Amanda Knox

nagirrac

Wibbs wrote: »

Yet even after consultation with her solicitor and interpreter she lays the same story down in a 5 page deposition in english 12 hours later. Duress? Certainly a possibility, but it still seems worth questioning.

If you read the note (sorry don't have a link, but you can find it online), it is heartbreaking. She is clearly psychologically destroyed from what occurred the night before. It is a clear case of "absorbed memory" where her own memory of the night in question is blurred with the suggested memory. If you doubt this is possible, research interrogation techniques, the police themselves are warned about such false confessions in their training and such confessions have led to many acquittals (and false convictions).
The key part of her handwritten note is where she says she is confused by the memory involving Lumumba and it appears less real than her other memory of the night. It is the testimony of someone who was psychologically shredded.

syklops

Tayla wrote: »

Maybe someone on here with some computer expertise could explain to us what they mean by no computer activity? Do they mean online activity? or do the experts have a way of tracking whether the computer was used offline?

I need a bit more perspective, but yes, generally speaking computer usage can be followed after the fact. There are time stamps of when websites are visited and when system events(like coming out of sleep mode) occur, as well as when other files were accessed.

Police: What were you doing between 2pm and 6pm on the day in questiom?
Amanada: Watchin Porn on the Internet.
Police: Thats funny, because according to our logs, the computer was in sleep mode from 1.30 to 6.15 at which point someone googled for "Best way of getting rid of evidence" followed by "tips for getting rid of body".

Tayla

nagirrac wrote: »

If you read the note (sorry don't have a link, but you can find it online), it is heartbreaking. She is clearly psychologically destroyed from what occurred the night before. It is a clear case of "absorbed memory" where her own memory of the night in question is blurred with the suggested memory. If you doubt this is possible, research interrogation techniques, the police themselves are warned about such false confessions in their training and such confessions have led to many acquittals (and false convictions).
The key part of her handwritten note is where she says she is confused by the memory involving Lumumba and it appears less real than her other memory of the night. It is the testimony of someone who was psychologically shredded.

Here's the link, she sounds completely confused and terrified. She had been (or so she thought) helping the police for days and she sounds confused that they turned on her, she didn't realise she was a suspect until she had spoken to her solicitor.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570225/Transcript-of-Amanda-Knoxs-note.html

I think she spoke to her solicitor who told her not to say anything else but then Amanda thought that she knew best and that she would write a letter explaining herself because she thought whoever was in charge would believe her honesty.

If she was guilty wouldn't she just listen to her solicitor?

Tayla

syklops wrote: »

I need a bit more perspective, but yes, generally speaking computer usage can be followed after the fact. There are time stamps of when websites are visited and when system events(like coming out of sleep mode) occur, as well as when other files were accessed.

Thanks, another question then if you don't mind....Raffaele was a computer studies graduate, would there be any way for him to have blocked his computer from tracking what he was doing? Not because he was doing something wrong but just in general? I know some people can block what they're doing online but what about offline?

Wibbs

Tayla wrote: »

I don't know a lot about the laptops but I had heard that the hard drives were fried when the police tried to copy them and then the defense couldn't test them independently because of that. I could be wrong there, going to look it up later.

Well the defence did have access to the drive in question as one of them suggested it might have connected for 4 seconds around midnight. I've not heard of any destruction during copying. In any event how could you fry a drive copying it?

My guess is that they convinced Raffaele that Amanda had done it and then intimidated him into admitting she might not have been there all night, I mean if you were asleep all night then you would have no proof that someone was definitely 100% there with you for the night and if the police are saying she's done it then wouldn't you think that there was a chance she did? Plus he would have known the stories about the notorious prosecuter.

Sorry no that bit I don't buy. How would you be convinced your partner left while you slept, got into some orgy action followed by some throat slitting, then came back to bed at some stage during the night? Hardly. Makes no sense.

She probably spoke to her solicitor but then by herself thought it would be a good idea to write a letter explaining herself, silly I know but wouldn't a guilty person have listened to her solicitors advice?

She did speak to her solictor, no probably about it and then she wrote not a letter to explain herself, but a 5 page deposition going along with the previous confession. Again it makes it all a bit odd. Hey maybe the weed they had been smoking was heavy duty, heavier than she was used to and the paranoia hit? Being baked of ones tits might explain the cartwheels and odd behaviour in the police station too.

The fact that she said that she wasn't sure of what she'd said rather than just saying outright that it didn't happen was probably because her solicitor had warned her that when she made future statements not to say oh that 100% wasn't true because then they would call her a liar.

So a solictor tells his or her client up for a brutal murder not to deny it 100% in case that wasn't true? Eh no.

I know this is guesswork but considering she is innocent, I presume it's pretty close to what happened.

She has been cleared of the crime on appeal, this suggests she is innocent, not necessarily that she actually is. Trite answer but OJ anyone?

Completely agree T, it is absolutely shocking!

Yea we're singing from the same hymn sheet there. Italian "justice" has serious issues going on, from cop on the beat up.

Tayla

Wibbs wrote: »

Well the defence did have access to the drive in question as one of them suggested it might have connected for 4 seconds around midnight. I've not heard of any destruction during copying. In any event how could you fry a drive copying it?

That was the expression I heard, that they were fried, perhaps destroyed is a better word.

Wibbs wrote: »

Sorry no that bit I don't buy. How would you be convinced your partner left while you slept, got into some orgy action followed by some throat slitting, then came back to bed at some stage during the night? Hardly. Makes no sense.

She'd been his partner for a week so it's not that unbelievable, they suggested she had left, he obviously thought that there was a reason for them to suspect her. Makes plenty of sense.

Wibbs wrote: »

She did speak to her solictor, no probably about it and then she wrote not a letter to explain herself, but a 5 page deposition going along with the previous confession. Again it makes it all a bit odd.

I didn't mean probably as in she 'probably' spoke to her solicitor, I meant that she 'probably' took it upon herself to ignore the solicitors advice and write the letter, I could have phrased that better.:)

I linked to the letter above, yes it's odd but the girl was in shock.

Wibbs wrote: »

So a solictor tells his or her client up for a brutal murder not to deny it 100% in case that wasn't true? Eh no.

As i've said before there have been 4 Million victims of judicial errors and unjust detentions in post war Italy, 50% of all convictions are overturned or greatly reduced on appeal.

It's clear that their system is entirely different to ours, who knows what Italian solicitors say to their clients, they are aware of the countless case of miscarriages of justices in Italy.

Also at that time Amanda wasn't accused of the brutal murder, she was accused of being at the house and hearing Patrick kill Meredith, it could be possible that her solicitor said don't deny it. As far as Amandas solicitor knew, Amanda could have been there when Patrick killed Meredith. What if it turned out that he really had???? Wouldn't her solicitor protect Amanda from this?

If Patrick was indeed the murderer and Amanda gave the statement saying that she heard what happened, then took it back and said that she didn't and then it turned out to be true? What would happen then?

Wibbs wrote: »

Yea we're singing from the same hymn sheet there. Italian "justice" has serious issues going on, from cop on the beat up.

No doubt about that!

Zebra3

Documentary about all this on Crime & Investigation channel (Sky 553) @ 22:00 tonight.

syklops

Well the defence did have access to the drive in question as one of them suggested it might have connected for 4 seconds around midnight. I've not heard of any destruction during copying. In any event how could you fry a drive copying it?

Well there are a number of ways this could happen. One way is it could have been bad a mistake during the forensic analysis. WHen analysing a harddrive one of the first things you do is make a backup of it. A common way is using the linux tool 'dd' to do the copying, e.g.:

dd if=<evidence drive> of=<blank drive>

If the person doing it was new, or half a sleep, or even just human, and instead typed:

dd of=<evidence drive> if=<blank drive>

Then they have overwritten the evidence with a blank image. Sounds like a rookie mistake but I have seen it done on more than one occasion.

In terms of intentional destruction there is also numerous ways it could be done. A former colleague of mine worked as a defence contractor, and worked on very sensitive stuff and he had a small amount of plastic explosive underneath his solid state drive. If you didnt turn on the laptop the correct way the explosive took out the storage.

Obviously nothing like that was employed here, but there are things that one could do to intentionally destroy a drive to prevent it being copied. All that aside though, if it was me, I would just encrypt the drive with a non-standard cipher and have a separate disk for mounting the drive. The reason being that to an analyst with no other information than whats in front of them, an encrypted drive, would also just look like scrambled data if they didnt know the cipher or keyphrase.

Thanks, another question then if you don't mind....Raffaele was a computer studies graduate, would there be any way for him to have blocked his computer from tracking what he was doing? Not because he was doing something wrong but just in general? I know some people can block what they're doing online but what about offline?

Yes there is a myriad of ways of hiding what you are doing, both on the computer and on the internet, once you know what you are doing.

previous user

previous user wrote: »

And doing cartwheels in the police station afterwards and sidesplits, what normal person acts like that after a murder, not a sane person thats for sure.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/4863279/Amanda-Knox-did-cartwheels-and-splits-at-police-station-after-Meredith-Kercher-murder.html

TheyKnowMyIP wrote: »

What is "normal"? I find people have their own special weirdness. Nobody is perfect.

parker kent wrote: »

What is a normal way to react to being questioned by police about a murder? Yeah she was a bit odd, but that is not a crime.

Any sane person, I think would have been too shocked to do cartwheels and sidesplits in a police station after been in the close proximity to a murder you'd have thought that they would have been terrified.

Tayla

previous user wrote: »

Any sane person, I think would have been too shocked to do cartwheels and sidesplits in a police station after been in the close proximity to a murder you'd have thought that they would have been terrified.

People react to shock and grief in all sorts of different ways

jill_valentine

If she had not been falsely convicted of murder afterwards, it would be little more than a curiosity; remarked upon by only a handful of people, and then forgotten.

Weird behaviour =/= murderer.

previous user

Tayla wrote: »

People react to shock and grief in all sorts of different ways

I disagree.

Tayla

previous user wrote: »

I disagree.

But it's a known fact

jill_valentine

Out of interest, is there a source for the cartwheel thing that doesn't feature with a load of the stuff that's already been discredited?

LH Pathe

If there's one certainty to have come out of all this, it's that amanda Knox is a fùckin dope that does not merit any more attention

she's finally off my tv screen, now let's banish her from ah?. ****n thread title makes me wretch, stop bumpin it

Tayla

jill_valentine wrote: »

Out of interest, is there a source for the cartwheel thing that doesn't feature with a load of the stuff that's already been discredited?

I've only read about in 2 contexts, one in which the police officer told her to stop because the police station wasn't the place for it and the other was that she was talking to the police and telling them she did gymnastics and they asked her to do a cartwheel.

Tayla

LH Pathe wrote: »

If there's one certainty to have come out of all this, it's that amanda Knox is a fùckin dope that does not merit any more attention

she's finally off my tv screen, now let's banish her from ah?. ****n thread title makes me wretch, stop bumpin it

Some of us like discussing the case and verdict actually.

LH Pathe

Fine.. I just hope it's the topic's last dying gasps. the girl revolts me

demolitionman

in this thread I havent yet seen a convincing/plausible argument or evidence for her having done it.

Amber Lamps

Tayla wrote: »

People react to shock and grief in all sorts of different ways

previous user wrote: »

I disagree.

sorry but that did actually make me laugh out loud for real. I'm guessing you weren't trying to be funny but....:pac:

LH Pathe

What's the difference between Foxy Knoxy and Sexy Sady?

sadie may have done it with just about everyone in the vicinity that night, but at least she wasn't asking for it - like, literally

*boom boom*

Jess16

demolitionman wrote: »

in this thread I havent yet seen a convincing/plausible argument or evidence for her having done it.

That's because there is none. If professionals can't provide credible evidence against her, then internet sleuths certainly can't

Yahew

Jess16 wrote: »

demolitionman wrote: »

in this thread I havent yet seen a convincing/plausible argument or evidence for her having done it.

That's because there is none. If professionals can't provide credible evidence against her, then internet sleuths certainly can't

You say there is no evidence? Cartwheels. Kissing her boyfriend? Burn the witch.

sam34

LH Pathe wrote: »

If there's one certainty to have come out of all this, it's that amanda Knox is a fùckin dope that does not merit any more attention

she's finally off my tv screen, now let's banish her from ah?. ****n thread title makes me wretch, stop bumpin it

oh I dunno- how about you just don't read the thread then?

you asked people to stop bumping it yet you posted on- thread three times in the space of an hour ... :rolleyes:

nagirrac

I guess it is time to say goodbye to this thread.

What is truly shocking is that 40% of the people who completed the survey on this thread still think she is guilty. Even though a jury of two experienced judges and six professionals after examining all the evidence in the case found her not just innocent, but chose the section of the acquittal code that states "did not commit the crimes" as opposed to "not guilty because of reasonable doubt".

Italy is ranked worst in the EU for judicial human rights violations by the European Court
50% of convictions are overturned on appeal
Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sallicido gave up 4 years of their lives for being naive enough to cooperate with the police. If they had given their initial statements and then refused to speak further without an attorney present (as the Italian flatmates did) they would never have been charged and we would never have heard of them.

This case will become a case study for police and prosecutors worldwide on how not to conduct an investigation

Giruilla

nagirrac wrote: »

What is truly shocking is that 40% of the people who completed the survey on this thread still think she is guilty.

I wonder how many people who have commented in the thread and voted in the poll have read the full judges report from the first trial, and not just the information supplied to them by the media? ie short, easy to understand, concise paragraphs that don't take 10 pages or so to read through.

nagirrac wrote: »

Even though a jury of two experienced judges and six professionals after examining all the evidence in the case found her not just innocent, but chose the section of the acquittal code that states "did not commit the crimes" as opposed to "not guilty because of reasonable doubt".

Thats not true. In the Italian appeals process, only the weakest evidence is treated, not the whole case.

Lirange

It is very reminiscent of the West Memphis 3 case. No physical evidence. No credible motive. A clown prosecutor with a penchant for spinning lurid tales to be lapped up by the media.

A Primal Nut

Giruilla wrote: »

I wonder how many people who have commented in the thread and voted in the poll have read the full judges report from the first trial, and not just the information supplied to them by the media? ie short, easy to understand, concise paragraphs that don't take 10 pages or so to read through.

Can you summarise - what evidence is in there that isn't popularly known?

Giruilla

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Can you summarise - what evidence is in there that isn't popularly known?

No, how about you read it yourself?

http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/2011/3/Massei_Report.pdf

A Primal Nut

Wibbs wrote: »

It's a hard one. I've been following the case for a while and there's all sorts of confusing strands running through it.

Her confession is odd. She said it was under duress and that's a point considering what was going on by her account, but then she repeats the confession a day later. You would think duress first time out, but second? After mature recollection and advic? Then again she's young so I dunno how I would have reacted when I was 20. Very differently to how I'd react now anyway.

Why would she confess and then deny it again later? According to her she was denied water until she confessed. Confessions which were later withdrawn should never be used in court.

Her alibi doesn't add up. IE she was all night with her boyfriend smoking weed(and him) and watching movies they'd downloaded(which records then showed their computers didn't go online and their phones were off). Problem being he couldn't be sure she was with him. That's mad strong ganja to forget hanging out with and shagging your new girlfriend.

According to Raffaele the computers showed activity. For some reason that has never been explained, the police destroyed the hard drives. So how can they be used as evidence in court?

Raffaele and Amanda knew they were together but the police told them there was evidence they had been at Amanda's house. They panicked and being the confused and naive kids that they were, they changed their story. The weed thing was an excuse they gave for why they changed their story.

Then her accusation of the bar owner guy. If someone independent hadn't come forward to give him a undeniable alibi he would have been screwed.

I agree she shouldn't have done it but she trusted the police and thought she was helping them. Remember she was 20 years old! And again it was in the context of 12-hour interrogations and she eventually gave in and signed the statement the police had written in Italian. Can anyone here say they would last that long before signing?

Here is the link to her note the next day. As someone said its heartbreaking - she's a naive, exhausted, confused 20 year old kid being interrogated intensely for hours at a time. She has no idea what's going on.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1570225/Transcript-of-Amanda-Knoxs-note.html

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

She definitely knows something. The whole case stinks, there's something not right about it at all. She was definitely involved in some way.

She has an alibi. She was in her boyfriend's apartment all night. She knows nothing.

Wibbs wrote: »

Well the defence did have access to the drive in question as one of them suggested it might have connected for 4 seconds around midnight. I've not heard of any destruction during copying. In any event how could you fry a drive copying it?

They destroyed it because it didn't show what the prosecutor wanted it to show. They haven't given any other reason.

previous user wrote: »

Any sane person, I think would have been too shocked to do cartwheels and sidesplits in a police station after been in the close proximity to a murder you'd have thought that they would have been terrified.

She had been sitting down in the police station for up to 12 hours at a time, mostly waiting around.. She was advised to exercise to keep her mind sharp and not fall asleep, etc. This was her way to exercise.

From the note:

But the truth is, I am unsure about the truth and here's why:

1. The police have told me that they have hard evidence that places me at the house, my house, at the time of Meredith's murder. I don't know what proof they are talking about, but if this is true, it means I am very confused and my dreams must be real.

2. My boyfriend has claimed that I have said things that I know are not true. I KNOW I told him I didn't have to work that night. I remember that moment very clearly. I also NEVER asked him to lie for me. This is absolutely a lie. What I don't understand is why Raffaele, who has always been so caring and gentle with me, would lie about this. What does he have to hide? I don't think he killed Meredith, but I do think he is scared, like me. He walked into a situation that he has never had to be in, and perhaps he is trying to find a way out by disassociating himself with me.