation will follow, but the gist is as follows, with the prosecution challenging the Court’s reasoning (shown in bold) for granting the general mitigation (and so knocking years off the sentencing). The prosecution challenge is shown underneath the Court’s thinking. }

  • the clean record of the accused
    • a clean record carries weight when an offender is of advanced age; with the offenders here being barely out of the age of minority, a clean record has little or no significance in terms of mitigation

  • the confirmed absence, besides drug use, of unseemly and disagreeable behaviour harmful to others
    • as above; plus their chosen lifestyle is not totally without a shadow side: Raffaele always carried a knife with him (Knox’s mother raised this and the daughter confirmed it) – hardly a reassuring and usual circumstance; Knox, on her side, was fined $269 as a result of an episode that was not, in fact, able to be ignored: both conducts either having the potentiality, or the likelihood, of harming others. And even if these circumstances have no negative weight, they do place a hurdle in front of the idea of the “strait-laced” behaviour that the Court bases its reasons on.

  • diligent behaviour in study and towards others, e.g. Sollecito offering a lift to Popovič, Amanda working for Lumumba, even though studying and attending lessons
    • these arguments are so facile that they hardly require commenting on: study success is tied to qualities of intelligence and memory, which the two accused certainly possess, but this is neither here nor there at the ethical level – which is where the mitigation operates. The Court emphasized Sollecito’s availability to help Popovič, to give her a lift to the bus station that night. Yet the same Popovič testified that Raffaele was not exactly happy at the prospect, so much so that he replied “in a cold tone”, and in any case not his normal one. And the fact that Amanda was working for Lumumba is also neutral with respect to the mitigation. Obviously, the accused had the economic need to do so, and that job, while not onerous, provided the opportunity for meeting people and avoiding the routine of study.

  • the inexperience and immaturity of the accused, long distance from their families, and their attachment to each other
    • inexperience and immaturity: the calunnia against Lumumba, its continuation during his unjust imprisonment and further calunnia against the Flying Squad during the trial, so opening up another case, – speak to a coldness and determination, and not a docile disposition and inexperience. And on the other hand, the intervention of the respective families never addressed themselves to undoing the initial calunnia against Lumumba even when Knox’s mother received her daughter’s confidences about Patrick’s innocence, and, notwithstanding that, there was no advice, from mother to daughter, to retract that accusation. No positive influence would have come from the presence of the families, at least to judge from the behaviour after the murder. The Court would have had to have considered this in conjunction with the staged burglary and the shared desire of both accused to mislead the investigation.

  • the events of that night being merely the accidental confluence of various factors in combination, with “no other plans, without any animosity or rancorous feeling against the victim that could by any means be seen as preparation/predisposition for the crime”
    • in terms of mitigation, the Court spent little time on this, and did so in contradictory ways: if, as the Court affirms, the two accused were totally impassive, as if killing someone their own age was the same as going to the pub, the club, consuming stupefactants, or having sex, or, more simply, just going to sleep, how could this “accidental contingency” be used to lessen the offence? How could it possible to hold, of all the options that presented themselves on that unexpectedly free evening, that the murder and sexual violence against the young English girl be one of them? And if the Court held them to be capable of such coldness, of extreme criminal acts, solely because they had a free evening and the two didn’t know what else to do, this certainly goes to worrying psychology for the pair, because both have been glacial in this case, more so than Rudy who, at least, expressed sadness and grief for the victim.

  • the post-crime conduct, that is covering Meredith’s body, and distancing themselves from the room when the door was forced open (i.e., as signs of conscience)

    • it is not reasonable to consider this as an expression of pity and a psychological rejection of the crime. The two types of behaviour are completely different and are expressions of different states of mind. It’s true that the covering of Meredith’s body expresses some form of pity towards the victim, but this gesture appears attributable solely to Amanda and as an instinctive expression of “feminine solidarity” which often characterises the murderous behaviour of women as against other women – rather than a conscience choice susceptible to ethical-legal evaluation. Both Amanda and Raffaele demonstrated a striking coldness, especially on the evening and night of 2 November.
      As for being distant from the door when it was broken open, it is evident that the two accused had no need to go and look at the murder scene. They knew well what lay behind the locked door.


Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:11 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

'female solidarity'??? Amanda??? ROFL....

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:53 am   Post subject: Re: Prosecution appeal grounds: A very brief summary   

The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


I think those are the court's reasons for mitigation and lack of aggravating circumstances challenged by the prosecution and nothing to do with the appeals of the accused. I don't have a book in front of me but I believe that life sentences require aggravating circumstances in Italy and that the mitigation was already considered in giving them 25 years instead of 30. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline katy_did


Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:30 pm

Posts: 48

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:56 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I think this is the prosecution appealing against Massei's arguments for mitigating circumstances for Amanda and Raffaele, rather than the appeal arguments from their lawyers. On the other hand, the argument for "female solidarity" comes from Mignini and Comodi, who are arguing that the covering of the body was an instinctive act of 'female solidarity' - because that's just what women do - and therefore shouldn't be given any credit from Massei, since Amanda just couldn't stop herself from doing it (as opposed to a thought out and reasoned act which would thus constitute 'mitigating circumstances'). Basically, the prosecution's argument is that covering the body is an automatic woman thing, not a conscious choice.

ETA: Whoops, Stilicho beat me to it (though somewhat less sardonically).


Last edited by katy_did on Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
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 Aug 20, 2010 10:56 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
'female solidarity'??? Amanda??? ROFL....


That's one part of the court's sentencing where I actually agreed with HumanityBlues at the JREF. I don't think the covering of the body was due to "feminine solidarity" but instead not wanting to view the body while they were searching the floor for (probably) one of Amanda's earrings lost during the violence.
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 Aug 20, 2010 11:00 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


It's the prosecution appeal Bard, against the mitigating circumstances awarded by the court.

I have to say, I have some sympathy. I didn't really agree with the court's mitigating circumstances either. I think it's simply a case that the court 'wanted' to give them, to try and find reasons to, because Amanda and Raffaele were not only young, but also so 'child like'. Purely and simply, they felt sorry for them.

_________________
"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 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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:29 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I'll put in a bunch of "The Court saids", and "The prosecution appeals against this by sayings", to make it clearer about who's saying what.

Sometimes my note-making is a bit compressed.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:37 am   Post subject: Re: Prosecution appeal grounds: A very brief summary   

stilicho wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


I think those are the court's reasons for mitigation and lack of aggravating circumstances challenged by the prosecution and nothing to do with the appeals of the accused. I don't have a book in front of me but I believe that life sentences require aggravating circumstances in Italy and that the mitigation was already considered in giving them 25 years instead of 30. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.



Ahhhhh....reading in haste...my bad. But the comments still stand. To me someone is really scraping the old barrel in trying to find mitigation. I found the grounds at the time to be like a bone they wanted to throw them at the end, just to kind of soften the blow and give them 'something'. In fact there were no bones to throw, as this shows. Yes, they were young. But so was Meredith. It wasn't an accident. It was a wicked act, for which they must take full responsibility.

_________________
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:54 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

When you go and sit in court in the public gallery, you'll often hear a convict's lawyer presenting the best view of their client (they're studying, their helping with the prison laundry is to be admired, they're etc), and sometimes, yes, it is painfully obvious they are grasping at straws, yet they are straws nonetheless, and where there's straw, there's hope; and some people have only one or two straws, if that, with which to begin building up their life's investment (if they choose).

Apologies about the head-hurting thing, by the way.
Let Mungo chew on half a carrot as a treat.
A creature that make a blade of grass disappear so efficiently and keep an eye out at the same time for hawks and falcons above, wonderful! I can only do one thing at a time, and that not always well (take my typing, e.g.).
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


It's the prosecution appeal Bard, against the mitigating circumstances awarded by the court.

I have to say, I have some sympathy. I didn't really agree with the court's mitigating circumstances either. I think it's simply a case that the court 'wanted' to give them, to try and find reasons to, because Amanda and Raffaele were not only young, but also so 'child like'. Purely and simply, they felt sorry for them.


Agree with you.
I also do not agree fully with the mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating ones. They are weak. A confession and full excuses are mitigating circumstances. I also feel the Court tried to find reasons as they are 2 kids. Keep in mind court has some discretion on this and have more experience than us all.

Micheli (1st degree Guede) felt differently: he said young age and clean record cannot be always used as a free ticket for leniency and gave RG life - reduced to 30 years due to the fast track law. This was changed in RG appeal (which gave him 24 - 1/3 = 16) to a framework very similar to the sentence of AK/RS.

Prosecution appeal has good arguments in my view and - if the 2 are confirmed guilty in appeal - could find acceptance. So they may get life or 30. I give it a rough 50% chance. Even if they get life or 30 years they will do about 20, if they stay at 25/26 they will do about 15/17 with possible earlier permits to go out of prison during the day to work. This will be possible with good conduct.

BTW the big discounts good conduct gives you in Italian jail is another important reason why [subject of previous discussion] AK/RS run negligible risks of abuse, violence etc. in prison. They are in fact applicable to all prisoners even the most dangerous limiting bad episodes in prison.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


It's the prosecution appeal Bard, against the mitigating circumstances awarded by the court.

I have to say, I have some sympathy. I didn't really agree with the court's mitigating circumstances either. I think it's simply a case that the court 'wanted' to give them, to try and find reasons to, because Amanda and Raffaele were not only young, but also so 'child like'. Purely and simply, they felt sorry for them.


Agree with you.
I also do not agree fully with the mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating ones. They are weak. A confession and full excuses are mitigating circumstances. I also feel the Court tried to find reasons as they are 2 kids. Keep in mind court has some discretion on this and have more experience than us all.

Micheli (1st degree Guede) felt differently: he said young age and clean record cannot be always used as a free ticket for leniency and gave RG life - reduced to 30 years due to the fast track law. This was changed in RG appeal (which gave him 24 - 1/3 = 16) to a framework very similar to the sentence of AK/RS.

Prosecution appeal has good arguments in my view and - if the 2 are confirmed guilty in appeal - could find acceptance. So they may get life or 30. I give it a rough 50% chance. Even if they get life or 30 years they will do about 20, if they stay at 25/26 they will do about 15/17 with possible earlier permits to go out of prison during the day to work. This will be possible with good conduct.

BTW the big discounts good conduct gives you in Italian jail is another important reason why [subject of previous discussion] AK/RS run negligible risks of abuse, violence etc. in prison. They are in fact applicable to all prisoners even the most dangerous limiting bad episodes in prison.


I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Couple observations from where my 'morning' is about 5 hours after many of yours.

1) Good to see Bard again, returning from her admirable neighborly help gig, and in customary exemplary 'form'. (Does Mungo have small cart he pulls to help movers??)
Strongly agree with her kudos, and find myself often in awe at the talents of so many others here.
Especially evident and appreciated during small spying strays into other Boards

2) Hard to believe, but I am very much in agreement with Rose...a real groundbreaker for me....
But her praise for Catnip's extensive efforts today are right on and rightfully echoed.
tt-)
Top Profile 

Offline gardner


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:37 pm

Posts: 46

Location: Ohio USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

gardner wrote:

And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truly enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


Hi gard:

You are absolutely accurate (and quite astute) with that assessment.

As an 'explanation' (not excuse):

After Rose's tumultuous time here, and her undiminished, uninhibited, undaunted, unanimous untruths on her present pulpit, I personally thought even a stark naked, stone solo; 'thanks' *from her* to anyone here spoke *volumes* of appreciation and admiration for the quality and timeliness of Catnip's extensive efforts today
Just my opinion, humbly proffered.

Your appreciation of the troll-less time here is noted and echoed
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Machine wrote:
Popper wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Bard wrote:
Very interesting Catnip. Absolutely STUNNED at the weakness of these 'grounds for appeal'. Totally insipid eg.

1. they were nice kids realllllly; (huh?)

2. they felt sarweeee for Meredith when they'd finished because they covered her with a duvet, which was quite nice of dem, you gotta admit... (WHAT WHAT WHAT??? THIS MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL. I get so ANGRY when I see this used in some sort of mitigation. I don't see any pity in this act at ALL. I see guilt, and/or squeamishness. Where is the pity? Meredith is DEAD. Jeeeeeeeze...)

3. Dey were weallllllly young and far, far from home... (Raf wasn't, nor was Rudy. And the last time I looked there were literally thousands of young adults studying abroad who seem to resist the temptation to commit a brutal sexually motivated murder)

4. Raffy offered someone a lift. Amanda had a job while she studied. (How is this anything other than normal behaviour?)

They have NOTHING to offer in mitigation, is what I am reading. Absolutely nothing. Those grounds for appeal are an embarrassment, and insulting. Because they have not done anything bad up to now they should be given time off the most heinous crime known to man...? What?????? And just how would the judge break this news to the victim's family???

Shakes head sadly in disbelief. I think Amanda is going to be a Yoga Master by the time she gets out of clink...She's have the best Downward-Facing Dog in Seattle....


It's the prosecution appeal Bard, against the mitigating circumstances awarded by the court.

I have to say, I have some sympathy. I didn't really agree with the court's mitigating circumstances either. I think it's simply a case that the court 'wanted' to give them, to try and find reasons to, because Amanda and Raffaele were not only young, but also so 'child like'. Purely and simply, they felt sorry for them.


Agree with you.
I also do not agree fully with the mitigating circumstances equivalent to the aggravating ones. They are weak. A confession and full excuses are mitigating circumstances. I also feel the Court tried to find reasons as they are 2 kids. Keep in mind court has some discretion on this and have more experience than us all.

Micheli (1st degree Guede) felt differently: he said young age and clean record cannot be always used as a free ticket for leniency and gave RG life - reduced to 30 years due to the fast track law. This was changed in RG appeal (which gave him 24 - 1/3 = 16) to a framework very similar to the sentence of AK/RS.

Prosecution appeal has good arguments in my view and - if the 2 are confirmed guilty in appeal - could find acceptance. So they may get life or 30. I give it a rough 50% chance. Even if they get life or 30 years they will do about 20, if they stay at 25/26 they will do about 15/17 with possible earlier permits to go out of prison during the day to work. This will be possible with good conduct.

BTW the big discounts good conduct gives you in Italian jail is another important reason why [subject of previous discussion] AK/RS run negligible risks of abuse, violence etc. in prison. They are in fact applicable to all prisoners even the most dangerous limiting bad episodes in prison.


I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.




Mental insanity is not what you want to have in Italy. AK and RS did not seem to be mentally insane and never claimed that.
People who are mentally insane cannot be charged for murder and would leave prison. In that case they would be sent to a "ospedale psichiatrico giudiziario" [criminal mental hospital] and most probably be out much before than we discussed above.

If they claimed "mental insanity" in trial and got it accepted it could be
(a) partial, in this case crime would be valid, they would go to prison but conviction would be lowered or
(b) full - in which case the criminal mental hospital and no charge for the crime. In this case it is likely they would be out quite soon after being cured.

AK and RS - if confirmed guilty - will be out of prison in the terms (more or less) I told you, getting hefty discounts for good conduct: this is why it is important a good assessment of mitigating circumstances not to favour too much people who do not deserve real mitigation.

Recently one of the worst killer Italy ever had (Marco Furlan of Ludwig, a neonazi band of 2 people which in the period 77-84 committed 15 murders in Italy and Germany for futile motives linked to nazi ideology) was released. He was first convicted for 30 years (instead of life due to partial insanity) then in Appeal and Cassazione this was reduced to 27 years. He did 1984 to 1988 in jail then escaped abroad as they had to release him awaiting trial (court had ordered "soggiorno obbligato" [obligation of not moving from one place] in a small city given his dangerous nature), then in 1995 was captured again and served until 2009. 14+4=18 out of 27 he had to serve and this was a really cruel and dangerous killer. This is because he got 45 days discount every semester for good conduct and 3 general discounts (applicable to all prison population). He never received any "personal" discount. This guy was probably a touch insane but who knows. Certainly he is getting out quite early.

Having said that, every case is different but in my view insanity or partial insanity helps a lot people who should not be helped. AK/RS are not insane and did not claim it.

I would reiterate how lucky these 2 people are to have been tried in Italy and in Perugia and to be in prison there (and one could say this regardless of actual innocence or guilt but based on the strong evidence presented at trial)...and this is totally the opposite of what most US media reported.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:07 pm   Post subject: Cottage Locquat   

Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?

Anyway, I'm 10 hours ahead in a sunny Australian winter, and an early morning tomorrow: voting day here.

Earlier, I was trawling some pages, and came across a video attached to an LA7 report here about the second crime scene inspection on 18 December 2007, and the defence lawyer "finding" a knife (the wrong sort, as it turned out later).

On the video, there is a view into the hallway from across the terrace from across the yard from across the street.

The tree is loquat. Definitely a loquat. (It's a bit blurry on Google).

They would have been able to make a jam preserve or a custard torte in the appropriate season. Via della Pergola is well-named.

A lack of emotion/regret, and/or of certain social interactions in upbringing may be added to the Penal Code in the future, when more becomes known about how the brain works and develops (not to mention what certain combinations of chemical substances can do).

I had a really complicated dream today about a friend of Stewart's coming to post, and using a long-sentence literary-style style. I'm not sure what that means, if anything, but I was thinking about how the knife was carried about in at least two ordinary containers and touched by at least as many (latex-gloved?) hands, and still the DNA found on it was not contamination material from the officers involved in its handling. The contamination hypothesis is definitely drawing a long bow. Even Robin Hood needed a target to aim at.

And so off to my burrow (or den).


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

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:17 pm   Post subject: Re: Prosecution appeal grounds: A very brief summary   

Catnip wrote:
Thanks to RoseMontague.

PROSECUTION APPEAL TIMELINE


4-5 December 2009
Court of Assizes in Perugia hands down its verdict
“una vera e propria doccia fredda a Seattle” (a real and true cold shower in Seattle) – [ TuttOggi ] Perugia - 05/12/2009 00:10

The public prosecutors. “Our submissions have been accepted, the Court in substance has adopted the prosecutorial framework,” was the comment of public prosecutor Giuliano Mignini. “It’s a sentence that the defence will surely appeal,” he added. “The judges have upheld the concession of general mitigating circumstances but, however, our theses have been accepted.” “We will read the sentence motivations,” he concluded. “In any case, at this point, we’re exiting the scene.”
“The sentencing, with such a severe penalty, of two young people always leaves a taste of bitterness in the mouth, but I believe that justice was done for a very grave crime, the killing of a very young student,” added public prosecutor Manuela Comodi.
– [ Repubblica ] 05 December 2009



4 March 2010
The Court reasons (motivazioni) are handed down.

13 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document signed and initialled.

?15 April 2010
Prosecution appeal document lodged.
The [prosecution] appeal in particular contests the granting of general mitigation and the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons [futili motivi].

The magistrates [public prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi] have defined the reasoning by which the Court of Assize granted general mitigation to the two accused as “not convincing”.
– [ IrisPress ] 15 April 2010

Prosecution appeal document scanned into Word.


15 April 2010 06:05:24 PM
PDF document produced from Word 2007

12 July 2010
PDF document loaded onto Docstocs, into RoseMontague’s library [ here ].




** SUMARY ONLY ** SUMMARY ONLY **
A full translation will follow.


PROECUTION APPEAL SYNOPSIS

There are two reasons why the prosecution is appealing against the Court’s sentence:

  • the Court resolves the exclusion of the aggravating factor of trivial reasons in one line – on page 419
  • and on page 420, the Court reflects on general mitigation, which it held, with unconvincing arguments, to be grantable to the accused




FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL
Denial of aggravating circumstances
{ The appeal point revolves around legal definitions, formal logic, and the Court’s somewhat self-contradictory reasoning regarding the applicability of the aggravating circumstances: a full translation will follow, but basically it boils down to: if it was done for trivial reasons by Rudy, then it would be the same for the other two. }




SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL

General Mitigation
{A full translation will follow, but the gist is as follows, with the prosecution challenging the Court’s reasoning (shown in bold) for granting the general mitigation (and so knocking years off the sentencing). The prosecution challenge is shown underneath the Court’s thinking. }

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the clean record of the accused
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: a clean record carries weight when an offender is of advanced age; with the offenders here being barely out of the age of minority, a clean record has little or no significance in terms of mitigation

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the confirmed absence, besides drug use, of unseemly and disagreeable behaviour harmful to others
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: as above; plus their chosen lifestyle is not totally without a shadow side: Raffaele always carried a knife with him (Knox’s mother raised this and the daughter confirmed it) – hardly a reassuring and usual circumstance; Knox, on her side, was fined $269 as a result of an episode that was not, in fact, able to be ignored: both conducts either having the potentiality, or the likelihood, of harming others. And even if these circumstances have no negative weight, they do place a hurdle in front of the idea of the “strait-laced” behaviour that the Court bases its reasons on.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: diligent behaviour in study and towards others, e.g. Sollecito offering a lift to Popovič, Amanda working for Lumumba, even though studying and attending lessons
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: these arguments are so facile that they hardly require commenting on: study success is tied to qualities of intelligence and memory, which the two accused certainly possess, but this is neither here nor there at the ethical level – which is where the mitigation operates. The Court emphasized Sollecito’s availability to help Popovič, to give her a lift to the bus station that night. Yet the same Popovič testified that Raffaele was not exactly happy at the prospect, so much so that he replied “in a cold tone”, and in any case not his normal one. And the fact that Amanda was working for Lumumba is also neutral with respect to the mitigation. Obviously, the accused had the economic need to do so, and that job, while not onerous, provided the opportunity for meeting people and avoiding the routine of study.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the inexperience and immaturity of the accused, long distance from their families, and their attachment to each other
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: inexperience and immaturity: the calunnia against Lumumba, its continuation during his unjust imprisonment and further calunnia against the Flying Squad during the trial, so opening up another case, – speak to a coldness and determination, and not a docile disposition and inexperience. And on the other hand, the intervention of the respective families never addressed themselves to undoing the initial calunnia against Lumumba even when Knox’s mother received her daughter’s confidences about Patrick’s innocence, and, notwithstanding that, there was no advice, from mother to daughter, to retract that accusation. No positive influence would have come from the presence of the families, at least to judge from the behaviour after the murder. The Court would have had to have considered this in conjunction with the staged burglary and the shared desire of both accused to mislead the investigation.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the events of that night being merely the accidental confluence of various factors in combination, with “no other plans, without any animosity or rancorous feeling against the victim that could by any means be seen as preparation/predisposition for the crime”
    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: in terms of mitigation, the Court spent little time on this, and did so in contradictory ways: if, as the Court affirms, the two accused were totally impassive, as if killing someone their own age was the same as going to the pub, the club, consuming stupefactants, or having sex, or, more simply, just going to sleep, how could this “accidental contingency” be used to lessen the offence? How could it possible to hold, of all the options that presented themselves on that unexpectedly free evening, that the murder and sexual violence against the young English girl be one of them? And if the Court held them to be capable of such coldness, of extreme criminal acts, solely because they had a free evening and the two didn’t know what else to do, this certainly goes to worrying psychology for the pair, because both have been glacial in this case, more so than Rudy who, at least, expressed sadness and grief for the victim.

  • In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: the post-crime conduct, that is covering Meredith’s body, and distancing themselves from the room when the door was forced open (i.e., as signs of conscience)

    • The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: it is not reasonable to consider this as an expression of pity and a psychological rejection of the crime. The two types of behaviour are completely different and are expressions of different states of mind. It’s true that the covering of Meredith’s body expresses some form of pity towards the victim, but this gesture appears attributable solely to Amanda and as an instinctive expression of “feminine solidarity” which often characterises the murderous behaviour of women as against other women – rather than a conscience choice susceptible to ethical-legal evaluation. Both Amanda and Raffaele demonstrated a striking coldness, especially on the evening and night of 2 November.
      As for being distant from the door when it was broken open, it is evident that the two accused had no need to go and look at the murder scene. They knew well what lay behind the locked door.


---
Edited to make the Court reasons and the prosecution appeal challenging a bit clearer:
i.e., added the tags:
"In allowing mitigation, the Court referred to: "
and
"The prosecution is appealing against this reasoning by saying: ".

Michael, amongst the posts below, has correctly detected the "softness" of the Court in regards to the sentencing phase. The lawyers would describe the Massei Court as a "lenient" one, in this sense. There is some merit and argument in leniency, and also some in being strict. Wiser minds at appeal level will weigh this in the balance and come to a decision (but it interlocks with how well the evidence stacks up, and so will logically be decided after the evidence is looked at).




Bravo Catnip...

The comments above and Bard's reaction confirm my personal take on the court's mitigation of the aggravating circumstances is that Massei bent really pretty hard to find that mitigation to help Amanda and Raffaele. I don't mean as a comment on how *I* see their characters, simply that the credits given for the the mundane mitigations submitted are really rather large. If you consider that they offset in totality the entire aggravation part of the charge remembering that the aggravation was pointing to a life sentence on the tariff, that is a huge amount of credit given.

The scales of justice are not beyond a little adjustment sometimes and frankly I think Massei put his thumb fairly heavily on them to get that aggravation cancelled out. He recited all the above in the report and he used them to actually help Amanda and Raffaele. I realise there's FOA spitting teeth at this point but you have to maintain the perspective; they had been found guilty of the charge and would have done life. Massei gave them basically a huge credit in cancelling the aggravation. (BTW I've actually seen it suggested that Massei did this because he really thinks they are innocent which is the sort of level of moronity that makes the internet so special).

I think the prosecution's got a pretty good go at arguing these mitigations are too lenient but the covering of the body expressing regret seems missing to me. Whether you think that ridiculous or not (and I think it's a fair perspective) I think that gives the appeal court enough space to keep the sentencing down it so desired because they can argue true remorse if they want to. What you and I believe is neither here nor there - this is about the court setting the length of sentence it feels fits.

This prosecution appeal is a sort of push-me-pull-you force against the defence appeal. Sure they may want the sentence increased but I think they are more concerned to keep a counter-weight against the appeal and I think they'd see a cancellation-out leaving it at 25 & 26 apiece would be a reasonably good result.

_________________
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 SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Hi, Catnip. When girls murder girls, it's almost always because of jealousy, involving a love interest. And, usually, the murderer has at least a couple of friends involved.


Two teenages in Perth murdered their roommate because they were "annoyed" at her (as fas as they were able to work out why they did it).

In England, a younger sister had an argument with her older sister, and the mother did not realise that there had been a stabbing, or how serious it was, until too late. Presumably the driving emotion was anger.

I expect a full statistical sweep will reveal a range of emotions will be involved, so emotion will not necessarily be the common factor.

The frequency of reports of the jealousy/boyfriend territorial dispute, escalating to feud/murder, may be because the newspapers like to report that type of story more than "accidental" deaths like lashings out, drug overdoses, drunken hijinks, unintended killing during sex, and so on.

Though, what is reported on the news becomes part of the moral environment and is incorporated into the standard of behaviour of the upcoming generation.



As we all know, a huge amount of the issue around Amanda Knox is the generalised belief that "girls like that don't do things like that". It would be very helpful to compile a list if people could data dump them here?

_________________
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 stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


Mental insanity is not what you want to have in Italy. AK and RS did not seem to be mentally insane and never claimed that.



Hi Pop

Enjoyed the background information and examples you provided.

With the caveat that I am neither qualified to nor now attempt to speak for Machine......

That said, I think I read his post differently, and I placed much more emphasis on his intent with the use of *become*.
Rather than suggesting upcoming possible insanity might be beneficial by reducing sentence, or early release, I read it as an additional *burden* that they rightfully might receive because of what they did to Meredith.

A mental picture of AK and/or RS sitting in a straight jacket does not incite glee in me, in contrast, I am sad also for them.
But it seems definitely more fitting than eating crab and chocolate cakes, singing (with uplifted hands), playing guitars and doing yoga (no cartwheels ? that Curt says were your preferred stretching stress relievers?)
Any additional hardships they must suffer still pales in contrast to the finality of the hardship they horribly inflicted on Meredith and her loved ones.

Finally, from the fragmentary information from Vanessa and others, the fate Machine cites as a future possibility seems to be even more accurately prognosticated as a a probability
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
gardner wrote:

And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truly enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


Hi gard:

You are absolutely accurate (and quite astute) with that assessment.

As an 'explanation' (not excuse):

After Rose's tumultuous time here, and her undiminished, uninhibited, undaunted, unanimous untruths on her present pulpit, I personally thought even a stark naked, stone solo; 'thanks' *from her* to anyone here spoke *volumes* of appreciation and admiration for the quality and timeliness of Catnip's extensive efforts today
Just my opinion, humbly proffered.

Your appreciation of the troll-less time here is noted and echoed


While I have made no scientific study of this matter, my informal observation after three years of, well, observing is that this board functions really well when it is unimpeded by trolls, with trolls understood to be anyone who comes here to obfuscate, stonewall and distort rather than engage in a good faith, give and take discussion. The bottom line is that trolls are really just people who want to prevent others from experiencing the unique satisfactions that challenging and intelligent debate offers. I have always thought that, at bottom, it is because they have not cultivated the art of respectful discussion with others and instead have learned to get attention by being disruptive when they encounter that kind of thing. It makes them angry and uncomfortable because they can't "shine" in a collegial setting. So they shout, insult, twist arguments, break their toys, etc. Anything to get attention. "Look at me" is what they are saying. So trolling is a behavior that narcissists are attracted to. Some are even addicted to it.

_________________
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: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
As we all know, a huge amount of the issue around Amanda Knox is the generalised belief that "girls like that don't do things like that". It would be very helpful to compile a list if people could data dump them here?


Pauline Parker
Juliet Hulme
Myra Hindley
Susan Atkins
Patricia Krenwinkel
Leslie Van Houten
Brenda Anne Spencer
Laurie Ann Swank
Robin Lee Row
Top Profile 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:

I have always thought that, at bottom, it is because they have not cultivated the art of respectful discussion with others and instead have learned to get attention by being disruptive when they encounter that kind of thing. It makes them angry and uncomfortable because they can't "shine" in a collegial setting. So they shout, insult, twist arguments, break their toys, etc. Anything to get attention. "Look at me" is what they are saying. So trolling is a behavior that narcissists are attracted to. Some are even addicted to it.


I'll be damned if Amanda's name didn't immediately come to mind when I read this.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Machine wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
As we all know, a huge amount of the issue around Amanda Knox is the generalised belief that "girls like that don't do things like that". It would be very helpful to compile a list if people could data dump them here?


Pauline Parker
Juliet Hulme
Myra Hindley
Susan Atkins
Patricia Krenwinkel
Leslie Van Houten
Brenda Anne Spencer
Laurie Ann Swank
Robin Lee Row


It might also be interesting to make a study of "who's hot and who's not" from this list, and then ascertain whether those who are "hot" are more likely to have fervent supporters than those who are "non-hot."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline gardner


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:37 pm

Posts: 46

Location: Ohio USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:28 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Catnip wrote:
Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?


.


well, I would like to believe that their absence is related to the recent release of the English translation of the Massei report, rather than the summer holidays. I'm hoping they rather feel they have had the rug pulled out from under them. They may be hesitant to post here for fear of being directed to the report, then where will their drivel fall?

I too am interested whether this murder is an isolated incident, or a tip of the ice berg.

My Mother was a narcissist, so this personality defect is of great interest to me. She had other mental health issues too, and eventually turned out to be an evil person. I only know a well developed narcissistic personality, not a developing narcissist. I can imagine my Mothers' problems started very early in her life. Her father was devoted to her, to the extreme.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:

I have always thought that, at bottom, it is because they have not cultivated the art of respectful discussion with others and instead have learned to get attention by being disruptive when they encounter that kind of thing. It makes them angry and uncomfortable because they can't "shine" in a collegial setting. So they shout, insult, twist arguments, break their toys, etc. Anything to get attention. "Look at me" is what they are saying. So trolling is a behavior that narcissists are attracted to. Some are even addicted to it.


I'll be damned if Amanda's name didn't immediately come to mind when I read this.


Very astute, my Lord. In fact, it seems to me that this describes AK and many of her more fervent admirers. The level of narcissism on display is as high as the capacity for honest give and take discussion is low.

Speaking of terminal narcissism, as you know I stay away from cess pits (doctor's orders), but Mr. Skeptical Bystander mentioned last night that your Mrs. Lady Mary H was getting quite the thrashing over at cess pit number 1 (the West Seattle Herald blog). She got her bell rung, apparently. So sorry to hear it. Such a gentle soul she is, and so devoted.

_________________
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 Aug 20, 2010 3:33 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

gardner wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?


.


well, I would like to believe that their absence is related to the recent release of the English translation of the Massei report, rather than the summer holidays. I'm hoping they rather feel they have had the rug pulled out from under them. They may be hesitant to post here for fear of being directed to the report, then where will their drivel fall?

I too am interested whether this murder is an isolated incident, or a tip of the ice berg.

My Mother was a narcissist, so this personality defect is of great interest to me. She had other mental health issues too, and eventually turned out to be an evil person. I only know a well developed narcissistic personality, not a developing narcissist. I can imagine my Mothers' problems started very early in her life. Her father was devoted to her, to the extreme.


Narcissists are among the most difficult people to live with; it must have been very difficult to be the child of one. Speaking of which, have you read The Drama of the Gifted Child? It is one of the most insightful essays on narcissism I have ever read. I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.

As for the trolls and the report, I think its release has rattled some cages.

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

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
. It would be very helpful to compile a list if people could data dump them here?


Interesting list here with pics of the 10.
(Not all young and attractive, but most are/were)
Especially Diane Downs who in her ('Counsellor arranged, Vestial Virgin, Look I am Innocent') outfit is almost an Amanda look a like (after Amanda's Jailhouse rejuvenation and renovation of hair *and* courtroom demeanor)
Aren't the coached downcast eyes and demure expression familiar ??
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-deadliest ... illers.php


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


Last edited by stint7 on Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
Popper wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


Mental insanity is not what you want to have in Italy. AK and RS did not seem to be mentally insane and never claimed that.



Hi Pop

Enjoyed the background information and examples you provided.

With the caveat that I am neither qualified to nor now attempt to speak for Machine......

That said, I think I read his post differently, and I placed much more emphasis on his intent with the use of *become*.
Rather than suggesting upcoming possible insanity might be beneficial by reducing sentence, or early release, I read it as an additional *burden* that they rightfully might receive because of what they did to Meredith.

A mental picture of AK and/or RS sitting in a straight jacket does not incite glee in me, in contrast, I am sad also for them.
But it seems definitely more fitting than eating crab and chocolate cakes, singing (with uplifted hands), playing guitars and doing yoga (no cartwheels ? that Curt says were your preferred stretching stress relievers?)
Any additional hardships they must suffer still pales in contrast to the finality of the hardship they horribly inflicted on Meredith and her loved ones.

Finally, from the fragmentary information from Vanessa and others, the fate Machine cites as a future possibility seems to be even more accurately prognosticated as a a probability



Yes, I think your comment is very appropriate, although Machine said "more mentally unstable", which I read "more that they are now". Anyway, forgetting the interpretations, let us assume they become "mentally insane" in prison. An insane person cannot stay in prison in Italy. By officio or by lawyers' request a judge will have to decide if they are actually insane, with the help of doctors' assessment. Insane means "really insane" not "strange". A positive opinion will send them to the same criminal psychiatric hospital. The judge will have to make sure security is enough to avoid risk of escape. Life for them in the hospital will be better than in prison. Theoretically once doctors say they are cured they go back to normal prison. Once their penalty has ended they are released. If they continue to be insane they go to another mental hospital (non criminal one), which for AK - if freedom is final and non conditional - means she may even go back to the US - under family supervision - to another mental institution.

What I wanted to observe in general is that - at least in Italy - real or faked mental illness does not make harder and longer the penalty and the experience in jail. Normally it is exactly the opposite. What may very well happen is that some judge one day will decide that - because they were partially insane - penalty is reduced or freedom is given before the time is out and all gets delegated to some doctors. And doctors release more often than not. [Remember the case of the Japanese cannibal in France who murdererd and ate that Dutch girl? He was sent back to Japan and never spent a day in mental hospital there, he even made money out of the whole experience].

If Amanda had confessed to the crime, apologized to MK's parents, chosen fast track, denounced other killers, claimed partial insanity for whatever reason, claimed of having acted under the use of drugs and alcohol, claimed to have killed MK by mistake etc. she would now be looking at 10-15 max and be out in 6-8, which means in 3-5 from now. In the US with most of these excuses she would have got death penalty or life no parole anyway.

If a little insane they are (very possible, probably not for hospital) they are likely to be cured by the time they exit prison. This was the case of Furlan, who now seems absolutely regretful of what he did 30 years ago, or Doretta Graneris, the 18 year old killer of her whole family (back in 1975) who graduated in architecture in prison during her life sentence (she was given parole in 2000).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Thanks, Popper

Your disclosures clarifying the Italian Prison Procedures were most informative and helpful for me
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


Speaking of terminal narcissism, as you know I stay away from cess pits (doctor's orders), but Mr. Skeptical Bystander mentioned last night that your Mrs. Lady Mary H was getting quite the thrashing over at cess pit number 1 (the West Seattle Herald blog). She got her bell rung, apparently. So sorry to hear it. Such a gentle soul she is, and so devoted.


^^^^^^^^^^^
If you would indulge me to copy here one sent to Mary that may help us all


Guest wrote 1 day 26 min ago
Suggestion for Mary's Responders

When MaryH typically calls an obvious well known by everyone (including her) fact to be untrue, and she asks for documentation.

Understand she uses this tactic everywhere

She then totally ignores the documentation you respectfully, and with much personal effort provided for her.
She always just, goes on another endless talk a thon about another unrelated part of her talking point FOA script

The ultimate insult to you is that the next time you are reading somewhere something about the case

Presto, .....Mary pops up......calling the same fact false, and asking some other *sucker* to provide documentation

Mary, Please restrict yourself to fanatical FAOKer Forums where people just feed off each other's requrgitations of the PR Firm's provided vomit inducing list of tired 'talking points
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


Speaking of terminal narcissism, as you know I stay away from cess pits (doctor's orders), but Mr. Skeptical Bystander mentioned last night that your Mrs. Lady Mary H was getting quite the thrashing over at cess pit number 1 (the West Seattle Herald blog). She got her bell rung, apparently. So sorry to hear it. Such a gentle soul she is, and so devoted.


^^^^^^^^^^^
If you would indulge me to copy here one sent to Mary that may help us all


Guest wrote 1 day 26 min ago
Suggestion for Mary's Responders

When MaryH typically calls an obvious well known by everyone (including her) fact to be untrue, and she asks for documentation.

Understand she uses this tactic everywhere

She then totally ignores the documentation you respectfully, and with much personal effort provided for her.
She always just, goes on another endless talk a thon about another unrelated part of her talking point FOA script

The ultimate insult to you is that the next time you are reading somewhere something about the case

Presto, .....Mary pops up......calling the same fact false, and asking some other *sucker* to provide documentation

Mary, Please restrict yourself to fanatical FAOKer Forums where people just feed off each other's requrgitations of the PR Firm's provided vomit inducing list of tired 'talking points


Unfortunately, listening/taking in what others say or write is not a well-developed trait in narcissists.

_________________
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:15 pm   Post subject: Another one for "The List"   

stint7 wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
. It would be very helpful to compile a list if people could data dump them here?


Interesting list here with pics of the 10.
(Not all young and attractive, but most are/were)
Especially Diane Downs who in her ('Counsellor arranged, Vestial Virgin, Look I am Innocent') outfit is almost an Amanda look a like (after Amanda's Jailhouse rejuvenation and renovation of hair *and* courtroom demeanor)
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-deadliest ... illers.php


Another one for the list : RACHELLE A. WATERMAN, just sixteen years old--an honor student, athlete, gifted singer, AND murderer... Also, a journal writer...her online blog was Rachelle's undoing...



from

"Anchorage Daily News"


"Sixteen-year-old Rachelle A. Waterman would appear to be any parent's ideal child -- an honor student, an athlete, a gifted singer. But for months, she planned her mother's murder with two of her former boyfriends who are eight years her senior, according to Alaska State Troopers.

Two weekends ago on Southeast's Prince of Wales Island, their plot ended in the death of 48-year-old Lauri Waterman of Craig, according to court papers.

Lauri Waterman, a teacher's aide and community activist, was killed by one of the men using a blunt object, the papers say. Her body was burned when the men torched her van off a remote logging road.

Rachelle Waterman and the two 24-year-olds, Brian James Radel of Thorne Bay and Jason Allen Arrant of Klawock, have been charged with first-degree murder.

...

The weekend her mother was killed, Nov. 13 and 14, Rachelle Waterman and her team were playing in Anchorage at the Class 3A state volleyball tournament.

The timing of the tournament played a key role in the crime, troopers said. Carl Waterman also was out of town that weekend. The plotters felt the time was right to abduct Lauri Waterman, Sgt. Randy McPherron of the Alaska Bureau of Investigation said ...

"This had been plotted for months," McPherron said. "She made the initial solicitation for the murder (to Arrant) sometime in the summer. After she enlisted the aid of Arrant, Arrant talked to Radel."

You read that right. A 16-year-old girl had two 24-year-old guys carrying out the murder of her mother. " n-((
Top Profile 

Offline DLW


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:41 pm

Posts: 623

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

‘Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make films’
Perugia, 20, August 20 (Adnkronos) - Actor Colin Firth would be thinking of London, with director Michael Winterbottom to make a film about the murder of British student Meredith Kercher, killed in Perugia on November 1, 2007. And 'the''Courier Umbria''to report the news in an article. The actor, reported the newspaper, he spent several days in Perugia with the director and Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of''Angel Face. The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox''. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer.''

Saw this in the Il Tempo.it. If they made a film, they couldn’t find a book better than Barbie Nadeau’s. I’d use the Motivation report also. Although I’m skeptical of anything they have put on the airways.


Last edited by DLW on Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:31 pm   Post subject: Trolls on Vacation   

Catnip wrote:
Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?


I think you're right about that, Catnip.


This is actually one of a series of "Troll Trouble" books.

Another title: Trolls, Go Home!
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

GREAT addition to SA's list, 411

Hope you do not object to me adding two pics of Rachelle (the Mother Murderess) without your prior permission


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


Last edited by stint7 on Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline gardner


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:37 pm

Posts: 46

Location: Ohio USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:35 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
gardner wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?


.


well, I would like to believe that their absence is related to the recent release of the English translation of the Massei report, rather than the summer holidays. I'm hoping they rather feel they have had the rug pulled out from under them. They may be hesitant to post here for fear of being directed to the report, then where will their drivel fall?

I too am interested whether this murder is an isolated incident, or a tip of the ice berg.

My Mother was a narcissist, so this personality defect is of great interest to me. She had other mental health issues too, and eventually turned out to be an evil person. I only know a well developed narcissistic personality, not a developing narcissist. I can imagine my Mothers' problems started very early in her life. Her father was devoted to her, to the extreme.


Narcissists are among the most difficult people to live with; it must have been very difficult to be the child of one. Speaking of which, have you read The Drama of the Gifted Child? It is one of the most insightful essays on narcissism I have ever read. I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.

As for the trolls and the report, I think its release has rattled some cages.


LOL, that would be a Yes. My Mother was an only child; she in turn had 3 daughters. I am the youngest. My sisters and I have benefited greatly from psychological counseling to overcome this deficit in our upbringing. We are close and keep a keen eye on each other, to detect any behaviors that may be similar to our Mothers'.

Thank you for the suggested reading. No, I have not read this book.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
Thanks, Popper

Your disclosures clarifying the Italian Prison Procedures were most informative and helpful for me



One final observation: in Italy most criminal lawyers will tell you that it is better to shut the client up to avoid incrimination and because there is a strong "in dubio pro reo" attitude ("when in doubt, for [favour] the accused"). However, this strategy (you may see it in Sollecito) is often not compatible with claiming "mitigating factors" which are contemplated in the criminal code - such as insanity, drunken state, use of drugs, being deaf or dumb or under age. To claim some of these you need to confess the crime. If you say you did not commit the crime as you were not there how can you say "I wish to have a discount as I was insane or drunk". The same applies for mitigating factors not contemplated in the code (eg regret shown partially by RG not by AK and RS as they did not admit).

The court may still consider some of these even if not claimed because are objective or they become evident in trial (age, record and even insanity or drug use etc.).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

DLW wrote:
‘Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make films’
Perugia, 20, August 20 (Adnkronos) - Actor Colin Firth would be thinking of London, with director Michael Winterbottom to make a film about the murder of British student Meredith Kercher, killed in Perugia on November 1, 2007. And 'the''Courier Umbria''to report the news in an article. The actor, reported the newspaper, he spent several days in Perugia with the director and Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of''Angel Face. The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox''. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer.''

Saw this in the Il Tempo.it. If they made a film, they couldn’t find a book better than Barbie Nadeau’s. I’d use the Motivation report also. Although I’m skeptical of anything they have put on the airways.


La Nazione has just published an article about the proposed film:

Perugia, 20 August 2010 - British actor Colin Firth would be thinking of making a film about the murder of Meredith Kercher, the student killed in Perugia November 1, 2007. To bring the news Courier Umbria. Firth, according to the article, he spent several days in Perugia with director Michael Winterbottom and the two would be achieved by journalist Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of "Angel Face. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer", under which should be made the screenplay.

The three have made a series of visits and meetings on the story and its protagonists. The idea of the film - so far only hinted at, is specified - Firth would play a British detective investigating the case and finds its truth never stop chasing a track before.

The idea of the film comes when a few weeks, beginning the appeal process to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, the sweethearts of First Instance sentenced respectively to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/ ... dith.shtml
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

gardner wrote:
RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


I hate to rain on anyone's parade (if that is the correct americanism) but I do feel this is a little bit of a double bind for our "trolls". They are damned if they do and damned if they don't because there was earlier criticism for the lack of thanks for the translation. I personally am pleased that these thanks were proffered. I see no reason to take umbrage at a short post, really.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:08 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
gardner wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Missing trolls may indicate something.
Summer holidays, maybe?


.


well, I would like to believe that their absence is related to the recent release of the English translation of the Massei report, rather than the summer holidays. I'm hoping they rather feel they have had the rug pulled out from under them. They may be hesitant to post here for fear of being directed to the report, then where will their drivel fall?

I too am interested whether this murder is an isolated incident, or a tip of the ice berg.

My Mother was a narcissist, so this personality defect is of great interest to me. She had other mental health issues too, and eventually turned out to be an evil person. I only know a well developed narcissistic personality, not a developing narcissist. I can imagine my Mothers' problems started very early in her life. Her father was devoted to her, to the extreme.


Narcissists are among the most difficult people to live with; it must have been very difficult to be the child of one. Speaking of which, have you read The Drama of the Gifted Child? It is one of the most insightful essays on narcissism I have ever read. I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.

As for the trolls and the report, I think its release has rattled some cages.


I've often had to think of that in fact when looking at the relationship of Edda and Amanda - honor student, 'innocent' and now a model prisoner. It's hard to imagine that Amanda will be able to cut this symbiotic bond and reject her mom's need for her to be a good child.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline norbertc


User avatar


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:16 am

Posts: 307

Location: France

Highscores: 2

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:10 pm   Post subject: Massei Report Translation   

Many thanks to those who contributed their hard work on this translation!

Am just back from a trip and spotted its availability. My first reaction is one of sadness - that I now understand why some of the jurors cried after the trial. What a waste of human life!

I hope that one of the killers will finally tell the truth. Shame on the FOA for encouraging the endless cover-up. As much as I may hate Sollecito and Knox for their deed, they are also - to a degree - a product of their environment. Surely it would be in their own interest to clear the air. Despite the sexual attack that contributed to a heavy sentence, there is no evidence that the murder was premeditated.

Perhaps it would be useful for Ms. Knox to be offered a printed copy of the translation? Not for pleasant bedtime reading, but as a wake-up call?

Norbert
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Machine wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make films’
Perugia, 20, August 20 (Adnkronos) - Actor Colin Firth would be thinking of London, with director Michael Winterbottom to make a film about the murder of British student Meredith Kercher, killed in Perugia on November 1, 2007. And 'the''Courier Umbria''to report the news in an article. The actor, reported the newspaper, he spent several days in Perugia with the director and Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of''Angel Face. The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox''. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer.''

Saw this in the Il Tempo.it. If they made a film, they couldn’t find a book better than Barbie Nadeau’s. I’d use the Motivation report also. Although I’m skeptical of anything they have put on the airways.


La Nazione has just published an article about the proposed film:

Perugia, 20 August 2010 - British actor Colin Firth would be thinking of making a film about the murder of Meredith Kercher, the student killed in Perugia November 1, 2007. To bring the news Courier Umbria. Firth, according to the article, he spent several days in Perugia with director Michael Winterbottom and the two would be achieved by journalist Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of "Angel Face. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer", under which should be made the screenplay.

The three have made a series of visits and meetings on the story and its protagonists. The idea of the film - so far only hinted at, is specified - Firth would play a British detective investigating the case and finds its truth never stop chasing a track before.

The idea of the film comes when a few weeks, beginning the appeal process to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, the sweethearts of First Instance sentenced respectively to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/ ... dith.shtml


Okay, at least these are fairly good filmmakers. But what if the Kercher family objected against a movie about the murder of Meredith, would it still be possible? I doubt it somehow.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Ava wrote:
The Machine wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make films’
Perugia, 20, August 20 (Adnkronos) - Actor Colin Firth would be thinking of London, with director Michael Winterbottom to make a film about the murder of British student Meredith Kercher, killed in Perugia on November 1, 2007. And 'the''Courier Umbria''to report the news in an article. The actor, reported the newspaper, he spent several days in Perugia with the director and Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of''Angel Face. The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox''. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer.''

Saw this in the Il Tempo.it. If they made a film, they couldn’t find a book better than Barbie Nadeau’s. I’d use the Motivation report also. Although I’m skeptical of anything they have put on the airways.


La Nazione has just published an article about the proposed film:

Perugia, 20 August 2010 - British actor Colin Firth would be thinking of making a film about the murder of Meredith Kercher, the student killed in Perugia November 1, 2007. To bring the news Courier Umbria. Firth, according to the article, he spent several days in Perugia with director Michael Winterbottom and the two would be achieved by journalist Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of "Angel Face. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer", under which should be made the screenplay.

The three have made a series of visits and meetings on the story and its protagonists. The idea of the film - so far only hinted at, is specified - Firth would play a British detective investigating the case and finds its truth never stop chasing a track before.

The idea of the film comes when a few weeks, beginning the appeal process to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, the sweethearts of First Instance sentenced respectively to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/ ... dith.shtml


Okay, at least these are fairly good filmmakers. But what if the Kercher family objected against a movie about the murder of Meredith, would it still be possible? I doubt it somehow.



Is it just me that finds the notion of this film utterly distasteful? What is the need for it? Haven't the Kerchers suffered enough?

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
gardner wrote:
RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


I hate to rain on anyone's parade (if that is the correct americanism) but I do feel this is a little bit of a double bind for our "trolls". They are damned if they do and damned if they don't because there was earlier criticism for the lack of thanks for the translation. I personally am pleased that these thanks were proffered. I see no reason to take umbrage at a short post, really.


My father always told me that praise should be accepted graciously :)

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
gardner wrote:
RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


I hate to rain on anyone's parade (if that is the correct americanism) but I do feel this is a little bit of a double bind for our "trolls". They are damned if they do and damned if they don't because there was earlier criticism for the lack of thanks for the translation. I personally am pleased that these thanks were proffered. I see no reason to take umbrage at a short post, really.


But you have completely missed the irony of RoseMontag's little thank you.

RM's sarcastic thank you is, unfortunately, a claws-out bat-at-the-Cat in defense of Bruce Fisher's summary.

You can bet that there will be no thank you when the full translation that RM is waiting for appears.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Fiona wrote:
gardner wrote:
RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


I hate to rain on anyone's parade (if that is the correct americanism) but I do feel this is a little bit of a double bind for our "trolls". They are damned if they do and damned if they don't because there was earlier criticism for the lack of thanks for the translation. I personally am pleased that these thanks were proffered. I see no reason to take umbrage at a short post, really.


But you have completely missed the irony of RoseMontag's little thank you.

RM's sarcastic thank you is, unfortunately, a claws-out bat-at-the-Cat in defense of Bruce Fisher's summary.

You can bet that there will be no thank you when the full translation that RM is waiting for appears.


Blimey...really? That went right over my head too FBN!!! I can't keep up... :(

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
Blimey...really? That went right over my head too FBN!!! I can't keep up... :(


Got to be subtle these days, Bard, because: the Gong awaits...
Top Profile 

Offline christiana


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:03 pm

Posts: 80

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
Fiona wrote:
gardner wrote:
RoseMontag wrote:
Pardon the intrusion, just wanted to leave a quick thank you to Catnip for that summary. First I have seen on this particular document, look forward to the translation.


oh gosh, I thought you said you were sorry for the intrusion, but I see that is not true. I was going to say that I was sorry too. :)

A PM to Catnip would have prevented this intrusion.


And Stint7, I see no praise for Catnips extensive efforts by RM, only a quick thank you.

I must say that I have truely enjoyed the past weeks readings on this forum, without the trolls


I hate to rain on anyone's parade (if that is the correct americanism) but I do feel this is a little bit of a double bind for our "trolls". They are damned if they do and damned if they don't because there was earlier criticism for the lack of thanks for the translation. I personally am pleased that these thanks were proffered. I see no reason to take umbrage at a short post, really.


But you have completely missed the irony of RoseMontag's little thank you.

RM's sarcastic thank you is, unfortunately, a claws-out bat-at-the-Cat in defense of Bruce Fisher's summary.

You can bet that there will be no thank you when the full translation that RM is waiting for appears.


Rose has been very vocal about her disagreement with the theory and reasoning of the motivations, however, she has been quite complimentary of the efforts which have gone into the translated Massei Motivations and for any other translation efforts (summary or otherwise) which have been acquired from posters here. I believe she is sincere when she gives her thanks to Catnip.
Top Profile 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

christiana wrote:
Rose has been very vocal about her disagreement with the theory and reasoning of the motivations, however, she has been quite complimentary of the efforts which have gone into the translated Massei Motivations and for any other translation efforts (summary or otherwise) which have been acquired from posters here. I believe she is sincere when she gives her thanks to Catnip.


If so, then RM will surely be back shortly to clarify and reiterate...
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
Ava wrote:
The Machine wrote:
DLW wrote:
‘Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make films’
Perugia, 20, August 20 (Adnkronos) - Actor Colin Firth would be thinking of London, with director Michael Winterbottom to make a film about the murder of British student Meredith Kercher, killed in Perugia on November 1, 2007. And 'the''Courier Umbria''to report the news in an article. The actor, reported the newspaper, he spent several days in Perugia with the director and Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of''Angel Face. The True Story of Student Killer Amanda Knox''. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer.''

Saw this in the Il Tempo.it. If they made a film, they couldn’t find a book better than Barbie Nadeau’s. I’d use the Motivation report also. Although I’m skeptical of anything they have put on the airways.


La Nazione has just published an article about the proposed film:

Perugia, 20 August 2010 - British actor Colin Firth would be thinking of making a film about the murder of Meredith Kercher, the student killed in Perugia November 1, 2007. To bring the news Courier Umbria. Firth, according to the article, he spent several days in Perugia with director Michael Winterbottom and the two would be achieved by journalist Barbie Nadeau Latz, author of "Angel Face. The True Story of Student Amanda Knox Killer", under which should be made the screenplay.

The three have made a series of visits and meetings on the story and its protagonists. The idea of the film - so far only hinted at, is specified - Firth would play a British detective investigating the case and finds its truth never stop chasing a track before.

The idea of the film comes when a few weeks, beginning the appeal process to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, the sweethearts of First Instance sentenced respectively to 26 and 25 years in prison for the murder of Meredith.

http://www.lanazione.it/umbria/cronaca/ ... dith.shtml


Okay, at least these are fairly good filmmakers. But what if the Kercher family objected against a movie about the murder of Meredith, would it still be possible? I doubt it somehow.



Is it just me that finds the notion of this film utterly distasteful? What is the need for it? Haven't the Kerchers suffered enough?



Since with film it's almost always about money and/or fame, yes, you are probably right.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fly by Night wrote:

But you have completely missed the irony of RoseMontag's little thank you.

RM's sarcastic thank you is, unfortunately, a claws-out bat-at-the-Cat in defense of Bruce Fisher's summary.

You can bet that there will be no thank you when the full translation that RM is waiting for appears.


You may well be right. I think Catnip is due the thanks however they were intended: I do not think there is any comparison between his effort and BF's "summary".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

christiana wrote:
Rose has been very vocal about her disagreement with the theory and reasoning of the motivations, however, she has been quite complimentary of the efforts which have gone into the translated Massei Motivations and for any other translation efforts (summary or otherwise) which have been acquired from posters here. I believe she is sincere when she gives her thanks to Catnip.


Rose Montague's open-mindedness about the case was quite insincere. She also misled posters on here about joining PMF months before Bruce Fisher and London John when in fact they all joined within days of each other.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Timing is everything. Rose's pathetic * pardon the intrusion* came RIGHT after Catnip's *thanks to Rose Montag*. She might as well have screamed from the rooftops * THAT'S ME, THAT'S ME!!!!!!!!! I shall repeat Rose's favourite phrase, which she uses ad nauseum.... *THAR SHE BLOWS, THAR SHE BLOWS*!!!!!!!!

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

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fly by Night wrote:
christiana wrote:
Rose has been very vocal about her disagreement with the theory and reasoning of the motivations, however, she has been quite complimentary of the efforts which have gone into the translated Massei Motivations and for any other translation efforts (summary or otherwise) which have been acquired from posters here. I believe she is sincere when she gives her thanks to Catnip.


If so, then RM will surely be back shortly to clarify and reiterate...



Heaven forbid! I am quite happy to see her remain where she generally is these days: obsessively watching this board, round the clock almost, but refraining from wasting people's time with talking points fabricated by Bruce Fisher.

And as for whether or not her thanks are sincere in this case or not, who cares? I'm sorry to be so blunt, but seriously.... The expresison of sincere thanks can be made in a dozen quiet ways.

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

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I wanted to meditate for a moment about the significance of the duvet, and Amanda's supposed instinct of "female solidarity."

She'd just finished either directing or assisting in removing more of Meredith's clothing, and moving her dead body in an effort to stage a more explicit rape scene.
Maybe it's just me, but that really doesn't shout out "female solidarity."

What do I think was the purpose of the duvet?
I think they had managed to make Meredith "icky" and she didn't want to have it in her face.
I think squeamish is closer to the mark than compassionate.
Indeed, in this case it would be as likely to have been Raphael as Amanda.
(Maybe he'd never considered what the aftermath of something like this would be; maybe his cleanliness fetish was triggered.)
And maybe it involved a little shame and denial, like a toddler who hides a broken toy, since if you don't see it it never happened.
None of these involve any feeling for their victim, only an attempt to soothe their own discomfort.

And, further, I think it was part of the planned discovery "surprise."
First the locked door, then the unwrapping.
Not that there would be a real practical gain from the extra half minute before discovery, but the emotional kick of controlling the unfolding of the event.
I think there was a sadistic desire to create a painful impression on the person they set up to unwrap their package.
It was supposed to just be Filomena, forcing the door and lifting the duvet.
I wonder what she ever did to annoy them.
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 Aug 20, 2010 7:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
I wanted to meditate for a moment about the significance of the duvet, and Amanda's supposed instinct of "female solidarity."

She'd just finished either directing or assisting in removing more of Meredith's clothing, and moving her dead body in an effort to stage a more explicit rape scene.
Maybe it's just me, but that really doesn't shout out "female solidarity."

What do I think was the purpose of the duvet?
I think they had managed to make Meredith "icky" and she didn't want to have it in her face.
I think squeamish is closer to the mark than compassionate.
Indeed, in this case it would be as likely to have been Raphael as Amanda.
(Maybe he'd never considered what the aftermath of something like this would be; maybe his cleanliness fetish was triggered.)
And maybe it involved a little shame and denial, like a toddler who hides a broken toy, since if you don't see it it never happened.
None of these involve any feeling for their victim, only an attempt to soothe their own discomfort.

And, further, I think it was part of the planned discovery "surprise."
First the locked door, then the unwrapping.
Not that there would be a real practical gain from the extra half minute before discovery, but the emotional kick of controlling the unfolding of the event.
I think there was a sadistic desire to create a painful impression on the person they set up to unwrap their package.
It was supposed to just be Filomena, forcing the door and lifting the duvet.
I wonder what she ever did to annoy them.


I have always liked Miss Represented's interpretation of the covering of the body at Lies Our Mothers Told Us.

Quote:
As with the burglary, the staging of the rape implies a prior relationship between the defendants and the victim, this is further supported by the fact that Meredith was found partially clothed and not fully naked. Research and analysis of previous cases indicates that offenders who stage a crime scene to look like rape are extremely unlikely to leave the victim completely naked and are much more likely to cover the body than offenders who have committed violent sexual homicides. This is because the person/s staging the crime scene often knows the victim personally. This was not a random attack, whoever covered Meredith’s body didn’t want to look at her (or couldn’t).


Miss Represented

And then this paragraph.

Quote:
Evidence about catathymic killers often suggests deep inner turmoil which is more often than not sexual in nature. These killers feel inadequate in every way and possess, hurt and control their victims to appease their feelings of inadequacy. Most of them feel equal pangs of guilt and excitement. This could explain why Meredith’s body was covered, why Amanda was acting strangely calm in the police station but also at other times excited. Amanda was deeply stressed, excited, scared and conflicted. Note that Amanda could not look at images of Meredith’s body in court, yet Raffaele was able to do so. I don’t believe this was an act, Amanda covered Meredith, she didn’t want to look at her then and she doesn’t want to look at her now.


Miss Represented
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Messrs Alibi, Lye and Bluster:

It is with regret that I inform you that his Lordship has recently suffered a series of misfortunes. The result has been a severe depletion of his resources. This week the auctioning off of his ancestral home was only narrowly avoided by the timely sale of his overseas holdings.

I can assure you that his Lordship has every intention of fulfilling his obligations to his remaining creditors and, more to the point, of settling his account with your firm.

If you would kindly exercise more patience for an additional period of time, I am confident that the matter will be resolved to your satisfaction.

In fact, only last week his Lordship, after receiving a most promising tip at the Ascot, placed a sizable wager on a horse named “Lucky Seven” with the expressed purpose of raising funds for the repayment of the aforementioned bill. Unfortunately, what his Lordship unreservedly felt to be a sure thing proved not to be so sure after all. Be that as it may, he has every confidence that he will soon cease to be down on his luck.

Apropos of your services rendered in Seattle, Washington, his Lordship extends his gratitude to you and regrets any inconvenience suffered on his behalf.

So excited and eager was he to meet his betrothed, Ms Mary H, that he journeyed at once to her residence. However, after meeting his bride-to-be, his Lordship found her not to be to his liking and quite a bit more advanced in years than her photograph and agents acting on her behalf had led him to believe. Furthermore, she was also found to be lacking in sufficient assets that could be conveniently and speedily liquidated in order to help restore his family’s fortune and good name.

As events would have it, upon leaving the home of Ms Mary H, his Lordship was blocked at the doorway by an inflamed gentleman named Christopher Mellas, who was said to be acting on behalf of Mary H. A confusing and surprisingly loud exchange took place, which left his Lordship thoroughly shaken and perplexed. Mr Mellas was adamant in his insistence that his Lordship honour his obligations to Mary H. According to Mr Mellas, it was furthermore understood that, as part of the pre-nuptial agreement, there was to be a purchase of letters purported to be from his step-daughter, Miss Amanda Knox, who, he was given to understand, was presently attending an exclusive all-girls boarding school in Perugia, Italy. Mr Mellas assured him that his step-daughter was a cause célèbre and that the letters were therefore a prized commodity.

When his Lordship failed to show any inclination to accede to Mr Mellas' demands, he was repeatedly asked by Mr Mellas whether he would like to have his face “rearranged.” His Lordship assured him that he did not, stating for the record that he most definitely preferred his face the way it was. His Lordship then relates that at this point Mr Mellas was joined by a Mrs Janet Huff, who, in support of Mr Mellas, proceeded to call his Lordship a “moron” no less than five or six times.

Fortunately, a local attorney known as Ms Anne Bremner then arrived in her motor-car and was able to calm all concerned. Ms Bremner, who was in a most amiable mood, even offered a lift to his Lordship as soon as she had finished her last “drinky-poo” as she termed it.

His Lordship has asked me if you would kindly offer your advice on the matter of possible litigation and whether there are sufficient grounds for a successful lawsuit against Mary H and her associates based on the circumstances described above.

Your most ob’nt ser’t,


William Shuttlecock, Esq,
Secretary to his Lordship, Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey
Howick Hall, Howick
Northumberland


Quote:
SomeAlibi wrote:

25 & 26 Stretch Chambers
Round the back of the Barista Stand
Store Street
London
WC1E 1AK


Dear Lord Grey,

Re: Project Tinkerbell

Thank you for your letter of the 12th inst., in which you instructed Alibi, Lye and Bluster in the matter of your impending nuptials to Ms Mary H aka Project Tinkerbell. May I speak for the entire staff here when I say that your lordship is a pioneer in matters amatory and you have left us all quite speechless in our regard of your situation.

In re the same, I am grateful for your lordship's confirmation that you had not sampled the No.2 Mushroom Tea consignment in which we had the honour of defending Grey Enterprises against the joint action by HM Revenue & Customs and The Southampton Happy Daze Treatment Centre. If I may be so indelicate, may I take this opportunity to remind your Lordship that your account with us is due settlement in regards the expense claims for i) secure transporation provided to those members of HMRC who inspected the consignment at close quarters and ii) the bill for professional services from Dr Sigmund Mocio who convinced Officer Trepanner that he was indeed not a Plum-Headed Parakeet and should under no circumstances attempt to fly down from the shipping container upon which he was perched.

At the same time, I regret to inform you that matters regarding the successful negotiation of a pre-nuptial agreement with Ms H. in respect of your lordship's estates and the 1973 Mater's Settlement For Dinkums Will Trust have proved somewhat vexing;

I had, of course, travelled, at your instruction, to Seattle to secure the same and met with the future Lady Gray and her representative. However I am sorry to relate that the meeting seemed marred by some social misunderstandings and perhaps a lack of mutual terminology. Those representing Ms Gray seemed to take great exception to the fact that I declined to join them in a celebratory "Three Wheel Blow-Out" cocktail on the basis that I had only just had breakfast and that, regardless, the fumes were condensing on my reading glasses making the working environment quite uncondusive. The attorney offered me an alternative which in their quaint vernacular I believe she called a "Stuck Up Limey Bastard" but it was a little hard to hear her as she had her forehead on her desk and was talking directly into a stack of envelopes which she appeared to be making ready for the affixing of postage stamps by the liberal application of a small pool of spittle.

I must say, your dearly intended was quite delightful and read through the terms of the "prenup" most attentively, all the while entertaining us with the utterance of a series of bon mots which I believe are distinctly local. When I questioned her on their meaning, she enquired if I had ever been to Kismiaz but I informed her that I was Church of England and sadly unversed in the Jewish festivals.

At this point, her attorney muttered "Breakfast?" in a bemused voice but before I realised that she was merely catching up with my previous statement I responded that I had said that I had had my breakfast, had she? Then suspecting my mistake, I begged her pardon if I had had mistaken what she had said to have had a conotation than it had not had, or that she had meant it to have had imparted unless of course I was in error and she had had intended it through what she had stated in the manner she had. She enquired if "the three of you are trying to ring my bell?" to which I responded I was a fan of campanology, certainly, to which she replied that she could tell by the way I walked. I merely relay it as it happened...

Terms were proceeding quite well until we came to the conditions that your Lordship felt might ease the future Lady Grey's passage into English society. I had showed her the pictures of the estate stables and said that she would be instructed in the equestrian arts but on seeing the riding instructors' picture, Ms H. pointed at their jodhpurs and said "who are these jackboot, tight trousered somovbitches?". The ensuing explanation took some time as did reducing the temperature when Ms H. mistook a reference to your Lordship's fondness "for all matters equine" for something related to a certain oriental book of flexible education.

Unfortunately our last misunderstanding may take even longer to resolve. Ms H. asked what honourific might be due to her following your marriage. She said she had expressed her excitement at marrying the "Duke of Earl" to her friends at the weekly branch meeting of "Tourette Patriots for Freedom". I explained, of course, that your Lordship's position was not that of a Dukedom but nevertheless your Lordship was indeed an Earl and therefore a Lord which should make it clear, inter alia, that you were not the "Duke of Earl". She seemed to follow this explanation well enough, counting on her fingers with her tongue wedged charmingly between her dainty teeth but it must be said that both of us were somewhat distracted by her attorney singing the lyrics to the eponymous ditty by Gene Chandler while trying to insert a handful of ice-cubes into the clock on her mantlepiece.

Ms H. then asked if this meant whether she would be a Lady. I responded that indeed it did but only once the marriage was complete and that people might also refer to her as a Countness but not to her face. It was at this point, I am sorry to relate that she vaulted the desk and punched me squarely in the face.

In the circumstances I am sure that you will appreciate that I await your Lordship's instruction before taking matters further.


Yours sincerely

S.Alibi


p.s. I should also relay the Orient Express is off for the honeymoon. She informs me that she "don't do no railroads".


Last edited by Earl Grey on Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.
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 Aug 20, 2010 8:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
BTW the big discounts good conduct gives you in Italian jail is another important reason why [subject of previous discussion] AK/RS run negligible risks of abuse, violence etc. in prison. They are in fact applicable to all prisoners even the most dangerous limiting bad episodes in prison.


I didn't want to make the risks appear worse than they actually are. Generally US prisons (and Canadian ones too) have serious issues with gang violence, overcrowding, untrained staff, untreated mental illness and STDs, and so on.

Yet, in prison and outside, sex offenders are always at the bottom of the heap, so to speak. I'd have to see the evidence this is not true in Italy before I'd agree with it. This doesn't necessarily mean physical violence. There are all kinds of ways to ostracise someone without physically harming them.

Furthermore, as I've suggested before, I think that Knox will have to register as a sex offender upon her return to North America. What she did is no different than what Karla Homolka did and in many ways it's worse since there was no evidence that she was abused as Homolka had claimed.
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 Aug 20, 2010 8:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
What do I think was the purpose of the duvet?
I think they had managed to make Meredith "icky" and she didn't want to have it in her face.
I think squeamish is closer to the mark than compassionate.
Indeed, in this case it would be as likely to have been Raphael as Amanda.


I agree with this. In fact, the body was not removed from the room but simply covered and the door locked. Knox must have been absolutely frantic at her "boyfriend's" unhelpfulness in removing the evidence from the cottage. He had a car and the strength to implement some kind of plan but without his approval they were left with locking the door. Neither of them would have believed the police wouldn't immediately suspect Knox and I am certain this had a lot to do with their inseparable status from 02 NOV until their arrests.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Lex Rex


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:33 am

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Someone who has been following the case since it began made a neat discovery this year:

Post a link to a value-neutral picture on PMF, get over 200 views in 24 hours;

Post a link to a value-neutral picture on a pro-Amanda site, get less than 20 views in 24 hours.

Anyone know what the readership at these pro-Amanda websites is like?

Are numbers down, or were they always rather low relative to pro-Justice sites?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Hi, Lex Rex...I don't know the readership numbers at the pro-Amanda sites, but I heartily recommend them as a sleeping aid........

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

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Earl Grey wrote:
Messrs Alibi, Lye and Bluster:

It is with regret that I inform you that his Lordship has recently suffered a series of misfortunes.

(Quote clipped for space, but see Earl's above post for complete masterpiece of melodrama)

Couple questions for His Lordship:

1) As part of the pre-nup, did the "always amicable" Messr Mellas make any attemp to throw in that Red Neck Reminder of a 'fishing boat' that he was always whining about having insufficient funds to keep in the water a while back?
He was soliciting sympathy for himself and his **drinking buddy** stepdaughter, at being financially forced to dry dock the monstrosity in his own driveway.
This seemed to most to be much akin to the tendency of his Appalachian ilk to store each and every rusty replicas of their previously used and abused dead old cars in their front 'yards.

2) Was Counsellor Bremner's BMW still running ragged on 3 flat tires and dripping life bloods from the undercarriage ?
This as a result of a recent (losing) traumatic traffic tussle with a "Bushy Haired Stranger" ?
She remembered her 'best truth' a long while after her arrest as to him crashing into her, submarining completely under her BMW, and then vanishing (without a trace).

3) Finally, is there some way we can temporarily disable your Avatar as we read your priceless parcels? . When I am laughing so hard reading and then see that guy with that ever so intriguing eye, monocle, and pointing digit, I have to laugh ever harder, to possible detriment of my health


Last edited by stint7 on Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


I hope The Machine is right. Popper's viewpoint is extremely depressing.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bedelia wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


I hope The Machine is right. Popper's viewpoint is extremely depressing.


What do you find depressing about it?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

OT OT, Post on behalf of a third party : Message for Michael. (Michael, look at his little down-turned mouth...as my Italian friend Fede says 'You crasha his hert..')


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

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
bedelia wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


I hope The Machine is right. Popper's viewpoint is extremely depressing.


What do you find depressing about it?



I was responding to this:

Popper said: "Prosecution appeal has good arguments in my view and - if the 2 are confirmed guilty in appeal - could find acceptance. So they may get life or 30. I give it a rough 50% chance. Even if they get life or 30 years they will do about 20, if they stay at 25/26 they will do about 15/17 with possible earlier permits to go out of prison during the day to work. This will be possible with good conduct."

It's depressing to me that one could take away someone's life in such a brutal manner and yet possibly be out of jail in 15 years! Especially after all the hoopla declaring her innocence, the calumnia of Patrick, the staged scene to mislead the police, the lies and all the horrible TV appearances of her parents. If I was Mrs. Kercher I would want people to protect me from all the media calling for her release. I could never, ever submit myself to it. I have such sympathy for her.
Top Profile 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Oh, Bard..Mungo looks so Euro chic and SVELTE!!!!!!!! He's so adorable, I could just eat him up.....:):):)

_________________
"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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I see. I, too, have sympathy for the Kerchers. I do not think them vengeful, however. Nothing can bring Meredith back. I do not feel as you do: for me, no matter what anyone has done, I do not find any comfort in punishment. What I hope for, is that when all this hype and horror is over, they will have an opportunity to truly face what they have done and find a way to change their lives around. I do not wish to see them released till they have done so: but nor do I wish them to remain in jail after they have done so: however long that may take, short or long. For that reason the circumstances of their imprisonment do not annoy me either. I do not believe brutalising people is an effective way to get them to make changes and I think there is evidence for that: for example Barlinnie Special Unit seemed to have some success before they closed it down. I can't make sense of draconian regimes with no hope and no humanity: the do not seem to lead to rehabiliation: they do not seem to be cheaper: they do not seem to be good for the prisoners, nor for the victims' families; nor for the rest of us.

I do not think that is an idealistic view: I think it is largely pragmatic. For some victims there does seem to be a need for punishment and it will perhaps always be an element in criminal justice for that reason: but it is greater than psychology demands, at least in my country; and I think in America also. That is something I regret: but the world turns
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bedelia wrote:
Fiona wrote:
bedelia wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


I hope The Machine is right. Popper's viewpoint is extremely depressing.


What do you find depressing about it?



I was responding to this:

Popper said: "Prosecution appeal has good arguments in my view and - if the 2 are confirmed guilty in appeal - could find acceptance. So they may get life or 30. I give it a rough 50% chance. Even if they get life or 30 years they will do about 20, if they stay at 25/26 they will do about 15/17 with possible earlier permits to go out of prison during the day to work. This will be possible with good conduct."

It's depressing to me that one could take away someone's life in such a brutal manner and yet possibly be out of jail in 15 years! Especially after all the hoopla declaring her innocence, the calumnia of Patrick, the staged scene to mislead the police, the lies and all the horrible TV appearances of her parents. If I was Mrs. Kercher I would want people to protect me from all the media calling for her release. I could never, ever submit myself to it. I have such sympathy for her.


I can understand what you say and how you feel.

Do think however that 25/26 years in prison are a tough penalty and benefits are given with continuous good conduct for all those years. The Italian system is directed towards rehabilitation.

Benefits for good conduct (if there is good conduct) are decided by a judge but are almost automatic and very common (so my estimate can be slightly off but it is not opinion). This is why I said that mitigating circumstances "given as extra bonus with no good resons" should be evaluated well in presence of all these subsequent benefits.

To be more precise, with a life sentence I think they will not get "conditional freedom" [parole] before 26 years but would be allowed to get out for work (and then sleep in prison) at about 20 years (this is more or less). With 25/26 years sentence and good conduct I would say about 17/18 years minus possible extra benefits (eg "indulto" benefits - which we may not know in advance but sometimes are decided by parliament and applicable to most prison population) 15/17 is a ballpark figure for conditional release. Daily work outside prison certainly by year 15. If they get 30 year sentence make the proportions.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
I see. I, too, have sympathy for the Kerchers. I do not think them vengeful, however. Nothing can bring Meredith back. I do not feel as you do: for me, no matter what anyone has done, I do not find any comfort in punishment. What I hope for, is that when all this hype and horror is over, they will have an opportunity to truly face what they have done and find a way to change their lives around. I do not wish to see them released till they have done so: but nor do I wish them to remain in jail after they have done so: however long that may take, short or long. For that reason the circumstances of their imprisonment do not annoy me either. I do not believe brutalising people is an effective way to get them to make changes and I think there is evidence for that: for example Barlinnie Special Unit seemed to have some success before they closed it down. I can't make sense of draconian regimes with no hope and no humanity: the do not seem to lead to rehabiliation: they do not seem to be cheaper: they do not seem to be good for the prisoners, nor for the victims' families; nor for the rest of us.

I do not think that is an idealistic view: I think it is largely pragmatic. For some victims there does seem to be a need for punishment and it will perhaps always be an element in criminal justice for that reason: but it is greater than psychology demands, at least in my country; and I think in America also. That is something I regret: but the world turns


This opens up the whole issue of forgiveness Fiona, doesn't it. We had long discussions about it here as it was a school philosophy project. Such questions as 'Is it possible to forgive someone if they don't want to be forgiven? If they don't ask for forgiveness? If they don't see what they have done wrong? - all these came up. It was terribly hard to work it all out to be honest. One party argued that it was possible and another that this was not, in effect, forgiveness and that forgiveness had to be a two way process. Otherwise it is just self-comfort. I don't share your pov entirely, although I am very pro a positive prison regime, particularly for vulnerable and uneducated offenders - of which there are many. To fail to equip them for life outside seems nothing short of cruelty. But for high functioning offenders like Amanda and Raffaele I think I would want to see some sort of admission of culpability before I could forgive them. To sit in jail for twenty years refusing to move on would show a lack of maturity and development to me. Added to this I am quite sure that upon release maximum capital will be made out of their 'celebrity status', which I simply cannot accept or forgive as I feel it is rubbing the noses of the victim's family in their loss and robbing them of any peace they might have won over the years they have been away. It seems the opposite kind of behaviour to elicit forgiveness. A little dignity, a little restraint, some grace would go a long way towards healing the hurt caused by this tragic murder. I really believe that. The circus is an abomination.

Also I don't think you can dismiss people's desire for punishment. Punishment is one of the roles of prison, as well as reform. It is important for victims to feel their pain has been atoned for in some way, in order for them to be able to move on in the grieving process. It is about balance. Punishment is part of that, and if my child had been murdered I would certainly feel that I wanted the wanton scumbags that committed the crime to suffer. Why should victims do all the suffering? Balance in all things. And it all takes time. The healing will take many years.


There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:
A time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
A time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
A time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
A time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
A time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
A time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
A time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.


I think at the least Amanda has to find a time to be silent within herself, and so do her family. There is a need for peace in this whole affair and a time of deep reflection over many years. Forgiveness? It's not within me right now. I can't hear myself think...

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
3) Finally, is there some way we can temporarily disable your Avatar as we read your priceless parcels? . When I am laughing so hard reading and then see that guy with that ever so intriguing eye, monocle, and pointing digit, I have to laugh ever harder, to possible detriment of my health



No kidding. You're not related to 'Dochennessy' from the Daily Beast forums are you, Earl?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline pataz1


Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:02 am

Posts: 303

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stilicho wrote:
lauowolf wrote:
What do I think was the purpose of the duvet?
I think they had managed to make Meredith "icky" and she didn't want to have it in her face.
I think squeamish is closer to the mark than compassionate.
Indeed, in this case it would be as likely to have been Raphael as Amanda.


I agree with this. In fact, the body was not removed from the room but simply covered and the door locked.


Its also easier to get an image out of your mind if you never get it in your mind in the first place... . While they were up at the basketball court,they may have been seeing images of the murder flash through their minds. Since they may have left the apartment and come back to arrange the scene, they may have "come down" a little more back to reality (either from drugs or adrenaline).. since that rearranging takes a deliberateness, they'd probably want to avoid as much as possible any further strong visual images residing in their brains.

Pat
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Hi, Fiona. I always give you the utmost respect, and I would say that in a perfect world, those are wonderful sentiments. However, I feel this should apply on a case by case basis. After almost three years, from Amanda, no remorse shown to Meredith's family, no reaching out to apologise to Patrick. And everything as usual, always, always about her. I don't believe psycopaths can be cured, ( and Amanda fits the bill to a tee, IMO). And, certainly, her family and *fans* don't seem to be any help at all, with their constant denials. What is there waiting for Amanda when she is out? Probably a nice big payday. How far does this apple fall from the tree? The only tears I've ever seen from her family, are for the little angel, and their mortgage payments.

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

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Hi, Bard. We're on the same page here. While prison may be no picnic, the sentence handed down, all the time off for good behaviour, the conditions that Amanda is living in, could be regarded as a picnic in comparison to what she could have faced elsewhere. And, having followed this case for so long, and having read the translation of what Meredith went through, it seems like a slap on the wrist.

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
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 Aug 20, 2010 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
I see. I, too, have sympathy for the Kerchers. I do not think them vengeful, however. Nothing can bring Meredith back. I do not feel as you do: for me, no matter what anyone has done, I do not find any comfort in punishment. What I hope for, is that when all this hype and horror is over, they will have an opportunity to truly face what they have done and find a way to change their lives around. I do not wish to see them released till they have done so: but nor do I wish them to remain in jail after they have done so: however long that may take, short or long. For that reason the circumstances of their imprisonment do not annoy me either. I do not believe brutalising people is an effective way to get them to make changes and I think there is evidence for that: for example Barlinnie Special Unit seemed to have some success before they closed it down. I can't make sense of draconian regimes with no hope and no humanity: the do not seem to lead to rehabiliation: they do not seem to be cheaper: they do not seem to be good for the prisoners, nor for the victims' families; nor for the rest of us.

I do not think that is an idealistic view: I think it is largely pragmatic. For some victims there does seem to be a need for punishment and it will perhaps always be an element in criminal justice for that reason: but it is greater than psychology demands, at least in my country; and I think in America also. That is something I regret: but the world turns


I honor the sentiment that both you and The Bard are putting forward in your statements. My caveat to any discussion of this type would be the safety of whatever citizens these two may live among in the future after their release. Psychological evaluation and treatment (if possible) is what I am concerned with here. If it is determined that either of these two is capable of repeating such an offense then tell me what should be done with them then. You want either of them living next door to you.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

capealadin wrote:
Hi, Bard. We're on the same page here. While prison may be no picnic, the sentence handed down, all the time off for good behaviour, the conditions that Amanda is living in, could be regarded as a picnic in comparison to what she could have faced elsewhere. And, having followed this case for so long, and having read the translation of what Meredith went through, it seems like a slap on the wrist.



I wholeheartedly agree. Bard, your post really sums it up for me as well. Personally, I'll never understand why "life in prison" doesn't really mean life in prison.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stilicho wrote:
Popper wrote:
BTW the big discounts good conduct gives you in Italian jail is another important reason why [subject of previous discussion] AK/RS run negligible risks of abuse, violence etc. in prison. They are in fact applicable to all prisoners even the most dangerous limiting bad episodes in prison.


I didn't want to make the risks appear worse than they actually are. Generally US prisons (and Canadian ones too) have serious issues with gang violence, overcrowding, untrained staff, untreated mental illness and STDs, and so on.

Yet, in prison and outside, sex offenders are always at the bottom of the heap, so to speak. I'd have to see the evidence this is not true in Italy before I'd agree with it. This doesn't necessarily mean physical violence. There are all kinds of ways to ostracise someone without physically harming them.

Furthermore, as I've suggested before, I think that Knox will have to register as a sex offender upon her return to North America. What she did is no different than what Karla Homolka did and in many ways it's worse since there was no evidence that she was abused as Homolka had claimed.


Sure, also in Italian jails there are "honour rankings" and pedophiles and sex offenders are on the low side of the popularity. Brutal murderers too. I am sure prison is not a piece of cake for anyone and will not be for them. I am also sure they will find plenty of people who will despise them. With time they will become veterans, not many people are in for 25 years in Perugia. Physically I think they run low risks of violence/abuse (probably lower than if they were free). In case of their transfer to a big overcrowded city prison risk would increase (or if there is a mass transfer of prisoners to Perugia or Terni, sometimes these things happen).
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Macport wrote:
My caveat to any discussion of this type would be the safety of whatever citizens these two may live among in the future after their release.



I think this is where The Machine was heading with the post earlier, only he was using lay-person's language rather than legal phrasing from the various criminal codes, like "a danger to the community".

"whatever citizens these two may live among in the future" also includes their own families and friends, and that would be a true test of faith for them and their beliefs (and possibly an objectively dangerous risk to place them under, given possible psychological testing).
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

capealadin wrote:
Oh, Bard..Mungo looks so Euro chic and SVELTE!!!!!!!! He's so adorable, I could just eat him up.....:):):)



Ooooooo, cape...someone once said to me that the way to a woman's heart was through complimenting their child. With me it's the bun. He is adorable, isn't he! I like the phrase 'Euro chic and svelte'. I shall pass it on! Thank you for recognising his utter gorgeousness - but keep the comments about rabbit eating a bit quiet...there have been relatives....shhhh....you know whereof I speak. Amen.

p.s do you notice how his tail is folded down? I didn't know rabbits' tails could actually do this until I had one. He is sunbathing here, and very, very relaxed...

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Oh, Bard..Mungo looks so Euro chic and SVELTE!!!!!!!! He's so adorable, I could just eat him up.....:):):)



Ooooooo, cape...someone once said to me that the way to a woman's heart was through complimenting their child. With me it's the bun. He is adorable, isn't he! I like the phrase 'Euro chic and svelte'. I shall pass it on! Thank you for recognising his utter gorgeousness - but keep the comments about rabbit eating a bit quiet...there have been relatives....shhhh....you know whereof I speak. Amen.

p.s do you notice how his tail is folded down? I didn't know rabbits' tails could actually do this until I had one. He is sunbathing here, and very, very relaxed...


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bedelia wrote:
Especially after all the hoopla declaring her innocence, the calumnia of Patrick, the staged scene to mislead the police, the lies and all the horrible TV appearances of her parents.


Summing it up like this conjured up an image of a Little Miss Tornado Tantrum, with her personality bottled up inside a tiny little tot-sized magic lamp that the occupant of the room affected to profess having no knowledge of or interest in, but had somehow become mysteriously focused upon the occupant of the other room.

And it only needed a small rub (on the ear?) for the tornado genie to pop out for a quick visit before popping back in again.
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:11 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Mac, that's a classic! Someone once called him the George Clooney of the rabbit world. I think Hollywood beckons...

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bedelia wrote:
The Machine wrote:

I'm not sure Knox and Sollecito will ever be released from prison. I think there's a very strong possibility that they will both become even more mentally unstable and be certified as insane. The Italian authorities have a responsibility to protect the public.


I hope The Machine is right. Popper's viewpoint is extremely depressing.


Popper's assessment is neutral and I agree with it for the most part. I feel that Popper is downplaying the risk accrued to sex offenders in prison but that's going to play out one way or the other. The real challenge for these people (Guede, Knox, and Sollecito) is going to serve itself upon their release from prison. If Knox returns to Washington State she will probably be branded as a sex offender. I don't know if that will happen to Sollecito and Guede because Italy and the EU might have different considerations.

Sex offence registration is basically the end of your life in North America. You won't get hired. You will forever be under the care of your family. You can't go out on the town. Your movements are monitored. If you do manage to find a spouse there is a high likelihood that he or she would be under the same or similar shadow.

Sex offenders in North America are among the highest victims of suicide in prison. The reasons are obvious. There is nothing waiting for them on the outside except for more of the same. They made their choice and they wind up paying for it until the day they die.

Knox is another of a stream of garden-variety sex offenders who decided that her own life was as unimportant as those she chose to victimise.
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 Aug 21, 2010 1:17 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
What I hope for, is that when all this hype and horror is over, they will have an opportunity to truly face what they have done and find a way to change their lives around. I do not wish to see them released till they have done so: but nor do I wish them to remain in jail after they have done so: however long that may take, short or long.


They have faced what they did. This is part of the problem of crime and punishment. All three young people know exactly what they did and the first thing each of them did is enter a stage of avoidance and denial.

The way our justice systems work (regardless of capital punishment) the convicted are already presumed to have known very well what they did and the probable consequences of their actions.

We sometimes like to see crime as aberration and that there is always an opportunity to "change their lives around". But really that's what they did in the first place. They changed their lives around from being constructive and responsible citizens (or citizens-in-being) to becoming sex killers. They decided that upon their own.

The only way to "change their lives around" is for them to accept that what they did was wrong. None of the three have done that. I doubt any of them want to "change their lives around". I think they all expect to be freed, in time, without the slightest affectation of guilt.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:23 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stilicho wrote:
Fiona wrote:
What I hope for, is that when all this hype and horror is over, they will have an opportunity to truly face what they have done and find a way to change their lives around. I do not wish to see them released till they have done so: but nor do I wish them to remain in jail after they have done so: however long that may take, short or long.


They have faced what they did. This is part of the problem of crime and punishment. All three young people know exactly what they did and the first thing each of them did is enter a stage of avoidance and denial.

The way our justice systems work (regardless of capital punishment) the convicted are already presumed to have known very well what they did and the probable consequences of their actions.

We sometimes like to see crime as aberration and that there is always an opportunity to "change their lives around". But really that's what they did in the first place. They changed their lives around from being constructive and responsible citizens (or citizens-in-being) to becoming sex killers. They decided that upon their own.

The only way to "change their lives around" is for them to accept that what they did was wrong. None of the three have done that. I doubt any of them want to "change their lives around". I think they all expect to be freed, in time, without the slightest affectation of guilt.



I agree with this assessment. So far, RS and AK (I have no idea about RG) appear to be merely waiting for their respective families to get them out of the mess they have created for themselves. In order to accept that they have done something wrong, they have to admit what they have done. So far, there is only denial at the highest levels. I have heard that the lawyers for Knox in particular sugar-coated everything that happened in the courtroom because they were required to.

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

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:07 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I think I have not been very clear. I do not believe that they have faced what they have done. I do not think that is possible for them while they are surrounded by the circus and the fantasy. I have said before: there will come a time when that goes away and there is no more hope of avoiding the truth. When they are alone with their sentences and the long years in obscurity; at that point I think there is hope for them: not before. Denial is possible now: indeed it is perhaps necessary given the path their families have chosen: but it will not always be so

Perhaps those who believe that AK and/or RS and/or RG are psychopaths are correct: I do not know. I think it is unlikely that three psychopaths happened on each other, though. I am not a psychiatrist, to make such a judgement. There are those who have argued that any of them acting alone would not have committed this crime. Again I do not know. I think it is perhaps true that it was the dynamic which drove it.

That does not mean that any of them would not be dangerous on release. Neither does it mean that they would. That is judgement for much later.

For me prison has four components: there is punishment. I have said that is given more weight than I think reasonable in my country: it is less emphasised in other countries (and at other times in my own country) and from what Popper says it is less important in Italy than it is here. That is a good thing IMO. I accept that victims need that element (though many need it less than is often claimed, IMO: they are used to justify the balance that we have here, I think). But punishment is not all we require from penal policy. There is also deterrence: we could argue till the cows come home about how effective that is but it is a strand in why we do what we do. There is also, as Macport says, the safety of other people: that is central, and one of the hardest calls to make. I am glad I do not need to make such judgements: I think they are impossible in the regime that we have: perhaps a little easier in the more flexible circumstances Popper describes. And there is rehabilitation. Very little is done in that regard here: again it seems to be better in Italy.

Punishment is regrettable but necessary for some of the victims: deterrence is an unknown. But the safety of others and rehabilitation are inseparable. And we cannot escape the risks unless we take the path of "life means life" or of capital punishment. Many would say we should take that path. I do not agree. There are people who are truly psychotic and who will always be a danger: some of them even know this of themselves. Ian Brady, for example, has not tried for release, so far as I know. There are others like him, and some take their own lives. But most who commit murder are not like them: and I do not think we can judge these people at this time.

If there is a regime which will truly aim at rehabilitation, and not just pay it lip service, then there is hope. I think of Jimmy Boyle. His background is not comparable, on the surface: but there is no doubt he was a dangerous man and a very persistent offender: yet he was rehabilitated. He is not alone.

To rebuild a personality takes time and skill: and sometimes it will fail utterly. But I think we should try. Like it or not, most prisoners are eventually released. They will live amongst us. We owe it to everyone to try to make change: to victims and prisoners and to ourselves.

The criminally insane are different: but unlike what I understand Popper to be saying, in this country they are a group for whom life can really mean life: that is being applied more and more to sane criminals but it is still very rare in this country. For those who are deemed psychopaths the situation is different. And it is interesting how that plays out. Peter Sutcliffe was originally said to be sane; and he stood trial as a sane person. For me that was amazing: I thought that any definition of insanity which did not include his behaviour was a rubbish definition, and needed to be thrown out. And so it proved: he was moved to Broadmoor sometime after sentence. Yet the fact he was originally held to be sane remains a puzzle: and I suspect it was this same desire for punishment which drove that, in that very high profile case. I hope I am wrong about that.

For those recognised to be crimally and homicidally insane there is no automatic release for they do not have a sentence. Sane criminals do have a sentence and so we are logically driven to strive for rehabilitation: or to whole life sentences/execution. We seem to be moving as a society in the direction of the latter, in the UK. But how are we to hold ourselves as civilised if we do that when we have not even begun to explore the limits of what can be done with rehabilitation? I personally cannot seee that we can.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:20 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Mac, the pic is OUTSTANDING!! I never knew a rabbit could be so sexy!! I tell ya, Mac, he looks like a Casino Boss..Bard, Is Mungo's colouring unusual in a bunny? Because it's fabulous!! As for, umm, eating, no, no, and no. :( Actually, I have never eaten le lapin, or wanted to, or fois gras, but that's just me. I'm sorry to say, others rave.....In any event, pets are safe, no?

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

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:39 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona, I agree that there are circumstances where people have killed, and where rehabilitation is, and can be successful. My heart bleeds when a child commits patricide, or matricide, for instance. Some stories are so horrific, especially where children are concerned, that I really don't think I could ever work in the system. I do believe Amanda is a psycopath, and I believe, from everything I have heard and read, that is incurable. Would she kill again? Somehow, I don't think so. She will mature, learn to handle her emotions, or lack of them better. I don't know if being in a strange country, being found attractive there ( I believe one of her teachers in Seattle described as her mousy, and not a *dazzler* by any means. ) and then, measuring herself against young ladies like Meredith, and so on...Amanda was newly bloomed, and, I believe, had she stayed in Seattle, would have remained a very ordinary girl, with a very ordinary life. Las Vegas is having quite a few problems, maybe because it has become the norm to behave outrageously. Perhaps having given permission by a HUGE advertising campaign . * WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS, STAYS IN VEGAS*. Inhibitions are certainly freed, in mamy young people, leaving home for the first time. I don't class Raff and Rudi as psycopaths, perhaps because not much is known about them, as say Amanda. I'm sure I could find many cases where people shouldn't be in prison at all, but I don't feel Amanda fits that criteria. And, she will never atone, as she is completely lacking in empathy..and that cannot be learned. Or taught. Amanda may learn to mimic empathy, but she cannot feel it. IMO, of course.

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

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:06 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

OT/ On 48 Hours they are doing the Craigslist killer story. Another unlikely murderer, a brilliant medical student, engaged, with friends. No priors.

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

Offline Lex Rex


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:33 am

Posts: 136

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:14 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
So far, there is only denial at the highest levels. I have heard that the lawyers for Knox in particular sugar-coated everything that happened in the courtroom because they were required to.


Interesting.

"Sugar-coated" for whom? Amanda? Edda?

"Required" by whom? Curt?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:33 am   Post subject: Haaaaaaaaaaaaare's Mungo!   

The Bard wrote:
Mac, that's a classic! Someone once called him the George Clooney of the rabbit world. I think Hollywood beckons...


Actually, I've just read that Mungo already hired somebunny to be his tail-ent agent.

Here is a photo of the hired Hollywood hare honcho, posing next to Mungo.

The agent thinks Mungo has a promising future in the entertainment business and ALSO hopes to sign him with a major recording label--as the next hip hop sensation. bu-)

Top Profile 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:36 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
When you go and sit in court in the public gallery, you'll often hear a convict's lawyer presenting the best view of their client (they're studying, their helping with the prison laundry is to be admired, they're etc), and sometimes, yes, it is painfully obvious they are grasping at straws, yet they are straws nonetheless, and where there's straw, there's hope; and some people have only one or two straws, if that, with which to begin building up their life's investment (if they choose).

Apologies about the head-hurting thing, by the way.
Let Mungo chew on half a carrot as a treat.
A creature that make a blade of grass disappear so efficiently and keep an eye out at the same time for hawks and falcons above, wonderful! I can only do one thing at a time, and that not always well (take my typing, e.g.).


_________________



///
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zinnia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am

Posts: 56

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:46 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona,
Just wow.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:59 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Lex Rex wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
So far, there is only denial at the highest levels. I have heard that the lawyers for Knox in particular sugar-coated everything that happened in the courtroom because they were required to.


Interesting.

"Sugar-coated" for whom? Amanda? Edda?

"Required" by whom? Curt?


Yes, sugar coated for the named individuals + other family members.
Required by same.
It's a bit like the "we don't appear on television programs with 'hostile' journalists" approach.
Head in the sand kind of thing.
Fingers in the ears and la la la I can't hear you.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
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 Aug 21, 2010 4:23 am   Post subject: PERUGIA NEWS DIGEST 20 AUGUST 2010   

Some context for the summer holiday news.




PERUGIA NEWS DIGEST 20 AUGUST 2010


  • Three students were killed in a car crash in Narni (n1). The driver of the Alfa 147 and sole survivor had not been drinking or using drugs. (n2) The victims were: Maria Chiara Latini and Marianna Boccolini, both 18, Michael Cipiccia, 17 (n3); and on 30 July another road accident: Marco Pelini, 16, Alessio Venturi and Antony Bernardi, both 18 (n4). Fiorella Giardinieri, mother of Marco Pelini, made a plea for people not to invent things to fill in the gaps and speculate, "There's no need to throw mud. Our children are dead. We'll never see them again. I would like our grief to be given respect." (n5) The rumour-mill goes: "Young layabouts, drug addicts, no rules. That's the reason they died." -- (n6) Often human beings try and find a justification for everything to feel better, to find peace, to close the circle. (n7)
    Attachment:
    roadaccident_PrimaPagina1.jpg

    Corriere dell’Umbria
  • The funeral of politician and benefactor Alfredo De Poi, taken too soon, at 65, (n8) was held in the cathedral. The city's highest honour, the red gonfalon, in recognition of his services to the city, was at the altar (n9). His friends will continue his last battle, trying to save the Pietro Vannucci Academy of Fine Art of which he was, in the last two years, president (n10).
  • A 52-year-old Nigerian courier, being sought as part of Operation Black Passenger, was arrested by the Perugia Flying Squad at Fiumincino airport, with 80 ovules of pure cocaine (1.2kg) in his stomach. He had just arrived on a flight from Nigeria and was taken to a hospital in Ostia for an X-ray. (n11)
    Attachment:
    drughaul_20Aug2010_Cronaca2.jpg

  • A 65-year-old Perugian businessman is seeking a divorce after falling in love with a Chinese girl and giving her 1.2 million euro worth of gifts. (n12)
  • British actor Colin Firth, together with director Michael Winterbottom, is thinking of making a film about the murder of English student Meredith Kercher, reports the Corriere dell'Umbria. (n13) The English actor, who has lived for years in Italy with his partner, Italian producer Livia Giuggioli, is reported to have spent several days in Perugia with the director, joined by Barbie Latza Nadeau, author of the book Angel Face, in scouting locations in the city. In the film, still only an idea, Firth will play an English detective who, in investigating the case, finds his own truth by pursuing a never-before-followed trail. (n14)
    Image
    [ SKY ] Hilly Umbria
  • Panorama reports that Giuliano Mignini (acting Public Prosecutor and an experienced magistrate who investigated the Monster of Florence and more recently the murder of Meredith Kercher), has opened an investigation on the Tulliani fortune, for possible fraudulent bankruptcy. The prosecutor is being assisted by colleague Antonella Duchini, who dealt with the related failure of Perugia Soccer: she has been recalled after the summer break of Ferragosto, the other day she was in the Justice Building in the Umbrian capital to examine initial documents. Said businessman Gaucci: "If the Perugia Prosecutor's Office thinks my money is illicit and has seized it, why don't they do the same thing with the goods that I gave my ex?" The accusation was triggered by the irritation provoked by the words of his ex-girlfriend, 34 years his junior, who says she bought everything with family money and the winnings of a Superlotto ticket. The soccer scandal involved 200 million euro, of which the creditors are seeking 58 million from Gaucci. Panorama notes that even if the allegation isn't confirmed, it could give rise to a counter-accusation of calunnia. (n15)


Notes
n1 – 1
n2 – 1
n3 -- 1,2
n4 – 2
n5 – 2
n6 – 2
n7 – 2
n8 – 3
n9 – 3
n10 – 3
n11 – 4
n12 – 5
n13 – 6
n14 -- 6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,15
n15 – 10


References

1 - La strage di Narni - Una città in lacrime per i tre studenti. (Tragedy at Narni – A city in tears for three students) [Corriere dell’Umbria] 20 August 2010
2 - Non gettate fango sui nostri ragazzi. (Don’t throw mud on our young people) [Corriere dell’Umbria] 20 August 2010
3 - Addio a un grande amico della città. (Farewell to a great friend of the city) [Corriere dell’Umbria] 20 August 2010
4 - Operazione Black passenger - Portava droga per 15mila dosi. (Operation Black Passenger – He was carrying enough drugs for 15,000 doses) [Corriere dell’Umbria] 20 August 2010
5 - Amare costa oltre un milione (Love costs more than a million) [Corriere dell’Umbria] 20 August 2010
6 - L’omicidio di Meredith sarà presto un film (The Meredith Murder will soon be a film) [Seccolo XIX] 20 August 2010
7 - Detective inglese indaga sul caso MeredithMa per un film (English detective investigates the Meredith case – but for a film) [Nazione] 20 August 2010
8 - Caso Meredith, Colin Firth e Michael Winterbottom vogliono girare un film (Meredith Murder: Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make a film) [ADN Kronos] 20 August 2010
9 - Il delitto di Perugia diventa un film con Colin Firth (The Perugia murder will become a film with Colin Firth) [Sky] 20 August 2010
10 - La Procura indaga sui palazzi dei Tulliani (The Public Prosecutor’s Office investigates Tulliani properties) [Giornale] 20 August 2010
11 - CASO MEREDITH / Colin Firth, l’attore pensa ad un film sulla studentessa inglese uccisa a Perugia (Colin Firth: The English actor is thinking of a film about the English student killed in Perugia) [Diretta News] 20 August 2010
12 - "La vera storia di Amanda Knox": diventa un film (“The true story of Amanda Knox” will become a film) [Quotidiano] 20 August 2010
13 - Omicidio Meredith: Colin Firth e Michael Winterbottom vogliono girare film (Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make a film) [Tempo] 20 August 2010
14 - Omicidio Meredith: Colin Firth e Michael Winterbottom vogliono girare film (Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make a film) [Ultime Notizie] 20 August 2010
15 - Omicidio Meredith: Colin Firth e Michael Winterbottom vogliono girare film (Colin Firth and Michael Winterbottom want to make a film) [University] 20 August 2010


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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:52 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

To the general public, Skep, people generally are pretty smart. Except those that are in denial, and have their own agenda, of course. JUST THE LIES, should send out huge flags. And then, of course, there are people who simply post on sites, because they have no lives, and just NEED to be seen as so smart, and have NOTHING to do with Meredith, or the pain to her family. This site, PMF, keeps it real, IMO. There are many murders out there, all of them tragic. But, this one just grates, because of the concerted effort of some who malign the victim, and portray the killers as above reproach.For me, I always see Meredith's smile, and the anguish of her father. And when I read the comment , that the Kercher's needed to get over it, my blood just boiled. I will keep posting, here and on other sites, until justice is done. This case strikes a chord, and just one of the reasons, are: All of my children have studied overseas, and, even at the age of fifteen, went to camp in Europe. I felt, that they would be safe there, and give them some freedom, that I didn't feel Los Angeles, would give them. We spent holidays in Europe during summers as well. All I know is, I thank G-d I can see them every day, know that they're safe, and count my blessings. My heart aches for the Kerchers, and this talk of movies, just makes me cringe. It doesn't change anything for them though. Their pain, and loss, must be everywhere. And everyday. Please G-d, they don't know about crab cakes, guitar playing, and having to see pictures of *The Saint Amanda*.

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

Offline capealadin


User avatar


Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:58 am

Posts: 4089

Highscores: 11

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:58 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Ahh, Catnip. Wonderful post. And if one believes the girlfriends story, I have the Brooklyn Bridge for sale, to her....

_________________
"You have been PERMANENTLY Banned!" - by .ORG eee-)
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 Aug 21, 2010 7:59 am   Post subject: Open-ended Questions   

bolint wrote:
Fiona wrote:
"Why would they expect the police to arrive before an ordinary level of wetness had dried up?"

This brings up Amanda's cryptic phrase on the use of the hair drier: "obviously to dry my hair"

— posted by bolint [XVII.13] (Post 55420 on 17-Aug-2010)




The story of going into the big bathroom “obviously to dry my hair” brought to mind the photo of Amanda’s room again:

Image
Gallery: "Amanda's room" link


Is that a hair-dryer plugged into the wall?

But that question already assumes an answer (and is a bit confrontational, as well).

This is a good opportunity to practice investigative interviewing techniques (1).



Leading question:
“That looks like an unplugged phone charger on the floor. So is that a hair-dryer plugged into the wall?”

Open-ended question:
“What’s plugged into the wall?”
"What did you bring over from the States? From Germany? Do you have your own hairdryer?"


In real life, that might be the computer plugged into the wall.

Assumptions only hinder seeing what is there. It's a lot like coming across a new word or phrase when translating -- you ask yourself, "What does it mean?" and you don't automatically accept the first definition in the dictionary as being the correct one.



Other things to notice:

  • The electrical feature above the wardrobe seems to be disconnected/yanked out (Grr students! - it's all part of the adventure though).
  • Another light switch (for the fixture above?) and a second powerpoint (US: socket?) half-hidden by the wardrobe, which itself looks fairly clean and newish (so maybe there used to be a desk or something there?)
  • The key in the inside lock (as mentioned back in May).
  • Can't tell what month the Picasso wall calendar is open at - too blurry.
  • The tiled floor throughout (walking barefoot on it in autumn, and at night or early morning at that, would have been an endurance test if it was for a really really long period - all other things being equal)


By the bye, the six-string classical guitar was described in some reports as being found in the wardrobe, as opposed to next to, or leaning against it, as the photo shows.




(1) "one of the most critical skills of investigative interviewers is the ability to maintain the use of non-leading, open-ended questions. ...Open-ended questions are defined as those questions that encourage elaborate (as opposed to brief or one-word) responses. ...they maximize the accuracy of the interviewee's account of the offence and minimize the opportunity for confusion, contamination and/or misunderstandings. " — Becky Milne and Martine Powell, "[2.9] Investigative Interviewing", in Jennifer Brown and Elizabeth Campbell (eds), The Cambridge Book of Forensic Psychology (2010) [Cambridge University Press 2010] pp 208-214 p 211
Top Profile 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:27 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"The story of her lock-up is one of little evidence and lots of tabloid fodder. Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito are said to have sexually assaulted and slain Meredith to see how killing felt....." it gets worse

///
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Black Dog


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:43 pm

Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:13 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

fine wrote:
"The story of her lock-up is one of little evidence and lots of tabloid fodder. Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito are said to have sexually assaulted and slain Meredith to see how killing felt....." it gets worse

///


OMG...
The blogger looks like one of Candace Dempsey's disciples as most of it is almost verbatim Dempsey biased nonsense.
It just goes to show that if you throw enough crap around some of it will stick. I think that is the tactic here with Marriot and the FOA, although they are fighting a lost cause.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:45 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:

I'll be damned if Amanda's name didn't immediately come to mind when I read this.


Very astute, my Lord. In fact, it seems to me that this describes AK and many of her more fervent admirers. The level of narcissism on display is as high as the capacity for honest give and take discussion is low.

Speaking of terminal narcissism, as you know I stay away from cess pits (doctor's orders), but Mr. Skeptical Bystander mentioned last night that your Mrs. Lady Mary H was getting quite the thrashing over at cess pit number 1 (the West Seattle Herald blog). She got her bell rung, apparently. So sorry to hear it. Such a gentle soul she is, and so devoted.


The last time I looked in there two or three days ago I noticed that Mary H still had more air to let out of her balloon.
I was surprised to see her and others still going at it a week or more after that article had been published. From what I could see, the heavy artillery pieces had been brought up and were blasting away at her, and she seemed to have no place to run to. I would have felt great sympathy for her, except that it was far too pleasant to observe.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:55 am   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Very good point some of you made above on repentance and admission of guilt.
May be what below can lower the state of depression of some of you.

In Italian law repentance [ravvedimento accertato] is a very important factor to obtain benefits of conditional freedom and any other benefit (work outside, good conduct). It must be "certain" (verified by Surveillance Judge for that prison) and can be shown also by behaviour (like asking for pardon etc.). Obtaining pardon by parents of victim (or victim in case it is not murder) is not necessary to get conditional freedom. Admission of guilt is obviously part of repentance.

With repentance there must be 2 other conditions: time in prison (as by law, for example life prisoners cannot get CF before 26 years) and full payment of damages to victim/victim family if any (if possible for the person who has to pay).

Judge cannot be influenced by public opinion in this decision. If the 3 factors above are verified he/she MUST automatically give conditional freedom. Normally a life prisoner receiving conditional freedom will be under surveillance for about 5 additional years and may have limits to move from a city, will work in the same place where he/she started to work before freedom and may have to be in touch with social workers and check in at police station once in a while.

Let us look at an example I made some time ago, the Ludwig band (2 neo nazi killers, young men of rich families + honour students [real ones not like AK, MSc in physics and mathematics and got more degrees in jail] who murdered 15 people between 77 and 84). They were both convicted to 30 then reduced to 27 yrs (not life due to partial insanity):

1) Marco Furlan never admitted responsibility in trials but admitted it fully (and asked pardons, which some families gave him) later and well before he could start asking for permits to go out and then conditional freedom. He did 84-88 and then 95-2009 = about 17/18 years out of 27. He was out even before for day time work (then sleep in prison) and various permits. Showed total repentance and regret.

2) His partner, Wolfgang Abel (considered the mind of the duo) never admitted his guilt, and in that case there was ample evidence and his defence got parial insanity. Never asked any pardon. Only recently released after full sentence never got any discount, conditional freedom or work outside prison (he was given only last 2 years in house arrest - and I believe the "indulto" benefit which parliament sometimes approves and applies to all prisoner).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2308

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Here are a few of the ridiculous claims made by some hysterical conspiracy theorists in the media:

“However, at this point the rumour mill about Knox and her boyfriend had been in full flood for 18 days and the authorities had already put Knox behind bars…. To save face, Knox and her poor boyfriend had to be somehow levered into the frame.” (Amy Jenkins, The Independent).

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 91798.html

"Everyone knew from the beginning that the prosecutor had it in for Amanda Knox, that the charges are pretty much trumped up..."

"From the beginning this was carefully choreographed, they wanted to find her guilty, they've kept her in jail for two years even before trial and they did find her guilty. This is the way Italian justice is done. If you're accused, you're guilty." (Judy Bachrach, CNN).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5kPa4pq ... ure=search

“My thoughts, Larry, it’s probably the most egregious international railroading of two innocent young people that I have ever seen. This is actually a public lynching based on rank speculation, and vindictiveness. It’s just a nightmare what these parents are going through and what these young adults are going through also.” (John Q Kelly, CNN).

"Studying abroad should have been a grand adventure. Instead, Amanda Knox has spent a year in jail, accused by a corrupt legal system of murdering her roommate." (Jan Goodwin, Marie Claire).

http://www.marieclaire.com/world-report ... ent-murder

All of the people above were ignorant of the basic facts of the case and never offered any proof to support their claims that Knox and Sollecito were railroaded by a corrupt Italian legal system.
Top Profile 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

fine wrote:
"The story of her lock-up is one of little evidence and lots of tabloid fodder. Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito are said to have sexually assaulted and slain Meredith to see how killing felt....." it gets worse

///


sure this is put up as a straw man -- but in reality this may not have been too far from the truth.

RS is a HUGE fantasist. RS would do ANYTHING to impress AK. AK would COMPETE with RS to show that she too could be outragous. They were DRUGGED OUT OF THEIR MINDS ... cocaine - possibly even crack.

Even their defence admits they are immature.


Last edited by ttrroonniicc on Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
Lex Rex wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:
So far, there is only denial at the highest levels. I have heard that the lawyers for Knox in particular sugar-coated everything that happened in the courtroom because they were required to.

Interesting.

"Sugar-coated" for whom? Amanda? Edda?

"Required" by whom? Curt?

Yes, sugar coated for the named individuals + other family members.
Required by same.
It's a bit like the "we don't appear on television programs with 'hostile' journalists" approach.
Head in the sand kind of thing.
Fingers in the ears and la la la I can't hear you.


Smells to me similar to the scent of a signature 'Simonesque' spin strategy.
Early on, after Simon's $500,000 retainer check cleared, and he changed his previously : "..evidence makes this a tough case to defend..." statement he made while on one of his multitude of moneyed media moments, he subsequently stated that bashing Italian procedures and media was only counterproductive.

The behind the curtains only 'advisor' may be having influence ?? ( a half a million ++ worth ??)
Top Profile 

Offline Black Dog


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:43 pm

Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

TM,
Amy Jenkins in your post above states an old dog eared mantra we hear all the time from the alternative universe.
Why did the Italian police have to save face as they repeatedly say? I can't understand it, what does it mean?
Save face? What for? What have they done in order to have to 'save face'?
Of course I know what saving face means and I also know it is very important to Italian people but I don't see why they had to keep Amanda Knox in Jail to 'save face'.
Could this be something the FOA and Marriot hit on while trying to educate themselves about Italian people?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Machine wrote:
Here are a few of the ridiculous claims made by some hysterical conspiracy theorists in the media:

“However, at this point the rumour mill about Knox and her boyfriend had been in full flood for 18 days and the authorities had already put Knox behind bars…. To save face, Knox and her poor boyfriend had to be somehow levered into the frame.” (Amy Jenkins, The Independent).

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 91798.html

"Everyone knew from the beginning that the prosecutor had it in for Amanda Knox, that the charges are pretty much trumped up..."

"From the beginning this was carefully choreographed, they wanted to find her guilty, they've kept her in jail for two years even before trial and they did find her guilty. This is the way Italian justice is done. If you're accused, you're guilty." (Judy Bachrach, CNN).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5kPa4pq ... ure=search

“My thoughts, Larry, it’s probably the most egregious international railroading of two innocent young people that I have ever seen. This is actually a public lynching based on rank speculation, and vindictiveness. It’s just a nightmare what these parents are going through and what these young adults are going through also.” (John Q Kelly, CNN).

"Studying abroad should have been a grand adventure. Instead, Amanda Knox has spent a year in jail, accused by a corrupt legal system of murdering her roommate." (Jan Goodwin, Marie Claire).

http://www.marieclaire.com/world-report ... ent-murder

All of the people above were ignorant of the basic facts of the case and never offered any proof to support their claims that Knox and Sollecito were railroaded by a corrupt Italian legal system.


This is why MSM is dying off. These are supposed to be serious journalists.
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:34 pm   Post subject: Remorse and Regret   

If people like some bedtime reading --

In 2002, Martha Duncan wrote an essay in the Columbia Law Review arguing that young people are still undeveloped in the brain department, so when they murder, adjustments must be made for their apparent lack of remorse and regret.

John Morss disagreed, arguing “that the ‘adolescence defense’ is unsound in principle and that children and youth should be treated in the same forensic manner as adults. If we respect children and youth, we must respect their autonomy however uncomfortable for us this may be”.

And Bibas and Bierschbach looked at remorse and apology in general, and how it integrates into criminal procedure.




References listed in [ LawCite ]:

Martha Grace Duncan, " ‘So Young And So Untender’ : Remorseless Children And The Expectations Of The Law", (2002) 102 Columbia Law Review 1469

John R Morss, in [ (2004) 9 Deakin Law Review 643 ] and [ (2004) 1 University of New England Law Journal 187 ]

Stephanos Bibas and Richard A Bierschbach in [ (2004) 114 Yale Law Journal 85 ], PDF version is [ here ].
Top Profile 

Offline stint7


User avatar


Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm

Posts: 1582

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Thanks, Machine, interesting quotes to prove just how biased (and clueless) so much of the media really is.

My take on "why":

Personally, I surmise that a *very* active PR firm provides (bombards) the media with E-M talking points that make it so easy for the 'journalists' and producers to save themselves the effort of having to research anything (except the talking point info) to come up with their requireddaily quota of airtime or newsprint.

My opinion is strengthened when I recall some the major objectives that the PR Firm seeks to instill:
1) The Italian procedures and personnel are at best sub par, and at worst sub third world, and blatantly biased against USA
2) A nice wholesome looking soccer player from Seattle could *never* commit such a crime, and there is no evidence she did.
3) The only guilty party has already fast tracked himself
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Black Dog wrote:
TM,

Why did the Italian police have to save face as they repeatedly say? I can't understand it, what does it mean?
Save face? What for? What have they done in order to have to 'save face'?


They must also have "saved-face" when it came to Rudy Guede, by the same logic, since it is the same police and investigating prosecutor.

:) Unless they're "two-faced" as well, by sentencing Rudy, but not freeing Amanda (and whatshisname).

It's always been a bug-bear/thorn-in-the-side, having more than one defendant.
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
Very good point some of you made above on repentance and admission of guilt.
May be what below can lower the state of depression of some of you.

In Italian law repentance [ravvedimento accertato] is a very important factor to obtain benefits of conditional freedom and any other benefit (work outside, good conduct). It must be "certain" (verified by Surveillance Judge for that prison) and can be shown also by behaviour (like asking for pardon etc.). Obtaining pardon by parents of victim (or victim in case it is not murder) is not necessary to get conditional freedom. Admission of guilt is obviously part of repentance.

With repentance there must be 2 other conditions: time in prison (as by law, for example life prisoners cannot get CF before 26 years) and full payment of damages to victim/victim family if any (if possible for the person who has to pay).

Judge cannot be influenced by public opinion in this decision. If the 3 factors above are verified he/she MUST automatically give conditional freedom. Normally a life prisoner receiving conditional freedom will be under surveillance for about 5 additional years and may have limits to move from a city, will work in the same place where he/she started to work before freedom and may have to be in touch with social workers and check in at police station once in a while.

Let us look at an example I made some time ago, the Ludwig band (2 neo nazi killers, young men of rich families + honour students [real ones not like AK, MSc in physics and mathematics and got more degrees in jail] who murdered 15 people between 77 and 84). They were both convicted to 30 then reduced to 27 yrs (not life due to partial insanity):

1) Marco Furlan never admitted responsibility in trials but admitted it fully (and asked pardons, which some families gave him) later and well before he could start asking for permits to go out and then conditional freedom. He did 84-88 and then 95-2009 = about 17/18 years out of 27. He was out even before for day time work (then sleep in prison) and various permits. Showed total repentance and regret.

2) His partner, Wolfgang Abel (considered the mind of the duo) never admitted his guilt, and in that case there was ample evidence and his defence got parial insanity. Never asked any pardon. Only recently released after full sentence never got any discount, conditional freedom or work outside prison (he was given only last 2 years in house arrest - and I believe the "indulto" benefit which parliament sometimes approves and applies to all prisoner).


Let us therefore discuss 2 Amanda Knox scenarios, assuming she gets 26 as final sentence in Supreme court Cassazione:

SCENARIO 1
At year 5 to 10 she admits guilt or partial guilt, shows regret and asks pardon (even in a private way, it does not have to be public, and she will obtain it given the humanity of MK family), makes an effort to pay damages to MK family, keeps good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). Probably in language school or social community for drug addicts or – if she has competences in relative field (eg Sollecito will surely work in IT which is very common for ex prisoners). At year 16/17 she is out on conditional and gets a flat and continues to work. Possibly slightly earlier with some “indulto”. She is under surveillance for a while and has to stay in the city. She runs little risk of being expelled. At the end of surveillance period (probably one or two years) she is completely free and can even go back to the US. Given what Stilicho says, does going back make sense if you are a sex offender with no work ?
SCENARIO 2
Never admits guilt not even partially. Never asks for pardon. Does not study or improve herself. Makes money with book which says she is innocent and does not pay damages to Kerchers. Keeps decent but strange behaviour. Shows psycho problems (every prisoner is always monitored by social workers and psychologist appointed by surveillance tribunal for the prison). At year 15 she is denied benefits. At year 17 the same. Without initial benefits and no repentance she is later denied conditional freedom. At end of sentence - 26 yrs less possibly some general “indulto” ie 2 yrs so 24 years - she is expelled as she is not a EU citizen.

You say which scenario is more likely. I think scenario 1 LIKELY and scenario 2 UNLIKELY. Any normal or semi normal person wishes to exit prison asap.

BTW a curiosity: it seems that conditional freedom was invented in the English colonies of Australia (one was Norfolk island) where prisoners were gradually released to work for a salary. If they behaved badly or escaped they were sent back. Salary could be used to purchase gradually freedom or goods.
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 Aug 21, 2010 2:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
a *very* active PR firm provides (bombards) the media with E-M talking points that make it so easy for the 'journalists' and producers to save themselves the effort


And then they must either "save-face" themselves to avoid the embarassment of being shown up as copy-pasters instead of journalists, or they drift away very quietly, unnoticed.


Quote:
2) A nice wholesome looking soccer player from Seattle could *never* commit such a crime, and there is no evidence she did.
3) The only guilty party has already fast tracked himself


I think the tactic must be to take control of the discussion, relying on people's innate deference to authority: the one talking first and fastest must know what he's talking about, right?, so he must be the one in charge, right?, and there's no-one around saying anything different, right? And so on.

It is similar to when a Troll-Dodo poster comes along and posts: "OK, Mr Wise Guys, you prove to me that Amanda did/didn't do it. See if you can convince me. Give it your best shot! I double-dare you!!" As if it was a presidential election campaign debate, or a school sandbox-standoff.

As opposed to professionally presenting case that persuades anyone who hears it.

Q: How did Rudy get to be the only guilty party?
A: Because "A nice wholesome looking soccer player from Seattle could *never* commit such a crime, and there is no evidence she did".

Q: And how did "A nice wholesome looking soccer player from Seattle" etc get to be that way?
A: Because Rudy is the only guilty party.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

It's a little bit circular, though.
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:

BTW a curiosity: it seems that conditional freedom was invented in the English colonies of Australia (one was Norfolk island) where prisoners were gradually released to work for a salary. If they behaved badly or escaped they were sent back. Salary could be used to purchase gradually freedom or goods.


Yes, ticket-of-leave.
It also applied to the mainland as well.

There was a practical reason: you cannot grow things or make things or build things or have your dinner cooked and served to you, if the entire population is kept inside, in cells. There has to be at least a few people trustworthy enough to wash the clothes and put them up to dry, and iron them, and dye them, and stitch them, and, etc etc.

Someone has to take the function and position of the lower class. It may as well be the convicts. :)

Psychologically, the stigma of having convict ancestors lasted until 1970s-1980s.


Last edited by Catnip on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:
Thanks, Machine, interesting quotes to prove just how biased (and clueless) so much of the media really is.

My take on "why":

Personally, I surmise that a *very* active PR firm provides (bombards) the media with E-M talking points that make it so easy for the 'journalists' and producers to save themselves the effort of having to research anything (except the talking point info) to come up with their requireddaily quota of airtime or newsprint.

My opinion is strengthened when I recall some the major objectives that the PR Firm seeks to instill:
1) The Italian procedures and personnel are at best sub par, and at worst sub third world, and blatantly biased against USA
2) A nice wholesome looking soccer player from Seattle could *never* commit such a crime, and there is no evidence she did.
3) The only guilty party has already fast tracked himself



From my post above on repentance and parole you can understand how dangerous - should AK be confirmed guilty in a final judgement - will be to continue the strong PR campaign.

- Any money spent in PR after final conviction is money that reasonably could be used to pay civil damages to Kerchers.
- it is the opposite of admission of guilt and repentance.

This is why AK Italian lawyers are against too much PR even now and consider the possibility that, if she is found guilty, family may be damaging her already. In "political terms" [this is well explained in TJMK website] the PR campaign is not very useful as judiciary power in fully independent from political/executive power in Italy.

Court is hardly influenced by newspapers as journalists get their article from bits and pieces of judicial documents and court has full documentation available. The idea whereby decisions are only made based on what it is said during the trial, therefore allowing the jury to be influenced by external factors, is more typical of an adversarial system (trial based system) where jurors have to forget most or all other documents. This is the reason why in adversarial systems there is huge controversy in every trial on what is admitted as evidence and what is not. In non adversarial systems not many things are not admissable.


Last edited by Popper on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
Popper wrote:

BTW a curiosity: it seems that conditional freedom was invented in the English colonies of Australia (one was Norfolk island) where prisoners were gradually released to work for a salary. If they behaved badly or escaped they were sent back. Salary could be used to purchase gradually freedom or goods.


Yes, ticket-of-leave.
It also applied to the mainland as well.

There was a practical reason: you cannot grow things or make things or build things or have your dinner cooked and served to you, if the entire population is kept inside, in cells. There has to be at least a few people trustworthy enough to wash the clothes and put them up to dry, and iron them, and dye them, and stitch them, and, etc etc.

Someone has to take the function and position of the lower class. It may as well be the convicts. :)

Psychologically, the stigma of having convict ancestors lasted until 1970s-1980s.


I was sure you knew about this.

Everyone in the world has either a convict ancestor or an ancestor who committed a crime [under today's standards] and was not sent to prison or sanctioned because of various reasons. BTW, prison as a penalty dates back to 1600. Before prison was only a detention awaiting judgement or debt payment. Penalty was money, death, physical penalty, exile or pillory.
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 Aug 21, 2010 2:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Wouldn't conspiracy theorists be innately attuned to being "spun"?
Why believe a PR firm and not the official Venus-investigation-BlueBook-counterespionage-propaganda story?

What makes a PR firm believable? Wouldn't "they" ss-) use that tactic?

How can skeptics identify the non-skeptic "true-believers"?

There is some viral thinking going on that the marketers and advertisers might want to exploit if they want to take advantage of the gullible.

Being a Randi is not saying "I'm skeptical" and wearing a badge.

Being a Randi is saying "I'm skeptical, and here are the reasons why..."
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
Everyone in the world has either a convict ancestor or an ancestor who committed a crime [under today's standards]...


Somewhere back along the timeline, the ancestors of those alive now killed off (either slowly or quickly) the ancestors of those who aren't.

Like that Otzi chap in the Alpine glacier.

Very sobering thought.
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
Popper wrote:
Everyone in the world has either a convict ancestor or an ancestor who committed a crime [under today's standards]...


Somewhere back along the timeline, the ancestors of those alive now killed off (either slowly or quickly) the ancestors of those who aren't.

Like that Otzi chap in the Alpine glacier.

Very sobering thought.



Exactly.

A friend of mine from a family which was part of the nobility in the 1830s had an ancestor who killed a man. Reason was the victim offended him. The killer was a huge man, 6'6'' and 120 kilos. The victim was a farmer. All was resolved by the payment of a sum of money and the gift of a piece of land with animals. In this case the victim had a big family and many children who could live well out of the money and land but on average victims certainly have fewer children.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:41 pm   Post subject: Future Shock   

Popper wrote:

Let us therefore discuss 2 Amanda Knox scenarios, assuming she gets 26 as final sentence in Supreme court Cassazione:

SCENARIO 1
At year 5 to 10 she admits guilt or partial guilt, shows regret and asks pardon (even in a private way, it does not have to be public, and she will obtain it given the humanity of MK family), makes an effort to pay damages to MK family, keeps good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). Probably in language school or social community for drug addicts or – if she has competences in relative field (eg Sollecito will surely work in IT which is very common for ex prisoners). At year 16/17 she is out on conditional and gets a flat and continues to work. Possibly slightly earlier with some “indulto”. She is under surveillance for a while and has to stay in the city. She runs little risk of being expelled. At the end of surveillance period (probably one or two years) she is completely free and can even go back to the US. Given what Stilicho says, does going back make sense if you are a sex offender with no work ?
SCENARIO 2
Never admits guilt not even partially. Never asks for pardon. Does not study or improve herself. Makes money with book which says she is innocent and does not pay damages to Kerchers. Keeps decent but strange behaviour. Shows psycho problems (every prisoner is always monitored by social workers and psychologist appointed by surveillance tribunal for the prison). At year 15 she is denied benefits. At year 17 the same. Without initial benefits and no repentance she is later denied conditional freedom. At end of sentence - 26 yrs less possibly some general “indulto” ie 2 yrs so 24 years - she is expelled as she is not a EU citizen.

You say which scenario is more likely. I think scenario 1 LIKELY and scenario 2 UNLIKELY. Any normal or semi normal person wishes to exit prison asap...


Interesting, post, Popper:

I also wonder about a third scenario, a hybrid of your aforementioned scenarios One and Two.
A Third Scenario might be:
1.) Amanda never admits guilt, not even partially BUT-
2) Amanda maintains "good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). "

Speculating about the future, I also think we need to wonder about the next 14-15 years-- OUTSIDE of Amanda's prison.

Specifically I'm thinking about her support network.

Her family's single-minded focus is, and has been, Amanda. Will they be able to sustain that through the years for her? Can the family guarantee that? I don't think so.

Are the younger sisters supposed to sacrifice their lives, dreams and ambitions on the "Amanda Altar" for the next decade or so of their lives?

Amanda's survival thus far, has been contingent on the fact that she has been able to occupy her family's sole focus--financial, emotional, spiritual.

Most of us can look back at the past 10-15 years of our own lives and realize "the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry." Or as Amanda would remind us, in life, especially over a ten year period: "Shit happens." To the best of us. Life is not fair, it's unpredictable and life can be quite strange.

Just because you have been diagnosed with cancer doesn't mean you're immune from having another life-threatening disease. Just because you have one child in prison, doesn't mean another child won't engage in criminal behavior and end up in the slammer.

Amanda and her family have been truly FORTUNATE that the worst thing that happened to the family thus far, was Curt's job loss and oh, yes, Edda's shrinking dress size. ss)

But what if--IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS OR SO-- one of the sisters, or the parents or anyone in the immediate family had an EQUALLY COMPELLING "need" that demanded attention, funds, support of the entire family.

I'm confident that the Melloxes would never FULLY abandon Amanda, but life just wouldn't be the same for the Narcissist Incarcerated Victim, having to share the spotlight, the emotional energy, and the funds.

Oh, and what about the inevitable waning international media attention for the Aging Angel ... ???

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

The 411 wrote:
Popper wrote:

Let us therefore discuss 2 Amanda Knox scenarios, assuming she gets 26 as final sentence in Supreme court Cassazione:

SCENARIO 1
At year 5 to 10 she admits guilt or partial guilt, shows regret and asks pardon (even in a private way, it does not have to be public, and she will obtain it given the humanity of MK family), makes an effort to pay damages to MK family, keeps good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). Probably in language school or social community for drug addicts or – if she has competences in relative field (eg Sollecito will surely work in IT which is very common for ex prisoners). At year 16/17 she is out on conditional and gets a flat and continues to work. Possibly slightly earlier with some “indulto”. She is under surveillance for a while and has to stay in the city. She runs little risk of being expelled. At the end of surveillance period (probably one or two years) she is completely free and can even go back to the US. Given what Stilicho says, does going back make sense if you are a sex offender with no work ?
SCENARIO 2
Never admits guilt not even partially. Never asks for pardon. Does not study or improve herself. Makes money with book which says she is innocent and does not pay damages to Kerchers. Keeps decent but strange behaviour. Shows psycho problems (every prisoner is always monitored by social workers and psychologist appointed by surveillance tribunal for the prison). At year 15 she is denied benefits. At year 17 the same. Without initial benefits and no repentance she is later denied conditional freedom. At end of sentence - 26 yrs less possibly some general “indulto” ie 2 yrs so 24 years - she is expelled as she is not a EU citizen.

You say which scenario is more likely. I think scenario 1 LIKELY and scenario 2 UNLIKELY. Any normal or semi normal person wishes to exit prison asap...


Interesting, post, Popper:

I also wonder about a third scenario, a hybrid of your aforementioned scenarios One and Two.
A Third Scenario might be:
1.) Amanda never admits guilt, not even partially BUT-
2) Amanda maintains "good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). "

Speculating about the future, I also think we need to wonder about the next 14-15 years-- OUTSIDE of Amanda's prison.

Specifically I'm thinking about her support network.

Her family's single-minded focus is, and has been, Amanda. Will they be able to sustain that through the years for her? Can the family guarantee that? I don't think so.

Are the younger sisters supposed to sacrifice their lives, dreams and ambitions on the "Amanda Altar" for the next decade or so of their lives?

Amanda's survival thus far, has been contingent on the fact that she has been able to occupy her family's sole focus--financial, emotional, spiritual.

Most of us can look back at the past 10-15 years of our own lives and realize "the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry." Or as Amanda would remind us, in life, especially over a ten year period: "Shit happens." To the best of us. Life is not fair, it's unpredictable and life can be quite strange.

Just because you have been diagnosed with cancer doesn't mean you're immune from having another life-threatening disease. Just because you have one child in prison, doesn't mean another child won't engage in criminal behavior and end up in the slammer.

Amanda and her family have been truly FORTUNATE that the worst thing that happened to the family thus far, was Curt's job loss and oh, yes, Edda's shrinking dress size. ss)

But what if--IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS OR SO-- one of the sisters, or the parents or anyone in the immediate family had an EQUALLY COMPELLING "need" that demanded attention, funds, support of the entire family.

I'm confident that the Melloxes would never FULLY abandon Amanda, but life just wouldn't be the same for the Narcissist Incarcerated Victim, having to share the spotlight, the emotional energy, and the funds.

Oh, and what about the inevitable waning international media attention for the Aging Angel ... ???

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?



Good point.
Let us reiterate we are talking about a situation in which 3 degrees of magistrates have convicted her so conviction is final (now she is still a defendant awaiting trial).

In order to give parole (and therefore freedom, even if partial) a surveillance Judge needs "sicuro ravvedimento accertato" (difficult to translate, i would say "sure and proved repentance") plus those 2 other things (time spent in prison and pay damages if possible). Other benefits (like permit to go outside to work etc.) need various requisites gradually more important but all related to showing important positive personality traits (altruism, solidarity, interest for victim, absence of social danger, appreciation of moral values, interest for life, interest for some discipline etc.) and signs of rehabilitation.

Without admission of guilt everything would become very difficult for Amanda in particular parole/conditional freedom. Not technically impossible but very difficult.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:33 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.



When I managed 7 people, I was fortunate to attend a one week class about how to manage your people better knowing their personality type. The thought was that everyone falls into a category, 1-9. Without going into detail about 3-9, I'll just focus on 1 and 2.

1's are driven, sometimes ruthless and will do just about anything to further their careers. They will often step on anyone and everyone to get to the top. Most, but not all CEOs fall into this category although you will find a smattering of 2's.

Many of the characteristics of these numbers are narcissistic for sure.

Most in the class I took were 3's.

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:48 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

The 411 wrote:

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?



Good consideration.
Once her appeals are exhausted, the later she will start to "re-educate herself" the later she will be out.
Family may not abandon her but I think big time PR will go away sooner than expected by all of us. In Europe it is already hardly seen as family has less power vs media. People lose interest very soon in much more important things, imagine here. There will be other murder cases. At the moment we should all remember her situation may still get worse (life or 30) and only her lawyers work really for her - with low chances - so family should save money for them.

I agree she looks like a narcissistic personality and that will harm her if not addressed. Once finally convicted she will have available automatic psychological treatment.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

Popper wrote:
The 411 wrote:
Popper wrote:

Let us therefore discuss 2 Amanda Knox scenarios, assuming she gets 26 as final sentence in Supreme court Cassazione:

SCENARIO 1
At year 5 to 10 she admits guilt or partial guilt, shows regret and asks pardon (even in a private way, it does not have to be public, and she will obtain it given the humanity of MK family), makes an effort to pay damages to MK family, keeps good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). Probably in language school or social community for drug addicts or – if she has competences in relative field (eg Sollecito will surely work in IT which is very common for ex prisoners). At year 16/17 she is out on conditional and gets a flat and continues to work. Possibly slightly earlier with some “indulto”. She is under surveillance for a while and has to stay in the city. She runs little risk of being expelled. At the end of surveillance period (probably one or two years) she is completely free and can even go back to the US. Given what Stilicho says, does going back make sense if you are a sex offender with no work ?
SCENARIO 2
Never admits guilt not even partially. Never asks for pardon. Does not study or improve herself. Makes money with book which says she is innocent and does not pay damages to Kerchers. Keeps decent but strange behaviour. Shows psycho problems (every prisoner is always monitored by social workers and psychologist appointed by surveillance tribunal for the prison). At year 15 she is denied benefits. At year 17 the same. Without initial benefits and no repentance she is later denied conditional freedom. At end of sentence - 26 yrs less possibly some general “indulto” ie 2 yrs so 24 years - she is expelled as she is not a EU citizen.

You say which scenario is more likely. I think scenario 1 LIKELY and scenario 2 UNLIKELY. Any normal or semi normal person wishes to exit prison asap...


Interesting, post, Popper:

I also wonder about a third scenario, a hybrid of your aforementioned scenarios One and Two.
A Third Scenario might be:
1.) Amanda never admits guilt, not even partially BUT-
2) Amanda maintains "good conduct, studies and works in prison, does not give signs of being insane etc. at year 14/15 she gets outside permits and outside work (day time, then sleeps in prison). "

Speculating about the future, I also think we need to wonder about the next 14-15 years-- OUTSIDE of Amanda's prison.

Specifically I'm thinking about her support network.

Her family's single-minded focus is, and has been, Amanda. Will they be able to sustain that through the years for her? Can the family guarantee that? I don't think so.

Are the younger sisters supposed to sacrifice their lives, dreams and ambitions on the "Amanda Altar" for the next decade or so of their lives?

Amanda's survival thus far, has been contingent on the fact that she has been able to occupy her family's sole focus--financial, emotional, spiritual.

Most of us can look back at the past 10-15 years of our own lives and realize "the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry." Or as Amanda would remind us, in life, especially over a ten year period: "Shit happens." To the best of us. Life is not fair, it's unpredictable and life can be quite strange.

Just because you have been diagnosed with cancer doesn't mean you're immune from having another life-threatening disease. Just because you have one child in prison, doesn't mean another child won't engage in criminal behavior and end up in the slammer.

Amanda and her family have been truly FORTUNATE that the worst thing that happened to the family thus far, was Curt's job loss and oh, yes, Edda's shrinking dress size. ss)

But what if--IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS OR SO-- one of the sisters, or the parents or anyone in the immediate family had an EQUALLY COMPELLING "need" that demanded attention, funds, support of the entire family.

I'm confident that the Melloxes would never FULLY abandon Amanda, but life just wouldn't be the same for the Narcissist Incarcerated Victim, having to share the spotlight, the emotional energy, and the funds.

Oh, and what about the inevitable waning international media attention for the Aging Angel ... ???

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?



Good point.
Let us reiterate we are talking about a situation in which 3 degrees of magistrates have convicted her so conviction is final (now she is still a defendant awaiting trial).

In order to give parole (and therefore freedom, even if partial) a surveillance Judge needs "sicuro ravvedimento accertato" (difficult to translate, i would say "sure and proved repentance") plus those 2 other things (time spent in prison and pay damages if possible). Other benefits (like permit to go outside to work etc.) need various requisites gradually more important but all related to showing important positive personality traits (altruism, solidarity, interest for victim, absence of social danger, appreciation of moral values, interest for life, interest for some discipline etc.) and signs of rehabilitation.

Without admission of guilt everything would become very difficult for Amanda in particular parole/conditional freedom. Not technically impossible but very difficult.


Well, maybe she will admit some kind of guilt once she's not her family's sole focus any more. It seems that her parents' behavior has been really toxic for her so far. And as Amanda probably won't cure her narcissism any time soon (or ever), a confession for her could also mean gaining power/control over her situation, and renewed attention.
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:15 pm   Post subject: ADMINISTRATOR NOTE!   

ADMINISTRATOR NOTE:

I have now made a copy of the Massei Report Translation thread available for public perusal to ensure the process is completely transparent. The only edits I have made to the thread is to remove the personal/private details of those who took part. The rest is 'as is'.

You can read it in the 'Projects For Meredith' subforum: MASSEI MOTIVATIONS REPORT MAIN DISCUSSION

Thank you

_________________
"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 Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
Catnip wrote:
Popper wrote:
Everyone in the world has either a convict ancestor or an ancestor who committed a crime [under today's standards]...


Somewhere back along the timeline, the ancestors of those alive now killed off (either slowly or quickly) the ancestors of those who aren't.

Like that Otzi chap in the Alpine glacier.

Very sobering thought.



Exactly.

A friend of mine from a family which was part of the nobility in the 1830s had an ancestor who killed a man. Reason was the victim offended him. The killer was a huge man, 6'6'' and 120 kilos. The victim was a farmer. All was resolved by the payment of a sum of money and the gift of a piece of land with animals. In this case the victim had a big family and many children who could live well out of the money and land but on average victims certainly have fewer children.


Speaking of the nobility, I've heard that behind every family fortune there is a pirate or some other cut-throat who acquired his wealth through illicit means. This includes -- dare I say it?-- the fortunes of earls.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:39 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

Ava wrote:
a confession for her could also mean gaining power/control over her situation, and renewed attention.


good point compatible with a narcissistic personality but she will get renewed attention and control if she confesses during appeal and SC trials. Later after 10 years few will care.

To me she looks like someone who will eventually confess, most probably after final conviction (now she has too much PR and is in defensive mood). After all she already confessed only after 4 days.
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 Aug 21, 2010 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

This is a follow up to identifying the location of RS's apartment within his building. It would appear to be ground floor and first to the right as you enter.


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

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

capealadin wrote:
Hi, Fiona. I always give you the utmost respect, and I would say that in a perfect world, those are wonderful sentiments. ***

A perfect world have no need for prisons. I think that the very imperfection of the world is all the more reason for a more civilized, less brutal approach to crime and criminals.

Where I live public clamor for retribution has brought about draconian mandatory sentencing laws (replacing indeterminate sentencing which sought to avoid keeping people locked up who didn't need to still be), including the "three-strikes" law which, for example, put Jerry Dewayne Williams, at age 27, back in prison for 25-years-life for stealing a slice of pepperoni pizza. Luckily for him, the sentencing judge used a provision to strike a prior conviction and treat the pizza theft as a second offense. Williams was released in 1998. Still, three years is long time for one slice of pizza.

I am with Fiona on this, and I agree that it is a more practical approach. But in my country, public policy and the practical are often strangers.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline beans


Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:00 am

Posts: 220

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

If (and I really hope it is "when") Amanda is finally fully convicted, when there are no more appeals to comment and debate upon and Amanda is just serving her time, her family will be supportive to some degree or other. Although whether they will want to spend the rest of their lives and future earnings jetting back and forth to Italy to make sure she has someone to visit her for two hours a week would seem to be debatable. But, I highly suspect that the talking heads will quickly move on to other new media-worthy stories--they won't be getting paid and getting their celebrity fix for old news and Amanda and the rest of the family will have to learn to live a life where they are no longer the "stars of the show." There may be some money- and publicity- generating opportunities and they make make a bundle, but those, IMO, won't actually last for long--again it's the old news thing. The fervent supporters like Bruce and Charlie, et al. will move on to new controversies and conspiracies and the "huge flow of letters" will dwindle. The Amanda and Knox-Mellas family had better enjoy the spotlight now, because when the appeals are done, the spotlight will fade rather quickly. I understand that Edda and Curt would obviously prefer that this whole situation had not arisen--but I also think they have rather enjoyed all the media attention. The really long days for Amanda and her family still lie in the future.
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

TomM wrote:
capealadin wrote:
Hi, Fiona. I always give you the utmost respect, and I would say that in a perfect world, those are wonderful sentiments. ***

A perfect world have no need for prisons. I think that the very imperfection of the world is all the more reason for a more civilized, less brutal approach to crime and criminals.

Where I live public clamor for retribution has brought about draconian mandatory sentencing laws (replacing indeterminate sentencing which sought to avoid keeping people locked up who didn't need to still be), including the "three-strikes" law which, for example, put Jerry Dewayne Williams, at age 27, back in prison for 25-years-life for stealing a slice of pepperoni pizza. Luckily for him, the sentencing judge used a provision to strike a prior conviction and treat the pizza theft as a second offense. Williams was released in 1998. Still, three years is long time for one slice of pizza.

I am with Fiona on this, and I agree that it is a more practical approach. But in my country, public policy and the practical are often strangers.


I think the three strikes law is an abomination. The punishment must always fit the crime, if it does not then that is not 'justice' and worse, makes a mockery of the concept. It sounds to me like the judge in the case you cited understood this very well and found a loophole that maybe didn't ensure justice was served (as you say, three years is a long time for a slice of pizza) but at least limited the damage to it.

But let's be candid and use the less polite but more honest word to retribution...revenge. Revenge is the imposter to justice. This is why I'm against the election of law enforcers and officials. In the old days the mob would surround the jail and drag criminals (or accused criminals) from their cells and hang them from the nearest tree, with little care for mercy, mitigation, rehabilitation, atonement or even a concern that they may even be innocent. Democratising justice simply puts the same 'mob' in charge via the ballet box that allows them to vote for the first official that runs a campaign on the ticket of a policy of dragging criminals out of their cells and hanging them from the nearest tree. It's just now done in a more 'savoury' way that doesn't put people off their breakfast...throw them in jail forever...out of sight, out of mind...who cares?

_________________
"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 Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:57 pm   Post subject: Re: Open-ended Questions   

Catnip wrote:
bolint wrote:
Fiona wrote:
"Why would they expect the police to arrive before an ordinary level of wetness had dried up?"

This brings up Amanda's cryptic phrase on the use of the hair drier: "obviously to dry my hair"

— posted by bolint [XVII.13] (Post 55420 on 17-Aug-2010)




The story of going into the big bathroom “obviously to dry my hair” brought to mind the photo of Amanda’s room again:

(IMAGE)
Gallery: "Amanda's room" link


Is that a hair-dryer plugged into the wall?

But that question already assumes an answer (and is a bit confrontational, as well).

This is a good opportunity to practice investigative interviewing techniques (1).



Leading question:
“That looks like an unplugged phone charger on the floor. So is that a hair-dryer plugged into the wall?”

Open-ended question:
“What’s plugged into the wall?”
"What did you bring over from the States? From Germany? Do you have your own hairdryer?"


In real life, that might be the computer plugged into the wall.

Assumptions only hinder seeing what is there. It's a lot like coming across a new word or phrase when translating -- you ask yourself, "What does it mean?" and you don't automatically accept the first definition in the dictionary as being the correct one.



Other things to notice:

  • The electrical feature above the wardrobe seems to be disconnected/yanked out (Grr students! - it's all part of the adventure though).
  • Another light switch (for the fixture above?) and a second powerpoint (US: socket?) half-hidden by the wardrobe, which itself looks fairly clean and newish (so maybe there used to be a desk or something there?)
  • The key in the inside lock (as mentioned back in May).
  • Can't tell what month the Picasso wall calendar is open at - too blurry.
  • The tiled floor throughout (walking barefoot on it in autumn, and at night or early morning at that, would have been an endurance test if it was for a really really long period - all other things being equal)


By the bye, the six-string classical guitar was described in some reports as being found in the wardrobe, as opposed to next to, or leaning against it, as the photo shows.




(1) "one of the most critical skills of investigative interviewers is the ability to maintain the use of non-leading, open-ended questions. ...Open-ended questions are defined as those questions that encourage elaborate (as opposed to brief or one-word) responses. ...they maximize the accuracy of the interviewee's account of the offence and minimize the opportunity for confusion, contamination and/or misunderstandings. " — Becky Milne and Martine Powell, "[2.9] Investigative Interviewing", in Jennifer Brown and Elizabeth Campbell (eds), The Cambridge Book of Forensic Psychology (2010) [Cambridge University Press 2010] pp 208-214 p 211

The photo in the lower right corner of this composite shows that the power cord coming from near the door is likely the power supply for AK's laptop. The dark object near her laptop appears to be headphones but that could possibly be a hair dryer as well.



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

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I've been thinking about the assumption that Amanda will be raking in cash upon her eventual release.
I'm not too sure about that one.
My own suspicion is that most of the money to be made off of this will be gotten by her family, and most of that in the next few years.

All news stories have a finite life span, and even the best PR firm can't spin straw into gold if there is just nothing to work with.
("Amanda Knox spends fourteenth birthday still in jail" isn't really all that gripping.")
They will do what they can with the appeal, which is certain to bring in more money for family interviews, more soggy Mater Dolorosa from Edda, more aggressive posturing from her men.
They will wring out whatever funds they can from any movie/tv projects, though these may turn out to be less lucrative than they hope if the appeal goes very badly for them.
(Or so one can hope.)

But all of that will be going on in the next few years, four or five at most.
And the earliest anyone is positing for her release is more like 14 years.
That's a lot of time for people to just forget about Amanda.
Other cute young things will flare across the public consciousness.
If her family end up making any money out of this disaster, it will be spent.
Money does just tend to go away - flights to Perugia, schooling for her siblings - and eventually their children, health issues.
There are always needs.
Are her various parents even still employed?
A single "normal" disaster, and the PR firm may turn into one expense too many.
Not this year, maybe not next, but in eight years? ten years? fourteen? twenty?

And the Amanda who leaves prison will not be a fresh-faced college student, but a tired grown woman either in her thirties, or even pushing forty.
Yes, when one thinks of Meredith's stolen life, that seems absurdly young to think of her killer rejoining civilized life.
But at least it doesn't make good tv.
There is nothing more ephemeral than the "news."
In fourteen years, no one will care about Amanda.
I was trying to think of who was in the news fourteen years ago, to use as an example.
But I couldn't remember any one, which I guess proves the point.
(Anyone paying much attention to Monica Lewinsky these days?)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:33 pm   Post subject: Re: ADMINISTRATOR NOTE!   

Michael wrote:
ADMINISTRATOR NOTE:

I have now made a copy of the Massei Report Translation thread available for public perusal to ensure the process is completely transparent. The only edits I have made to the thread is to remove the personal/private details of those who took part. The rest is 'as is'.

You can read it in the 'Projects For Meredith' subforum: MASSEI MOTIVATIONS REPORT MAIN DISCUSSION

Thank you


Thank you Michael. I just read through several pages of the thread again, and would like to name each person involved and thank them for what they have done.

In no particular order, our esteemed colleagues

Jools
Yummi
Catnip
Clander
Thoughtful
Katsgalore
Skep
The 411
Michael
Greggy
Drive By Doc
Some Alibi
Tiziano

We salute you!

r-((

ETA kats and Greggy.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Don't forget Katsgalore and Greggy :)

_________________
"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 cath


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:37 am

Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:41 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.


RE: narcissists in upper-management positions
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:05 pm   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

cath wrote:
Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.


RE: narcissists in upper-management positions


Thanks for the link. This book sounds very interesting. The psycho-narcissist I reported to eventually crashed and burned, like the Pit Bull. By then I had left the company, opting for self-employment. People told me he would eventually get his comeuppance and it would be a happy day. The funny thing is, when I heard that Psycho Narc had gotten it in spades, I did not feel any elation at all. His humiliation was so great that he actually moved to another country. He did leave with a huge wad of money, though. He had risen in the organization by basically collecting dirt on people, and was able to use some of it in exchange for a huge severance package when he was shown the door.

_________________
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: Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
I've been thinking about the assumption that Amanda will be raking in cash upon her eventual release.
I'm not too sure about that one.
My own suspicion is that most of the money to be made off of this will be gotten by her family, and most of that in the next few years.

All news stories have a finite life span, and even the best PR firm can't spin straw into gold if there is just nothing to work with.
("Amanda Knox spends fourteenth birthday still in jail" isn't really all that gripping.")
They will do what they can with the appeal, which is certain to bring in more money for family interviews, more soggy Mater Dolorosa from Edda, more aggressive posturing from her men.
They will wring out whatever funds they can from any movie/tv projects, though these may turn out to be less lucrative than they hope if the appeal goes very badly for them.
(Or so one can hope.)

But all of that will be going on in the next few years, four or five at most.
And the earliest anyone is positing for her release is more like 14 years.
That's a lot of time for people to just forget about Amanda.
Other cute young things will flare across the public consciousness.
If her family end up making any money out of this disaster, it will be spent.
Money does just tend to go away - flights to Perugia, schooling for her siblings - and eventually their children, health issues.
There are always needs.
Are her various parents even still employed?
A single "normal" disaster, and the PR firm may turn into one expense too many.
Not this year, maybe not next, but in eight years? ten years? fourteen? twenty?

And the Amanda who leaves prison will not be a fresh-faced college student, but a tired grown woman either in her thirties, or even pushing forty.
Yes, when one thinks of Meredith's stolen life, that seems absurdly young to think of her killer rejoining civilized life.
But at least it doesn't make good tv.
There is nothing more ephemeral than the "news."
In fourteen years, no one will care about Amanda.
I was trying to think of who was in the news fourteen years ago, to use as an example.
But I couldn't remember any one, which I guess proves the point.
(Anyone paying much attention to Monica Lewinsky these days?)


Just to give some time perspective about a crime story that occurred 14 years ago: This coming December will mark the 14th anniversary of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.

Just a few weeks ago (On August 6 to be exact), JonBenet, had she lived, would have turned 20 years old! It's hard to realize that JonBenet is was just three years younger than Amanda Knox. Amanda Knox was just nine years old (probably in the 4th grade!) at the time of JonBenet's murder.

The JonBenet tragic case had so many unforeseen bizarre twists and turns (think of creepy Jon Mark Karr's "confession" and sadly, the death of JonBenet's mother from ovarian cancer, four years ago.)

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/noto ... dex_1.html
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:
Don't forget Katsgalore and Greggy :)


Daaaaaim! They were on my list too...I just mis-wrote. This is the same as the Clintonesque 'mis-remembered' i.e I made a mistake but I am not going to admit it. In her case it was a lie, and her euphemism is almost as toecurling as her husband's weasel words some time earlier.

I wonder if when Amanda 'confesses' (oh, come the day) she will claim that she 'mis-remembered' events from that night. I wonder if she will claim she actually 'mis-murdered' Meredith, and that it wasn't her intention to hold her down and stab her AT ALL...it was a 'mis-act', nothing to do with her, and hence she really should be forgiven for it. Clinton has a lot to teach the liars of the world. She is shameless, like all politicians. Having said that I quite like her...she is looking more like Margaret Thatcher by the day however, which is punishment enough for any sins she may have committed in the past.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The 411 wrote:
lauowolf wrote:
I've been thinking about the assumption that Amanda will be raking in cash upon her eventual release.
I'm not too sure about that one.
My own suspicion is that most of the money to be made off of this will be gotten by her family, and most of that in the next few years.

All news stories have a finite life span, and even the best PR firm can't spin straw into gold if there is just nothing to work with.
("Amanda Knox spends fourteenth birthday still in jail" isn't really all that gripping.")
They will do what they can with the appeal, which is certain to bring in more money for family interviews, more soggy Mater Dolorosa from Edda, more aggressive posturing from her men.
They will wring out whatever funds they can from any movie/tv projects, though these may turn out to be less lucrative than they hope if the appeal goes very badly for them.
(Or so one can hope.)

But all of that will be going on in the next few years, four or five at most.
And the earliest anyone is positing for her release is more like 14 years.
That's a lot of time for people to just forget about Amanda.
Other cute young things will flare across the public consciousness.
If her family end up making any money out of this disaster, it will be spent.
Money does just tend to go away - flights to Perugia, schooling for her siblings - and eventually their children, health issues.
There are always needs.
Are her various parents even still employed?
A single "normal" disaster, and the PR firm may turn into one expense too many.
Not this year, maybe not next, but in eight years? ten years? fourteen? twenty?

And the Amanda who leaves prison will not be a fresh-faced college student, but a tired grown woman either in her thirties, or even pushing forty.
Yes, when one thinks of Meredith's stolen life, that seems absurdly young to think of her killer rejoining civilized life.
But at least it doesn't make good tv.
There is nothing more ephemeral than the "news."
In fourteen years, no one will care about Amanda.
I was trying to think of who was in the news fourteen years ago, to use as an example.
But I couldn't remember any one, which I guess proves the point.
(Anyone paying much attention to Monica Lewinsky these days?)


Just to give some time perspective about a crime story that occurred 14 years ago: This coming December will mark the 14th anniversary of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.

Just a few weeks ago (On August 6 to be exact), JonBenet, had she lived, would have turned 20 years old! It's hard to realize that JonBenet is was just three years younger than Amanda Knox. Amanda Knox was just nine years old (probably in the 4th grade!) at the time of JonBenet's murder.

The JonBenet tragic case had so many unforeseen bizarre twists and turns (think of creepy Jon Mark Karr's "confession" and sadly, the death of JonBenet's mother from ovarian cancer, four years ago.)

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/noto ... dex_1.html


Were the parents cleared of involvement in the end. I forget the outcome of that case.

Also, did it stop the beauty pagent for under-fives in the US? We had some documentary on tv here recently about this phenomena, which I had naively assumed would have died out by now - especially following that bizarre and tragic case. Is it very unusual in the US now? Just curious.

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline The 411


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:49 pm

Posts: 1386

PostPosted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:15 pm   Post subject: 3 Million Egos Recalled!!!   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
cath wrote:
Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.


RE: narcissists in upper-management positions


Thanks for the link. This book sounds very interesting. The psycho-narcissist I reported to eventually crashed and burned, like the Pit Bull. By then I had left the company, opting for self-employment. People told me he would eventually get his comeuppance and it would be a happy day. The funny thing is, when I heard that Psycho Narc had gotten it in spades, I did not feel any elation at all. His humiliation was so great that he actually moved to another country. He did leave with a huge wad of money, though. He had risen in the organization by basically collecting dirt on people, and was able to use some of it in exchange for a huge severance package when he was shown the door.


I just turned on the US TV business news and read the news ticker--you know the news crawl with headlines at the bottom of the screen-- and THIS is what I thought I saw.....after reading this post about Narcissists.

What I *thought* the headline said was : 3 MILLION EGOS RECALLED. huh-)
YEAH!!! I thought: " It's about time they did something about all those Narcissists!"

OK, is) and need to get my eyes checked! :shock:

Meantime, everyone: stay away from egos AND eggs--the toxic types of BOTH!
ih)
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 Aug 22, 2010 12:11 am   Post subject: Young egos need protecting   

Finding cases of youngsters killing youngsters is partially blocked here (understandably so) because their young age requires them to be protected from public notoriety.

For example: last February, a 14-year-old fatally stabbed a 12-year-old at what we call a “private school” (meaning a privileged, well-respected, sought after and usually expensive school).

Quote:
Brisbane Children's Court Magistrate Pam Dowse today ruled there was enough evidence to potentially convict the teenager over the death.

The teenager's three-day committal hearing, which started last week and concluded today, was held in closed court.

– “Teen to stand trial over schoolboy murder” [ ABC News ] 03 August 2010



The two 16-year-old girls who killed their 15-year-old friend in 2006 likewise have had their names suppressed during legal proceedings.


And probably likewise also for the two youngsters in Dallas a couple of days ago:

Quote:

A 13-year-old boy and 12-year-old girl face murder charges after allegedly carrying out a double shooting in Texas.

– “Thirteen-year-old, 12-year-old face murder charges in Dallas shootings” [ Herald Sun ] 19 August 2010



The age of majority here is 18 years, so people older than that are treated as adults. For example:

Quote:
Tasmania Police have charged a second man over a triple shooting on Hobart's eastern shore.

19-year-old Aaron Dean Eaves, of Rokeby, appeared in the Hobart Magistrate's Court on Monday charged with three counts of attempted murder.

Police say they have now charged a second 19-year-old man over the shootings on Sunday night [15 August 2010] which left three men with non-threatening gunshot wounds.

Police allege the shootings were the result of an altercation and the men were known to each other.

– “Second teen charged over Hobart shootings” [ ABC News ] 17 August 2010



“Altercation” + “victim/offender known to each other” seems to be a highly correlated pattern. The newspaper articles could almost write themselves.


Plus also:
If Texas teens already have access to guns when 12 and 13, then, with twenty-somethings in Italy have access only to knives, then Italy is waaay behind the US from that point of view: definitely Third-world category!

Australia is approximately halfway between, with the people getting the guns (illegally) only when they "grow up".
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 Aug 22, 2010 12:34 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Popper wrote:
A friend of mine from a family which was part of the nobility in the 1830s had an ancestor who killed a man. Reason was the victim offended him. The killer was a huge man, 6'6'' and 120 kilos. The victim was a farmer. All was resolved by the payment of a sum of money and the gift of a piece of land with animals.



Going back a bit further, to a wooded hillside somewhere:



Quote:

36. The action began with distant fighting. The Britons with equal steadiness and skill used their huge swords and small shields to avoid or to parry the missiles of our soldiers, while they themselves poured on us a dense shower of darts [magnum vim telorum = “a tremendous barrage of weapons” ], till Agricola encouraged three Batavian and two Tungrian cohorts to bring matters to the decision of close fighting with swords. Such tactics were familiar to these veteran soldiers, but were embarrassing to [inhabile = “difficult for” ] an enemy armed with small bucklers and unwieldy weapons. The swords of the Britons are not pointed, and do not allow them to close with the foe, or to fight in the open field. No sooner did the Batavians begin to close with the enemy, to strike them with their shields, to disfigure their faces, and overthrowing the force on the plain to advance their line up the hill, than the other auxiliary cohorts joined with eager rivalry in cutting down all the nearest of the foe. Many were left behind half dead, some even unwounded, in the hurry of victory. Meantime the enemy's cavalry had fled, and the charioteers had mingled in the engagement of the infantry. But although these at first spread panic, they were soon impeded by the close array of our ranks and by the inequalities of the ground [inaequalibus locis = “on the uneven ground” ]. The battle had anything but the appearance of a cavalry action, for men and horses were carried along in confusion together, while chariots, destitute of guidance, and terrified horses without drivers [vagi currus, exterriti sine rectoribus equi = “uncontrolled chariots and riderless horses”], dashed as panic urged them, sideways, or in direct collision against the ranks.


Tacitus, Agricola 36
Translation by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb [1864-1877]
– [ link ]

With supplemental translation by Herbert Benario [1991]
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 Aug 22, 2010 1:10 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

That old photo I found a while back, illustrating the guitar-Perugia-learning-Italian meme:


[ University for Foreigners: Archive ] Panorama article page

looks like a young Tracy Newman.


Tracy Newman (home page [ here ]), after a successful stint in television, has recently taken up the guitar again, and a review by Country Fried Rock of one of her songs:

Quote:

Tracy Newman, "Alice's Restaurant" for Moms

I really want Tracy Newman to write five or ten more verses for "It's All Coming Back to Me Now," AKA The Carpool Song. Listen to it, and solicit her with yours. Seriously. Motherhood can be thankless, and sometimes your kids are dingleberries, unless you are a liar. ;-) It's ok to embrace that dichotomy between love and exasperation with your children. Newman's catchy folk sing-along will be your new (secret) anthem.

– [ CFR ] Blog, March 2010


reminded me of the recent dingleberry-exasperation of the Fishburnes:

Quote:
Laurence Fishburne's friends have tried to buy every copy of his teenage daughter's porn video to save the family from scandal.

– [ NineMSN ] 07 August 2010


But it was too late; the videos had already gone out to retailers.

Teenagers!


Dingleberries here are dags; I think there is no UK equivalent, innit?
Top Profile 

Offline bedelia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:12 am

Posts: 167

Location: New York

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:27 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
I think I have not been very clear. I do not believe that they have faced what they have done. I do not think that is possible for them while they are surrounded by the circus and the fantasy. I have said before: there will come a time when that goes away and there is no more hope of avoiding the truth. When they are alone with their sentences and the long years in obscurity; at that point I think there is hope for them: not before. Denial is possible now: indeed it is perhaps necessary given the path their families have chosen: but it will not always be so

Perhaps those who believe that AK and/or RS and/or RG are psychopaths are correct: I do not know. I think it is unlikely that three psychopaths happened on each other, though. I am not a psychiatrist, to make such a judgement. There are those who have argued that any of them acting alone would not have committed this crime. Again I do not know. I think it is perhaps true that it was the dynamic which drove it.

That does not mean that any of them would not be dangerous on release. Neither does it mean that they would. That is judgement for much later.

For me prison has four components: there is punishment. I have said that is given more weight than I think reasonable in my country: it is less emphasised in other countries (and at other times in my own country) and from what Popper says it is less important in Italy than it is here. That is a good thing IMO. I accept that victims need that element (though many need it less than is often claimed, IMO: they are used to justify the balance that we have here, I think). But punishment is not all we require from penal policy. There is also deterrence: we could argue till the cows come home about how effective that is but it is a strand in why we do what we do. There is also, as Macport says, the safety of other people: that is central, and one of the hardest calls to make. I am glad I do not need to make such judgements: I think they are impossible in the regime that we have: perhaps a little easier in the more flexible circumstances Popper describes. And there is rehabilitation. Very little is done in that regard here: again it seems to be better in Italy.

Punishment is regrettable but necessary for some of the victims: deterrence is an unknown. But the safety of others and rehabilitation are inseparable. And we cannot escape the risks unless we take the path of "life means life" or of capital punishment. Many would say we should take that path. I do not agree. There are people who are truly psychotic and who will always be a danger: some of them even know this of themselves. Ian Brady, for example, has not tried for release, so far as I know. There are others like him, and some take their own lives. But most who commit murder are not like them: and I do not think we can judge these people at this time.

If there is a regime which will truly aim at rehabilitation, and not just pay it lip service, then there is hope. I think of Jimmy Boyle. His background is not comparable, on the surface: but there is no doubt he was a dangerous man and a very persistent offender: yet he was rehabilitated. He is not alone.

To rebuild a personality takes time and skill: and sometimes it will fail utterly. But I think we should try. Like it or not, most prisoners are eventually released. They will live amongst us. We owe it to everyone to try to make change: to victims and prisoners and to ourselves.

The criminally insane are different: but unlike what I understand Popper to be saying, in this country they are a group for whom life can really mean life: that is being applied more and more to sane criminals but it is still very rare in this country. For those who are deemed psychopaths the situation is different. And it is interesting how that plays out. Peter Sutcliffe was originally said to be sane; and he stood trial as a sane person. For me that was amazing: I thought that any definition of insanity which did not include his behaviour was a rubbish definition, and needed to be thrown out. And so it proved: he was moved to Broadmoor sometime after sentence. Yet the fact he was originally held to be sane remains a puzzle: and I suspect it was this same desire for punishment which drove that, in that very high profile case. I hope I am wrong about that.

For those recognised to be crimally and homicidally insane there is no automatic release for they do not have a sentence. Sane criminals do have a sentence and so we are logically driven to strive for rehabilitation: or to whole life sentences/execution. We seem to be moving as a society in the direction of the latter, in the UK. But how are we to hold ourselves as civilised if we do that when we have not even begun to explore the limits of what can be done with rehabilitation? I personally cannot seee that we can.



I agree with you on rehabilitation, however as others have pointed out, this cannot happen until they confess and express remorse. As far as punishment, I do not believe in "an eye for an eye". I am against the death penalty. Because they are so young, I would feel a little bit sorry for them if they were truly in prison for life. I feel the appropriate sentence is 30 years. But then again, if they haven't confessed why should they get out?

From the AP

American activist Lori Berenson has apologized for aiding leftist rebels and asked a Peruvian court to let her remain free on parole. She acknowledges collaborating with the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement but says she was never involved in violent acts. She said that "if my coming to Peru has meant harm to the country, I am sorry and I regret it."

Most think her apology was made in order to be out on parole.

Lori Berenson has been in jail for 15 years and she didn't actually kill someone. If Amanda doesn't confess, 15 years seems waaaaay too short for me!
Top Profile 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:59 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

regard must be given to the motivations document: why ak and rs are jailed

6 months it took by a team of professional translators legal representatives doctors and biochemists

a stupendous effort the underlying case explained for the stupid argument that ak, rs should not be jailed
Top Profile 

Offline cath


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:37 am

Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:34 am   Post subject: Re: Cottage Locquat   

Skeptical Bystander wrote:
cath wrote:
Earl Grey wrote:
Skeptical Bystander wrote:


I had the misfortune of reporting to a narcissist in a job setting, and it was sheer hell. She eventually crashed and burned in a torrent of self-destructive rage. She tried to take everyone down with her.



I once read that narcissists are very well represented in upper-management positions, where their lack of human empathy serves them well. They are particularly good at firing -- their moment to shine -- but perhaps not as good when it comes to the less exciting task of hiring.


RE: narcissists in upper-management positions


Thanks for the link. This book sounds very interesting. The psycho-narcissist I reported to eventually crashed and burned, like the Pit Bull. By then I had left the company, opting for self-employment. People told me he would eventually get his comeuppance and it would be a happy day. The funny thing is, when I heard that Psycho Narc had gotten it in spades, I did not feel any elation at all. His humiliation was so great that he actually moved to another country. He did leave with a huge wad of money, though. He had risen in the organization by basically collecting dirt on people, and was able to use some of it in exchange for a huge severance package when he was shown the door.


You are most welcome Skep. The message there is quite pessimistic - psychopaths thrive in corporate environments and their "managerial gifts" are most appreciated (I suppose by those who run companies).
You mentioned in another post Alice Miller's first book - The Drama of the Gifted Child. I would also add The Untouched Key, Banished Knowledge and maybe one of her last ones - The Body Never Lies.
Looking at AK family I often think of Scott Peck's book - People of the Lie.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline fine


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:00 am

Posts: 555

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:47 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
I've been thinking about the assumption that Amanda will be raking in cash upon her eventual release.
I'm not too sure about that one.
My own suspicion is that most of the money to be made off of this will be gotten by her family, and most of that in the next few years.

All news stories have a finite life span, and even the best PR firm can't spin straw into gold if there is just nothing to work with.
("Amanda Knox spends fourteenth birthday still in jail" isn't really all that gripping.")
They will do what they can with the appeal, which is certain to bring in more money for family interviews, more soggy Mater Dolorosa from Edda, more aggressive posturing from her men.
They will wring out whatever funds they can from any movie/tv projects, though these may turn out to be less lucrative than they hope if the appeal goes very badly for them.
(Or so one can hope.)

But all of that will be going on in the next few years, four or five at most.
And the earliest anyone is positing for her release is more like 14 years.
That's a lot of time for people to just forget about Amanda.
Other cute young things will flare across the public consciousness.
If her family end up making any money out of this disaster, it will be spent.
Money does just tend to go away - flights to Perugia, schooling for her siblings - and eventually their children, health issues.
There are always needs.
Are her various parents even still employed?
A single "normal" disaster, and the PR firm may turn into one expense too many.
Not this year, maybe not next, but in eight years? ten years? fourteen? twenty?

And the Amanda who leaves prison will not be a fresh-faced college student, but a tired grown woman either in her thirties, or even pushing forty.
Yes, when one thinks of Meredith's stolen life, that seems absurdly young to think of her killer rejoining civilized life.
But at least it doesn't make good tv.
There is nothing more ephemeral than the "news."
In fourteen years, no one will care about Amanda.
I was trying to think of who was in the news fourteen years ago, to use as an example.
But I couldn't remember any one, which I guess proves the point.
(Anyone paying much attention to Monica Lewinsky these days?)


_____________________

WARNING: ANYONE SUFFERING FROM DEPRESSION MAY WISH TO IGNORE THIS POST.



I think it likely that Amanda will be walking the streets of Seattle (so to speak) in a few short years. Once her appeal process in Italy is exhausted, in a couple years, she'll be eligible for PRISONER TRANSFER to the USA. (See US State Department ) The only obstruction I see to her transfer, and early parole, is the civil DAMAGES she owes to the Kerchers. (Damages owed to Patrick and the cottage landlord are modest.) But, in my opinion, all the damages are subject to negotiation. Here is what the MOTIVATIONS report says about the damages owed to the Kercher family:


"Sentences
KNOX Amanda Marie and SOLLECITO Raffaele to the compensation, jointly with each other, for damages in dealings with the constituted plaintiffs John Leslie Kercher, Arline Carol Lara Kercher, Lyle Kercher, John Ashley Kercher, and Stephanie Arline Lara Kercher, damages to be liquidated in another trial and awarding an immediately executive provisional [compensation] equal to the amount of 1,000,000 euro each in favour of John Leslie Kercher and Arline Carol Lara Kercher, and to 800,000 euro each in favour of Lyle Kercher, John Ashley Kercher and Stephanie Arline Lara Kercher, in addition to a lump-sum refund, Value Added Tax and CPA as required by law;...." (English Translation, page 13.)


As I read this judgment, Amanda can negotiate a mutually-acceptable amount to be paid in damages. And if Amanda and her family can raise the money---or borrow the money---she can then be transfered to the USA and await parole in a sympathetic climate, thanks to the Marriott & Co. PR machinery.

Perhaps one of our Italians, familiar with Italian legal procedures, will clarify this issue.

///


Last edited by fine on Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Black Dog


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:43 pm

Posts: 109

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:07 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Mmm.. A tough one. For want of not wanting to tie myself in knots I think the whole system of incarcerating offenders needs reviewing, certainly in the UK and US.
I could never see any sense in locking people up when it is costing thousands of pounds at the expense of the state - and in all probability this cost far outweighing the value of items an individual thief may have been sentenced for.
TomM's comment regarding the guy who stole a slice of pizza springs to mind. I think if this type of thing happens in a system, it needs reviewing.

Of course there are different types of offender like murderers and child abusers. This type of offender has to be punished for their crimes and should be denied their freedom until they are no longer a threat to society.
In the case of Amanda Knox, I believe she does have mental health issues and should receive treatment while incarcerated and I see no point in letting her out until it is certain she won't hurt or kill anyone else. Easier said than done of course in cases like hers but treatment is the best option in my opinion.
However, people do need to be punished for their crimes so as to act as a deterrent in order for them to not repeat offend.
Offenders should not be released early from prison until they have demonstrated genuine remorse for their crimes.In other words when they have truly learned their lesson. Offenders who continually profess their innocence throughout their sentence when there are heaps of evidence to the contrary do not fall into this category.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:40 am   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

Popper wrote:
The 411 wrote:

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?



Good consideration.
Once her appeals are exhausted, the later she will start to "re-educate herself" the later she will be out.
Family may not abandon her but I think big time PR will go away sooner than expected by all of us. In Europe it is already hardly seen as family has less power vs media. People lose interest very soon in much more important things, imagine here. There will be other murder cases. At the moment we should all remember her situation may still get worse (life or 30) and only her lawyers work really for her - with low chances - so family should save money for them.

I agree she looks like a narcissistic personality and that will harm her if not addressed. Once finally convicted she will have available automatic psychological treatment.


This is armchair psychology by all of us but I still think we have the wrong narcissist/sociopath identified. I just watched two of the episodes on Joran Van Der Sloot and the various opinions on his emotional disablities. The difference between Van Der Sloot and Knox is that in his case he is probably that narcissist/sociopath; in her case it's her parents.

It's consistently been Curt, Edda and Chris who have worked tirelessly to cultivate a public image for their daughter/stepdaughter. Amanda showed up in court in a blazingly inappropriate Beatles shirt but don't forget that her mother, sister, and half-sisters showed up in their beachwear. Who made those decisions? Who are the attention-seekers who hired the Marriott corporation to influence the US media? It certainly wasn't Amanda.

Van Der Sloot reminded me a lot more of Chris Mellas than he did of Amanda. He was the one bowing to Sollecito and whose presence in the courtroom urged Amanda to start talking about the beatings she allegedly suffered at the hands of the police. Amanda's stories didn't change nearly as often as Joran's did. But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?

The family will always be there for Amanda, I believe. They are the ones who really need the psychiatric treatment first because everything they've done in this case has been harmful to their own daughter along with their callous assessment of the Kerchers and their legal representation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:00 am   Post subject: Re: Young egos need protecting   

Catnip wrote:
Finding cases of youngsters killing youngsters is partially blocked here (understandably so) because their young age requires them to be protected from public notoriety.

For example: last February, a 14-year-old fatally stabbed a 12-year-old at what we call a “private school” (meaning a privileged, well-respected, sought after and usually expensive school).


These are the type of hazing rituals that I believe cost Meredith her life. It doesn't have to be an exclusive school where it happens. I find it very difficult to locate well-sourced information on hazing either on-line or in the library. It's puzzling. These rituals begin at an early age and especially among athletic individuals or "alphas".

The origin of the attack on Meredith is so similar to standard hazing rituals that I would have expected to see a lot more publicity about them. There hasn't been.

We know that there was the unsubstantiated rumour about the simulated sexual assault from Amanda's UW days but where are the stories about her time on sports teams at Seattle Prep?

I'm not off-base on this and it makes a whole lot more sense than the prosecution's or Massei's allegations. This is why I think they all entered Meredith's room at pretty much the same time. That's how those scenarios are set up. They are accomplished through stealth and an overwhelming show of force.

Do you have any knowledge of hazing?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:09 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

A few third strike cases:

Shane Reams' mother, a practitioner of "tough love", encouraged her neighbors to press charges against the son for stealing from the neighbors' garages. The two burglary convictions then became the basis for a three-strike 25 years to life sentence for aiding and abetting a $20 drug sale to an undercover officer.

Ronnie Villa is doing 25 to life for stealing five bottles of Head and Shoulders<tm> shampoo. His most recent prior occurred 12 years earlier.

William Anderson was convicted of a robbery 27 years before. His 25 to life was imposed for having a forged drivers license.

Robert Loomis' third strike was the theft of a $37 calculator. His prior strikes were residential burglaries committed over ten years before.

Michael Morgan is doing 25 to life for stealing $25. He had burglarized a garage ten years before.

Then there is Leandro Andrade. His third offense was stealing $153 worth of videotapes from two Kmarts in Southern California. Because Andrade took the videos from two different Kmarts, he was prosecuted for two third strikes. As a result, Andrade was sentenced to life in prison with no parole for 50 years.

On appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that a sentence of 50 years to life for shoplifting was cruel and unusual punishment. But the US Supreme Court overturned that ruling on a 5-to-4 vote, holding that Andrade's sentence was not disproportionate because he still had the possibility of parole. He will have to be 87 just to begin parole. Justice John Paul Stevens, who was only member of the court old enough to be able to enjoy a few years of freedom were he in Andrade’s shoes, dissented. Stevens will be missed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline mortytoad


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 335

Location: Seattle, Washington

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:50 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

TomM wrote:
A few third strike cases:

Shane Reams' mother, a practitioner of "tough love", encouraged her neighbors to press charges against the son for stealing from the neighbors' garages. The two burglary convictions then became the basis for a three-strike 25 years to life sentence for aiding and abetting a $20 drug sale to an undercover officer.

Ronnie Villa is doing 25 to life for stealing five bottles of Head and Shoulders<tm> shampoo. His most recent prior occurred 12 years earlier.

William Anderson was convicted of a robbery 27 years before. His 25 to life was imposed for having a forged drivers license.

Robert Loomis' third strike was the theft of a $37 calculator. His prior strikes were residential burglaries committed over ten years before.

Michael Morgan is doing 25 to life for stealing $25. He had burglarized a garage ten years before.

Then there is Leandro Andrade. His third offense was stealing $153 worth of videotapes from two Kmarts in Southern California. Because Andrade took the videos from two different Kmarts, he was prosecuted for two third strikes. As a result, Andrade was sentenced to life in prison with no parole for 50 years.

On appeal, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that a sentence of 50 years to life for shoplifting was cruel and unusual punishment. But the US Supreme Court overturned that ruling on a 5-to-4 vote, holding that Andrade's sentence was not disproportionate because he still had the possibility of parole. He will have to be 87 just to begin parole. Justice John Paul Stevens, who was only member of the court old enough to be able to enjoy a few years of freedom were he in Andrade’s shoes, dissented. Stevens will be missed.


I agree that the 'third strike' is ridiculous. I think that repeat offenders of violent crimes, those who harm children and murderers are the ones that should suffer the harsher penalties, such as life in prison (as opposed to a death penalty). But I honestly do not know who can be truly rehabilitated and who can not be. Rafaelle really seems like he could turn out to be dangerous, or at the very least, highly mentally unstable and a danger to himself. I've always thought of Amanda as a wishy-washy poser flake. She seemed to be at a highly impressionable stage of her life when she went to Italy and , as someone has suggested, entirely rudderless. She appears to be becoming institutionalized. This may be the only time in her young life that she's had any kind of structure/routine and it very well could be good for her. If she spends enough time in there.

I also agree with Stillcho about Chris Mellas and Joran Vander Sloot. Chris seems like he could go postal on someone himself. I wonder what he really feels about the whole situation that Amanda has brought down on him. Him. Chris Mellas. Does he resent her? If she were somehow released on appeal, would he wait until all of the commotion and excitement of Amanda finally coming home had died down after a few months and then try to confront her privately and tell her how badly she screwed the whole family over and how much that he, Chris Mellas, had to give up for her? Would the relationship then start right back up where it seemed to have left off before Amanda left for Italy? He really does seem like that kind of a prick.


Last edited by mortytoad on Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline cath


Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:37 am

Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:50 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

fine wrote:
I think it likely that Amanda will be walking the streets of Seattle (so to speak) in a few short years. Once her appeal process in Italy is exhausted, in a couple years, she'll be eligible for PRISONER TRANSFER to the USA. (See US State Department ) The only obstruction I see to her transfer, and early parole, is the civil DAMAGES she owes to the Kerchers. (Damages owed to Patrick and the cottage landlord are modest.) But, in my opinion, all the damages are subject to negotiation.


According to "Guidelines for the Evaluation of Transfer Applications of Federal Prisoners" of the quoted US Department of Justice International Prisoner Transfer Program Knox would also have to meet following requirements (this is just my selection of other conditions that would create difficulties for Knox, IMO):

    under Likelihood of social rehabilitation:

    - Acceptance of Responsibility. The acceptance of responsibility is a condition precedent for rehabilitation. Acceptance of responsibility is a positive factor for transfer, and is demonstrated by cooperation with the authorities, providing complete and candid information as to involvement in the offense, and/or the timely entry of a guilty plea.

    - Seriousness of the offense. The seriousness of the offense, the critical factor in any sentencing decision, is equally important in evaluating whether serving out all or most of his sentence in the United States will do more for the prisoner's rehabilitation than transferring him to what may be a less punitive and possibly less lengthy incarceration.

    in regards to Law enforcement concerns:

    - Seriousness of the offense. The more serious the offense, the more important the certainty of incarceration in the place it was committed becomes.

    - Public sensibilities. Would the return of the prisoner to a foreign country [I would think this applies to USA in her case] so outrage public sensibilities because of the extremely serious nature of the prisoner's crimes or the circumstances surrounding the prisoner's crimes as to outweigh the rehabilitation considerations?

    - Before approving transfer, the sending country must therefore consider factors such as:

    1. Is the prisoner's testimony needed against codefendants?
    3. Are there other open cases or investigations involving the prisoner?
    5. Unpaid court-ordered assessments, fines, or restitution. Because all supervisory authority over the prisoner is terminated when the prisoner transfers, financial obligations of the prisoner need to be settled prior to transfer [you mentioned this condition]

For her sake I hope she stays far beyond clutches of her dysfunctional family and has a chance to receive a thorough psychiatric treatment.
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 Aug 22, 2010 6:02 am   Post subject: Re: Young egos need protecting   

stilicho wrote:
Do you have any knowledge of hazing?


No, not recently.

Bullying has been outlawed here for some time now, after several high-profile deaths among cadets and school children.

It still occurs, sporadically here and there, but the young ones are taught from kindergarten onwards how to to deal with bullying in school and how to cope with bullies.

The different services (Navy, Air Force, and so on; and every company, in fact) are liable legally for not managing (and removing) the bullying that occurs under their care, and some parents are still finding an actively stubborn resistance to compensation being paid and fault being assigned, but those cases are dwindling in number over the years. The social and monetary insurance premiums are just too high to continue with the old-fashioned bluster.

The Whistleblowers legislation protects those reporting corrupt practices (which goes hand-in-hand with bullying) in the corporate and government spheres, and management and personnel across the board realise the extremely high economic cost (production, health, reputation) of the disruptive, selfish, short-term, self-centred toxic behaviour of the bully.

In terms of Original Series Trek analogies: the choice is:

brute-force Klingon or Federation?

Machiavellian Romulan or Federation?

The all-round winner is the team-player; bullies weed themselves out by self-definition, because they are (i) destructive to others, (ii) therefore, expensive to maintain (and with minimal long-term return, in any case). Sure, the immediate gains from high-risk choices in a crowd situation (e.g., the sharemarket) is seductive, but shareholders are starting to get wiser and smarter, because they're after stability and security, not adrenalin and hijinks.

This is why, after the murder, the UW felt a need to tighten restrictions, Perugia to up the supervision, and the Public Prosecutor's Office to expand the remit of drug-busting.

The children are our investment in the future and we fail if they fail.
Top Profile 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:17 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

fine wrote:
I think it likely that Amanda will be walking the streets of Seattle (so to speak) in a few short years. Once her appeal process in Italy is exhausted, in a couple years, she'll be eligible for PRISONER TRANSFER to the USA. (See US State Department ) The only obstruction I see to her transfer, and early parole, is the civil DAMAGES


If she does it when free or on parole OK.
If she does it - I mean ask for an international prison transfer - to go to a US prison Amanda Knox is definitely crazy.

No prison is nice but, as discussed above with eloquent data on abuse and violence, US prisons are certainly some of the riskiest in the civilized world. I believe few actually ask for transfer if detained in Western European prisons to go to the US. On the contrary, most Western European prisoners ask immediately to go back to Europe if jailed in the US. In fact some Euro governments wish to make automatic treaties (whereby prisoners do not have to accept the transfer) to get rid of foreign prisoners.

Read linked article
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world ... .html?_r=1

QUOTE FROM ARTICLE APRIL 23 2008, THE NY TIMES ON PRISON
"....Far from serving as a model for the world, contemporary America is viewed with horror," James Whitman, a specialist in comparative law at Yale, wrote last year in Social Research. "Certainly there are no European governments sending delegations to learn from us about how to manage prisons." Prison sentences here have become "vastly harsher than in any other country to which the United States would ordinarily be compared," Michael Tonry, a leading authority on crime policy, wrote in "The Handbook of Crime and Punishment...."

http://www.justdetention.org/en/factshe ... Basics.pdf
In the US a 2007 survey estimated that 60,000 inmates were abused sexually only in the last 12 months (4.5% of total jail population m+w) by fellow prisoners or guards and that 20% of total population was abused at some point during their time in prison (men's prisons, imagine women)

Read also the very long list of complaints Amnesty International makes regarding prison system in the US


Last edited by Popper on Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:28 am   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

stilicho wrote:
Popper wrote:
The 411 wrote:

To survive, Narcissists need power, control and "special consideration." Can all that be maintained at the present level, especially after all her appeals are exhausted?

How will UNREPENTANT, UNTREATED Amanda respond to all those inevitable changes and losses, as time goes by?



Good consideration.
Once her appeals are exhausted, the later she will start to "re-educate herself" the later she will be out.
Family may not abandon her but I think big time PR will go away sooner than expected by all of us. In Europe it is already hardly seen as family has less power vs media. People lose interest very soon in much more important things, imagine here. There will be other murder cases. At the moment we should all remember her situation may still get worse (life or 30) and only her lawyers work really for her - with low chances - so family should save money for them.

I agree she looks like a narcissistic personality and that will harm her if not addressed. Once finally convicted she will have available automatic psychological treatment.


This is armchair psychology by all of us but I still think we have the wrong narcissist/sociopath identified. I just watched two of the episodes on Joran Van Der Sloot and the various opinions on his emotional disablities. The difference between Van Der Sloot and Knox is that in his case he is probably that narcissist/sociopath; in her case it's her parents.

It's consistently been Curt, Edda and Chris who have worked tirelessly to cultivate a public image for their daughter/stepdaughter. Amanda showed up in court in a blazingly inappropriate Beatles shirt but don't forget that her mother, sister, and half-sisters showed up in their beachwear. Who made those decisions? Who are the attention-seekers who hired the Marriott corporation to influence the US media? It certainly wasn't Amanda.

Van Der Sloot reminded me a lot more of Chris Mellas than he did of Amanda. He was the one bowing to Sollecito and whose presence in the courtroom urged Amanda to start talking about the beatings she allegedly suffered at the hands of the police. Amanda's stories didn't change nearly as often as Joran's did. But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?

The family will always be there for Amanda, I believe. They are the ones who really need the psychiatric treatment first because everything they've done in this case has been harmful to their own daughter along with their callous assessment of the Kerchers and their legal representation.



See link http://missrepresented.net/blog/
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:38 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Proposition 184, also known as the Three Strikes Initiative, was on the November 8, 1994 ballot in California

Yes: 5,906,268 (71.8%)
No: 2,314,548 (28.2%) "

And it works.

California crime:
Attachment:
calcrime.png


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 Aug 22, 2010 11:51 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Quote:
Perhaps one of our Italians, familiar with Italian legal procedures, will clarify this issue.


The whole sum must be estabilished by a civil judge and will be paid later, but 5,2 million euros + vat are owed immediately ad should be paid now.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Proposition 184, also known as the Three Strikes Initiative, was on the November 8, 1994 ballot in California

Yes: 5,906,268 (71.8%)
No: 2,314,548 (28.2%) "

And it works.

California crime:
Attachment:
calcrime.png


You cannot say it works without a great deal more information. For example is there a comparison with trends in states which did not adopt this legislation? What about the trend in other countries? The trends in england and wales shows a similar pattern, for example, judging by the shape of the curves. This kind of assertion is not really very helpful unless all other factors are taken into account
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10645702
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
bolint wrote:
"Proposition 184, also known as the Three Strikes Initiative, was on the November 8, 1994 ballot in California

Yes: 5,906,268 (71.8%)
No: 2,314,548 (28.2%) "

And it works.

California crime:
Attachment:
calcrime.png


You cannot say it works without a great deal more information. For example is there a comparison with trends in states which did not adopt this legislation? What about the trend in other countries? The trends in england and wales shows a similar pattern, for example, judging by the shape of the curves. This kind of assertion is not really very helpful unless all other factors are taken into account
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10645702


I agree. Correlation doesn't imply causation. Three strikes laws are arcane and violate almost every principle of justice. I think it was in Livy or Pliny that I'd read about Roman law (which certainly couldn't be construed as lax in any sense) and the constitutional prohibition against the misapplication of punishments. These included punishing relatives of the offender which had been common among tribal communities surrounding the Romans. They wanted their law to be distinct from their neighbours in part to make Roman rule more palatable than rival towns' administrations. They seemed to be pretty successful in doing that too.

I don't know what has led to lower crime rates generally in North America but it isn't three strikes legislation because there's nothing close to that in Canada and we have the same curve.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:44 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

Popper wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Popper wrote:
Good consideration.
Once her appeals are exhausted, the later she will start to "re-educate herself" the later she will be out.
Family may not abandon her but I think big time PR will go away sooner than expected by all of us. In Europe it is already hardly seen as family has less power vs media. People lose interest very soon in much more important things, imagine here. There will be other murder cases. At the moment we should all remember her situation may still get worse (life or 30) and only her lawyers work really for her - with low chances - so family should save money for them.

I agree she looks like a narcissistic personality and that will harm her if not addressed. Once finally convicted she will have available automatic psychological treatment.


This is armchair psychology by all of us but I still think we have the wrong narcissist/sociopath identified. I just watched two of the episodes on Joran Van Der Sloot and the various opinions on his emotional disablities. The difference between Van Der Sloot and Knox is that in his case he is probably that narcissist/sociopath; in her case it's her parents.

It's consistently been Curt, Edda and Chris who have worked tirelessly to cultivate a public image for their daughter/stepdaughter. Amanda showed up in court in a blazingly inappropriate Beatles shirt but don't forget that her mother, sister, and half-sisters showed up in their beachwear. Who made those decisions? Who are the attention-seekers who hired the Marriott corporation to influence the US media? It certainly wasn't Amanda.

Van Der Sloot reminded me a lot more of Chris Mellas than he did of Amanda. He was the one bowing to Sollecito and whose presence in the courtroom urged Amanda to start talking about the beatings she allegedly suffered at the hands of the police. Amanda's stories didn't change nearly as often as Joran's did. But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?

The family will always be there for Amanda, I believe. They are the ones who really need the psychiatric treatment first because everything they've done in this case has been harmful to their own daughter along with their callous assessment of the Kerchers and their legal representation.



See link http://missrepresented.net/blog/


The quote I find closest to my own understanding is the one by Dr Welner:

Quote:
“All of my academic background and experience in this area of tragedy reinforces my impression that anyone is capable of anything, so long as they have the physical wherewithal. So many times have I seen cases that “never happened before.” And then I saw them happen.”


I think I've been in a minority on this board in seeing Sollecito, Knox, and Guede using that perspective. Most people don't like to think that 'anyone is capable of anything' but that appears to be a part of the human condition. It's another way of phrasing Solzhenitsyn's observation on the inability of humans to rid themselves entirely of evil without cutting their hearts in two.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 12:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I think a lot of the fall is demographic: there are fewer young people and they are disproportionately involved in crime: there are probably other factors too: but that is one that has been extensively discussed because the trend seems to be repeated in a lot of western countries and that is one factor they mostly have in common
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: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stilicho wrote:
Fiona wrote:
bolint wrote:
"Proposition 184, also known as the Three Strikes Initiative, was on the November 8, 1994 ballot in California

Yes: 5,906,268 (71.8%)
No: 2,314,548 (28.2%) "

And it works.

California crime:
Attachment:
calcrime.png


You cannot say it works without a great deal more information. For example is there a comparison with trends in states which did not adopt this legislation? What about the trend in other countries? The trends in england and wales shows a similar pattern, for example, judging by the shape of the curves. This kind of assertion is not really very helpful unless all other factors are taken into account
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10645702


I agree. Correlation doesn't imply causation. Three strikes laws are arcane and violate almost every principle of justice. I think it was in Livy or Pliny that I'd read about Roman law (which certainly couldn't be construed as lax in any sense) and the constitutional prohibition against the misapplication of punishments. These included punishing relatives of the offender which had been common among tribal communities surrounding the Romans. They wanted their law to be distinct from their neighbours in part to make Roman rule more palatable than rival towns' administrations. They seemed to be pretty successful in doing that too.

I don't know what has led to lower crime rates generally in North America but it isn't three strikes legislation because there's nothing close to that in Canada and we have the same curve.



And even if it did work it matters not a jot to me, it wouldn't change the fact that it violates every principle of justice. Without justice one no longer has a society but a tyranny. The fact something works is not in and of itself justification for its existence. For example, I dare say you'll wipe out every last single episode of crime out of a town if you marched every citizen out of it at gun point and then machine gunned them. It would work. Should we do it?

If a society is quite happy with injustice because 'it works'...why stop there? Why be happy with the principle of fair trials..let's do away with them and have kangaroo courts instead. Sure, lots of people who are innocent would go to jail or be executed but it would get a lot of the guilty too, be so much cheaper and quicker and what would such injustice to the few matter when 'it works' and keeps the majority happy? That is, happy until they or theirs face such an injustice.

_________________
"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 bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"You cannot say it works without a great deal more information. "

I compared the California crime rate to the whole US crime rate.

Attachment:
calif-vs-us.png


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

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

These graphs are not helpful. What are the scales on the y axis? they do not seem to be the same?
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 Aug 22, 2010 1:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Fiona wrote:
I think a lot of the fall is demographic: there are fewer young people and they are disproportionately involved in crime: there are probably other factors too: ...



A tiny factor is the give-and-flow in the amphetamine import quotas(e.g., Canada busting the bikies there), a little bit learning about the side effects and managing health risks better (e.g., information ads on TV about drinking enough water and calling the ambulance in terms of ecstacy), and a changing trend in drug fashions, (im)purity control, and altering geo-political circumstances (illegal heroine and cocaine shutting down and having to divert and diversify; and legal heroine for the medical market sucking up the production effort).

Of interest in terms of prescribed drugs, regarding the girl-pair murderers in New Zealand that a film was made out of, there was mention in the background story of a prescribed medication that has coincidentally cropped in a couple of other "bizarre" murders in "unexpected" situations. It would be a supreme irony if unintended chemical lobotomy were the underlying physical contributor for some of these, or that was a germ or two able to initiate an equivalent chemical cascade reaction as part of its natural life cycle, and it was sensitive to soil and/or atmospheric conditions or hitched rides on pollutant particles.

But all of that is for the medico-ecologists, of which there are very few at the moment (other than swine and avine flu epidemic trackers, or the ones looking at the flying fox/equine flu virus, fatal to humans -- and which has killed more people in Australia than taipans, I learned tonight).
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"What are the scales on the y axis? they do not seem to be the same?"

The ratio of Calif crime rate to US crime rate.
Before the 3 strikes law Calif was leading the US by 20%, after 5 years it was 10% behind.
A change of 30% in five years in the same general society.
The real change is even bigger, because the whole US number contains California (and of course all those states that installed 3 strikes laws, too)
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 1:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:



And even if it did work it matters not a jot to me, it wouldn't change the fact that it violates every principle of justice. Without justice one no longer has a society but a tyranny. The fact something works is not in and of itself justification for its existence. for example, I dare say you'll wipe out every last single episode of crime out of a town if you marched every citizen out of it at gun point and then machine gunned them. It would work. Should we do it?

If a society is quite happy with injustice because 'it works'...why stop there? Why be happy with the principle of fair trials..let's do away with them and have kangaroo courts instead. Sure, lots of people who are innocent would go to jail or be executed who are actually innocent but it would get a lot of the guilty too, be so much cheaper and quicker and what would such injustice to the few matter when 'it works' and keeps the majority happy? That is, happy until they or theirs face such an injustice.


I agree with this Michael. But this is the primary question, and it seems the majority in California have answered it differently from how I would answer, or you would. They are perfectly happy with the outcome and this is really a difference of opinion about what we mean when we say "works". For me, and I infer for you too, a society which is consituted in this way is not "working", almost by definition. For them this is what a functioning society looks like.

So there is a difference of principle, it seems. Or a different weight given to competing principles, more likely. Any society must make a decision about what is important when principles conflict. How we do that is interesting, but in this case they have already done it. I presume, because the assertion has been made that "it works", the only legitimate question one can ask of those who have already made that decision is "are you sure?". Because if that cannot be proved then the weighting must be re-evaluated.
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 Aug 22, 2010 1:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Careful with reading the stats.

State borders are an artificial human construct, and not necessarily respected by time and tide.

"Moving the problem", for example, south, could also explain the apparent drop in California.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"What are the scales on the y axis? they do not seem to be the same?"

The ratio of Calif crime rate to US crime rate.
Before the 3 strikes law Calif was leading the US by 20%, after 5 years it was 10% behind.
A change of 30% in five years in the same general society.
The real change is even bigger, because the whole US number contains California (and of course all those states that installed 3 strikes laws, too)


Perhaps I would understand better if you linked to the sources. I can't make sense of a graph which compares two trends on one line: I am not very numerate.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Careful with reading the stats."

OK.
Let's stick to sentimental prisoner's stories. They are more reliable. :D
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Careful with reading the stats."

OK.
Let's stick to sentimental prisoner's stories. They are more reliable. :D



OK

Lets stick with the false dichotomy. It is more reliable ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Perhaps I would understand better if you linked to the sources. I can't make sense of a graph which compares two trends on one line: I am not very numerate."

United States: Uniform Crime Report -- State Statistics from 1960 - 2008
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/

(Though I don't think they are less numerate)
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I don't see these graphs there: am I missing them?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"I don't see these graphs there: am I missing them?"

There are only numbers there. I made the graphs in Excel from those numbers.
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 Aug 22, 2010 2:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Murder has been "fairly stable" in California in absolute numbers (~3k/yr, with std variation) since the mid-1970s, which is interesting in itself, and also because the population has almost doubled.

Something is fuelling the murder dynamic and it is independant of any influence from outside (such as government policy). The cause has not been stemmed, in other words.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Murder has been "fairly stable" in California in absolute numbers (~3k/yr, with std variation) since the mid-1970s, which is interesting in itself, and also because the population has almost doubled."

That's not true!

Number of murders in California:

Attachment:
califmurder.png


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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 Aug 22, 2010 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Interesting, New York over the same time period (mid-1970s to nowish) had a steady population (~18m) and, at the beginning a high number of murders (~2k/yr), almost equivalent to California's, yet in the last 10 ten years, that number has dropped to almost a third of what it was.

Giuliani's strategy (get the broken window guys) might have merit; or else there was a generational change in the "milieu" (that is, crime bosses reaching critically low numbers themselves); or maybe New Yorkers had other things to do.

This implies that California's crime rate(s) are not separated from Mexico's (or Nevada's).

State-by-state (as opposed to demographic region by demographic region) comparison is intended to measure what? In a statistical sense. The borders are looking increasingly artificial.
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 Aug 22, 2010 2:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Murder has been "fairly stable" in California in absolute numbers (~3k/yr, with std variation) since the mid-1970s, which is interesting in itself, and also because the population has almost doubled."

That's not true!



All interpretations are true. :)

3000 a year, +/- the variation.

I see no improvement compared to the mid-1970s, in terms of absolute numbers.
I relative terms, an absolute definite improvement. Yay!

Compared to 1960s, when there was a different generation, figures now are enormous.

The interpretation derives from its logical borders.
In a sense, all interpretations are useless. They are not transferable, in terms of dynamics, causes and solutions.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

If it's such a panacea against crime, one can only ask why every other state hasn't adopted it...even, other countries. Indeed, what's stopping them implementing this wonder cure against crime?

Actually...haven't we been there and done that already...didn't we used to hang people just for stealing a loaf of bread?

On a different note, I do find it rather amazing that a country that is quite happy to lock someone away and throw away the key for stealing some bottles of shampoo or a slice of pizza will also quite happily lecture the Italians on their justice system. I also wonder, do the relatives of those in the states who have been treated by 'Lady Justice' in such a Dickensian manner get given the tour of the US media studios and offered tea and sympathy on morning interview couches or get to appear on Oprah? I also find it quite ironic that these same Americans will hand wave away Amanda's drug taking as a 'nothing' but would at the same time offer no complaint if said smoking of a spliff sent her to jail for life in the US if on the wrong end of a three strike law.

_________________
"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 thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stilicho wrote:
Quote:
But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?


Stilicho. This was maybe one of the few times where nothing was wrong with Edda. She did it because she was under oath to tell the truth and what she said was substantially true. She did it because unlike her daughter, she knew that denying a phone call that showed up on the phone records and in intercepted conversations is STUPID. The real question is, why did Amanda deny it, not why did Edda describe it?
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 Aug 22, 2010 2:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The graphs are nice.
I like Excel.

Are you able to a weighted average (say, with a 16-year rolling mean or similar)? That would give a "truer" picture (whatever that means) when the underlying base population is shifting in volume.

This is slightly OT, but when I looked at the Italian crime stats a while back, the numbers of murders are so low -- I was surprised.
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Compared to 1960s, when there was a different generation"

Yes, and there was a working death penalty at hand.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Bolint wrote:
"Murder has been "fairly stable" in California in absolute numbers (~3k/yr, with std variation) since the mid-1970s, which is interesting in itself, and also because the population has almost doubled."

That's not true!

Number of murders in California:


But if it 'is' true, that can have nothing to do with the three strikes law...it must be something 'else' at play and it may be that that something 'else' that is also a major factor in reducing the overall crime rate...if you are correct. A three strike law isn't going to effect the murder rate...murder is already a capital crime without the three strikes law and murderers go to jail for life (or worse) anyway. The three strikes law makes no difference to them, it would give them what they'd have gotten already. So, if the murder rate has dropped sharply, then it indicates something 'else' is at play, rather then your three strikes law. This is simple logic.

_________________
"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 bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

I don't want to be off topic, even this was too much.

"when I looked at the Italian crime stats a while back, the numbers of murders are so low"

Well, you don't have to go to Italy, Iowa also will do. But avoid Washington DC: :D

And we know that Italian jails are full of innocent people because juries are not sequestered and they are sleeping during trials. :D


Last edited by bolint on Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 2:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
This is slightly OT, but when I looked at the Italian crime stats a while back, the numbers of murders are so low -- I was surprised.


And all without a three strikes law! :)

_________________
"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 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 Aug 22, 2010 3:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Compared to 1960s, when there was a different generation"

Yes, and there was a working death penalty at hand.


And murders were still committed.
The penalties do not seem to remove the motivational causes, only to shift the threshold baseline. And so we come back to their "effectiveness", such as it is.

Plus also increased sophistication in forensics must be factored in to adjust the weightings... Hypothesis: perhaps the murder volumes (not the rates) have always been the "same"?
Top Profile 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"it must be something 'else' at play and it may be that that something 'else' that is also a major factor in reducing the overall crime rate"

CO2 emission must be a strong contender.

"murder is already a capital crime without the three strikes law and murderers go to jail for life (or worse) anyway. The three strikes law makes no difference to them"

It can make a difference by forcing some of the criminals to be more cautious and drop some of their plans to commit some of the crimes which they would have committed otherwise.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Catnip wrote:
bolint wrote:
"Compared to 1960s, when there was a different generation"

Yes, and there was a working death penalty at hand.


And murders were still committed.
The penalties do not seem to remove the motivational causes, only to shift the threshold baseline. And so we come back to their "effectiveness", such as it is.

Plus also increased sophistication in forensics must be factored in to adjust the weightings... Hypothesis: perhaps the murder volumes (not the rates) have always been the "same"?



In England in the 16, 17 and 1800's they'd hang people for pickpocketing. In the meantime, pickpockets would be working the crowd who'd come to watch them hang. Some deterant.

_________________
"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 bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"And murders were still committed."

Yes, there were crimes at all times, no matter how severe was the punishment. So severity has its limits.
But so have other proposed and used more lenient or defensive means like e.g. education.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"And murders were still committed."

Yes, there were crimes at all times, no matter how severe was the punishment. So severity has its limits.
But so have other proposed and used more lenient or defensive means like e.g. education.



If they 'all' have their limits, then surely it is better to have the ones that cause the least harm and are the most just and to dispense with cruel and unusual punishments?

_________________
"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 bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Then if they 'all' have their limits, then surely it is better to have the ones that cause the least harm"

Yes. But to whom?

One choice is the 20.000+ would-have-been murder victims who have stayed alive in California since 1994.
The other choice is the 3000 3-strikers sitting in jail, most of whom were criminals anyway.

For me it would be an easy choice.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"I don't see these graphs there: am I missing them?"

There are only numbers there. I made the graphs in Excel from those numbers.



You what? Now that's what I call enthusiasm!!!

_________________
"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: Sun Aug 22, 2010 3:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Then if they 'all' have their limits, then surely it is better to have the ones that cause the least harm"

Yes. But to whom?

One choice is the 20.000+ would-have-been murder victims who have stayed alive in California since 1994.
The other choice is the 3000 3-strikers sitting in jail, most of whom were criminals anyway.

For me it would be an easy choice.


To whom indeed...you tell us!

Where on Earth do you get that 20,000+ figure from? What is your basis that 20,000+ people are still alive purely due to the three strikes law...or even as a result of any connection to it whatsoever?

_________________
"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 bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"Where on Earth do you get that 20,000+ figure from?"

Look at the numbers.

1993: 4096 murders.
The estimated number for the 15 years of 1994-2008 is 15*4096=61440 murders.
The actual number of murders in the same 15 year period is 37774 murders.
I attribute the large part of the difference (23600 and still growing since 2008) to the 3 strikes law.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Where on Earth do you get that 20,000+ figure from?"

Look at the numbers.

1993: 4096 murders.
The estimated number for the 15 years of 1994-2008 is 15*4096=61440 murders.
The actual number of murders in the same 15 year period is 37774 murders.
I attribute the large part of the difference (23600 and still growing since 2008) to the 3 strikes law.



Bolint, clearly you missed my earlier post on murder pertaining to the three strikes rule.


But anyway, notwithstanding, let's do the maths...what you are essentially saying is that these 3000 people sitting in jail equates to 20,000+ murders that never happened because these 'specific' people are in jail. 20,000 (without the '+') divided by 3000 = about 5 7/8....which means you are saying that these are not people locked up for stealing shampoo or whatever, but that they are all actually serial killers (or were about to be)...I think killing 3 or more people is classed as being a serial killer. Doesn't this seem rather preposterous to you? It sounds like total bollocks to 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 Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Bolint wrote:
I attribute the large part of the difference (23600 and still growing since 2008) to the 3 strikes law.


On the basis of WHAT evidence? The mere fact it exists?

_________________
"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 Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:
If it's such a panacea against crime, one can only ask why every other state hasn't adopted it...even, other countries. Indeed, what's stopping them implementing this wonder cure against crime?

Actually...haven't we been there and done that already...didn't we used to hang people just for stealing a loaf of bread?

On a different note, I do find it rather amazing that a country that is quite happy to lock someone away and throw away the key for stealing some bottles of shampoo or a slice of pizza will also quite happily lecture the Italians on their justice system. I also wonder, do the relatives of those in the states who have been treated by 'Lady Justice' in such a Dickensian manner get given the tour of the US media studios and offered tea and sympathy on morning interview couches or get to appear on Oprah? I also find it quite ironic that these same Americans will hand wave away Amanda's drug taking as a 'nothing' but would at the same time offer no complaint if said smoking of a spliff sent her to jail for life in the US if on the wrong end of a three strike law.



Michael, I could not use better words.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:51 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

stilicho wrote:
Popper wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Popper wrote:
Good consideration.
Once her appeals are exhausted, the later she will start to "re-educate herself" the later she will be out.
Family may not abandon her but I think big time PR will go away sooner than expected by all of us. In Europe it is already hardly seen as family has less power vs media. People lose interest very soon in much more important things, imagine here. There will be other murder cases. At the moment we should all remember her situation may still get worse (life or 30) and only her lawyers work really for her - with low chances - so family should save money for them.

I agree she looks like a narcissistic personality and that will harm her if not addressed. Once finally convicted she will have available automatic psychological treatment.


This is armchair psychology by all of us but I still think we have the wrong narcissist/sociopath identified. I just watched two of the episodes on Joran Van Der Sloot and the various opinions on his emotional disablities. The difference between Van Der Sloot and Knox is that in his case he is probably that narcissist/sociopath; in her case it's her parents.

It's consistently been Curt, Edda and Chris who have worked tirelessly to cultivate a public image for their daughter/stepdaughter. Amanda showed up in court in a blazingly inappropriate Beatles shirt but don't forget that her mother, sister, and half-sisters showed up in their beachwear. Who made those decisions? Who are the attention-seekers who hired the Marriott corporation to influence the US media? It certainly wasn't Amanda.

Van Der Sloot reminded me a lot more of Chris Mellas than he did of Amanda. He was the one bowing to Sollecito and whose presence in the courtroom urged Amanda to start talking about the beatings she allegedly suffered at the hands of the police. Amanda's stories didn't change nearly as often as Joran's did. But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?

The family will always be there for Amanda, I believe. They are the ones who really need the psychiatric treatment first because everything they've done in this case has been harmful to their own daughter along with their callous assessment of the Kerchers and their legal representation.



See link http://missrepresented.net/blog/


The quote I find closest to my own understanding is the one by Dr Welner:

Quote:
“All of my academic background and experience in this area of tragedy reinforces my impression that anyone is capable of anything, so long as they have the physical wherewithal. So many times have I seen cases that “never happened before.” And then I saw them happen.”


I think I've been in a minority on this board in seeing Sollecito, Knox, and Guede using that perspective. Most people don't like to think that 'anyone is capable of anything' but that appears to be a part of the human condition. It's another way of phrasing Solzhenitsyn's observation on the inability of humans to rid themselves entirely of evil without cutting their hearts in two.



You can count me in your minority. I believe that we are all capable of evil as well as it's opposite, good. I believe that we have much choice in terms of how we feel (rage, fear, love, etc.), though we have some, but we have a lot in terms of how we act on our feelings. "Every human heart" (to quote James) is comprised of both good and evil.

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

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"what you are essentially saying is that these 3000 people sitting in jail equates to 20,000+ murders that never happened because these 'specific' people are in jail. 20,000 (without the '+') divided by 3000 = about 5 7/8....which means you are saying that these are not people locked up for stealing shampoo or whatever, but that they are all actually serial killers (or were about to be)...I think killing 3 or more people is classed as being a serial killer. Doesn't this seem rather preposterous to you?"

It seems.
But fortunately it is not me who is saying it. :D

Clearly, if we knew who would commit murders then we could vastly reduce the number of murders.
But as a sage said: "It is difficult to foretell. Especially regarding the future."
So we have to live with a less perfect scheme.
The people in many US states had enough of murders and other crimes (but surely murders were the driving force) and enacted new laws telling criminals "don't commit serious or violent crimes, especially not repeatedly, or you'll be spendig a huge part of your life in jail". California people were even more fed up and they told them "don't commit any crime once you are caught". A few of them did not understand it, they are now crying. Big deal.

It is not about if they had become murderers, let alone serial killers.
It is a fact that crime rate (murder and other crimes) was sharply reduced in these states immediately after enacting these laws.
It may have been caused by some magic force and completely unrelated to the 3 strikes laws. That's what the opponents try to peddle with.
With litlle success so far. That's why they try with a handful of shampoo thieves and other alleged Jean Valjean figures.
Top Profile 

Offline TomM


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:28 pm

Posts: 583

Location: California

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

bolint wrote:
"Compared to 1960s, when there was a different generation"

Yes, and there was a working death penalty at hand.

In 1962 there were 10 executions in California. One in 1963. One in 1967. None until one in 1992. There have been 12 more since.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline bolint


Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:04 pm

Posts: 1251

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

"In 1962 there were 10 executions in California. One in 1963. One in 1967."

Matching perfectly the beginning of the long years of continuous increase in the number of murders.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Bolint wrote:
It seems.
But fortunately it is not me who is saying it.


But it is, it is YOU that's saying that it's all down to the three strikes rule and the three strikes rule is cool because 'it works'.

Bolint wrote:
The people in many US states had enough of murders and other crimes (but surely murders were the driving force) and enacted new laws telling criminals "don't commit serious or violent crimes, especially not repeatedly, or you'll be spendig a huge part of your life in jail". California people were even more fed up and they told them "don't commit any crime once you are caught". A few of them did not understand it, they are now crying. Big deal.


In other words, we should lock people up for what they 'might' do, not for what they have done. And hey right, they're crying...no big deal...after all, you're alright aintcha Jack?

And don't dress it up as though this three strikes rule is limited to serious or violent crimes, as we've seen...it is not!!!


Bolint wrote:
It is not about if they had become murderers, let alone serial killers.


According to you it WAS...according to you locking up 3000+ people on the three strikes rule saved 20,000+ people from being murdered!!!

Bolint wrote:
It is a fact that crime rate (murder and other crimes) was sharply reduced in these states immediately after enacting these laws.


The world's just black and white to you isn't it Bolint? No other factors exist...just one statistic will do and it proves it!

Bolint wrote:
It may have been caused by some magic force and completely unrelated to the 3 strikes laws. That's what the opponents try to peddle with.


It wouldn't be 'magic' if you took the time to stroll over in your jack boots and have a look at the other factors that may actually play a role, or bothered to open your eyes and actually examined the MAJOR flaws in your own logic that I pointed out earlier but as in one in true denial completely sidestepped.


Look, hey...I'll tell you what Bolint, the three strikes rule is fantastic...it represents the pinnacle of human justice and evolution. But I feel it needs tweaking. I mean...why bother locking these people up for life...why don't we just get rid of them? We could just wipe those damned pizza slice and shampoo thieves off the face of the planet! Let's just gas them. Don't worry about the cost of getting rid of all the bodies...great big ovens will deal will all of those for you and as for the rest, mass graves will do the trick ;)

Puke

_________________
"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 SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Could you lot take it to JREF please where this debate in statistical correlation proof / fallacy can and should be debated.

I add one comment;

Bollocks.

_________________
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 guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:43 pm   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

stilicho wrote:
It's another way of phrasing Solzhenitsyn's observation on the inability of humans to rid themselves entirely of evil without cutting their hearts in two.


Skeptical Bystander wrote:
"Every human heart" (to quote James) is comprised of both good and evil.


Hey guys (Stilicho & Skep),

I have been sitting here trying to think of the exact quote from Solzhenitsyn. Once, I used it as an epigraph for an essay (term paper) I wrote a long time ago, when I was still at school.

I might be getting a bit philosophical here, but I thought I'd share it with you:

"Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not trough states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either - but right through every human heart - and through all human hearts."


Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago II, New York: Harper and Row, 1974, Part IV, Ch. 1, p. 615.


Right now, I'm trying to find a similar Marcel Proust quote, a very good one (and very relevant to this case). I'll post more later, I have to go through all my "quote files". ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Macport


User avatar


Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 7:54 am

Posts: 710

Location: Western USA

Highscores: 12

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

A criminal becomes a popular figure because he unburdens in no small degree the consciences of his fellow man, for now they know once more where evil is to be found. ~Carl G. Jung

I liken this to a personal concept I call "camp asshole". That is where you may be traveling in a group and you get up the next morning after a night of imbibing libations. And the person (usually a guy) who drank too much the night before gets up in a foul mood and starts ranting and treating everyone else badly. And you quietly turn to your partner and whisper "camp asshole". And the pressure is all off of you because he's drawing all the negative attention. Has anyone else ever been there?


Last edited by Macport on Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

As a citizen of the bewildering state of California, I have to express my complete dismay at the whole notion of placing issues of justice and human rights on the ballot.
Just saying.
And I should point out that who the three strikes law "catches" are basically just petty criminals: theft, drugs, that sort of thing.

And, if anything, it tangles up the courts in dealing with such concerns, since no one wants to put someone in jail for life for stealing pizza or shampoo.
And fills up the jail with non-violent multiple offenders, leading to early parole for people who shouldn 't be back on the street.
(Yes, you see this one in the fine print in the local news all the time.)

Murder, however, is quite often a one time crime.
And, a murderer, once caught, is going to jail anyway.
So I don't see where three strikes is making anyone any safer.
The whole three strikes issue was just more hate mongering, in a state where they regularly put nasty things on the ballot to pull the loonies to the polls.
Sadly, sometimes they pass.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline lauowolf


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:50 am

Posts: 525

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Oh, btw.
There have been at least two local incidents where armed robberies went bad, there were shootouts and such.
People dying.
Because the criminal involved *couldn't* face arrest.
He already had two strikes.
He knew that if he were captured, he'd be going away for life because of the three-strikes law.
That is.
People died because a career criminal who had not meant to murder knew that he faced life in prison if arrested for a lesser crime.
So, if he had to kill to escape, for him that was a reasonable gamble.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:02 pm   Post subject: U.S. Homicides   

It is highly unlikely that the precipitous drop in California homicides starting in 1994 had anything to do with the three-strikes law. There was a corresponding drop throughout the country in states without such laws. However, there was a federal law that went into effect in 1994 that probably did have a significant effect - The Brady Bill. The law which went into effect in February 1994 required mandatory background checks for all handgun sales.

If one looks at hand gun sales over that same time period, there was a precipitous drop across the country. Here's the California data:

Attachment:
MurdersVsGuns.jpg


Sources:
http://ag.ca.gov/cjsc/keyfacts.php
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/


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

Offline disinterested


User avatar


Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 10:34 pm

Posts: 236

Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Interesting article discussing the "range of evil" in regard to types of murders, devised by a forensic psychologist.
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
Could you lot take it to JREF please where this debate in statistical correlation proof / fallacy can and should be debated.

I add one comment;

Bollocks.



It is one of those dead-end, polarizing debates. Best leave it, I think.

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

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

stint7 wrote:

Couple questions for His Lordship:

1) As part of the pre-nup, did the "always amicable" Messr Mellas make any attemp to throw in that Red Neck Reminder of a 'fishing boat' that he was always whining about having insufficient funds to keep in the water a while back?
He was soliciting sympathy for himself and his **drinking buddy** stepdaughter, at being financially forced to dry dock the monstrosity in his own driveway.
This seemed to most to be much akin to the tendency of his Appalachian ilk to store each and every rusty replicas of their previously used and abused dead old cars in their front 'yards.

2) Was Counsellor Bremner's BMW still running ragged on 3 flat tires and dripping life bloods from the undercarriage ?
This as a result of a recent (losing) traumatic traffic tussle with a "Bushy Haired Stranger" ?
She remembered her 'best truth' a long while after her arrest as to him crashing into her, submarining completely under her BMW, and then vanishing (without a trace).


Thank you, Stint (and Mortytoad) for your approval of my choice of avatar.

In answer to your first question, Stint, his Lordship is still too shaken up at this time to provide further details related to his encounter with Chris Mellas. The only other thing I can add is that his Lordship was especially taken aback by the provocative and unrequested ruffling up of his cravat by him. His Lordship has yet to fully recover from this assault on, as I understand it, one of his very best cravats.

In your second question you asked about Anne Bremner's car. For the record, it was not a BMW. In fact, his Lordship was told at the time that Anne B did normally drive a BMW but that it was still at a repair shop.

As I think you'll remember, his Lordship was driven from Mary H's house to his hotel by Anne B. What I didn't mention before was that, on his second refill, his Lordship noticed one other person in the car-- a person who was referred to by Ms Bremner as "Judgy." They seemed to be very good friends and several times clinked their wine glasses together in the car. I can tell you that the speed at which Anne B was driving alarmed his Lordship, and when they came to an abrupt halt in front of the hotel, the car struck and bent a sign post. When this happened, the judge winked at Anne B and said, "Don't worry; I'll take care of you and yours, Annie-girl. Just like I always do." The two then clinked their glasses together again and sang "Sweet Adeline."

Once inside the hotel his Lordship had difficulty keeping up with his two companions, who literally ran into the cocktail lounge, where Anne B seemed to be well known by all the staff and patrons. His Lordship's memory is a little foggy, but he seems to remember that they were joined at one point by someone named Phanuel, who plied him with further drinks and tried to convince his Lordship to sign a piece of paper with a list of names in support of something or other.

The next morning his Lordship woke up fully dressed in his hotel room with no recollection of anything else that had happened the night before.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Michael wrote:

I also wonder, do the relatives of those in the states who have been treated by 'Lady Justice' in such a Dickensian manner get given the tour of the US media studios and offered tea and sympathy on morning interview couches or get to appear on Oprah?


And, on at least one occasion, interviewers have said to Amanda's parents, "Please let us know if there's anything we can do."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Popper


Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:36 am

Posts: 266

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

lauowolf wrote:
As a citizen of the bewildering state of California, I have to express my complete dismay at the whole notion of placing issues of justice and human rights on the ballot.
Just saying.
And I should point out that who the three strikes law "catches" are basically just petty criminals: theft, drugs, that sort of thing.

And, if anything, it tangles up the courts in dealing with such concerns, since no one wants to put someone in jail for life for stealing pizza or shampoo.
And fills up the jail with non-violent multiple offenders, leading to early parole for people who shouldn 't be back on the street.
(Yes, you see this one in the fine print in the local news all the time.)

Murder, however, is quite often a one time crime.
And, a murderer, once caught, is going to jail anyway.
So I don't see where three strikes is making anyone any safer.
The whole three strikes issue was just more hate mongering, in a state where they regularly put nasty things on the ballot to pull the loonies to the polls.
Sadly, sometimes they pass.



This is a typical example of the risks created sometimes by "direct democracy in legislative capacity".
Karl R. Popper argued that real democracy is the power given to people to get rid of governments by vote and without bloodshed: a negative power [which, just like falsification of theories in science, allows better theories to advance]. Hitler was elected democratically - positive power - but could not be sent home without bloodshed. Therefore, citizens should vote directly regarding a particular law – especially important ones - only to ban it, never to approve it. Popper stresses that important policy decisions must be left to legislative power which is supposed to have studied the subject and is better prepared to decide for the good of all. Common people will not necessarily vote for the best policy or the one which follows justice because they may not be informed fully about the consequences of what they are voting. They are however entitled to judge that law and vote to ban it. It is as if murder trials were decided by telephone surveys among people based on a few television shows (as some would love in the case of Amanda Knox) rather than by fully informed judges and courts …. or if Obama decided new financial laws ONLY based on result of an internet opinion poll (many bad presidents do that) rather than his own ideas, expert economic advisors, congress opinion, justice and what is best for the country.

The "3 strikes law" – especially its “non-proportional” aberrations - should hardly be part of a highly civilized system. In addition it is not a good incentive against crime. Vindicative policies create vindicative citizens.
In many Euro countries (incl. Italy) it is against one of the basic principles of the Constitution by which the conviction must always be "PROPORTIONAL" to the crime. Someone has already said this principle we find back in Roman law of more than 2000 years ago. I think – even if not literally - this could be also a reading of the US Amendment 8 as aberrations of 3SL are “cruel and unusual” by today’s standards (let us forget the different interpretations of Supreme Court for a moment. SC defines “not cruel” and therefore "constitutional" by AM8 even the killing of people by death penalty creating a paradox by which even a murderer is not cruel).

Penalty must not be against humanity and years in prison for certain crimes must be fixed by law within a certain interval. Recidival behaviour must be punished in a severe but balanced way.
"Dickensian" is exactly what 3SL is (Michael said that very rightly). In old England prison was the house of correction especially for people who were at the margin of society (prostitutes, beggars, vagabonds) so they would not bother the "productive ones". Correction was bullshit as real rehabilitation and reeducation was never achieved. They were just kept out of society in subhuman living conditions.
The issue is not simple to solve as the US is a relatively violent society and many say "we have to protect the good people". It is obvious that society can be better protected from violent crimes with smarter policies keeping intact the basic principles of justice.

One (of many) is stricter and smarter gun regulation, which does not mean prohibition and can be background checks and much more. A better prison system is another important way. I see the very well informed Itchy B. mentioned guns and I agree fully with the assessment. I also agree that 3SL may create very violent crimes when one has two strikes going for third.

I will stop here as Skep suggests.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
Could you lot take it to JREF please where this debate in statistical correlation proof / fallacy can and should be debated.

I add one comment;

Bollocks.


That's a pretty good summary.

For those interested in a scholarly examination of the significant drop in crime in the U.S. I'd recommend The Crime Drop in America.

Here's an excerpt from the first part of chapter 1:

Attachment:
CrimeDrop.jpg


I'd say that's a pretty good summary too.


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: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Umm, Earl Grey, there is already a Lady grey (tea). Fact: Lady Grey tea is named after MARY Elizabeth grey, who was the daughter of Baron William Ponsonby. Lady grey was also mentioned in a song by *Oasis* called *Bag it up*. Just looked it up. LOVE the posts, BTW :)

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

Offline The Bard


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:46 pm

Posts: 2486

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 9:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Am off for a few days, on a free trip to....ROMA!!!!!! (Good old Airmiles...) I am so excited! Have never been before and feel quite overwhelmed by the number of things there are to do. Where to start???

_________________
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 10:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
Am off for a few days, on a free trip to....ROMA!!!!!! (Good old Airmiles...) I am so excited! Have never been before and feel quite overwhelmed by the number of things there are to do. Where to start???


By buying a train ticket to Perugia?

_________________
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 Aug 22, 2010 10:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Earl Grey wrote:
Michael wrote:

I also wonder, do the relatives of those in the states who have been treated by 'Lady Justice' in such a Dickensian manner get given the tour of the US media studios and offered tea and sympathy on morning interview couches or get to appear on Oprah?


And, on at least one occasion, interviewers have said to Amanda's parents, "Please let us know if there's anything we can do."



It seems to me that most of the media has already gone above and beyond the call of duty by ensuring that the family's collective denial gets passed on to the unsuspecting viewer.

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

Offline Clander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:26 am

Posts: 855

Location: Rome

Highscores: 77

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

The Bard wrote:
Am off for a few days, on a free trip to....ROMA!!!!!! (Good old Airmiles...) I am so excited! Have never been before and feel quite overwhelmed by the number of things there are to do. Where to start???


Where to start?
The Vatican museum. The Maps Room. You'll love it.

Anyway, since you are not the first PMF member to come to Rome since I have joined the forum, give me a call.
I happen to know Rome quite well. :D
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline thoughtful


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 8:48 pm

Posts: 1225

PostPosted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 11:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

michael wrote:
Quote:
But anyway, notwithstanding, let's do the maths...what you are essentially saying is that these 3000 people sitting in jail equates to 20,000+ murders that never happened because these 'specific' people are in jail. 20,000 (without the '+') divided by 3000 = about 5 7/8....which means you are saying that these are not people locked up for stealing shampoo or whatever, but that they are all actually serial killers (or were about to be)...I think killing 3 or more people is classed as being a serial killer. Doesn't this seem rather preposterous to you? It sounds like total bollocks to me!


Michael, without involving myself in your debate with bolint in any way, I can't resist pointing out the math/deduction error in your argument. The 20,000+ would-have-been murder victims IF the murder rate from 1993 and earlier had continued were not saved from the murderous efforts of the 3000 shampoo-and-pizza thieves now enduring cruel and unusual punishment for minor crimes. What bolint is presuming is that they were saved from completely different people, namely some 20,000 would-be-murderers who were DETERRED from murder by the existence of the 3-strikes law. That is the argument given by pro-3-strikers, not what you are saying.

I personally believe that the decrease in the murder rate is due to a combination of other factors (such as the aging of the population pointed out by Fiona), but that is not a reason to misunderstand or misrepresent what is at the very least a logical argument.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:04 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

thoughtful wrote:
michael wrote:
Quote:
But anyway, notwithstanding, let's do the maths...what you are essentially saying is that these 3000 people sitting in jail equates to 20,000+ murders that never happened because these 'specific' people are in jail. 20,000 (without the '+') divided by 3000 = about 5 7/8....which means you are saying that these are not people locked up for stealing shampoo or whatever, but that they are all actually serial killers (or were about to be)...I think killing 3 or more people is classed as being a serial killer. Doesn't this seem rather preposterous to you? It sounds like total bollocks to me!


Michael, without involving myself in your debate with bolint in any way, I can't resist pointing out the math/deduction error in your argument. The 20,000+ would-have-been murder victims IF the murder rate from 1993 and earlier had continued were not saved from the murderous efforts of the 3000 shampoo-and-pizza thieves now enduring cruel and unusual punishment for minor crimes. What bolint is presuming is that they were saved from completely different people, namely some 20,000 would-be-murderers who were DETERRED from murder by the existence of the 3-strikes law. That is the argument given by pro-3-strikers, not what you are saying.

I personally believe that the decrease in the murder rate is due to a combination of other factors (such as the aging of the population pointed out by Fiona), but that is not a reason to misunderstand or misrepresent what is at the very least a logical argument.



Or perhaps, you just want to argue for the sake of it. Nothing unusual there.

_________________
"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 stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:25 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

thoughtful wrote:
stilicho wrote:
Quote:
But Edda sat in court, under oath, and delivered a detailed account of the phone call that her daughter claimed she had entirely forgotten. Why did Edda do that? What is wrong with her?


Stilicho. This was maybe one of the few times where nothing was wrong with Edda. She did it because she was under oath to tell the truth and what she said was substantially true. She did it because unlike her daughter, she knew that denying a phone call that showed up on the phone records and in intercepted conversations is STUPID. The real question is, why did Amanda deny it, not why did Edda describe it?


I don't have the transcript in front of me but I think you're quite incorrect about this. Edda delivered a detailed account of a very brief phone call. I had read here, I think, that those present in the courtroom were baffled at the "gotcha" detail of Edda's account. It was delivered almost as a reproach to her own daughter, in public.

There is definitely something wrong with Edda and that testimony about a call lasting just over a minute was one of the weirdest things I'd read about Amanda's "support group".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline stilicho


User avatar


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 am

Posts: 2492

Location: Western Canada

Highscores: 8

PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:33 am   Post subject: Re: Future Shock   

guermantes wrote:
stilicho wrote:
It's another way of phrasing Solzhenitsyn's observation on the inability of humans to rid themselves entirely of evil without cutting their hearts in two.


Skeptical Bystander wrote:
"Every human heart" (to quote James) is comprised of both good and evil.


Hey guys (Stilicho & Skep),

I have been sitting here trying to think of the exact quote from Solzhenitsyn. Once, I used it as an epigraph for an essay (term paper) I wrote a long time ago, when I was still at school.

I might be getting a bit philosophical here, but I thought I'd share it with you:

"Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not trough states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either - but right through every human heart - and through all human hearts."


Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago II, New York: Harper and Row, 1974, Part IV, Ch. 1, p. 615.


Right now, I'm trying to find a similar Marcel Proust quote, a very good one (and very relevant to this case). I'll post more later, I have to go through all my "quote files". ;)


I have no problem with getting philosophical! It's one of my favourite hobbies.

I work with a few Russians (mainly in IT and Planning & Analysis) and I know from talking to a few of them that I wish I could read that language. Many of the idioms are lost in English translations (and vice versa, they admit). I like most classical Russian writers including Solzhenitsyn, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Chekov, and I wish I had all the idioms explained in front of me when I read them.

That's the most famous of Solzhenitsyn's quotes but one might almost say that's a theme of his entire work. It certainly was for Dostoevsky. I enjoy Eastern European writers on the whole and I've found their sense of the absurd to be quite familiar.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:15 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Hi Stilicho,

I'm Russian (the only representative of Russia in this forum?), so I know my Solzhenitsyn, Dostoyevsky, and Gogol (the three best, and all the rest :) ).

Sending you greetings with this picture postcard.

A historical then and now look at the State Russian Museum in St. Petersburg:

Attachment:
Russian-Museum-St.Petersburg-postcard.jpg


Attachment:
Russian-Museum-St.Petersbug-2.jpg


ETA: Sorry for the OT post. Now we are back on topic - silence .............


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:57 am   Post subject: сердце   

guermantes wrote:
I'm Russian (the only representative of Russia on this board?), so I know my Solzhenitsyn, Dostoyevsky, and Gogol (the three best, and all the rest :) ).




Hi Guermantes,

I found the quote:
Quote:
Постепенно открылось мне, что линия, разделяющая добро и зло проходит не между государствами, не между классами, не между партиями -- она проходит через каждое человеческое сердце -- и черезо все человеческие сердца.

ЧАСТЬ ЧЕТВЈРТАЯ. ДУША И КОЛЮЧАЯ ПРОВОЛОКА
Part Four: Soul and barbed wire

ГЛАВА 1. ВОСХОЖДЕНИЕ
Chapter 1. Ascent

– [ Gulag 4.1 ] (in Russian)


"сердце" (serdtsye) and "heart" are the same word, down different lines of descent, so Russian and English are related. "cardio-" from medicine (Greek/Latin), also.

Interestingly, the epigraph for Part 4 is Corinthians 15:51:

Quote:
Говорю вам тайну: не все мы умрем, но все изменимся.
1-е послание к коринфянам, 15,51.
("I tell you a secret: we do not all die, but all be changed. "
1 Epistle to the Corinthians, 15.51 )

or in the traditional English translation:

"We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed"
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: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:02 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Speaking of California, I like el zorro (the fox).

I even once had the hat and mask, cape and sword, and everything, in the actinic summer of an Australian Christmas.

Stories are timeless, and reach across the years and across languages.
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: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:14 am   Post subject: Re: XIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUGUST 19 -   

Speaking of play-acting, when the publicity campaign says that there was no evidence of Amanda, why is it that they are ignoring her "footprints" all over the narrative?

The staged burglary, the shifting alibis.

Is there an unspoken science worship going on: only the scientific evidence gets the focus or the belief-reward-points?

Or is it that there is a tacit agreement that the staging and lying are unassailable, so therefore should remained un-mentioned?

Or, is Amanda a third party, an outsider, a commodity, and anything she says is to be ignored as trivial, worthless and inconsequential? Is there a hint of a pattern here?

The campaign is definitely not helping her as a person or as a defendant, and is being deliberately obstructionist and manipulative vis a vis her rights and obligations.
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 32 [ 7802 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 32  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 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 


29,421,698 Views