Pages

Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Quenching the Media Leaks

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

1. Peter Quennell seems to think that the coerced statements of November 6, 2007 were the beginning of detrimental leaks Amanda Knox created against herself. He also includes as admission of presence at the murder her First Memorandum in which she calls the other two statements unreal and unreliable.

Amanda's First Memorandum was not her only attempt to recant the false impression those coerced statements created. She had an interview with Mignini in December 2007, and appeared at numerous hearings trying to explain that her 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements on November 6, 2007 were not voluntary.

None of this explains the media frenzy that occurred during the investigation and the trial. Inflammatory information was regularly appearing in the media that had to be coming from someone familiar with the investigation.

2. So what does Peter Quennell say about this? He says that there are rules that prevent Italian police and prosecutors from leaking information. And he claims there were no proven examples of police and prosecutors giving reporters information. So where did all the bootleg information come from? One example is Amanda's prison diary. The police confiscated it at the end of November 2007. Yet in June 2008, Amanda's prison diary was leaked to the media. Since it was the police or the prosecutors who had it, who else but the police or prosecutors could have leaked it?

3. So who does Peter Quennell say leaked the prison diary that only the police or prosecutors had possession of? Peter Quennell says it was Amanda's defense lawyers who leaked it. Peter Quennell says her defense lawyers leaked her prison diary to hurt the police and prosecution in the case. Never mind that information about Amanda's sex life was in that leaked prison diary. Peter Quennell doesn't explain how the leaked information was supposed to have hurt the police and prosecutors instead of hurting Amanda.

4. Peter Quennell seems to imply that leaks he attributes to Amanda and her defense lawyers are responsible for the frenzy of accounts "making things up for profit and fame." He even quotes Guede's lawyer Walte Biscotti complaining about the leaks as though that makes it official. Peter Quennell claims pro-Amanda books of writers Dempsey, Burleigh, Moore, Preston, Hendry, Waterbury, and Fischer include false information due to the leaked information frenzy. Of course Peter Quennell doesn't mention any of the guilter books that took up this leaked information.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Seriously Sick Individuals

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

How was Amanda Knox encouraging West Seattle to adulate seriously sick individuals by questioning how society handles sexual crimes? That's what TJMK's Hopeful wanted people to believe.

http://www.westseattleherald.com/2016/06/13/opinion/amandas-view-stanford-rape-case-redirecting

Amanda didn't doubt the sentence that Judge Aaron Persky handed down to Brock Allen Turner was lenient. She was analyzing what Judge Persky was trying to achieve with his leniency.

Of course, even though the jail time was only six months and the probation time was only three years, the real punishment was the lifetime registration as a sex offender.

What Amanda pointed out is that extremes in either severity or  leniency will be detrimental toward the combined goals of retribution and prevention. If the punishment is too severe, the convicted will acquire the attitude of being the victim instead of seeing the severity of the crime done. If the punishment is too lenient, there is little incentive to improve behavior to avoid punishment for a repeat offense.

What TJMK's Hopeful did was to ignore Amanda's thorough analysis of crime and punishment, and make the controversy all about Amanda. Hopeful thinks that Amanda is "seething with jealousy." Hopeful assumed Amanda's envy that Turner got off so light whereas she didn't dodge the bullet since she didn't leave Meredith alive.

Amanda didn't write that punishment does no good but that vengeance does no good. She did write that there should be education to encourage awareness of sex crimes and to help victims to overcome the psychological problems they face. Hopeful had the audacity to claim the non-stop accusations against Amanda that TJMK and Perugia Murder File were doing just that.

Since TJMK's Hopeful claimed that Amanda was Brock Turner's best apologist, Hopeful needs to read Amanda's article again for what she really said.

Monday, May 29, 2017

Documentary cherry-picked

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

Swansea Jack claims that impressionable people seeing the Netflix Amanda Knox Documentary can be prejudiced in favor of her beyond reasoning about her guilt. Twitter comments from people claiming to have seen the documentary do not demonstrate that the documentary changes anyone's mind who have already decided whether that person believes she is guilty or innocent.

Swansea Jack doesn't explain what the clever and sneaky method is that Blackhurst and McGinn used to disguise their bias in favor of Amanda. Presumably what they did that upsets Swansea Jack was to present the participants in the documentary speak for themselves.

Not everyone who was involved in the investigation and trial was presented, but Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini was. This documentary was never intended to be a re-trial of Amanda Knox as Swansea Jack would have preferred. It was only intended to present people in their own words.

Of course since the documentary was about Amanda Knox, more of her words were presented than anyone else's, but the directors did not try to explain anything about what the participants' words meant. This is the only neutrality Blackhurst and McGinn intended. Blackhurst and McGinn did not express their own opinions in the documentary, but why is that supposed to be hiding anything?

Guilters are indignant over tweets made about Amanda being innocent, but Blackhurst and McGinn were initially interested in the case because of media manipulation of tragedy. They could not understand how Meredith's death had become entertainment.

http://www.businessinsider.com/amanda-knox-documentary-netflix-directors-2016-9

They never claimed that they did not come to see Amanda's innocence, but it's not really that which upsets guilters about the Netflix documentary. What they don't like is that the film doesn't present the reasons guilters claim prove Amanda's guilt.

It's really the guilter opinion that Marasca and Bruno confirmed Amanda's presence at Meredith's murder. Marasca and Bruno acknowledged the lower court ruling, but offered nothing to confirm that it was valid.

Why was Amanda the first person to think that Meredith had been raped when it was common knowledge Meredith was found nude. The autopsy actually found that she had not been raped. So what difference does it make that Amanda thought so?

The coerced 5:45 AM statement has Amanda both saying she heard the scream and that she didn't remember hearing it. What does that mean? Also, three elderly ladies including Nara Capezzali and Antonella Monacchia said they heard a scream, but they didn't identify the scream as coming from Meredith. The prosecutor did. It was only because Judge Massei interpretted the time of death as being sometime around 11:30 PM that the sleeping ladies had supposedly heard Meredith's scream. However, the medical examiner had estimated the time of death as being around 9:30 PM.

Luca Altieri was the one who broke down Meredith's door. He certainly saw all the blood and saw that Meredith must have been nude under the duvet. The police later told Luca about Meredith's neck being slashed. Amanda overheard Luca telling this to Raffaele in Luca's car on the way to the police station.

Amanda didn't get the details of the murder correct after all. She thought Meredith was pushed into the wardrobe, but she was not. Amanda also thought Meredith had bled to death, but Meredith had suffocated on her own blood.

What difference does it make that Amanda and/or Raffaele woke up at various times and went back to sleep until they finally got out of bed after 10:00 AM? How does Swansea Jack even know that Amanda woke up just because Raffaele put music on? Some people have to have music or the radio on in order to sleep.

Of course Amanda cannot understand why Meredith's DNA would have been on Raffaele's kitchen knife. Meredith had never been near that knife.

There were lots of wire taps that were not mentioned on the 90 minute documentary. What of it? Why waste time explaining the police were lying about Meredith's DNA being found on that kitchen knife. We know the police did lie about it.

What's the point of mentioning Raffaele's speculation in his own diary that should never have used against him? Raffaele didn't know the police were lying about Meredith's DNA being on his kitchen knife, and he was trying to remember how it could have gotten there.

Raffaele should never have had to correct the false impression he really believed his speculation of how impossible Meredith DNA could have gotten on his kitchen knife. It was his own diary he wrote the speculation in. So who was he trying to deceive?

First off, it was not Amanda who swapped Guede for Lumumba. It was the police after they found that Lumumba could not have done the crime who swapped Guede for Lumumba. Now, the police had been questioning Amanda from 10:30 PM until 1:45 AM before they coerced her into signing the statement. That is hours. And asking who the men were who knew Meredith is indeed questioning.

The investigators testified it was the text message in reply to Lumumba that immediately trigger her to accuse him. They don't even seem to know when or how Amanda learned that Raffaele has supposedly withdrawn his alibi for her.

Ficarra didn't ask Amanda for a list of suspects or persons of interest. Ficarra only asked Amanda for a list of men who knew Meredith. And what version of events did Raffaele decided to reject? The coerced statement he was forced to sign doesn't detail that.

Also, the coerced statement Raffaele was forced to sign doesn't say Amanda had asked Raffaele to lie for him as guilters love to assert.

There was no sample of Amanda's blood recovered from the faucet of the sink of the small bathroom. There was only Amanda's DNA that was proved to have come from skin cells when Amanda washed her hands.

Amanda's DNA would be expected in the villa where she had lived. That would include Filomena's room she entered when she discovered the break-in throught Filomena's window. Even assuming the Luminol discovered trace was Meredith's blood which it was not confirmed with the necessary additional test, there is no evidence that Amanda tracked Meredith's blood from Meredith's room. The footprints Amanda left the morning after the murder originate in the small bathroom instead. If there was a sourse of Meredith's blood that Amanda stepped into, it was probably the spot of blood on the bathmat when Amanda stepped out of the shower. It's probably her footprint that was on that bathmat since she was the one who was barefoot and not Raffaele or Guede.

It is worth noting that there was no biological trace of Amanda in Meredith's room

Addressing the bra clasp, what type of DNA testing was Prosecutor Comodi talking about when asking Carla Vecchiotti if sex days was a sufficient interval to rule out contamination? What decomtamination method was used to prepare the equipment for re-use?

If six days is all the time for DNA material to break down on its own, then the DNA on the bra clasp would have had to have been contrived anyhow. What is more important is whether decomtamination for regular testing of DNA would be sufficient for the LCN sample collected from the kitchen knife?

There's nothing magic about the DNA that comes from primary and secondary contamination. Guilters love to talk about how terciary touch contamination is not proved, but they dismiss other contamination as though there's no first and second after which the third would come.

Saliva carried DNA. Raffaele sneezed or coughed. The droplets of DNA carrying saliva falls on dust on the floor or furniture. The DNA carrying saliva saturated dust is picked up by dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers that it was video-recorded that the investigators didn't change before entering Meredith's room. The DNA either transfer directly to the bra clasp from the saliva saturated dust or is carried along with that dust when the dust adheres to the bra clasp.

DNA can only be found where investigators swab for it. That the investigators didn't find Raffaele's DNA other than on a cigarette butt and on the bra clasp doesn't mean that his DNA would not be expected elsewhere in the villa. It could just be that it was in locations that were not swabbed.

Of course no DNA from Guede should have been expected in the villa since he had never visited there before like Raffaele had. However, Guede's DNA would have been expected in the small bathroom since Guede has said he went into that bathroom to get towels for trying to stop Meredith's bleeding.

Now, the swabbing for DNA evidence in Filomena's room was limited to only four or five places: the rock and fragments and several Luminol indicated traces. There's no report of finding anyone's DNA on the rock. Certainly we would have heard about it if Amanda's or Raffaele's DNA were found there. It was just the DNA found with what was assumed to have been blood that was reported. Were was an attempt to find DNA evidence of someone coming through the window?

Guede originally claimed it was an Italian not fitting Raffaele's description who killed Meredith. Guede couldn't blame Raffaele until he learned who he was. It wasn't until his appeal that Guede started talking about Amanda and Raffaele killing Meredith. However, Guede refused to testify at their trial. Did he refuse to appear in this documentary also?

As said before, the documentary presented those involved talking about it in their own words. Not everyone agreed to appear.

Sunday, May 28, 2017

Raper's Unruly Thread

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

Why is Raffaele Sollecito's claim to compensation dependent on what he is accused of lying about instead of the injustice done to him?

Whatever claim that he lied about anything, how was he acquitted of murder, but not elegible for compensation for the incarceration associated with the false accusation of murder?

How can the coerced statement extracted from Raffaele be used as an excuse for claiming he lied to much to be compenstated for the wrongful conviction and wrongful incarceration he endured?

If Dr. Maresca really did represent the interests of the Mereith family in questioning the good cause of Raffaele's claim to compensation, what does that say about the neutrality of the Kercher family in the legal proceedings?

2. James Raper seems to think that the quantity of facts put forward as evidence makes more difference than what those facts prove. He thinks he can thread together his own logic.

However inappropriate, implausible, inconsistent, contradictory, evasive, or obfuscating he thinks Amanda and Raffaele are, what does this alleged behavior prove? How does this body of alleged assertions concerning character portend culpability?

================================================================
The facts James Raper put forward as physical evidence are already controversial.

1) It's just an opinion that the break-in was staged.

2) There is no evidence of a clean-up, and James Raper only gives missing footprints as proof of that. These footprint are meaningless anyhow since they left them when they were in the villa the morning after the murder and they had nothing to do with the blood in Meredith's room.

3) There is no significance to Amanda's lamp being in Meredith's room, and testifying to her ownership of the lamp is not conceding anything. She never denied that it was her lamp.

4) Amanda's blood was not found on the bidet of the small bathroom. Meredith's blood was found there, but there was no reason to expect Amanda's blood to be there, and her DNA found there was attributed to her washing he hands at that sink.

5) The footprint found on the bathmat was only attributed to Raffaele by measurements made from a picture. That is no an accurate determination, and it makes more sense that Amanda left that footprint when she stepped on the spot of blood that was there after taking a shower the morning after the murder. That would explain why her footprints were found in the hall. Also, there was no reason for Raffaele to have removed his shoes which were what left prints of his steps in the hall.

6) There is nothing significant about finding Amanda's or Meredith's DNA in the villa were they lived. Finding Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's DNA outside Meredith's room doesn't prove Amanda was at the murder.

7) Regardless of whether traces illuminated by Luminol were found in the hall and Filomena's room were actually blood with mixed Amanda's and Meredith's DNA, Amanda left those traces the morning after the murder. None of her footprint lead out of Meredith's room, and their DNA would have been expected in that villa were they both lived.

8) Amanda and Raffaele left the footprints found outside of Meredith's room the morning after Meredith's death. Their footprint were not found inside Meredith's room. So there is no connection between Amanda and Raffaele with Meredith's murder.

9) Stefanoni had to cheat on the test she used to indicate Meredith's DNA was found on Raffaele's kitchen knife. Stefanoni enlarged the sample attributed to Meredith so much the minute residue from other tests confirming Meredith's DNA would have showed Meredith's DNA even though it had not been there. The test results had no meaning.

10. Dust contamination of the LCN trace of Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp cannot be ruled out since dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers were used for collecting the bra clasp. The fact that the bra clasp was recovered a yard away from where it was originally discovered shows that it had been kicked around, and the presence of the DNA of men other than Raffaele cannot be explained except by contamination.
================================================================

James Raper is unconvincing in claiming that Amanda's behavior on the morning after the murder is implausible and that her account is unreliable.

a) Why would Amanda be focusing on the shutters to the side of the villa when the destination of her approach was the door that was conspicuous by being open? The open door would have attracted her attention, but it wouldn't be upsetting since the door came open by itself if not locked properly. Also, the apartment is small so that Amanda would have expected to hear anyone who was in it if they were there.

b) Eye witnesses are often mistaken, and Raffaele's account of the door being open cannot prove that Amanda was not correct in saying it was closed. And maybe Amanda simply didn't notice the door was open. People think they see what they expect to see. So how would that be a lie instead of a mistake?

c) Amanda noticed the tiny bit of blood on the faucet. She didn't notice the blood on the bathmat until after her shower. Stepping on that blood on the bathmat was probably what brought it to her attention why also making the footprint which was only a partial footprint anyhow. There was no proof that it was either Raffaele's or Guede's footprint. The measurements being taken from a photo could not have been accurate enough to rule out it was hers instead.

d) Assuming Amanda noticed Meredith's door being closed, why would she even check at that point to see that it was locked? If Meredith were sleeping in there, why would Amanda disturb her to see that she was there?

e) There was no police report of Amanda having body odor. Nor did this come out in trial. Barbie Nadeau wrote in her book that police had told journalist Carmignani that Amanda had body odor, but there is no confirmation of this. Amanda had no reason to suspect an intruder in the villa until she went to use the hair dryer in the front bathroom. It's unclear that she noticed the unflushed toilet before she drying her hair, since she may not have seen the toilet until she was putting the hair dryer away. There's no way to know from the pictures of her later if she had wet or dry hair. Having seen the unflushed toilet, she knew the last person using it could not be any of her flatmates. She left in a hurry.

f) It's not that Amanda was uncomfortable with the toilet being unflushed that made her leave. It was the realization that there had to have been an intruder in the villa. Why would James Raper expect her to go further into the long bathroom to flush the toilet? She could grab the mop and bucket on her way out.
================================================================
Does James Raper expect us to believe Curatolo instead of Amanda or Raffaele?

a) Even if Amanda and Raffaele didn't remember the exact order things happened, Curatolo couldn't remember the same day that things happened. Curatolo confused Halloween with the night Meredith was murdered. Judge Massei had to rule that Curatolo saw the two on November 1st because Raffaele could not have been there on Halloween. How did Judge Massei prove that the couple Curatolo saw were Amanda and Raffaele? Whomever Curatolo saw, he claimed that they were in the Piazza Grimana until nearly midnight. Judge Massei ruled that Curatolo meant a little after 11:00 PM.

b) Using Raffaele's coerced statement of when he talked to his father the night of the murder doesn't prove anything. The police were pressuring him to say things they could use against him.

c) Yes, Raffaele did turn off his phone to watch the movie, Emelie, with Amanda. That would be why he didn't find the text message from his father until the next morning. Amanda said she turned her phone off to keep her boss from changing his mind and calling her to work after saying not to come in.

d) How does lack of phone activity during the night prove Amanda and Raffaele were not together that night. Even lack of GPS location doesn't prove they were somewhere else.

e) Again, using the statement the police coerced Raffaele to sign proves nothing about when he used his computer the night of the murder.

f) Amanda and Raffaele didn't look exhausted in the video of them waiting outside the villa when the police were investigating. Where did James Raper get that idea?
================================================================

Amanda talked to her mother several times the day Meredith's body was discovered. It's a little strange that Amanda had not anticipated the furor James Raper and other guilters would make over getting the order wrong in her book. It's totally incomprehensible what Amanda could have been hiding in this. What difference does it make that she wrote that she called her mother before she called Filomena? None.

Was there any significance in how Amanda told her friends and family she couldn't get an answer to her calls to Meredith's phones? She still didn't get an answer. Of course if Amanda had thought she would be a suspect in the murder, she would have been more exact, or avoided sending the email at all.

It was probably the Italian phone for which there was an out of order notice since it was the one that was turned off. Amanda seems to have misunderstood that it was also the one that went to voice mail because the phone itself was turned off.

It wouldn't be strange that Amanda didn't leave a message on the voice mail of the Italian phone since she would want to try the other phone again. Since she had already let the English phone ring for 16 seconds, 4 seconds was plenty of time to see if Meredith had located her phone to answer it.

If Amanda were trying to delay the discovery of Meredith's body, why did she return to the villa and eventually call attention to the strange things she observed there? Why wouldn't she and Raffaele have just gone on their day trip to Gubbio like they had planned and let the guys downstairs make the discovery?

Amanda's going back to the villa the morning after Meredith's murder makes no sense if she did it.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

TJMK's Inqusition for Amanda Knox 01--Chimera's dirty dozen

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: "Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided")

1. The interrogation on November 5-6th did not continue being voluntary. Amanda Knox did not give the text message reply to the police. They insisted she give them her phone and they examined her text messages one at a time asking questions about them. Amanda did not claim it as proof that she left Raffaele's apartment. The police insisted that that was what it meant even though she told them she was only saying "Goodbye." Amanda wasn't fluent enough in Italian to know how the police would understand the words she used. Why would she have to have a reason to neglect to erase it? Even if she knew how to erase outgoing text messages, expecting her to do it is ridiculous. If she had erased it, you would probably be acusing her of destroying evidence.

2. Why would the police ask permission to videotape or audio record the interrogation? They never asked permission for bugs they had out in the waiting room. So it's ridiculous to ask why Amanda would refuse. Since the police recorded other witness interviews, they probably recorded this one also. They may very well deny doing it because it would expose their illegal abusive interrogation practices. Of course, since the police already suspected Amanda before November 5th, it makes no sense that they didn't record this crucial interrogation unless they didn't want their behavior exposed.

3. Despite assurances from Stefanoni, the results of Meredith's DNA on Raffaele's kitchen knife cannot be reliable. The sample was enlarged too much to mean anything. So where is the proof that Amanda carried that knife to and from the villa? The kitchen knife could not have made the wounds to Meredith's neck since it's too long for the shallow wounds with hilt marks beside them. Amanda's bag did not have the tears and blood stains that would have been in it if she had used it to carry the kitchen knife.

4. When did Amanda deny the April Fools Prank? She only denied that it had anything to do with Guede's breaking into the villa through Filomena's window. Amanda broke nothing in the prank, but Guede broke the window and killed Meredith. Chimera exaggerated how disturbed Amanda's UW housemate or anyone else were. The alleged staging of the break-in was only ruled by fiat. The facts given do not prove what happened. Assuming Amanda had to have thought of staging such a break-in before or after the murder doesn't prove there was a staging or that Amanda had anything to do with the murder.

5. That Amanda researched a lot of information about Guede for her book doesn't prove that she knew anything about him at the time of the murder. Amanda had met Guede, but didn't even remember his name or anything about him when she was questioned by the police. It's an idiot's question to ask whether she knew about his arrest for breaking and entering at the time of the murder.

6. Amanda has never denied she turned off her phone to keep Patrick from contacting her again to call her to work that night. Raffaele has already said he turned his off to avoid interruption while watching a movie. Chimera can suspect they didn't want the phones to record their movements, but all they had to do was leave the phones behind. They could have said the volume of the ring got turned down accidentally.

7. There is absolutely no proof that Amanda or Raffaele took Meredith's cell phones. If Chimera thinks Amanda or Raffaele would get rid of the phones because they are evidence that would tie them to the murder, so would Guede have come to that conclusion. So why did the disposal of the phones lead to Amanda and Raffaele when the dump site was on the route Guede would have taken to leave the villa?

8. It's only an assertion that the police found Frederico Martin's phone number in Amanda's phone. The phone number the police claim was his number was not in her phone. If the police had found a real connection between Amanda and a cocaine dealer, it would have been entered as evidence. They entered all sorts of other irrelevant things but they didn't enter this.

9. Why does it have to be either Amanda or the killer who took Amanda's lamp into Meredith's room? Why couldn't Meredith have borrowed it? Guede said he did get towels from the small bathroom to try to stop Meredith's bleeding. Since guilters don't agree that the bloody footprint on the bath mat is Guede's, that's at least one place they have to agree he went without leaving tracks. So why couldn't he have also gotten the lamp out of Amanda's room.

10. It's a ridiculous assumption that Amanda could have cleaned up all her fingerprints but leave those of others. And why would Amanda clean up her own fingerprints in her own room or in the livingroom or kitchen? The kind of clean-up Chimera asserts would have been beyond the ability of someone guilters as slovenly as guilters claim Amanda was. So asking if Amanda bought or stole gloves is assuming she ever had occasion to use them. Chimera even admitted in the next question that Amanda is not much of a cleaner.

11. Quintavalle saw some woman, but he took a whole year pondering on what he saw to claim it were Amanda. He only claimed that this woman he saw went toward the back of his store where the cleaning section was, but Quintavalle never claimed she bought any cleaning supplies. Maybe Quintavalle is not a liar, but he did decide to come forward when there was favorable publicity to do so. We know that Amanda had to buy more clothes after she was locked out the villa where all her clothes were. The police never found bloody clothes of hers supposedly worn at a murder. If she had indeed bought cleanser anywhere, the police would have found that evidence, but it didn't exist. Chimera is fishing again.

12. What does Chimera mean by a trip a day after Meredith was killed was out of place? It was the same day Meredith died. Amanda and Raffaele had already planned this trip before Meredith died, and why would they need to pack for a trip that took less than an hour? This was likely a day trip and they would have been coming back the same day. If the trip to Gubbio was a cover, Amanda and Raffaele would have been on their way there instead of alerting everyone to the possible intruder at the villa. Of course the trip was real, but did Chimera expect them to leave once they discovered Meredith had been murdered?

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 02--Overboard and hypercritical

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

Peter Quennell did post this before it was popular among guilters to claim Amanda Knox was rich off of Meredith's death, but it still seems strange for Peter Quennell to admit that Amanda's legal defense gave her financial woes.

Of course Peter Quennell did use a familiar refrain among guilters. He called Amanda's and Raffaele's defense a cover-up but Peter Quennell implied that Guede got a good deal by plea bargaining. Guede has never shown remorse for what he did to Meredith. He didn't always blame the murder on Amanda and Raffaele, but he never admitted he did it.

Guede requested a fast-track trial to separate his trial from that of Amanda and Raffaele. In return, nearly half of his sentence was cut. He never admitted responsibility in order to get this deal.

There's nothing smart about accepting guilt that doesn't belong to you. You don't just unjustly pay for someone else's crime, but you pay for the mistake of agreeing to the easier deal the rest of your life.

And with Italian justice, it's illegal to plea deal anyhow. So Amanda would have no way to do what Peter Quennell demands of her. It is not at all certain that Amanda would have gotten any shorter sentence for agreeing to guilt Peter Quennell wanted her to take in Guede's place.

And even if Amanda could get a deal for a shorter sentence, how would that end the terrible agony of Meredith's family? After getting the shorter sentence, Amanda could have gone back to protesting her innocence just as Guede never stopped claiming his innocence. Added to the original injustice of being charged with the crime Amanda didn't commit would be the coercion to confess for leniency.

> Remember that the case against Amanda was totally arbitrary. Crucial points in convicting her are not facts but are fiat rulings that are not proved by facts.

> Remember that the only explanation for the ridiculous case against Amanda is collective bias, but guilters claim it's the defense that is corrupt.

How does Peter Quennnell know the judicial appointments to the 2011 appeal court were corrupt and hijacked? That Judge Chiari who was by-passed for the appointment expressed this opinion does not prove anything. Of course Prosecutor Comodi was unhappy with the decision handed down by the Hellmann Court, and Dr. Galati would say Cassation would reverse it since he appealed the Helmman decision. If Judge Hellmann was forced to retire because of the decision he reached, doesn't that demonstrate the bias against Amanda?

Peter Quennell already admitted in the title of this article that Amanda has financial problems. So how could she have bribed her way to an accommodating court? Where is the collusion that Peter Quennell complains is the corruption of the Hellmann Court?

Peter Quennell only presented the ever present guilter assertion of Amanda's "serial lying" as proof of this corruption in her defense. Somehow, being wrongfully convicted of the lie against Patrick Lumumba which police made Amanda believe was true long enough to coerce her to sign false statements is supposed to validate all the other lies guilters attribute to her.

Is Peter Quennell's image of a flashmob supposed to be a reference to Amanda's supporters on social media? How was that organized? Peter Quennell dismissed the analysis of psychologist Saul Kassin, and experienced law enforcement professionals John Douglas and Jim Clemente with ridicule instead of facts.

If Peter Quennell asserts Steve Moore, Bruce Fischer, and Ted Simon are saddled with legal and financial liabilities for being mentioned in Amanda book, what is he talking about?

How does a quote from Amanda's book become public domain just because Peter Quennell puts it in his article? Carlo Dalla Vedova didn't say in court what Amanda quoted him as saying to her about the detectives who investigated her, but isn't that because the bullies he mentioned would have sued him for slander? It doesn't matter that what she quoted him saying is true. All that mattered is if they could prove he said it.

Sure, the police were careful and respectful when they testified before the judges, but were they honest? Some of them had to know that what they said was false.

It's strange that in Italian courts, they don't have defendants testify under oath since it's assumed they're lying anyhow, but it's illegal for a defendant to protest abusive treatment that results in coerced statements. A defense lawyer cannot be honest with a client if what the lawyer says would upset the police or prosecutors.

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 03--Malignant Book Review

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

1. The police did not confirm the assertion that Amanda had been sleeping with a dangerous drug-ring leader. They never confirmed that Amanda bought any drugs through whoever they were talking about. The phone number given in the order to tap his phone was not found in Amanda phone as claimed.

Assuming this was the Cristiano that Amanda had met on the train, how could this connection have helped the police to capture him and put him in prison? Was it that the police wanted to find a drug dealer for Amanda that led their attention to this person? That assumption doesn't prove he sold her drugs or had sex with her in payment for those drugs.

2. What fact-checking was required of Amanda to write about her own experiences? Did Peter Quennell expect her to have legal documents for all of what she remembered happening? That's ridiculous. Guilters were happy to use the book as proof of the most outlandish claims about Amanda. Did they ever do any fact-checking about their claims?

Amanda didn't admit to sleeping with Federico Martini. She never said what the last name of the Frederico she met on the train to Florence (not Perugia.) There is no evidence that she had Federico Martini's phone number in her phone. There is no evidence that she called a drug dealer before or after Meredith's death.

The police report only made assertions that were never confirmed with evidence. Of course the police was leaked to the Italian media anyhow.

These alleged police wire-tap transcripts of conversations between Amanda and the "drug kingpin" don't exist. If they had existed, why did Mignini say this issue wasn't part of the trial. He originally tried to make the case a drug-fueled sex game gone bad, but there was no evidence to support this.

If Peter Quennell was still waiting for the police wire-tap transcript of the conversation between Amanda and the drug kingpin to be release on 08/02/2014, why haven't they been released by now?

Amanda got a lot of trouble for lying that there was no use of marijuana in the apartment where she lived. And then her roommates testified about their drug use even though it was Laura who put Amanda up to lying that there was none.

There are many claims that Amanda used cocaine in addition to the marijuana she claimed to have used, but when the police did drug tests on samples of her hair when arresting her, they only found a trace of the marijuana. Where did all of this cocaine go?

As said before, guilters love to use Amanda's book to claim she's lying, but how does Peter Quennell prove the assertions of the lies he said her book was hiding about drug use?

3. 

a) Amanda admitted using marijuana in Seattle. What's she hiding here?

b) Amanda admitted helping to pay for the marijuana used in the apartment. Where is the proof that she's hiding knowledge of where to buy it?

c) Why would Amanda be aware of the high trafficing of drugs in Perugia? It's not something the chamber of commerce would brag about.

d) What was Amanda hiding in saying she shared marijuana with Raffaele? Is it that she expressed the need to be careful who she did that with that's supposed to be the lie?

e) Was it supposed to have been a lie that Laura asked her to lie about their smoking marijuana. In testimony Filomena would only admit to doing it once. Was that supposed to have been tuth?

f) Why wouldn't Amanda feel anxious lying about the marijuana use in the apartment? She had nothing to lose by telling the truth about that, but she lost a lot of credibility from that one lie that didn't benefit her at all.

g) Why would Amanda know the guys downstairs were growing marijuana? It was Meredith they asked to water their plants when they were away.

h) Why would Meredith or Amanda need to know where to buy marijuana when Filomena and Laura were the ones buying it?

i) Raffaele didn't use regular marijuana. He used hashish which is stronger than the marijuana Amanda usually used. What's the lie is saying it had this effect on her?

j) There have already been many people coming to all kinds of opinions because what Amanda wrote that Raffaele told her about his drug use was common knowledge. Was it supposed to have been a lie that she wrote about it, or was it supposed to have been a further invasion of privacy already lost?

k) Was it supposed to have been a lie that Amanda said Raffaele was sad for his friends still addicted to drugs? Or was it supposed to have been an invasion of those unnamed friends of Raffaele?

l) The full quote is:
"That night I smoked a lot of marijuana and I fell asleep at my boyfriend’s house. I don’t remember anything. But I think it’s possible that Raffaele went to Meredith’s house, raped her and then killed her. And then when he got home, while I was sleeping, he put my fingerprints on the knife. But I don’t understand why Raffaele would do that."

Amanda never said Raffaele actually did this.

m) The prosecution did claim that Guede was Amanda's drug dealer.
"During the first Amanda Knox trial in 2009, prosecutors claimed that Knox and Sollecito, along with a small-time drug dealer Rudy Guede, murdered Kercher 'under the fumes of drugs and alcohol.'”
http://www.inquisitr.com/1333248/amanda-knox-cocaine/

n) The prosecution did elaborate a whole scheme of hostility between Amanda and Meredith based on the supposition that Amanda could not compete with Meredith.

o) Filomena put it that just one time she sinned by smoking marijuana. The implication was that Amanda put her up to it.

p) Laura did testify that everyone in the villa smoked marijuana. Does Peter Quennell think that Amanda should have specified that Mignini was asking about hashish, the stronger form of marijuana?

q) Carlo Dalla Vedova's explanation that Amanda quoted makes sense of what happened. The case against Amanda was that ridiculous that all that kept it going would have to have been the investigators refusing to lose face over it.

r) Is Peter Quennell complaining that Amanda was invading the privacy of the inmate whose name Amanda changed to Laura? Or is he suggesting that Amanda didn't check to see if this inmate told the truth? Why does it matter. Events like this do happen. Likely, this inmate had been betrayed by her boyfriend.

s) What's the issue in writing that Curatolo had gone to prison on drug charges by the time he testified before the Hellmann Court? He confirmed it when Judge Massimo Zanetti asked him. He also testified to being homeless at the time of the murder, and taking heroin. He did claim herion does not cause people to hallucinate. Some guilters have needed to make the ridiculous claim that heroin is non-hallucinary because of what Curatolo testified.

t) It's strange that Peter Quennell doesn't notice that Amanda doesn't like Curatolo's lethal heroin addiction as the reason his testimony is meaningless. Judge Massei had to make rulings to straighten out what Mignini wanted Curatolo's testimony to mean, but Curatolo's total confusion seeps through anyhow. Judge Massei had to declare that Curatolo didn't see the two people he said were Amanda and Raffaele on Halloween because Raffaele could not have been there on Halloween. How does that prove that Amanda and Raffaele were the couple whom Curatolo saw? Also, when Curatolo was sure that he saw whomever he saw until nearly midnight, Judge Massei decided that meant until a little after 11:00 PM. If it took nearly an hour for Curatolo to notice the couple he said he saw, how can he be sure nearly an hour later who they were?

Friday, May 26, 2017

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 04--Marcelo's racist mantra

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

1. Why is it racist to say Guede committed his crimes against Meredith without first expressing the color of his skin? Whose racism is it once that declaration has been made? Amanda didn't accuse Guede in the statements the police coerced her to sign in accusation of Patrick Lumumba who in her right mind Amanda would never have considered guilty of murdering Meredith Kercher.

But Amanda was not in her right mind after the abusive interrogation the police subjegated her to in order to make her self-incriminate herself. Even TJMK admits that Amanda had to know that Patrick Lumumba was not likely to have been guilty of this crime they made Amanda think at the time he was guilty of.

What innocent DNA trace of Guede could there have been in the villa where she lived? Why does it matter how few the traces there were of Guede outside of Meredith's room when there were as many as there were inside Meredith's room?

Does it matter that there were no traces of Guede in the small  bathroom when he admitted getting towels from that bathroom for trying to stop Meredith's bleeding? He admitted being in that small bathroom. Why is Marcelo ignoring this?

2. What is it about the bloody footprint on the bathmat that Amanda needs to explain about Raffaele when it was most likely her own footprint she made the morning after the murder when she got out of the shower? What is there to explain about a clean-up that is only an attempt at face-saving for the police who could not find an incriminating link between Meredith's room and the footprint Amanda made getting out of the shower the morning after Guede killed Meredith?

Why should Amanda be responsible for Raffaele's faulty memory about what he did the night Meredith died? Hasn't he continually come back to the fact that Amanda spent the whole night with him?

If TJMK's Marcello thought the evidence against Amanda was much stronger, what did he think it was stronger than? Amanda has been acquitted?

A speculative video depecting the prosecution's concept of what happened is nothing but speculation.

It's unbelievable that the prosecution could second guess why Guede would choose to break into the villa the way he did. There's no real proof he didn't break in through the window of Filomena's room. It's just an opinion that he wouldn't do it that way.

There's no reason to believe Guede didn't just choose the first route he saw instead of walking all the way around the villa as Marcello suggested.

3. Numerous answers from which Marcello hid.

1) When did Guede ever visit the apartment where the girls lived? It's only known that Marcello was in the downstairs apartment.

2) Why would Guede expect the girls to return to the villa any more than he would have expected the guys downstairs to return on that holiday weekend? Why would Guede even care if someone caught him in the act when it didn't matter when he was caught breaking and entering before?

3) How does Marcello know that Guede had not ascertained that nobody was home in the villa? Guede got there over an hour before Meredith did. Apparently he was on the commode when Meredith came in. Meredith wouldn't have looked backward on her way to her room, but Guede wouldn't have been visible even if the big bathroom's door was open. Guede didn't flush the toilet. So the flushing of the toilet wouldn't have alerted Meredith.

4) The other side of the villa from where Guede broke in being in direct view of on-coming cars on that side of the road. Whereas, cars coming the other way would have no opportunity to shine headlights directly at the villa much less Filomena's window, cars coming the other way would be right next to the villa approaching it with the stray beams of their headlights coming right beside the villa. Passengers could have looked over the embankment right at Laura's windows.

5) That side of the villa with Filomena's window would have been visible from the car park if someone were standing right next to the edge of the parking lot. The car park lights are focused on the parking lot itself, and not on the villa. The reflected light would not have been that illuminating.

Cars toward side of the villa would be on the far side of the road and the road isn't curved toward the villa. The road is actually curved around the villa. The headlights would not have been directed toward Filomena's window. Also, the villa is set down the slope from the road. From that side of the street, the Filomena's window was not visible even from the driver's side of the car. Even if headlights were angled toward the villa, it would have been the roof that got the light. And even that would have been distorted by the limbs of a big tree and the bars of the fence on the side of the road.

6) Since the shutters were only nearly closed, Guede would seen he had the opportunity to test them to see if they would open. Nothing was ever said about the shutters of the other windows being defective like these were. The windows to the front bathroom look awfully small.

7) Why would Guede leave slippery grass and mud on his Nike sneakers before climbing the wall? There was however a scuff on the corner of the window below which Guede used as a ladder part of the way up.

8) Wearing Nike sneakers would have been the reason Guede didn't leave scuff marks on the wall that hiking shoes would have. It doesn't mean he couldn't have climbed the wall. He climbed the grill of the lower window as though it were a ladder, and then reached up to grab the window sill above.

9) The shutters may have been almost closed, but they wouldn't close all the way. That wouldn't have kept Guede from opening them to have better access to the window.

10) Since the inner scuri was not latched, why did Guede need to verify this? All he had to do was break the window and reach for the latch. Why would he worry about verifying before attempting? If it were latched, he could just climb down and go away. As it is, he probably did retreat somewhat to see if anyone noticed.

11) Why would Guede who played basketball have to carry the rock up in order to use it? He only had to stand opposite the window on the retaining wall for the parking area and lob it into the window. It was found in near the window where it would have fallen from such a lob.

12) Since Guede was lobbing the rock from away from the window, why would any broken glass reach him? Why would any of the glass fly backwards to the path of the rock anyhow?

13) Why would Guede throw the rock up 3 meters when he could lob it from the top of the retaining wall opposite from the window?

14) Why wouldn't Guede have a good chance of lobbing the rock from the top of the retaining wall? He wouldn't have to throw it up very far to make the proper trajectory that he would understand from playing basketball.

15) Since Guede made sure he didn't have slippery grass and weeds on his Nike sneakers the other time(s) he climbed the wall to the window, why would he neglect to make sure any other time as well?

16) Since Marcelo has already claimed that Guede would be knowledgeable of this kind of window, Guede would have known there was an inner shutter he had to force open when he threw the rock through the window. That would be a good reason for the heavy rock. Or it may just have been the only rock available.

17) If the rock had been going straight through the window, maybe the whole pane of glass would have shattered. However, the force of the impact is not likely to be even. The trajectory would have at least a little curve to it with more of the impact applying to the bottom of the window. The bottom of the pane would break first relieving the stress on the top of the pane. The police could have used the direction the glass in the top of the pane stretched without breaking to verify in which direction the rock went through the pane. Maybe the police didn't want to verify that.

18) The forward impact of the rock was absorbed by the inner shutter which was bruised from the rock and had glass fragments embedded in it. The remaining momentum of the rock would have been about the same as having been dropped from the height of where it hit the inner shutter.

19) Why would there have been glass flying back from the direction the rock went through the window? There was glass where it fell to the floor where the rock hit the inner shutter.

20) There were cuts to Guede's right hand that guilters claim didn't come from the knife slipping when he stabbed Meredith. Does Marcelo insist those cuts didn't come from this broken glass instead?

One of Guede's shoes was leaving an imperfection in his shoe prints that was mostly from a piece of broken glass wedged into the sole. Was it just coincidence that his shoe picked up this piece of broken glass?

21) The final position of the rock is consistent with being lobbed from the retaining wall and hitting the inter shutter before dropping. The spray of glass indicates that this is what happened.

22) As mentioned before, why would Guede leave slippery grass or mud on his Nike sneakers before climbing the wall? Since he was careful to shake this stuff loose before climbing the wall, why would it be on his shoes when he went through the window?

23) As mentioned before, why would Guede leave slippery grass or mud on his Nike sneakers before climbing the wall? Since he was careful to shake this stuff loose before climbing the wall, why would it be on his shoes when he went through the window?

24) Since these clothes of Filomena's were stored under the window sill of the window, when the glass of the window broke while a rock went through to hit the inner shutter, the broken glass fell on those clothes that were below the window sill.

25) The clothes that the broken glass fell on top of didn't come from the closet. That clothing was in a bag stored under the window. Guede didn't have to scatter the clothes since the bag had fallen over on its own.

26) Guede did steal two cell phones, two credit cards, and Meredith's rent money. There's no way to know if Guede had any way to fence Filomena's laptop, but even if he did, he wouldn't have wanted to take anything that would have tied him to the murder. He decided to get rid of the cell phones and the credit cards for that reason.

27) Why does Marcelo think Guede checked the closet in Filomena's room? Nothing was removed from it.

28) Meredith's room was certainly another room disturbed during Guede's break-in. We don't know what Guede did until Meredith showed up, but we know what he did after she came in. Killing her changed Guede's plans.

29) When Meredith came into the villa, she was heading toward her room at the rear of the building. She would not have been looking backward as she walked to see into Filomena's room to see the break-in. She also would not have seen Guede in the front bathroom for the same reason. When Guede attacked her, her options to run out of the villa and call the police became limited and ultimately nil.

30) Since Guede did attack Meredith in her room, he did not consider the consequences of more serious criminal charges. Why is Marcelo asking Amanda instead of Guede why he did this?

31) By his own admission, he identified himself as being the person in the CCTV video approaching the villa over an hour before Meredith arrived. So there was no way for Meredith to have already been in the villa to hear Guede breaking in.

32) By his own admission, he identified himself as being the person in the CCTV video approaching the villa over an hour before Meredith arrived. So there was no way for Meredith to have already been in the villa to find him crawling in the broken window. It's pure speculation that he would not have had time to go through Filomena's clothes on the floor since he didn't have to do that for the bag to have fallen over to scatter those clothes.

33) Amanda left that footprint in Filomena's room when she went in the morning after the murder and discovered the break-in. There is no significance to it containing a mixture of her DNA and Meredith's DNA because both of their DNA would be expected in the villa where they both lived.

34) The reason Amanda's footprint is not Guede's size is because Guede had not already killed Meredith at time he broke in through Filomena's window. Presumably, Amanda stepped in the blood that Guede dripped when he went into the small bathroom to get towels for trying to stop Meredith's bleeding. That blood that Guede left on the bathmat was what Amanda stepped in to leave the Luminol discovered prints outside Meredith's room the morning after the murder.

35) It is only an opinion without proof that Guede needed others to restrain Meredith. It is only an opinion that two knives were involved in her murder. The medical examiner originally determined there was just one knife. The medical examiner also determined that there was no sexual assault. If these accomplices were really necessary, why wasn't there traces such as shoeprints, footprints, fingerprints, DNA or otherwise found of them within Meredith's room? The bra clasp doesn't count since there is no proof it was not contaminated by the dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers used when collecting it.

36) Guede originally claimed in his Skype conversation with his friend that it was an unknown Italian who killed Meredith. Guede originally claimed it was not Amanda who was involved, and didn't even know who Raffaele was. Guede didn't start talking about Amanda and Raffaele committing the crime until Guede's appeal. Why would Amanda understand why Guede has made his unproven and inconsistent claims that she and Raffaele killed Meredith instead of him? She wasn't there to witness what he claims to have seen.

37) What other shoeprints, footprints, DNA traces and fingerprints point to Amanda and Raffaele being present at the murder? She lived in the villa. Her DNA and fingerprints would be expected in the villa even though she was not there that night. And no evidence proves she was in Meredith's room when Guede killed Meredith. Raffaele's DNA and fingerprints would also be expected in the villa since he came to the villa to visit Amanda before the murder. Amanda and Raffaele left their footprints and shoe prints outside Meredith's room when they came to the villa the morning after the murder. They left no footprints or shoe prints inside Meredith's room. Even if Raffaele or Amanda left the footprint on the bathmat in the small bathroom, how does that prove they left it only during the murder? It's only traces of Guede that would not be expected and should not have been in the upstairs apartment of the villa since he had never visited there before the murder.

4. Amanda has never said "The black guy did it." Guede was convicted by the evidence that was collected against him. It's the evidence that says Guede did it alone. The evidence doesn't have race. If Marcelo wants to accuse Amanda of racism because she says Guede did the crime alone, he needs to prove it with more than that.

Amanda doesn't approve of calling Italians corrupt and stupid. She expressed this objection to her Italian friend Rocco Girlanda. It's the case against her that's fraudulent. It is built on fiat rulings used as evidence when the facts don't prove anything against her.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 05--TJMK's call to repentance

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

SeekingUnderstanding claims to be a psychologist? Why is she not listening to Amanda's experience instead of making up stuff like a cult leader does to intimidate a prospective follower? Wouldn't Amanda Knox already be weary from this constant battle for her inner self? Whether it's her soul or not, it's what guilters want to steal from her.

Maybe with this upteenth interview it's hard to put on the plastic smile, but at least Ms. SeekingUnderstanding admitted that Amanda was not a psychopath or a sociopath. How could Ms. SeekingUnderstanding think Amanda found it hard to bear "people’s hatred of her" if Amanda had no ability to empathize with others?

Amanda was indeed smart enough to realize that this wrongful case was stacked against her. How does that make the wrongful case against her right? Wass this self-proclaimed psychologist willing to commit to an assumption that Amanda Knox was guilty because of stress Amanda suffered from the wrongful case brought against her?

Is the reality that SeekingUnderstanding subscribes to that of whatever seems to be the majority opinion of the time? Why is it childish in Amanda claiming the innocence she knows she has? Are the courageous supposed to give up just because the odds are against them? God would certainly be displeased if all of His or Her heroes thought that way. (Don't ever forget that the gender of the Hebrew verbs in the Creation story depended on what God was doing at the time._

It is the insinuation of this so-called psychologist that Amanda could relieve herself of the burden put on her for no blame of her own by admitting guilt for crimes she didn't commit.

Even if true, it would be a breach of confidence for a psychiatrist such as SeekingUnderstanding claims to be to intertwine confession to a crime with legitimate treatment. It is only under the treat of a patient committing a new crime that such a privileged counselor is ethical in alerting authorities. It violates the trust between patient and counselor to do otherwise. Of course SeekingUnderstanding can claim no such validation for what she attempts to do since she cannot claim to do no harm.

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 06--TJMK ex-machina

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

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

1. It's not that Amanda Knox has multiple alibis. She has always said she was with Raffaele Sollecito all night. What TJMK's Machine is saying is that they have more than one stoy about that.

The coerced statement that the police had Raffaele sign didn't just say that Amanda was away from his apartment from 9:00 PM until 1:00 AM, it said that wasn't there that evening before 9:00 PM either. Since there was no discussion of this during his interrogation, Raffaele was not aware that this wording was in the statement he was forced to sign. It's ironic that guilters point to Jovana Popovic's testimony of seeing Amanda at Raffaele's apartment at 6:45 PM and 8:40 PM as proof that Raffaele was lying in his coerced statement while using that incorrect statement as proof that Amanda was lying about being with him.

But it's not just this unreasonable assertion that the coerced statements Amanda and Raffaele are changes from their previous accounts of being together the night of the murder, it's that if either of them forget any detail they add later, guilters consider the resulting account to be a different story. Besides, who can really remember with perfect recall the details and order in what they did five or more days ago? Nobody. But when Amanda or Raffaele confuse a previous event with those of the night of the murder, guilters call it a lie.

2. Amanda did not repeatedly accuse Patrick of the murder. She was coerced into signing two statements during an abusive interrogation on November 6, 2007. She immediately wrote her First Memorandum recanting those statements within hours of signing them. She called the memory of being at the murder with Patrick unreal and unreliable compared to the memory of being with Raffaele at his apartment during the same period of time.

Amanda followed up the next day with her Second Memorandum elucidating her experiences as her confused memory came back from the trauma of the interrogation. However, a couple things should be noticed. Amanda was denying that she was at the murder. So she could not know who the killer was. Also, Amanda was not with Patrick the night of the murder. So she could not know if he went to the murder or not. So how was Amanda supposed to have declared Patrick innocent of the murder? She could only withdraw her accusation of him. And that she did do.

Exactly how was Amanda's mother supposed to have withdrawn Amanda's accusation of Patrick? Edda was not the acclaimed witness. Edda saying anything meant nothing.

3. The test Stefanoni used to claim Meredith's DNA was on Raffaele's kitchen knife was not designed to find reliable results from the LNC sample she tested. Stefanoni had to enlarge the sample beyond reasonable dimensions to get that result. She would have got that same result if there was only a few molecules of Meredith's DNA left over from previous tests she had done to confirm Meredith's DNA. It's strange that TJMK's Machine claimed that the previous tests being six days earlier rules them out as a source of contamination. If a mere six days would cause any DNA to disappear, why was the DNA on the bra clasp still available after the delay of 46 days before collecting it? DNA from Neanderthal men has been recovered after thousands of years.

Raffaele didn't know that Stefanoni's test results signified nothing. He only speculated into his diary what he wondered might have happened. He was mistaken about that, but who was he deceiving? He never expected his diary to be confiscated and used as evidence.

4. The question is not whether the DNA on the bra clasp was Raffaele's, but rather if the police had followed proper protocols to ensure that it was not the result of contamination. The sample of Raffaele's DNA was a LCN trace. The abundant amount of Raffaele's DNA must refer to the number of loci that were found. A lucus is the position of the chromosome that is being studied. The tests were only analyzing 17 of the positions, but they were all found in the sample.

The problem with the dirty gloves and dirty shoe covers that the investigators didn't change before entering Meredith's room is that they can harbour dust from other parts of the villa that Raffaele had been in while visiting Amanda before the murder and while he was accompanying him the morning after the murder.

The dust absorbs saliva droplets when a person sneezes or coughes as Raffaele probably had done at some time or another. Saliva has DNA in it.

So the investigators allowed dust from other parts of the villa into Meredith's room, and the bra clasp wasn't even collected from the same place it was discovered and catalogued. The bra clasp had been kicked a yard away from where it had been originally. There was plenty of opportunity for dust with Raffaele's DNA in it to adhere to the bra clasp or to transfer Raffaele's saliva it was carrying to the bra clasp.

5. It's strange that guilters believe Guede when he claims that Amanda and Raffaele killed Meredith and when he claims he tried to stop Meredith's bleeding, but do they believe Guede when he claimed to get towels out of the small bathroom for use in stopping Meredith's bleeding? What difference does it make that Guede's footprint lead straight out of Meredith's room and out the front door when he had to have been in the small bathroom sometime to get those towels?

The measurements of the bloody footprint on the bathmat were done from photographs. So there was no precision about those measurements. That footprint on the bathmat could have been Guede's, but it was Amanda the next morning who was in that bathroom in her bare feet. Since there is no real scale for knowing whose footprint it could be, it could be Amanda's. She probably discovered the spot of blood on the bathmat by stepping on it. That would account for why it's only a partial footprint. There wasn't enough blood to fill out the entire front of her foot, and it wouldn't have made a heel print on the floor.

This would also be the source of blood that she stepped in that left the footprint to her room. None of her footprints or Raffaele's lead out of Meredith's room.

6. Why would Amanda's lawyers have conceded that Amanda's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood? There was no indication that Amanda was bleeding at the time of the murder. The police didn't find a cut or wound on her when they did a physical exam of her on arresting her. So Meredith's blood is the only blood that anyone would have expected in the villa. That is unless the blood in the downstairs apartment really were from a cat that somehow got into and out of the locked apartment.

Amanda lived in that apartment before the murder and was there the morning after the murder. Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's DNA or blood were in Amanda's footprints from the bathroom to Amanda's room and in the sink where Amanda had washed her hands. It wasn't coincidence that the investigators took DNA samples where Amanda had just been. They knew the Laminol indicated footprints were Amanda's, and they knew she was the last person to use the bathroom sink. So there was a much greater chance of finding Amanda's DNA rather than Filomena's or Laura's especially since Filomena and Laura didn't go through that hall to get to their bedrooms or use that bathroom instead of their larger one.

But just as TJMK's Machine recognized that Filomena's and Laura's DNA could be expected to be in that apartment, so could Amanda's. That Amanda's DNA was mixed with Meredith's DNA or blood doesn't prove when either got there. Amanda's DNA would have been there from before the murder, and Meredith's DNA could have been there from before as well or Amanda would have stepped into Meredith's blood like the spot on the bathmat when Amanda came to the villa the morning after the murder.

This mixed DNA being outside Meredith's room does not prove that Amanda was at the murder.

7. Luminol does react with the iron in other substances besides blood. The additional test done to confirm blood came back negative on the footprint in the hall. The footprints do not prove Amanda and Raffaele were at the murder anyhow since they were in the villa the morning after the murder anyhow. Maybe there could have been tests that could have identified the exact substance that Luminol reacted to, but it is pure speculation to try to guess what it was.

8. There is absolutely no evidence proving that Guede did not break in through Filomena's window. There is no way to know that he would have left traces of anything while climbing the wall, but it was proved that a man like him could have done it.

He was a basketball player. So he could have opened up the broken shutter, climbed back down to go stand on the top of the wall across from the window and lobbed the stone into the window the first time.

He could have retreated to nearby trees to see if anyone would notice the window being broken, and then returned to climb again to enter the room.

The glass fragments bruising and embedded in the inner shutter indicates the glass broke toward it. The spray of the broken glass indicates the glass window was closed at the time the stone went through straight through. Why would a glass broken by a stone from the outside back spray to the ground? The broken glass would have been propelled in the same direction the stone was going.

There is no way to prove the bag of clothes had not already fallen over scattering clothes on the floor before the broken glass landed on them. It's a reach to assume the glass on the window sill would have been brushed off because Guede passed through the window. There is Guede's shoe print showing something stuck in his shoe that was probably a piece of broken glass. Guede did get rid of the shoes after he fled the murder.

9. Amanda may not have been in a position to see what was in the room when Luca Altieri knocked down Meredith's door, but Amanda was certainly present to hear Luca and the others talking about it. Also, the police told Luca details that Amanda then overheard him say to Raffaele while he was driving them to the police station. However, Amanda did get things wrong in her supposed pre-knowledge of the crime. She told others that Meredith bled to death, but Meredith suffocated on her own blood instead. Amanda told others that Meredith's body was in the wardrobe, but that's not where it was discovered. Amanda was not the person who found Meredith's body as she said, but she was the one who called attention to strange things in the villa that led to the discovery of Meredith's body. So to that extent, Amanda did find Meredith's body.

10. There wasn't blood all over the place when Amanda took her shower. There were a few tiny drops in the sink, and Amanda didn't notice the spot on the bath mat until she got out of the shower. The blood that would be found in other places were not all that obvious at the time.

Amanda did not do a shuffle that morning on the bathmat, but she probably did do it some other time when she had forgotten to bring a towel. Remember that Guede had said he got the towels from the small bathroom to try to stop Meredith's bleeding. Amanda wouldn't have known that which is why she found herself without a towel.

The police did not report Amanda stinking that morning. There was no mention of it at trial. There is only Barbie Nadeau's account of the journalist Carmignani claiming police told him about Amanda's body odor. Maybe the police realized they smelled something else. Maybe the whole story is fishy.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 07--What gets attention--or not

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/questions_for_knox_4_why_so_many_false_claims_in_accounts_of_your_visi/

It's not what eye-witnesses see that is astounding, it's what they don't notice. It's one thing to look at something, but it is a completely different thing to notice the thing looked at.

The thing that would have captured Amanda's attention on approaching the villa was not the condition of the shutters of Filomena's window, but the front door being wide open.

The pictures James Raper presented are careful to exclude the front door, but the front door was Amanda's destination in approaching the villa. She was not planning to enter through the window as Guede did.

Although there were four bedrooms in the villa, it's really quite small. Someone entering the main room can almost see the extent of the apartment from a central point. The boys downstairs were not home. The silence probably assured Amanda that nobody was home. It wasn't unusual for the front door to come open by itself if someone forgot to lock it.

It was only when Amanda saw the unflushed toilet that she had reason to worry about an intruder. James Raper can talk all he wants to about what a prudent person would have done, but Amanda had not anticipated an intruder until that moment.

All that Amanda could think of was getting out of the villa. Away from the villa, she had presence of mind to wonder if there was something to worry about. She called Filomena and her mother, and she talked to Raffaele.

It was only when Filomena asked her to check to see if anything had been taken that Amanda and Raffaele went to the villa and discovered the broken window. There's really no way to know the window is broken from the outside. The shutters being partially open would not have been enough to suspect the window being broken.

Barbie Nadeau wrote in her book that police had told journalist Carmignani that Amanda had body odor smelling like sex even though this claim never got to court.

Guilters like to repeat this alleged body odor story as contradiction to Amanda's account of taking a shower while at the villa. I suppose James Raper had to include a reference to this alleged body odor to shore up his assertion that Amanda's story about going to the villa for a shower and a change of clothes doesn't make sense to him.

Of course Amanda did have sex with Raffaele the night before, and women do like to wash after having sex. And they were planning on going on a day trip to Gubbio. Amanda did need a change of clothes. With these things on her mind, why would she be expected to see a broken window through only partially opened shutters while her attention was drawn to the open front door?

TJMK's Inquisition for Amanda Knox 08--Exaggerated lack of study abroad plan

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/questions_for_knox_3_why_the_huge_lie/

Amanda was enrolled in the study of Italian when she was arrested. Certainly that would have transferred into a credit at University of Washington. Especially since Perugia was a sister city of Seattle. We don't know what other courses Amanda might have taken if she had finished this language course

I wonder what credit she got for intensive study of an Italian prison?

What is the point of the quote of Philip Setran when he also said:
"Fellow student Philip Setran said: 'She did not seem to have many girlfriends. She would spend all of her time with the guys. She would come home looking like one of the guys, covered in mud after playing tag football.'"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492893/Foxy-Knoxy-girl-compete-mother-men.html

Amanda was a Tom-boy. Only one policeman responded to the noise violation.

Even if TJMK ignores it. Amanda was a good student. Why would she know that Perugia was supposedly a drug Mecca? Perugia is Seattles sister city.

How did TJMK decide that Amanda's parents were not aware of the cost of the Italian institution where Amanda choice to go? What they were not aware of was the legal cost of fighting wrongful accusations of murder like those of TJMK? Also, how can TJMK question the financial feasability of Amanda studying abroad, but also criticize her for doing so "cheaply."

Why didn't the Italian authorities not also charge Amanda with working illegally in Italy if that were her crime?

What Amanda's study abroad was credited for at the Universtiy of Washington was up to the UW officials. If Amanda was mistaken about what that would be, it's not up to TJMK to criticize. She graduated without the approval of TJMK anyhow.

Amanda never said she was in a study abroad program. She never said that she applied to the Perugia School for Foreigners through any program and the University of Washington. How can TJMK criticize Amanda for not studying through a program that the University of Washington controlled, but expect her to be controlled by the University of Washington anyhow.

Amanda had taken a leave from the University of Washington. So even if the University of Washington had changed its regulations concerning programs it administers, it would still not have had any control over the study Amanda went to Italy to do.

As much as TJMK tried to create the illusion of Amanda irresponsibility, it is absurd to consider Meredith's death the result of supposed shortcomings of her study abroad plan. There is no way that Amanda Knox's going to Perugia to study Italian caused Meredith to die.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

TJMK's Inquisition of Amanda Knox 09--All honourable men

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/C785/
(Search for: Questons For Knox: Adding A Dozen More To The Several Hundred Knox So Far Avoided )

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/questions_for_knox_2_do_you_think_false_memories_kassin/

1. TJMK's reference to an not unkind group is vague. TJMK had just referenced what TJMK claimed was 95% of Italians who believe she is guilty. TJMK asked if Amanda has one friend in Italy, but look what TJMK said to Rocco Girlanda who is her friend. TJMK had just criticized Amanda as being  "brash, sneering, sharp-elbowed, humorless, uncaring, and self-absorbed" while testifying. TJMK had just ridiculed Amanda as being "the 'lost little girl' persona, the 'chaste girl who never did sex and drugs' persona, the 'diligent girl who studied so hard' persona, and the 'they all want to get me because I am so fantastically cute' persona." TJMK has distorted information about Amanda's lack of social skills and her divorced parents as though those are reasons she could have killed Meredith. So TJMK is not being an unkind group.

For TJMK is an honourable group;
So are they all, all honourable men.

2. Amanda's honesty was her naive trust in helping the police to find the killer. She did not anticipate the police would lie to her since she expected the same honesty she had. It was the police who brought up Patrick's name from her cell phone. Amanda did not ask the police to look at her cell phone. They told her to hand it over. It's not he fault they manipulated her into accusing Patrick.

Amanda tried to answer every question the police asked her even though they were all demanding at the same time.

Since Anna Donnino was operating more as a mediator, there certainly was the good cop/bad cop routine. There was also the police officer who engaged her in conversation while she was doing her homework in the elevator lobby. He certainly enticed her into Ficarra's clutches. Anna Donnino certainly encouraged Amanda into agreeing with the memory she assured her would come back to her.

There was testimony that there were 4 investigators present, but there were a lot more signed to the report afterward. Who were these additional signees if they didn't partic
ipate in the interrogation they signed to?

Monica Napoleoni testified that Amanda was being interrogate in the antitheft office. http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_5_napoleoni/

Is TJMK really going to insist that everyone agrees on the HVAC settings anywhere? Since Amanda said the room was airless, that was how she experienced it. Her subjective evaluation probably had a lot to do with the pressure the police put on her.

The shouting Amanda was talking about was the shouting the police directed at her because she was not agreeing with them. There is no recording to say she's lying.

Amanda didn't write in this section of her book that she had been interrogated for 43 hours. She had only said it was for hours which TJMK even agreed with. The length of time Amanda was subjected to abusive interrogation only had to confuse her long enough to get her to sign statements she could not have understood. Her First Memorandum shows that this manipulation was not complete.

TJMK unwittingly had the right question. Why was Amanda so confused over such a simple question as what she meant by telling Patrick "See you later?" There had to be more to it than the police were admitting.

The story that police were forcing on Amanda was that she had immediately met with Patrick after sending him a text message she thought meant "Goodby."

The police lied about Raffaele withdrawing his alibi for Amanda. Since they had not talked about that at all while he was being interrogated, he was not aware the police had forced him to sign a statement with that wording that he was not aware of. The police of course had a convenient excuse for why they hadn't tape-recorded his interrogation, but it sounds more like they don't want to admit they had a recording that would prove them liars.

It's stupid to ask why the police didn't concoct and hatch false accusations against everyone who knew Meredith. How were the police supposed to have narrowed the playing field down to any target for accusation that could be prosecuted? Isn't that the problem with Agatha Christy's "Murder on the Orient Express?" Everyone had a reason to kill the victim, but there was no conclusive proof they were all involved.

The police could not avoid charging Guede for his crimes against Meredith, but they were still invested in the accusation against Amanda Knox. So they made believe the association they accused her of having with Patrick Lumumba really applied to Guede. The only problem was that Amanda had no relationship with Guede, but the Judiciary didn't worry about that.

What difference does it make that Amanda was not in the "vulnerable" target group of false confessions when enough pressure was put on Amanda to make her "break."

Why would the brainwashing have to be permanent when the objective was to get Amanda to self-incriminate herself? TJMK certainly insists to this day that Amanda's 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements are valid expressions of her free will even though she has rejected that.

The official police records have already exposed that there were more than four investigators involved in getting Amanda Knox to self-incriminate herself. Why does TJMK continue to question that?

Why does Amanda have to be in Kassin's "vulnerable" group to be subject to brainwashing by the police who took advantage of her naive trust of them? Why were there so many reserve policemen the night that Amanda was interrogated if they weren't needed for spelling the previous team harassing her?

Only psychopaths would have enough disinterest in herd mentality to be shielded from demands the police put on Amanda to agree with what they demanded she confirm about Patrick Lumumba. What was the excuse of the police for how they harassed Amanda? The greater good perhaps!

How was Amanda supposed to leave that small room with four investigators filling up the space between Amanda and the door? According to testimony thee were supposed to have been four investigators even if there were not more to rotate with them.

Amanda did not testify to being treated to refreshments until around noon the next day. She only said that her lawyers had done a good jobe when asked about the trial. Don't lie.

Amanda's lawyers never said that she were treated well. One of them only said they never said she was mistreated. That's not denying she was mistreated, but it was a cautious answer from a lawyer who knew he served no useful purpose being charged with slander.

Why would it do any good to lodge a formal complaint for how Amanda was treated in the abusive interrogation? She was sued for slander even though the charge was dismissed. Amanda's lawyers advised her it would do no good to complain. That's a shabby recommendation for the Italian Judiciary.

Since Anna Donnino worked as a mediator instead of a neutral interpreter, why would Amanda understand what Ms. Donnino decided to translate for Amanda? With as little fluency of Italian as Amanda had, she knew she was being betrayed.

TJMK demostrated its bias in assuming that it was Amanda who engineered the police's interest in Patrick Lumumba? The police insisted that Amanda observe the reply to Patrick that Amanda only meant "Goodbye."

Amanda was not left sitting in the corredor after signing the 1:45 AM statement. Monica Napoleoni testified that she saw her still in the interrogation room between 3:30 AM and 4:00 AM. Amanda may have finally gotten a chance to sleep after signing the 5:45 AM statement, but she couldn't have simply walked out. She was under arrest for murder.

The police do claim that Amanda was only a witness up until she signed the 1:45 AM statement, and of course they couldn't charge her with anything because they didn't admit she was a suspect until then. Maybe the "witness" interview started out voluntary, but Amanda didn't experience it as voluntary after the argument over the reply text message to Patrick.

What lack of pressure did Amanda enjoy during the interrogation? She was accused of lying because she insisted only meant "Goodbye" with the Italian words she thought said "See you later." She was told she met with Patrick Lumumba and that they had hard evidence that she was at the villa during the murder. The police insisted she knew who the murderer was, and kept asking what she and Patrick were doing even though she kept telling them she didn't meet with Patrick and she didn't go to the villa.

If it was that Amanda broke down and accused Patrick not long after being told Raffaele had withdrawn his alibi for her, why did the investigators say it was immediately after being shown her reply text message to Patrick that triggered her emotional accusation of him. The investigators were vague as to when and even how Amanda learned about Raffaele supposedly withdrawing his alibi for her and supposedly claiming she asked him to lie for her.

The 1:45 AM statement and the 5:45 AM statement that Mignini "witnessed" are quite different from each other. Neither one has Amanda acknowledging that Mignini cautioned her about self-incrimination, but the 5:45 AM does acknowledge that Amanda was asked to imagine what would have happened if she had been at the murder. Amanda hasn't said it was Mignini who suggested this police trick for extracting confessions. Mignini told CNN that he arrived after 1:00 AM. He claimed to be in another part of the building while Amanda was being interrogated. http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_knox_interrogation_hoax_15_mignini

It's hard to believe in all that time until 5:45 AM, Mignini was not involved in some way with the interrogation. He at least confirmed the items in the 5:45 AM statement the way Amanda wrote in her book that he did.

If confessing to being in the kitchen during the murder is not a confession, why was Amanda arrested? Supposedly, it was this confession that changed her status at 1:45 AM from witness to suspect. It was because the 1:45 AM statement was obtained while she was still supposedly only a witness that Mignini had to get the 5:45 AM statement as well. Whether as a witness or as a suspect, the police coerced a false confession from her.

TJMK made a point how Raffaele cracked like Amanda did, but that Amanda didn't point her finger at him or even mention him. Because of this TJMK demands she explain why he cracked. Probably Amanda didn't mention anything about this in the 1:45 AM and 5:45 AM statements because the police didn't write that in for her to sign. But in her First Memorandum, she expressed confusion that Raffaele would say she was not with him the night of the murder. Other than an abusive interrogation similar to the one she had endured, what other reason could Amanda have for Raffaele to have been coerced into signing a false statement?

3. I don't deny being a "rank amateur" compared to the professional posters who work for TJMK. How does that make my thinking on the subject of the case against Amanda Knox toxic misinformation? Being amateur instead of professional doesn't mean I cannot read and understand what was admitted as evidence in the case. Maybe it's because I do not profess TJMK's standard of adherence to the case as Mignini presented it that I have the ability to ask questions about the relevance and/or veracity of what is called evidence in this case.

I do find what TJMK quoted of Saul Kassim's paper to be interesting. It correlates what is known about false confessions with what happened to Amanda.

4.

(1) Amanda was indeed brought from the elevator lobby to the interrogation room which is what Mr. Kassim was talking about. It's irrelevant that Amanda was not called to the police station when Ficarra insisted that being there and talking with one of the policemen, they needed to move the informal conversation to a formal setting.

(2) According to the Italian law, the 1:45 AM statement could not be considered a confession since Amanda had not been declared a formal suspect until she placed herself at the murder with that statement. So the official confession didn't occur until 5:45 AM which is why Mignini wanted it.

(3) Ficarra discovered Amanda at the station at 11:00 PM, but Amanda had been talking to another police officer for thirty minutes before Ficarra got there. TJMK can claim that the police stopped the interrogation at 1:45 AM, but that just isn't believable. And besides that, since Mignini chose to use Amanda's First Memorandum as evidence, the interrogation wasn't really over until Amanda had given that written account to Ficarra at about 2:00 PM.

(4) Quoting Amanda's attorney denying saying anything about the police hitting Amanda is not that Attorney denying that the police had hit her. Regardless of the lies from the investigators, there is no video-recording to confirm their claims it wasn't done.

(5) Mr. Kassim overlooked that one Meredith's British friends had not left yet, but he is right that Meredith's British friends had left.

(6) Whoever overheard Amanda talking to her mother about the possibility of leaving Italy got it wrong. On the wire tap, Amanda tells her mother she doesn't want to leave because she wants to stay and help find the killer. It may be true that by the time Amanda sent her email the police had changed that.

(7) The snack bar was closed for the night. Ficarra didn't give Amanda the tea and bun until about noon.

(8) Hostile may have been extreme for characterizing Anna Donnino, but she was expecting Amanda to confess. Anna Donnino told Amanda she had forgotten what happened because of the trauma of the murder. Why would she assume Amanda had even been at the murder?

(9) Anna Donnino even testified that she worked as a mediator for the police. She considered it her job to put suspects at ease so that they would talk. Anna Donnino wasn't just translating.

(10) The police did lie to Amanda that they had hard evidence that she was at the villa during the murder. It was a lie that Raffaele had withdrawn his alibi for her. Raffaele had not talked to the police about the words they put into the statement they had him sign saying Amanda had not returned to his apartment with him. Also, the police lied that Raffaele had said Amanda had asked him to lie for her. That's not even in the coerced statement.

5. What is this epistemological problem with understanding that the police brainwashed Amanda Knox into believing she was at the murder and that Patrick did it? Trusting people like Amanda can be persuaded anything. There are plenty of charismatic leaders who do this all the time. Guilters cannot understand why Amanda's supporters don't yield to this kind of illogic.

First TJMK was talking about voluntary false confessions, coerced-compliant false confessions, and coerced-internalized false confessions.

Then TJMK aksed about the likelihood of confessions that are voluntary, persuaded, and compliant. What's the difference between compliant and persuaded? How does this relate to Amanda's whole frame of reference being crushed by the screaming and shouting of four to thirty-six irate investigators demanding she tell them details about all sorts of things no normal person could remember anyhow?

What difference does it make that Amanda doesn't fit in the category of those who are highly suggestible or compliant when the police did everything they could to confuse her memory, and create high levels of anxiety, low self-esteem, and low assertiveness? That's classic brainwashing.

Amanda didn't have to be developmentally disabled or cognitively impaired or a juvenile or mentally ill to be brainwashed. The police only had to deprive her of her sense of control. The police didn't have to make a permanent change to Amanda's beliefs. They only had to trick her long enough to get her to sign the coerced statements. The fact that she immediately wrote her First Memorandum and followed up the next day with her Second Memorandum proves the effect was not permanent.

Her First Memorandum demonstrates that the interrogation reduced Amanda into a hypnotic state of mind that would have precluded her from making any statement voluntarily. Amanda even said that she accused Patrick because at the time it seemed he could have been guilty. That is exactly the subject being persuaded by the interrogator's explanation being plausible. They told her to imagine what would have happened if she were at the murder with Patrick, and then they insisted what she told them she imagined was what really happened.

What Amanda described happened to her in the interrogation makes the likelihood that she was brainwashed almost certain. Only if she were a sociopath or a psychopath would she have been able to ignore the violence of that interrogation.

TJMK lied about Amanda claiming she was traumatized by the murder into forgetting what happened. She said the police claimed she was traumatized into forgetting what happened. And at least Anna Donnino told her that.

6. TJMK's version of what TJMK thought Mr. Kassin should have written in his paper about false confessions has nothing of importance about why Amanda was coerced into signing statements that placed her at a murder she had nothing to do with and accusing her boss whom in her right mind she would never have thought capable of committing murder.

I have else where discussed the issues presented in this convoluted account. Whatever facts it contains are overwhelmed by the biases expressed.