Failure of the Sollecito/Knox Florence appeal. Available now is a revised version of the report by Judge Nencini correcting and clarifying a few things. The Italian Supreme Court will rule on this next March. The translators were Ald, Jools, Kristeva, Olleosnep, Maundy, Catnip, Tiziano, Katsgalore (our ZiaK), Thoughtful, Sallyoo, The 411, Tom, and Popper, and the proofreaders were Tom, Thoughtful, Popper and Skeptical Bystander.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
A New Book Explains The Unfruitful Emergence Of More And More Conspiracy Theories
Posted by Peter Quennell
Conspiracy theorists have dismally failed to come up with a plausible alternative theory of how Meredith died.
However, they do keep trying. So do the proponents of literally hundreds of other conspiracy theories, constituting vast amounts of effort probably better spent elsewhere - conspiracy theorists very rarely achieve very much, or do well economically, or rise to the top jobs.
In Mr. Shermer’s view, the brain is a belief engine, predisposed to see patterns where none exist and to attribute them to knowing agents rather than to chance—the better to make sense of the world. Then, having formed a belief, each of us tends to seek out evidence that confirms it, thus reinforcing the belief.
This is why, on the foundation of some tiny flaw in the evidence—the supposed lack of roof holes to admit poison-gas cans in one of the Auschwitz-Birkenau gas chambers for Holocaust deniers, the expectant faces on the grassy knoll for JFK plotters, the melting point of steel for 9/11 truthers—we go on to build a great edifice of mistaken conviction….
Mr. Shermer offers a handy guide for those who are confused. Conspiracy theories are usually bunk when they are too complex, require too many people to be involved, ratchet up from small events to grand effects, assign portentous meanings to innocuous events, express strong suspicion of either governments or companies, attribute too much power to individuals or generate no further evidence as time goes by.
The increasingly shrill posts appearing daily on the website Ground Report seem to mark pretty high against that list. Could the Evil Mignini have engineered even this?
Oops. Another conspiracy theory in play.
Archived in Diversion efforts by, The Knox-Mellases, The Sollecitos, More sockpuppets, Reporting on the case, Media news, On psychology
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (14)
Monday, September 12, 2011
As We Long Predicted Knox Will Not Face Cross Examination When It Really Matters
Posted by Peter Quennell
Majority opinion in Perugia has long inclined to the view that the right perps were convicted back in December 2009.
It is very hard to see the six jury members (the lay judges) bucking that trend without being given a great deal more red meat for them to convince their friends and neighbors (and for that matter most of Italy) than they have now.
And Judge Hellman has a reputation similar to Judge Massei’s for making sure all the bases are covered and for not arriving at trial or appeal outcomes based on a few outlying contradictory “facts” or a mere whim. He too has been given very little that is new.
Putting Knox and Sollecito on the stand now would seem the last best shot at taking care of that.
But there is no sign that either defense team has been eager to see their clients speak out at any time, and Knox was even publicly warned early on not to do so.
The teams quite possibly winced now and then (along with many others) at Knox’s performances in past spontaneous declarations and in her stint on the stand in July 2009 which did not really go over at all well.
Kermit in this December 2010 post explained the risks Knox would face on the stand. Kermit helpfully included 150 cross-examination questions to drive home the stark point.
So. Knox and Sollecito. Trapped by poor legal and PR strategy between the devil and the deep blue sea.
Archived in Officially involved, Amanda Knox, Appeals 2009-2014, Hellmann appeal, Diversion efforts by, The Knox-Mellases
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (36)
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Conspicuous By Their Absence Now: Legal Commentators For Sollecito And Knox
Posted by Peter Quennell
There is a marked sharp contrast now between how various reporters without legal backgrounds and various real lawyers are seeing the state of play in the appeal.
The post below shows how flavor-of-the-month reporters like Nick Pisa are still reporting happy talk from Knox and her entourage, while, within their professional constraints, we see more and more lawyers realisng Sollecito and Knox really are cooked.
Half a dozen of the main posters on TJMK who are lawyers (they identify themselves as such when they post) have explained how tough is the real case. Various Italian lawyers continue to offer us insights and tips from Perugia and Rome. And we continue to see maybe half a dozen lawyers a week getting in touch by email or signing up, a trend that shows no sign of fading out.
In contrast all of the lawyers and legal commentators who were once suggesting the process in Perugia had taken a wrong turn have gone quiet, and no new legal voices for Solllecito and Knox are speaking up. The CNN legal shows devote almost no air time to the appeal, and Geraldo Rivera, Dan Abrams, John Q Kelly, Lis Wiehl and others have wound down their commentaries to brief equivocations or nothing at all.
Ted Simon who is believed to be still on the Mellas-Knox payroll seems be operating only from very deep cover. Knox’s own lawyers pass on the (to us sad) happy talk from Capanne while themselves sounding very cautious and down.
And the former lawyer and political commentator Ann Coulter who does us the peculiar favor of including us in her definition of right wing is starkly declaring that the increasingly small number of increasingly shrill non-lawyers for Sollecito and Knox really should get a life.
By now, the only people who believe Knox and Sollecito are the usual criminal apologists and their friends in the American media.
Serial smearer and evidence incompetent Steve Moore as one of the usual criminal apologists?! That has to hurt.
Archived in Officially involved, Amanda Knox, Raff Sollecito, Diversion efforts by, The Knox-Mellases, The Sollecitos, Reporting on the case, Media news
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (29)
Thursday, September 08, 2011
Fourteenth Appeal Session: Judge Hellmann Consults Jury And Concludes They Have Enough To Wrap Up
Posted by Peter Quennell
Judge Hellman took the jury into chambers for half an hour yesterday and they decided not to delay matters for a further DNA review.
Final arguments will therefore take place later this month (dates in our right column) and a verdict on the appeal could be announced by the end of the month.
Defenses didn’t ask yesterday to put their clients on the stand, no further impromptu remarks from the defendants were made, and no defense request for review of the very damning mixed blood traces was advanced.
Our Italian lawyers are not rating chances of a full acquittal above one or two percent. They believe the groundwork for that has simply not been laid. The judges and jury dont have what is needed to upend the detailed outcomes of two trials and two other appeals. And the Italian system is nothing if not very cautious and lacking in surprise.
The Supreme Court has accepted that THREE attackers had to have been present on the night. Not the slightest evidence of any perps other than the three put on trial has been advanced. No scenario has been offered in court for Guede having committed the crime on Meredith alone - in fact Guede accused the other two of being there right to their faces in court.
Free-lance reporter Nick Pisa (image above) who we often quote on the occasions when we think he’s got it right reported yesterday in the Daily Mail that Prosecutor Comodi expressed frustration with the judge and predicted an acquittal due to bias.
This is not confirmed by any Italian source and Ms Comodi is simply reported there as saying she had expected the request for further tests to be turned down and the defendants COULD still walk. Nothing more.
TJMK main poster Will Savive offered this explanation for Nick Pisa’s apparent serious mistake in a comment on our previous post.
ABC News is also reporting that they spoke to Comodi after the session and it is a big difference than what Pisa wrote.
In fact, it is ABC who has claimed that they interviewed her. According to ABC, Comodi informed them that there is “a possibility” that Knox and Sollecito could win the appeal. There is also a possibility that the sun will fall from the sky, so it is all in the context and translation of how she said it. Then ABC quoted her as saying, “I would find it very serious if they were set free.”
FOX News also reported Comodi speaking out. Sheppard Smith put Comodi’s alleged quote on the screen and it read word for word what Pisa wrote. FOX has been decent, in my opinion, thus far on reporting on the case, but Sheppard and his two cronies today were amateur at best and clearly not educated on the case.
It is very likely that Pisa twisted her quote to fit his agenda and make news; I wouldn’t be surprised!
The Seattle Times has the best piece on it I think. In their article they write the interview as going like this:
COMODI: We did our job. I am convinced by what I have said. I am fully convinced of their guilt and I would find it very serious if they were set free. Today’s decision could lead one to think that there is more of a possibility that they be set freed.
So in essence, she never said that there is a possibility, in her opinion. She said that the hearing today “could lead one to think that there is more of a possibility that they be set freed.” It seems as though only Pisa is reporting it the way he did.
The Seattle Times included this: “Knox’s lawyer Luciano Ghirga warned that the court’s rejection of new DNA testing was not equal to a positive outcome of the whole appeals trial.”
As discussed at length on PMF (link just below) the present Knox PR hype is very reminiscent of the hype just before Judge Massei’s blunt and unequivocal verdict was read out.
Archived in Public evidence, DNA and luminol, Appeals 2009-2014, Hellmann appeal
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (45)
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
Thirteenth Appeal Session: It Looks Like The Defenses’ Last Best Shot Might Have Fallen Short
Posted by Peter Quennell
Tuesday’s was an abbreviated court session because of a strike in Perugia.
It emerged in the time remaining that the DNA that was remaining on both the bra clasp AND the knife might have been re-tested if Carla Vecchioti and Stefano Conti had not come up with some contentious quibbles for not proceeding.
The prosecution may now call for those tests to actually be done, by a new set of independent experts. Hard to see this amounting to pivotal either way any more, and Judge Hellman might simply move the court on.
Seemingly no grounds left now for Judge Hellman to live up to the PR-instilled rumor that he is about to deny Meredith her justice.
The Italian reporting today as usual leaves the English reporting in the dust. It conveys a picture of more of the same tough rebuttal that we were seeing yesterday. There are some quick translations on PMF via the PMF link at the bottom of this post. .
Amanda Knox looked increasingly down today as she absorbed the trend in the testimony, and at one point she slumped on the table seemingly asleep. Serial over-promising by her suffocating entourage hasn’t done her any good.
Mr Mignini believes that at several points Amanda Knox wanted to confess and to pay her dues. Surely better this than a Caysey Anthony or OJ Simpson situation with their attendant huge overtones of illegitimacy.
Archived in Officially involved, The defenses, Appeals 2009-2014, Hellmann appeal
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (29)
Monday, September 05, 2011
Twelfth Appeal Session: Prosecution Start To Undermine The Independent Experts’ More Tenuous Claims
Posted by Peter Quennell
[Above: Dr Stefanoni head of the Scientific Police’s Rome DNA labs with her prosecution interrogator Ms Comodi]
Monday’s Italian reporting suggests that Dr Stefanoni is coming across as highly competent and very objective.
Her team’s DNA handling and testing seems to have cut no corners. Her testimony will spill over into Tuesday. The AGI News Service describes Dr Stefanoni on Monday running through her procedures and precuaions and denying that contamination could have taken place.
She hit point by point on all the complaints made by the consultants of the Assize Court of Appeal at Perugia about the police work in the context of scientific investigations into the murder of Meredith Kercher. She strongly defended the specialist work done by her laboratory. Stefanoni has categorically ruled out a possible contamination of the findings, pointing out that “the contamination is not ‘a thing that comes out of something abstract.”
The expert then recalled that the DNA of each operator that operates within the laboratories of the scientific police is ‘duly filed and that any possibility of contamination, whether by a person or from sample to sample, is tested on a regular basis. Dr Stefanoni also described how the “wet samples” collected on the first day of the murder investigation were kept in the refrigerator of the house and then brought to Rome.
And La Nazione in describing the same testimony adds that the defenses are taking quite a gamble in their all-or-nothing approach where a full acquittal seems increasingly unlikely and where the prosecution are asking for tougher sentences for Knox and Sollecito based on a waiver of Judge Massei’s mitigating circumstances.
The huge volume of evidence not being re-examined in the current appeal (about 95% of all evidence including a majority of the forensic evidence) is highlighted in many of the reports. Rudy Guede’s direct accusation of Knox and Sollecito to their faces in one appeal session is also recalled.
No mention of the position of the no-nonsense Supreme Court of Cassation position but that gorilla has to loom large in Judge Hellman’s mind. Judge Hellman does not have the final word on this appeal in Italian law, and a final outcome may take another 18 months. And if there is any funny business suspected, appeals can always be made to Cassation instantly.
In light of these two circumstances, the defense teams are still much more pussyfooting in Italian in the appeal court than the shrill PR claims in English-language media, while still not making the smartest move in Italian courts when defendants seem cooked and evoking some sympathy for them.
Knox’s best chances seem to be falling between those two stools.
Archived in Public evidence, DNA and luminol, Appeals 2009-2014, Hellmann appeal, Diversion efforts by, More sockpuppets
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (19)
In Good Italian Meredith’s Family Remind Italy Of Who Is The Real Victim Here
Posted by Peter Quennell
Stephanie Kercher writes an open letter (two of Meredith’s family are conversant in Italian, and Meredith had been fluent on arrival in Perugia) to Judge Hellman.
She questions the very strange slant of the DNA report in which Greg Hampikian seems to have had a suspect role.
The letter is very widely quoted from in the Italian media which has been highly sympathetic to Meredith and generally left cold by the antics of Knox, Sollecito, and their entourages.
CNN carries one of the few English-language reports. Generally a good one though it omits that Rudy Guede accused Knox and Sollecito to their faces in appeal court.
No English version was issued to our knowledge, and this is our main poster Tiziano’s translation, from TGCom.
In the last week we have been anxiously awaiting and in great agitation at the opinions being spread around about the original DNA tests. It is extremely difficult to understand how the evidence which had been acquired with care and presented at the first grade trial as valid can now risk becoming irrelevant.
How can a quantity of DNA evidence be considered of little importance when the same experts do not give precise answers on the quantity which ought to be taken into consideration?
Furthermore, it should be remembered that both the parties, the prosecution and the defence, engaged their own respective teams of scientific experts in the first level trial, in addition to the consultants of the Scientific [Police] in Rome.
The [representatives of the] defence seem to be focussed on and to base themselves heavily on these two pieces of DNA evidence, but we want to remember for a moment who this case is about: my sister, a daughter brutally taken away from us almost four years ago and still not a day goes by when we can find a little peace or to put an end to all this.
All those who read this document or who are following this case, please remember our beautiful Meredith. Her blood mixed with other samples spread around the bathroom, along the corridor and in Filomena’s room, and also so many other bloody prints. Remember too all the other evidence which has been presented up till today in this trial, 10,000 pages of evidence.
We still have confidence in the Perugia police and all our trust in all those people from the court and the investigations.
We ask that Appeal Court weigh up every single piece of evidence, scientific and circumstantial, together with every witness heard and that [the court] do this independently of every other source of information and [independently] of the media.
In the midst of all the frenzy created by the media, Meredith has been forgotten, she is no longer with us, yet everything that should be for her and [done] in order to understand what really happened that tragic night.
We have not forgotten her, and we will continue our struggle in order that justice be done with the continuing support of our lawyer Francesco Maresca and of his colleagues, the Police, the Public Prosecutor, the prosecution and all those taking part in this in Italy and also all those who in all the world still think of us and of Mez.
We would like to have the possibilty of working with Universty of Perugia on a project which would offer an annual place to a student in memory of Meredith. Meredith loved Italy and its people and wanted to immerse herself in Italian culture. We are well aware of the impact that all this has had on the city and we think that this is an appropriate way to commemorate Meredith in the beautiful place for which she left us to come and study.
Please do not let it be that Meredith died in vain, her courage and her strength continue to struggle and we shall look for justice so that she may rest in peace. She did not stop struggling that November 1st, and we shall not stop now.
Archived in Concerning Meredith, Her memory, Her family, Officially involved, Victims family, Reporting on the case, Media news
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (9)
Saturday, September 03, 2011
An Overview Of Modern Thinking On The Criminal Mind
Posted by Ergon
The question of criminality has been much in the news lately, as wild gangs of youth rampaged through British cities, and wild gangs of feral financial speculators rampaged through the world’s economies.
As a scientist I wonder about the pathologies involved, and as a spiritual person I wonder about root causes.
So this is about where we are going as a society. Are we descending into criminality, and is the problem getting worse? I also wonder about the connection between criminality and mental illness.
In the course of trying to find a treatment for my own children’s Autism, I came to the following conclusion: conventional medical science has no clue about the causes or effective treatment of mental illness.
Therefore I had to range further into alternative medicine to find solutions, and serendipitously, I did. Yet, when my son’s autism reversal was confirmed by psychologists, no one seemed to want to know how. Neither the media, nor the conventional establishment.
Never mind. My findings were presented, for free, to various alternative medical doctors and clinics, reported in journals and books, and confirmed by them. The protocol has great possibilities in the treatment of other neurological illnesses. It is possible to reverse brain disease.
At my clinic in Toronto as well as other countries, I treated hundreds of young people with Autism, ADHD, Aspergers, and other psychological disorders, using holistic medical methods alone. Many of them went on to have normal lives; most improved significantly. And, when I have the time, I will write a book about this journey, and share it with everyone.
Which I already did in fact. See here. But this is by way of background. I do not claim to have cures, or answers; I’m a searcher for knowledge, which I wish to share with others.
So: Is there such a thing as a criminal mind? This was a question much pondered as the new field of psychology came into being. In opposition to religious belief that crimes were caused by man’s original state of sin, and provoked by deadly sins like avarice and lust etc., it tried to define abnormal behaviour as a function of upbringing and environment.
It was only later as research into the nature of the brain emerged that new theories were formed; could neurological deficits explain criminal acts? Along with other suppositions of nurture and nature, addictions and abuse?
According to these studies yes there is..
The release today of a study by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) showing than 64 percent of local jail inmates, 56 percent of state prisoners and 45 percent of federal prisoners have symptoms of serious mental illnesses is an indictment of the nation’s mental health care system. It is both a scandal and a national tragedy.
The figures are worse than those generally believed in the past, in which estimates of the total number of inmates with mental illnesses have been approximately 20 percent. The study reveals that the problem is two to three times greater than anyone imagined. What is even more disturbing is the number of these inmates that have served prior sentences, committed violent offenses, or engaged in substance abuse.
This is not an ideological statement, nor is it an attempt to avoid the serious problem of crimes in society. We have to have a system of laws and justice, and we have to protect the innocent. But the present system of crime and punishment doesn’t work, either.
So, how do we measure the criminal mind? Could there possibly be genetic, neurological, behavioral or even, physiognomic markers? I was 10 years old when a gentleman took one look at certain bumps on my head and said I “was very perceptive; could look at a scene and see what others could not"Cool, and this was my introduction to phrenology.
This was where 18-19th century researchers sought to determine racial and emotional differences through the study of skull size, shape and protuberances. And yes, they did believe the criminal’s head was different than that of normal people. This later became the field of craniology and craniometry as scientists tried to avoid making unsavory determinations.
The scars left after World War II by these atrocious programmes of research meant that the study of human skull shape and size fell into disrepute. Human variation, the core subject of anthropology, was increasingly explored through genetics and other biological markers, and became functional and adaptive in orientation rather than a search for racial affinities.
In recent years, however, the introduction of new computer-based techniques of measurement, and the greatly enhanced power of statistical analysis, has meant that there has been a resurgence of interest in this subject, and, stripped of its non-Darwinian and racist past, the study of the human head remains a topic of major importance.
So now, scientists are using cranial measurements to determine mental illness as shown here:
Recently, Harvard researchers reported that children with autism have a wide range of genetic defects, making it nearly impossible to develop a simple genetic test to identify the disorder. Now, University of Missouri researchers are studying 3-D imaging to reveal correlations in the facial features and brain structures of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which will enable them to develop a formula for earlier detection of the disorder…
When you compare the faces and head shapes of children with specific types of autism to other children, it is obvious there are variations. Currently, autism diagnosis is purely behavior based and doctors use tape measurements to check for facial and brain dissimilarities. We are developing a quantitative method that will accurately measure these differences and allow for earlier, more precise detection of specific types of the disorder,” said Ye Duan, assistant computer science professor in the MU College of Engineering.
Then you have “The Criminal Brain-Understanding Biological Theories of Crime”, by author Nicole Hahn Rafter, New York University Press (October 2008)
What is the relationship between criminality and biology? Nineteenth-century phrenologists insisted that criminality was innate, a trait inherent in the offender’s brain matter. While they were eventually repudiated as pseudo-scientists and self-deluded charlatans, today the pendulum has swung back.
Both criminologists and biologists have begun to speak of a tantalizing but disturbing possibility: that criminality may be inherited as a set of genetic deficits that place one at risk for theft, violence, and sexual deviance.
If that is so, we may soon confront proposals for genetically modifying “at risk” foetuses or doctoring up criminals so their brains operate like those of law-abiding citizens.
Wow. Now this really frightens me, to see scientists, once again, barking up the wrong genetic tree, but there you go any way.
Brain Injury as a factor in crime:
Alternative physician Dr. Russell L. Blaylock: Vaccines, Depression and Neurodegeneration After Age 50
Previously, it was thought that major depression was secondary to a deficiency in certain neurotransmitters in the brain, particularly the monoamines, which include serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine. While alterations in these important mood-related neurotransmitters is found with major depression, growing evidence indicates that the primary culprit is low-grade, chronic brain inflammation.
In addition, we now know that inflammatory cytokines can lower serotonin significantly and for long periods by a number of different mechanisms.
I would agree with him there, since it has been my observation that mental illness is often accompanied by inflammatory disorders or auto-immune illness. I also believe the changes in vaccine schedules may have led to increased neurological deficits and genetic damage passed on to subsequent generations, but that is an argument for a separate article. I do not blame vaccines alone, as I will explain here.
There is research that shows criminal minds and behavior issues are often accompanied by brain damage.
Brain injury is a condition that involves microscopic damage to brain tissue that can only be seen in life through the lens of the patterns of the injured person’s life. Chris Henry, the former NFL wide receiver whose autopsy results confirmed he was living with brain damage, may have finally made that clear.
Results: Compared with criminal nonpsychopaths and noncriminal control participants, criminal psychopaths showed significantly less affect-related activity in the amygdala/hippocampal formation, parahippocampal gyrus, ventral striatum, and in the anterior and posterior cingulate gyri. Psychopathic criminals also showed evidence of overactivation in the bilateral fronto-temporal cortex for processing affective stimuli
The brains of autistic individuals show similar defects:
The two research teams have noticed an intriguing abnormality in the brains of the small group of autistics they have examined: The cerebellum, a portion of the brain involved with muscle coordination and the regulation of incoming sensations, contains fewer neurons known as Purkinje cells. There are also preliminary indications that growth in parts of the limbic system, which oversees emotion and memory, is arrested while autistics are still in the womb
New research shows for the first time that both have a common genetic basis that leads people to develop one or other of the two illnesses..find that thousands of tiny genetic mutations – known as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) – are operating in raising the risk of developing the illness.
“Early Signs of Psychopathy” argues that signs can show at an early age.
A twenty-five year study, published this month in The Journal of Abnormal Psychology, demonstrates that, as early as the age of three, there are temperamental and physiological difference between those who show psychopathic tendencies as adults and those who don’t.
Not only do psychopaths lack emotions of conscience and empathy, but research has shown that these individuals consistently display certain aspects of temperament including a lack of fear, lack of inhibition and stimulus seeking behavior.
We’ve long accepted that hormones can make you amorous, aggressive, or erratic. But lately neuroscience has been abuzz with evidence that the hormone oxytocin—which also acts as a neuromodulator—can enhance at least one cognitive power: the ability to understand the gist of what others are thinking. In this week’s Mind Matters, Jennifer Bartz and Eric Hollander, two leading researchers in this area, review the many and surprising ways in which oxytocin seems to influence both our openness to others and our understanding of them.
For inherently social creatures such as humans, the ability to identify the motives, intentions, goals, desires, beliefs and feelings of others is not a nicety but an essential skill. We must understand “where others are coming from” not only to pursue our individual goals but also to facilitate social harmony more generally. Specifically, we need to recognize that other people can have thoughts, beliefs, desires and feelings that differ from our own…
And it may be this that drives psychopathy, or the criminal mind.
Cleckley’s original list of symptoms of a psychopath:
1. Considerable superficial charm and average or above average intelligence.
2. Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
3. Absence of anxiety or other “neurotic” symptoms considerable poise, calmness, and verbal facility.
4. Unreliability, disregard for obligations no sense of responsibility, in matters of little and great import.
5. Untruthfulness and insincerity
6. Antisocial behavior which is inadequately motivated and poorly planned, seeming to stem from an inexplicable impulsiveness.
7. Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
8. Poor judgment and failure to learn from experience
9. Pathological egocentricity. Total self-centeredness incapacity for real love and attachment.
10. General poverty of deep and lasting emotions.
11. Lack of any true insight, inability to see oneself as others do.
12. Ingratitude for any special considerations, kindness, and trust.
13. Fantastic and objectionable behavior, after drinking and sometimes even when not drinking—vulgarity, rudeness, quick mood shifts, pranks.
14. No history of genuine suicide attempts.
15. An impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated sex life.
16. Failure to have a life plan and to live in any ordered way, unless it be one promoting self-defeat.
Hare in The Psychopathic Personality:
A psychopath can have high verbal intelligence, but they typically lack “emotional intelligence”. They can be expert in manipulating others by playing to their emotions. There is a shallow quality to the emotional aspect of their stories (i.e., how they felt, why they felt that way, or how others may have felt and why).
The lack of emotional intelligence is the first good sign you may be dealing with a psychopath. A history of criminal behavior in which they do not seem to learn from their experience, but merely think about ways to not get caught is the second best sign.
The following is a list of items based on the research of Robert Hare, Ph.D. which is derived from the “The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, .1991, Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.” These are the most highly researched and recognized characteristics of psychopathic personality and behavior”:
1. glibness/superficial charm
2. grandiose sense of self worth
3. need for stimulation/prone to boredom
4. pathological lying
6. lack of remorse or guilt
7. shallow emotional response
8. callous/lack of empathy
9. parasitic lifestyle
10. poor behavioral controls
11. promiscuous sexual behavior
12. early behavioral problems
13. lack of realistic long term goals
16. failure to accept responsibility for their own actions
17. many short term relationships
18. juvenile delinquency
19. revocation of conditional release
20. criminal versatility
What is Emotional Intelligence?
Is it becoming a rare quality among young people? It certainly seems to be declining in society.
Emotional intelligence “is a type of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions” (Mayer & Salovey, 1993: 433). According to Salovey & Mayer (1990), EI subsumes Gardner’s inter- and intrapersonal intelligences, and involves abilities that may be categorized into five domains:
Self-awareness: Observing yourself and recognizing a feeling as it happens.
Managing emotions: Handling feelings so that they are appropriate; realizing what is behind a feeling; finding ways to handle fears and anxieties, anger, and sadness.
Motivating oneself: Channeling emotions in the service of a goal; emotional self control; delaying gratification and stifling impulses.
Empathy: Sensitivity to others’ feelings and concerns and taking their perspective; appreciating the differences in how people feel about things.
Handling relationships: Managing emotions in others; social competence and social skills.
And according to Goleman (1995: 160), “Emotional intelligence, the skills that help people harmonize, should become increasingly valued as a workplace asset in the years to come.”
The last words belong to the educators, of course.
Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983) proposes that intelligent behavior does not arise from a single unitary quality of the mind, as the g -based theories profiled on this Web site suggest, but rather that different kinds of intelligence are generated from separate metaphorical pools of mental energy.
Gardner derived this conceptualization of intelligence in part from his experiences working with members (of) extreme populations, in which certain cognitive abilities are preserved (often to a remarkable degree) even in the absence of other, very basic abilities. For example, some autistic savants display extraordinary musical or mathematical abilities despite severely impaired language development and social awareness. Likewise, individuals with localized brain damage often demonstrate severe deficits that are circumscribed to a single cognitive domain (Gardner, 1983/2003).
And Piaget, who inspired me many years ago: Jean Piaget (August 9, 1896-September 16, 1980) Swiss Biologist and Child Psychologist
Definition of Intelligence: Intelligence is an adaptation…To say that intelligence is a particular instance of biological adaptation is thus to suppose that it is essentially an organization and that its function is to structure the universe just as the organism structures its immediate environment” (Piaget, 1963, pp. 3-4).
Intelligence is assimilation to the extent that it incorporates all the given data of experience within its framework…There can be no doubt either, that mental life is also accommodation to the environment. Assimilation can never be pure because by incorporating new elements into its earlier schemata the intelligence constantly modifies the latter in order to adjust them to new elements” (Piaget, 1963, p. 6-7) (Including, imo, ‘criminal intelligence’)
The Theory of Genetic Epistemology. Piaget also believed that intellectual development occurs in four distinct stages.
The sensorimotor stage begins at birth, and lasts until the child is approximately two years old. At this stage, the child cannot form mental representations of objects that are outside his immediate view, so his intelligence develops through his motor interactions with his environment.
The preoperational stage typically lasts until the child is 6 or 7. According to Piaget, this is the stage where true “thought” emerges. Preoperational children are able to make mental representations of unseen objects, but they cannot use deductive reasoning.
The concrete operations stage follows, and lasts until the child is 11 or 12. Concrete operational children are able to use deductive reasoning, demonstrate conservation of number, and can differentiate their perspective from that of other people.
Formal operations is the final stage. Its most salient feature is the ability to think abstractly.
It is my opinion that emotional intelligence development also follows these four distinct phases. This is where nurture and nature come into play, and any trauma, abuse, neglect, that occurs during these phases can lead to an emotional stunting where the child is unable to progress to the next stage of development.
In the same way, a positive home and school environment can help children grow to be more harmonious members of society, once you adjust for any biological and neurological deficits. Early recognition and treatment is key…
Having worked as a volunteer in the public school system, I can tell you what teachers and educators have been telling me for years: the number of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children is increasing exponentially..
Is it just me, or does it seem like the world has become an increasingly disharmonious place lately?
But the last word might well come from a book written by a Norwegian judge, Jens Jacob-Sander: The Criminal Brain: A View from the Bench… Exploring the Criminal Mind
What goes on in the minds of criminals? This question raises perennial philosophical issues about human behavior in general and criminal conduct in particular. Do criminals act the way they do because of how and what they think and feel? And, are these internal forces of thought and feeling caused by the states of their brains, which in turn are predetermined by biology, chemistry, and genetics? Is the problem, in short, what used to be called bad blood?
Or, are the thoughts, feelings, and actions of criminals caused by external factors such as parents, education, and other influences in the environment that mold and shape malleable brains, which, in turn, give rise to the criminal personality? In other words, is the real culprit for criminal behavior what used to be called society?
With the emergence of brain science over the past 50 years, including brain imaging technologies and the study of brain chemistry, perhaps we can return to these profound questions with new hope of making progress toward answers.
At the present time, although some scholars of brain science lean heavily toward a reductionistic biological determinism, others call attention to the plasticity of the brain and its capacity for change. Even if we cannot ever uncover a single satisfactory answer to how the criminal mind works, perhaps we can begin to diminish the devastation caused by criminal behavior.
An exploration of the criminal mind might yield insights, ideas, and innovative hypotheses worthy of serious consideration and further study. It might also provoke us to reconsider how we think about the questions we ask about the causes of criminal behavior. Instead of polarizing the discussion by pitting determinism (biological or social) against free will as mutually exclusive explanations of criminal conduct, we might discover that biological predispositions and habits of thought can be influenced by education, cognitive retraining, and behavior modification. Whatever our current state of knowledge, isn’t it worth our effort to try to formulate better theories and more effective forms of intervention?
That daunting task has been undertaken in a new e-book titled Exploring the Criminal Mind and subtitled Advances of Brainscience and Mental Procedures of the Criminal Personality: A Unified Brain-Mind Theory. The author and publisher, Jens-Jacob Sander, is a judge in the Norwegian Courts of Justice, located west of the city of Oslo. Judge Sander tells us in the foreword to his book that it grew out of his frustration with trying to understand the criminal mind while he was engaged in a major international fraud-hunt in 1989 that, although successful, was apparently hampered by the lack of adequate information and insights about criminal minds.
Perhaps we can return to these profound questions with new hope of making progress toward answers, indeed.
Archived in Crime hypotheses, On psychology
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (11)
Friday, September 02, 2011
Nina Burleigh: View From A Broad Who Doesn’t Seem To Like Broads Or Being Abroad
Posted by Peggy Ganong
In Burleigh’s shoddy book on the murder of Meredith Kercher, she gets the victim’s birthday wrong. But that’s not all she gets wrong. From what I can tell, Burleigh simply skips over much of the key evidence in favor of gossiping about and criticizing other journalists who have covered the case.
She is particularly hard on female journalists, which is odd given that she prides herself on being a modern feminist. I find it very telling, for example, that she indicates what Barbie Nadeau and Andrea Vogt’s husbands do for a living (one works for the UN and one is a university professor), but does not see fit to provide us with any information on what the wives of any of the male journalists do.
The implication is clear: these two “females” took up writing as a sort of hobby after trailing behind their menfolk to Europe. Worse, Burleigh notes that though they are both American born, they are more European in “style” and “craft” which, aside from being absolute nonsense, remains unsubstantiated by any analysis whatsoever. It amounts to saying “they’re sooooo European”. What does that mean?
Well, once you know that Burleigh is a relentless and mindless cheerleader for the superiority of all things American, it becomes clear that what she means is that they are inferior journalists because all things European are inferior to all things American. Burleigh also claims that what she calls Nadeau’s “cosmopolitan speech affect” is an attempt to hide her Middle American roots (in Burleigh’s words, her “rural South Dakota accent”). She says the “statuesque redhead” Vogt looks like she could play the role of Brenda Starr.
In other words, Burleigh is trying to suggest that these two are imposters, merely playing at journalism by dressing up like a cartoon journalist or putting on airs and trying to talk like a big city slicker instead of a sharecropper.
In fact, Vogt has been a working reporter for fifteen years, was awarded a Fulbright scholarship in journalism, is trilingual and has published in English, German and Italian. I don’t know much about Nadeau’s academic training, but she currently writes on a variety of topics for both Newsweek and the Daily Beast. And the excellent Christopher Dickey thinks quite highly of her.
Meanwhile, back to Burleigh and her seemingly endless supply of sour grapes. At one point in her book, she mentions an Italian female reporter, but only to comment on her boots! One starts to wonder what she has against women, especially her professional peers.
Her male peers do not get a free pass, either, at least those who work in that dreadful country Italy where, according to Burleigh, freedom of speech does not exist. She criticizes foreign journalists based in Italy, basically calling them a bunch of cowards, so fearful of the Mafia that they confine themselves to writing about la dolce vita—food, wine and bunga bunga. This is absolute bollocks, of course.
John Follain, who has covered the case for the Times, has written two books about Italy in the fifteen or so years he has lived there: one is about the Mafia, while the other takes on the Vatican. Vogt investigated the White Supremacy movement in Idaho and has written an excellent book about it, not without exposing herself to danger. As for Nadeau, she has covered Italy’s garbage crisis, and in one gritty, unforgettable article for Newsweek describes walking through some of the most dangerous Mafia neighborhoods.
All three have been viciously attacked by Knox supporters. Meanwhile, Nina Burleigh is happy to fixate on what her fellow journalists are wearing and eating and drinking. Come to think of it, when she was a correspondent in France, she was obsessed with complaining about and criticizing French women, probably for not instantly recognizing her innate superiority.
It is too bad Burleigh opted to focus on this kind of crap instead of actually discussing much of the real evidence against Knox and Sollecito. Frankly, hers is the most disappointing and surely the nastiest book on the tragic murder of Meredith Kercher that has been published to date. After reading what Burleigh wrote about Nadeau and Vogt, I was left wondering why she has such an ax to grind with them.
Is it because they are at least a decade younger than she is? Is it because they live in Europe and she doesn’t? Is it because they are fluent in foreign languages and she isn’t? I really don’t know, but the book sure has a bitter stench to it.
The good news is I didn’t even have to buy it. In fact, I don’t want to be seen reading it in public. Thanks to Google books, I was able to find many of the offending passages on line. In addition, I can discreetly skim at my local bookseller’s. All in all, I have found it a pretty dull exercise. The book is glib, superficial and gossipy. One walks away feeling dirty and sad, wondering where one would be placed within Burleigh’s social and class hierarchy. Hopefully at least a hair above middle class.
I almost forgot to mention the pièce de résistance in Burleigh’s sliming of the two female journalists who did not roll over for the Knox family PR supertanker. Burleigh also asserts that these two small-town American imposters, after acquiring their polished “style” and “craft” by living in Europe, were “appalled” by the way AK and her family “flouted” Italian mores, implying that this snobbery tainted their reporting.
While I recall both journalists providing good analysis of how and why some of the antics of AK and her family were not good strategy under the circumstances – for example, AK’s decision to turn up in court one day wearing an over-sized “all you need is love” t-shirt or her sister Deanna’s choice of courtroom attire on July 4 (red-white-and-blue hotpants outfit) – I have never read anything suggesting they personally disapproved of or were appalled by the American and her family.
Since this snide and non-sourced aside appears on the same page as Burleigh’s claim that Nadeau tried to hide her “rural” accent with a “cosmopolitan speech affect”, it is fair to say that Burleigh’s real goal is to discredit them as objective reporters. It is almost as if she - Burleigh - were taking dictation from Doug Preston! And if Burleigh finds this to be a sexist remark, then I suggest she take a long, hard look in the mirror.
In the same section of the book, Burleigh describes John Kercher as a tabloid reporter and notes that neither he nor his family even “attempted” to learn Italian, relying instead on their lawyer to tell them what was going on.
Yes, you read that right: Burleigh thinks that the grieving Kercher family should have set aside their grief and contacted Berlitz straight away! And she implies that it is a mistake to rely on their legal counsel for information or advice. (At least Italy gives the victim’s family a legal voice.) I guess Burleigh would prefer that the Kercher family turn to people like Amanda’s stepfather Chris Mellas, or the various profiteers riding the PR supertanker: David Marriott and Doug Preston to name just two. This is apparently what Burleigh did.
It is clear from what I have read that Burleigh is not concerned with the victim Meredith Kercher or her family. She seems more interested in passing judgement on those she considers inferior in station to herself (just about everyone),complaining about life in Italy and taking pot shots at other journalists. My guess is that deep down she likes Italy about as much as she liked France, which is to say not much, maybe not at all. Burleigh is that quintessential Ugly American. I saw early signs of it in her reporting on this case for Time.
Incidentally, she did not begin until June of 2009, when the trial was well under way and almost two years after the murder itself. I had never heard of Burleigh, so I decided to have a look at her earlier work, especially that on life in France. I truly was flabbergasted by her utter inability to cope in a strange land.
She took an instant dislike to the French in general and was unable to understand the culture, in part because she was unable or unwilling to learn the language. I find it ironic – and appalling – that she faults the Kerchers, of all people, for not learning the language of the country where their daughter/sister was murdered when she herself could or would not learn the language of the country she was residing in under happy circumstances.
Is it class or gender or nationality that Burleigh most has a problem with?
Hard to say, since she seems to have a sense of superiority that encompasses all three. Speaking of disapproval, Burleigh treats the Knox women and Meredith’s British friends in the same haughty, catty manner as she treats her professional peers. In fact, she refers to the Knox clan collectively as “a hair on the low side of middle class”. I guess from the throne upon which she has placed herself, Burleigh is able to make these fine distinctions and, in addition, finds it necessary.
And how about this fine value judgement on page 33? “Amanda was the sole member of the gaggle of menstruating, jealous, bitchy, angry, loving, needy females around Curt who could keep her emotions in check”. I’m not making this up; Burleigh actually wrote those words. One pictures hapless Curt surrounded by the seven dwarves (Jealous, Bitchy, Angry, Loving, Needy, Bloody and Amanda).
While I believe that Amanda Knox was rightly convicted for her role in Meredith Kercher’s death, and though I have been critical of her family’s decision to hire a PR firm that has attempted to manipulate public opinion, I certainly think they are entitled to a little more respect and empathy than this. Speaking of entitled, that is how Burleigh herself comes off throughout this book.
Moving on to Meredith’s British friends, Burleigh dismisses them en masse with this tightly packed bundle of sexism and stereotyping: “tweedy peaches-and-cream complected sylphs who moved as a pack”. How Burleigh would even know how they moved is beyond me, since she was not covering the case in the days or even months that followed this brutal murder. Perhaps, if they did stick together, it was for mutual comfort. That’s what the little people do, Nina.
Italian women are not spared either. In addition to her fixation on a local reporter’s boots (perhaps because she could not read her work?), Burleigh describes Police Chief Monica Napoleoni’s style as “part dominatrix, part donatella Versace with a badge” and another Italian policewoman as a “thick-bodied woman”. Nina’s motto: When in Rome and unable to follow what’s going on, focus instead on making disparaging comments about the way other women look.
Burleigh pretentiously dedicates her book to the victims of sexual violence, an odd choice since she does little more here than perpetuate the sexist and sexual stereotypes that underlie this phenomenon. I am all for supporting the victims of sexual violence and will do so by not buying Burleigh’s nasty piece of work, which adds nothing to our knowledge of the case anyway.
Anyone who really wants to read a good book on the murder of Meredith Kercher should try Darkness Descending and/or Angel Face, both out for some time now. In addition to these works, John Follain, who has lived in Italy since the mid-90’s and covered the case from the outset, has a book coming out soon. I seriously doubt he will be focusing on women’s boots.
Archived in Diversion efforts by, The Knox-Mellases, More sockpuppets, Reporting on the case, Poor reporting
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (24)
Thursday, September 01, 2011
Perugia Prosecutors In Italian News Daily For Formidable Investigations Into National Government
Posted by Peter Quennell
The apartment one down from the top in the above shot belongs to Claudio Scola.
Very expensive property. It has a prize view of Rome’s colosseum especially (image at bottom) at night. Up to a couple of months ago Claudio Scola (first image below) was the economic development minister in Silvio Berlusconi’s hard-pressed national Italian government.
He then had to resign.
He is under investigation for apparently accepting major renovations to that apartment as a freebie after he purchased it several years ago. Various parties on the giving end of this seeming large bribe for political favors are being investigated. The one most in the Italian national news is Diego Anemone (second image below).
Perugia prosecutors were handed the case by Rome prosecutors because Rome prosecutors choose not to handle cases involving national parliamentarians. They prefer that political investigations do not get slimed, demonized, or otherwise leaned-upon.
This is not something that ever seems to bother the formidable Perugia prosecutors, who have a good national reputation for never blinking.
The Claudio Scola case is tangentially connected to their ongoing investigations into political bribes at the national level for construction contracts related to the 2006 winter Olympics and the city partly leveled in the 2010 earthquake in the Appenine mountains.
In fact Perugia prosecutors are presently the most high-profile of those of any provincial capital in Italy. Their investigations are being reported upon almost daily in this case that could see PM Berlusconi’s grip on power relinquished.
They also have an outstanding record of non-reversals of their convictions by the Italian Supreme Court. The Knox and Sollecito defense teams are fully aware of this and have been ultra-careful never to raise questions about the prosecution.
And they have been spinning their wheels on the hard evidence. Unlikely they’d take bets on their winning the appeal. Signs are they realize they are cooked.
Archived in Officially involved, The prosecutors, The judiciary, The wider contexts, Perugia context
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (3)
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Brunello Cucinelli Perhaps The Most Globally Prominent Of Perugia’s Highly Successful Industrialists
Posted by Peter Quennell
The wealthy town of Perugia has not only a widely respected mayor, city administration, and justice system.
Its large main university houses some of the most advanced research and brightest academics in Europe. And the Perugia area is the home to some of Italy’s most successful industrialists.
The wildly successful fashion designer Brunello Cucinelli owns a worldwide chain of fashion stores, including a number in the United States. He has two stores in Manhattan and has just opened a new store in Las Vegas (images of the interior and his designs below).
His main factory is in Solomeo (image below) which is a stone’s throw to the west of Perugia, and just to the north of Capanne where Knox and Sollecito spend their days and nights The factory is in a converted castle (image below) and employs about 500 highly skilled and very well paid garment workers.
Mr Cucinelli has the reputation of being a really kind, decent, humane man. This description of him is from the Radio Netherlands Worldwide website.
Brunello Cucinelli’s business empire is doing very well thank you.
His range of luxury cashmere clothing has made him a wealthy man. But, going against the grain of the image of the heartless industrialist, Mr Cucinelli believes in a new form of capitalism “where profit is used to improve the condition of human life.”
With that goal in mind, he is determined that his 500 workers should count themselves amongst the happiest factory workers in Europe. They work not in a soulless factory building, but in a beautifully restored village nestled in the Umbrian hills in Italy.
The village of Solomeo has a 14th century castle at its heart, and its here that Cucinelli’s factory workers come, unimpeded by time clocks or mean bosses. They eat a 3 course home cooked Italian lunch for a couple of euros, they’re paid an average of 20% than their counterparts in other factories, and a percentage of the business profits go to community arts and culture.
As a child, Cucinelli lived in a harmonious home, but saw his father ground down by his bosses at work, and determined that when he became a boss, he would never lose sight of his employees’ humanity. And he’s kept that promise.
“I think this moment is the economic, moral and civil result of how we’ve behaved in the past 25 years. So I’m quite happy about this major change in humanity. I think we’ve had 25 years of universal economy in which we have all too often only worried about profit. I think that now something new is coming.”
Mr Cucinelli is again in the national news in Italy because he is contributing over one million dollars to restoring the fourth century Etruscan arch in Perugia (image at bottom) very close to what was once Meredith’s home. The arch is right across the street from Meredith’s language university, and she must have passed through it a number of times.
Some of Perugia’s lively discotheques are up through there, and the buses for discotheque goers that the witness Curatolo saw on the night head right up there.
Meredith really admired personal qualities of hard work, caring, humaneness and diligent application. Mr Cucinelli is certainly an epitome of all of those.
Archived in The wider contexts, Perugia context
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (3)
Monday, August 22, 2011
Near End To The Libyan Civil War Is Welcome Good News In Italy
Posted by Peter Quennell
Stocks surged over three percent today on the Milan Stock Exchange as Italy’s former colony once again seems set for political change.
As Reuters explains Italy is one of the largest foreign investors in Libya. If the war for control of Libya is indeed over, this promises cheaper oil in Italy and throughout the world.
Also an end to the refugee influx in to the south of Italy, the financial coping for which has been a sore point with France. At one point thousands of desperate Libyans a day were crossing over, and quite a few died.
Italian aid is expected to play a large role in moving the new Libyan government and civil society forward.
Archived in The wider contexts
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (5)
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Donald Trump Seems To Have Moved On After Fleetingly Fervent On Italy Framing Knox
Posted by Peter Quennell
Twenty months ago Donald Trump was sounding very very very anti-Italy.
His strident beef with Italy (his former wife Ivana Trump who he ditched for a showgirl lives there) seemed the real reason for his brief fling with the pro-Knox bandwagon, rather than any deep knowledge of the case.
Recently he made a contribution of a golf-related freebie to the Knox campaign. Otherwise he seems to have retreated to the sideline.
Normally he is seen as aimiable enough, if something of a lightweight having fun. His very successful father bankrolled him into property development. His properties and casino businesses fell on hard times several times. He lost control of all his casinos in Atlantic City and a very large development on Manhattan’s Upper West Side - even though all still bear his name.
He briefly thought of running for president as a Republican in 2012, but it seems the financial disclosures and fiery competition would have been altogether too much. Hollywood notables, who overall tend to be liberal, revealed for the occasion how much they hate him.
He still continues to snipe at President Obama from the sidelines and the latest is that he may run as a Ross Perot style independent for president in 2012.
To his credit, he has just done one thing that the country really needs.
He has joined billionaire Warren Buffet in saying that billionaires need to pay more taxes. Watch Harvard professor Robert Reich in the video below for the reasoning behind this. Robert Reich and Donald Trump may not start a billionaire’s stampede, but Trump should win some popular respect.
He may win more votes this way than by bashing Italy for murky reasons that most simply dont understand.
Archived in Diversion efforts by
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (10)
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Messing With The Justice Process In Perugia Does Not Seem At Front And Center In Politicians’ Minds
Posted by Peter Quennell
Is it arrivederci Mr Berlusconi?
The Italian prime minister is now reported to be downbeat and disempowered in the face of 80-percent-plus negative ratings, a mere shadow of his former self.
Berlusconi himself appeared a shadow of his former ebullient self on Friday as he announced Italy’s second austerity budget in as many months, blaming the global economic crisis….
For Italian daily La Stampa, the cuts and tax increases, which must now be approved by parliament, are another nail in the coffin of the scandal-weakened prime minister. “A funeral has been celebrated where the man officiating and the man buried were one and the same – Silvio Berlusconi,” it wrote…
Analysts say the latest spending squeeze could prevent the economy from expanding for the next two years. “The budget cuts are likely to have quite negative effects on [the] short-term GDP-dynamic, given the already-fragile situation of private sector’s financial balances. We expect Italian GDP growth to slow to close to zero in 2012 and 2013,” said Giada Giani, of Citigroup.
The Italian electorate goes to the polls in 2013. Chances of Mr Berlusconi’s party regaining popularity are remote in the face of his hugely expensive and decididly unpopular cave to the European Central Bank and his lack of compelling insights for bumping Italian growth.
Mr Berlusconi faces four personal lawsuits in Milan and all the magistrates overseeing the cases so far have been taking a hard line.
Sollecito lawyer Giulia Bongiorno seems very frustrated with Sollecito’s appeal which is doing her no good politically. With the bizarre claims of “superwitnesses” Alessi and Aviello on the stand and thereafter (one of which is that the Sollecito family offered Aviello a bribe, not yet rebutted) and an “independent” DNA report seemingly channeling Greg Hampikian and already partly discredited, she seems far short of landing a knockout blow.
And the junior Berlusconi-party MP Rocco Girlanda, who sits on Giulia Bongiorno’s Justice Committee, seems to have been very quiet about Amanda Knox since the President of the Italian Republic failed to even acknowledge his petition to intervene.
In what might seem a cynical move to gain favor with his party leaders, he is now reported as seeking to whittle away at the Italian justice system, specifically police wiretaps, which he wants to reduce or eliminate “for budgetary reasons”.
“In 2010 the cost of wiretapping by the prosecution amounted to 270 million euros, helping to increase the debt of the Ministry of Justice, where the deficit amounted to 360 million, which is why I asked the Minister of Justice to quantify, in economic terms and sentences, the effects of using this tool….
In a time of crisis like the current one, which requires a careful review of public spending and prudent management of resources allocated to various departments, including that of justice, which is one of the most sensitive from the point of view of the need for investments, almost half of the total debt is caused by increasing appropriations obtained by prosecutors, like Milan and Palermo, for wiretaps.”
Milan and Palermo? Hmmm. Mr Berlusconi’s four trials will take place in Milan, and Ms Bongiorno has been invited to run for mayor of Palermo. But no connection. Of course.
Archived in The wider contexts
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (31)
Friday, August 12, 2011
Austerity Fever In Europe And The US And The Discreet Fuelling Of Public Anger
Posted by Peter Quennell
There have been mass demonstrations and riots in a number of European countries and Italy may soon be seeing some too.
Here is one cynical but amusing Canadian take on austerity fever, the current UK riots, and the UK Establishment’s outraged reaction.
I was shocked when some young acquaintances riding the bulls on Bay Street first explained to me the theory of government that prevailed among their set, based on something they called the Riot Index.
Too many riots were bad for business, they allowed, but so were too few - a sign that government had become soft and inefficient. Prudent government squeezed until the mob rebelled, then increased spending just enough to prevent extensive property damage. Optimal social policy was a matter of dialling in the appropriate frequency of riots…
In light of the impotent moral outrage that has welled up in the wake of this week’s events in England, the cynicism of the Riot Index now seems downright refreshing. It is surely more informative than the theories about bad parenting, “over-entitlement” and psychotic consumerism that many Britons are advancing to explain the disorder.
Actually the cynics and the rioters may have something of a point. Getting it right on the gut causes of slow growth seems to have gone out of the window as austerity fever takes over and the great race to the bottom is on.
The western economies essentially muddled their way over many, many years to the heights they are at right now, interspersed by some spectacular crashes. Is their only stark choice now really to muddle their way down again?
Two things worth reading up about in this context. First, the Washington Consensus which was strongly promoted by the US and World Bank and IMF worldwide and which resulted in disastrous waves of austerity throughout the developing world.
And second the sudden sharp emergence of the Asian tiger economies which gave officials in the US and World Bank and IMF the shocks of their life. Those pesky Asians just did not understand… but they sure ended up eating everyone’s lunch.
Like Apple, now the most valuable company in the world, the Asian model consists of smart spotting of high-value opportunities, and putting in the smart systems and people to realise them.
It involves close co-operation between the population in general and the economic producers and the components of the institutional infrastructure. Research and training tend to be targeted and the governments invest - invest - but are careful not to over-capitalize. .
A while back I was involved with the introduction of rolling planning in the big Federal departments of Washington. These were two of the learning experiences.
First, the Federal Government does not seem to have been given a development and growth role in the Constitution, and many in Washington officialdom were uncertain as to how much if at all the Feds should be involved.
And second, there is no separate Federal capital or investment budget, as there is now in a majority of other governments, so all of the money pouring out and all of the national deficit and debt accumulating are for… what?
For investment or for consumption? Nobody really knows.
Right now, a Supercommittee has been created in Washington to wind back the US national debt, which tripled in the past decade. A parallel Supercommitee on jobs and growth is now being lobbied for by some of the brighter sparks in the Congress.
Perhaps that second comittee should really have come first? Austerity was what the Asians turned their backs on - and look where they are now.
In tribute to Meredith who, according to her father, seems to have been setting her sites on this universe.
Archived in The wider contexts
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (15)
Thursday, August 11, 2011
A More Detailed Analysis Of Knox’s Statement 6 November 2007 Points Even More Strongly Toward Guilt
Posted by Peter Hyatt
This analysis seeks to learn if Amanda Knox was part of the murder of her then roommate. The knowledge comes from Amanda Knox herself, who, if was at the crime scene during the murder, would give us verbal indicators. If she was not, and did not take part in the murder, she would tell us this, as well. Whether or not DNA was handled properly, or whether prosecutors are corrupt or not, her own words will tell us what we need to know.
Analysis Question: Is Amanda Knox guilty, in concert, of causing or participating in the death of her roommate?
“Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks” is a principle followed from antiquity where the words in which we choose are then discerned to be truthful or deceptive. The “heart” is the seat of the intellect and affections (emotions); what we think, and how we feel. Statement Analysis of statements is able to discern truth from deception, including false confessions made under coercion.
Pronouns are of particular value as they are learned in our earliest days of speech, with possessive pronouns often predating speech in young children, as they attempt to say “my” or “mine” with hand motions. Pronouns and articles are exempt from internal subjective dictionaries (as is objective time) and are reflex in our speech with our minds dictating to our tongues what words to say in less than a microsecond.
The Amanda Knox case is one that provokes emotional responses from both those who believe that she is guilty, and those who believe she is innocent. When people lie, they have a reason to lie. Here, she is brought in for a murder investigation.
Transcript of Amanda Knox’s handwritten statement to police on the evening of November 6, the day she was arrested.
The statement is in the blockquotes, with my statement analysis in bold type. Words that are blodened are done so for emphasis.
This is very strange, I know, but really what happened is as confusing to me as it is to everyone else.
The opening line appears deceptive.
Dr. Paul Eckman teaches that testifying to memory failure is almost always deceptive. We don’t know what drugs may have impacted her when this statement was made, but failure to remember is most always deceptive, especially in high stress situations. It should be noted that the word “this” indicates closeness, whereas the word “that” shows distance. On average, we see the word “that” used more frequently with memory failure.
note the inclusion of sensitive words, “very” strange, and “really” what happened. She notes that others are confused as she is. In a criminal investigation, innocent people (those who did not “do it” nor were involved in it) say so. They do so quickly, and without sensitivity indicators. Even in the most emotionally upsetting circumstances, a denial is found early.
It is comprised of: 1. First Person singular “I” 2. Past tense verb 3. Event specific. 4. Without qualifiers or sensitivity indicators. We expect to hear this quickly in a statement.
I have been told there is hard evidence saying that I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened. This, I want to confirm, is something that to me, if asked a few days ago, would be impossible.
Passive language “I have been told” rather than who told her what specifically. But far more telling is the following words within her statement possibly an embedded admission: “I was at the place of the murder of my friend when it happened”. This is not something an innocent person generally says, even in the form of a question, nor in a reflection of others’ words. Someone not at the crime scene would not frame these words, nor place herself there.
Note that she Wants to confirm, which is different than confirming and is a weak assertion.
She wants to confirm something that to her, if asked a few days ago, would be impossible. This means that, to someone else, it would not be impossible; only to “her”, and only on the condition of being asked a few days ago. This is a strong indication that Amanda Knox is lying.
Is the something that she wants to confirm something that would be different to someone else (hence the use of “to me”). This is why extra words are essential in analysis. She is not being asked “a few days ago”, she is being asked in the present. It appears that her perspective on the “something” she wants to confirm is different now than it was a few days ago.
Also note that “would be impossible” is different than “is impossible.” The addition of “would be” changes her claim from something that already happened into a future event; making it weaker.
I know that Raffaele has placed evidence against me, saying that I was not with him on the night of Meredith’s murder, but let me tell you this. In my mind there are things I remember and things that are confused. My account of this story goes as follows, despite the evidence stacked against me:
“I know” is strong and with the first person singular, it is something that she recognizes and asserts. Notice how “I know” is unlike her other statements. It is not “I believe” nor is it qualified with “I know that in my heart” or “I know that in my mind…” or any other additional words. That Raffaele has said that she was not with him on the night of Meredith’s murder is something strong to Knox.
Next notice that it is only “in my mind” that there are things that may be elsewhere; not just in her mind. This is likely deceptive, as it is only in her mind; and not in reality. It is an attempt to avoid the stress of lying.
When people recount events from memory, they generally don’t call it a “story”, a word which conjures images of a made up tale.
On Thursday November 1 I saw Meredith the last time at my house when she left around 3 or 4 in the afternoon. Raffaele was with me at the time. We, Raffaele and I, stayed at my house for a little while longer and around 5 in the evening we left to watch the movie Amelie at his house. After the movie I received a message from Patrik [sic], for whom I work at the pub “Le Chic”. He told me in this message that it wasn’t necessary for me to come into work for the evening because there was no one at my work.
Note that when the word “left” is used, it often indicates missing information. 70% of the missing information is due to time constraints, rushing, traffic, etc, with the other 30% being sensitive information.
Note whenever the number 3 enters a statement as it is known as the “liar’s number” It should not be considered deceptive on its own, only noted in context. When someone wishes to be deceptive and chooses a number, it is often “3” unless the subject is asked how many drinks he or she had, and then the number is “two”. The number 3 enters such as: “I was approached by 3 men” or “At 3 oclock on the third floor…” etc. It is not an indicator of deception on its own, for it is possible to be approached by 3 men on the third floor; only that it should be noted and later factored into the full analysis.
Note that the word “with” shows distance:
“My wife and I went shopping.”
“I went shopping with my wife.”
These are two ways of saying almost the same thing. A follow up question to B will likely show why distance entered into the statement; such as “I didn’t want to go shopping” etc. Here, the distance is between her and Raeffale:
“Raeffale was with me” but then immediately changes it to “we” which shows closeness, except that she has a need to emphasize the closeness by explanation: “We, Raffele and I stayed…” This need to emphasize, along with the needless repetition is an indicator that she is being deceptive.
Note that Patrik “told” me, rather than he “said” indicates firmness; It may be that she and Patrick argued, or that she wants to emphasize authority. But whatever the need, she uses “because” (which explains why something happened) making the statement itself, along with Patrik, sensitive.
Now I remember to have also replied with the message: “See you later. Have a good evening!” and this for me does not mean that I wanted to meet him immediately. In particular because I said: “Good evening!” What happened after I know does not match up with what Raffaele was saying, but this is what I remember.
Note that she “now” remembers which, like the word “but” (which refutes what was previously stated) stands to change her account.
Note that “goodbye”, “see you later” etc, in homicide cases can indicate the time of death.
Note the return of “I know” which is strong. What does she know? She knows that it does not match up with Raffaele’s testimony. weak commitment to the text. If the subject does not own the text, neither can we.
I told Raffaele that I didn’t have to work and that I could remain at home for the evening. After that I believe we relaxed in his room together, perhaps I checked my email. Perhaps I read or studied or perhaps I made love to Raffaele. In fact, I think I did make love with him.
Note the pronouns: “I told Raffaele” is strong language. This may indicate an argument.
Note “after that” is a passage of time, or skipping over. There is missing information at this point of her statement.
Note that “I believe” is weak; but when the weakness is added to: “we relaxed” (which, by itself is strong) is then added “together” (redundancy), we see deception. This needless emphasis is being made to place them together.
Note “perhaps” is a qualifier and she is not committed to the statement.
Note that she “perhaps” made love or perhaps read. This is more than just deceptive: it is an indication of someone else’s presence:
Timing is an issue as she has skipped over time and withheld information (temporal lacunae).
Why would she need to say that she made love to Raffaele? She already introduced him with “we”. This is an indication of not only deception, but of the presence, within sexual activity, of more than just Amanda Knox and Raffaele. We do not know the time frame since she has skipped time.
Note: Deceptive use of qualifiers. Again, see Dr. Eckman for this form of deception (memory). Note “perhaps” (qualifier) she made love “to” Raffaele. Sex is a theme in this case, and should be explored by investigators. First she says she may have made love TO Raffaele, then changes it to WITH him in the same sentence. The change in language would need to be explored.
However, I admit that this period of time is rather strange because I am not quite sure. I smoked marijuana with him and I might even have fallen asleep. These things I am not sure about and I know they are important to the case and to help myself, but in reality, I don’t think I did much. One thing I do remember is that I took a shower with Raffaele and this might explain how we passed the time.
Note anything reported in the negative as sensitive.
Note “I admit” show reluctance and resistance overcome.
Note “with him” instead of “Raffaele and I smoked marijuana”; shows distance
Note that “these” things instead of “those” things.
Note that the entry of water into a statement is often an indicator of sexual assault. Whether it is the washing of clothes, washing of hands, shower, bath, etc,
Here we have the first indicator that her roommate died as part of a sexual homicide.
Note that when she was with Raffaele, she had to mention that she had sex “with him” which is an indication that during sex, at least one other person was present. Now, with the entry of water into the statement is indicative that Amanda Knox was not simply present at the murder of Merideth, but that she was present for a sexual homicide.
Note that to be vague; indicates an attempt at deception. She reports what may have happened, with choices such as reading or sex. This lack of commitment indicates deception on her part.
Deception, in order to be deception, must be willful. Amanda Knox places herself at the scene of a crime, and then gives indicators of a sexual homicide.
In truth, I do not remember exactly what day it was, but I do remember that we had a shower and we washed ourselves for a long time. He cleaned my ears, he dried and combed my hair.
The qualifiers resemble Casey Anthony. “In truth” means she speaks at times outside of truth.
Note that ” I do not remember” is an affirmation of what she does not know. This is a signal of deception. Note that she does remember, but only not “exactly”
Note “we” took a shower. This is the 2nd indicator in a short statement where water is introduced. The element of water is often found in statements where a sexual assault or homicide has taken place.
It is significant that she tells us that Raffaele “cleaned” her. While speaking, even when attempting to be deceptive, what is in the heart slips out and she may have been thinking of washing off blood when she gave this statement. Those that wish to excuse her due to police misconduct, or mishandling of evidence must do so by ignoring not only the fact that she lied, but that she employed the language of a sexual homicide in doing so.
“I dropped off (the hitchhiker), stopped to get gas and wash up. After that, I drove down I-95 until…”
This was a statement where a hitchhiker was murdered. The timeframe where he washed up showed the time of death.
The shower details are also interesting as it is used to pass time and sexuality. Sex is a theme in her statement. Think how you might describe your night; even if you had a romantic shower, would you include it? If you felt that you needed to, would you give details about ears? Sex is in her mind while giving this statement and should alert investigators to any sexual motive in the crime. Making love “to” not “with” her boyfriend may show that Amanda Knox strongly wanted to please him. This may speak to motive and just how far she went.
One of the things I am sure that definitely happened the night on which Meredith was murdered was that Raffaele and I ate fairly late, I think around 11 in the evening, although I can’t be sure because I didn’t look at the clock.
The lack of commitment to the events is noted but we also see:
That which is in the negative: when someone tells us what they did not do, did not say, did not think, particularly when offered in an open sentence, it is a strong indicator of what they did do, did think, and did say. Here, she remembers that she did not look at the clock.
This tells us: She looked at the clock as time was significant.
Note that this is something that “definitely” happened, yet she then says “I think” showing the obvious contradiction. Deception noted.
It is like the statement where the person says “and I saw no one run across my lawn” indicating that she saw someone run across her lawn. Always flag anything offered in the negative.
Also note that “because” is sensitive as it explains why something took place. In a statement, we normally get what happened and not why something happened, and just as being told what didn’t happen, the “why, because, therefore, so, since, etc” is highly sensitive to the subject.
After dinner I noticed there was blood on Raffaele’s hand, but I was under the impression that it was blood from the fish. After we ate Raffaele washed the dishes but the pipes under his sink broke and water flooded the floor. But because he didn’t have a mop I said we could clean it up tomorrow because we (Meredith, Laura, Filomena and I) have a mop at home. I remember it was quite late because we were both very tired (though I can’t say the time).
Note “I noticed” is passive. Passive language seeks to conceal identity or responsibility. Note that the word “but” is used to refute what was just said. What does she refute? Noticing blood? It is the origin of the blood that she seeks to conceal, not the noticing.
Note that “after dinner” chronologically is when she “noticed” blood, but then in her statement she says “after we ate” is repeated, going back to the event. Truthful accounts are in chronological order and can be repeated backwards and forwards. Any time someone is out of chronological order, it should be flagged for deception. Always note when someone says that they “can’t” say something; it can indicate that if they did tell the information, it would harm them. Here, she “can’t” tell the time; yet has other details down carefully.
Note also any inclusion of thought/emotion within an event. When someone is giving a verbal or written statement, it has been shown through careful study that in the recall process, emotions and thoughts are added later; not in the actual event itself.
A statement has 3 general portions:
- an introduction
- the event
- post event action
It is in the 3rd section that emotions and thoughts are most likely to be included in an honest statement.
note also the “balance” of a statement is where the introduction of an honest statement is about 25% of the statement; the event is 50%, and the post event (like calling 911, etc) is 25%. Any deviation is noted but strong deviation is a solid test for deception. This is covered in other analysis)
Note time: she “can’t” tell us indicates that she is restricted by consequence, since we know that she looked at the clock.
The next thing I remember
Temporal lacunae. This indicates withheld information during a critical time period; high sensitivity. The police interview would strongly emphasize here
was waking up
Note verb tense
the morning of Friday November 2nd around 10am and I took a plastic bag to take back my dirty cloths to go back to my house. It was then that I arrived home alone that I found the door to my house was wide open and this all began. In regards to this “confession” that I made last night, I want to make clear that I’m very doubtful of the verity of my statements because they were made under the pressures of stress, shock and extreme exhaustion.
Note “very doubtful” qualifier; rather than making a full denial of her confession. This is because it is almost impossible to lie upon a lie. She can only doubt the lies she told earlier. Note “this” confession, rather than the expected “that” confession, had it been false.
Note the order: stress, shock, and extreme exhaustion. Stress is the first thing noted.
Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn’t remember a fact correctly.
This is an example of an extra word, ie, one in which the sentence works without, giving away information. She could have said “I didn’t remember a fact” but instead says “I didn’t remember a fact correctly” which would show deliberate deception. She cannot tell us what she didn’ remember, only what she remembers, so this would place it in the negative, however, it wasn’t remembered “correctly”, indicating that she did remember it, just not “correctly”; and is another indication of deception.
Here, Knox comes close to a confession, even in her denial. Note what she calls the information: “fact”
I understand that the police are under a lot of stress, so I understand the treatment I received.
However, it was under this pressure and after many hours of confusion that my mind came up with these answers. In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I’ve said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my head has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.
Note that innocent people never accept nor excuse false work.
Even within fabrication, each word spoken (or written) is vital and should be examined within the forensics of the investigation.
We have already seen the lack of ownership and now she only reports seeing things in her mind. Yet, in spite of lying, there may be many important elements within her account.
But the truth is,
This introduction tells us that she has lied and now wants to be believed
I am unsure about the truth and here’s why:
Note that “truth” repeated, shows sensitivity and the analyst should be on alert that “truth” is a sensitive topic to the subject.
1. The police have told me that they have hard evidence that places me at the house, my house, at the time of Meredith’s murder. I don’t know what proof they are talking about, but if this is true, it means I am very confused and my dreams must be real.
2. My boyfriend has claimed that I have said things that I know are not true.
Knox is acutely aware of the evidence, the crime scene, and that she has been blamed. Here, she also quotes her boyfriend, though we note the embedded still: “I have said things that I know are not true” appears supported by the analysis.
I KNOW I told him I didn’t have to work that night. I remember that moment very clearly. I also NEVER asked him to lie for me. This is absolutely a lie. What I don’t understand is why Raffaele, who has always been so caring and gentle with me, would lie about this. What does he have to hide? I don’t think he killed Meredith, but I do think he is scared, like me. He walked into a situation that he has never had to be in, and perhaps he is trying to find a way out by disassociating himself with me.
Note that she does not say “Raffaele did not kill Meredith” but only that she does not “think” he did; leaving room for someone else to “think” otherwise.
Note that while attempting to describe him as “caring and gentle” she uses the word “with” which shows distance, but then “this”, showing closeness, to the things he was saying. Amanda Knox brings herself close to the detail; not further away as expected with innocent people.
Note that “but” refutes what came before it. What came before it? “I don’t think Raffaele killed Meredith”
She recognizes that he had a part in the killing.
Several indicators here, including qualifiers, adverbs,and the inclusion of “never” which here is offered (negation) which suggests that she did ask someone to lie for her. Note that she says “he walked into a situation” with “walk” a word indicating tension.
Note that she says Raffaele is in need of a “way out” of the situation.
Repeated use of similar statements is from habitual liar (childhood) who wants to be believed
I understand because this is a very scary situation. I also know that the police don’t believe things of me that I know I can explain, such as:
1. I know the police are confused as to why it took me so long to call someone after I found the door to my house open and blood in the bathroom.
This tells us what Knox has been attempting to do: confuse the police. The police are not “confused”; they recognize the incongruity of Knox’ statements. This is the “muddy the waters” technique employed by the guilty (Jose Baez comes to mind)
The truth is,
Noted that she has a need to announce truth, which brings the rest of her statement into question. This is something deceptive people do when they want to be believed.
I wasn’t sure what to think, but I definitely didn’t think the worst, that someone was murdered.
Note twice she goes to the negative: not sure what to think and what she did not think, yet, she adds in the weakened “definitely” to what she didn’t think.
Note that the word, “someone” is gender free. This is an attempt to, perhaps, even lie to herself about the murder. She knows the gender of the victim.
I thought a lot of things, mainly that perhaps someone got hurt and left quickly to take care of it. I also thought that maybe one of my roommates was having menstral [sic] problems and hadn’t cleaned up. Perhaps I was in shock, but at the time I didn’t know what to think and that’s the truth. That is why I talked to Raffaele about it in the morning, because I was worried and wanted advice.
Note that frequently in murders, guilty perpetrators will minimize what happened. Meredith did not get “hurt”, she was murdered.
Note “left quickly to take care of it” can be viewed with the “taking care” of the cleaning of the person and the apartment.
Note the use of the word “perhaps” as not only used when a subject is deceptive and does not want to be pinned down in a statement, but here it is used repeatedly, showing sensitivity.
Note that “because” is noted for sensitivity as it is outside the boundary of the general statement of “what happened” and shows a need to explain.
Liars have a difficult and stressful task of recalling what stories they have told and by adding “perhaps” and “maybe”, they are able to later defend their inconsistency.
First, she lists possible excuses for not calling police, excuses that didnt cause her to be alarmed. Then she goes on to say that “perhaps” she was in “shock”, which means that she would have had knowledge of a traumatic event. In the next sentence, the “shock” turned to “worry” which caused her to seek advice.
2. I also know that the fact that I can’t fully recall the events that I claim took place at Raffaele’s home during the time that Meredith was murdered is incriminating.
This is similar to an admission.
And I stand by my statements that I made last night about events that could have taken place in my home with Patrik, but I want to make very clear that these events seem more unreal to me that what I said before, that I stayed at Raffaele’s house.
Note again that “but” refutes what came first. She wants to “stand” behind the statements but…this is where it is difficult to lie about a lie.
3. I’m very confused at this time.
Note that she is “very” confused, but only “at this time”
My head is full of contrasting ideas and I know I can be frustrating to work with for this reason. But I also want to tell the truth as best I can. Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith’s death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.
I’m trying, I really am, because I’m scared for myself. I know I didn’t kill Meredith. That’s all I know for sure. In these flashbacks that I’m having, I see Patrik as the murderer, but the way the truth feels in my mind, there is no way for me to have known because I don’t remember FOR SURE if I was at my house that night. The questions that need answering, at least for how I’m thinking are:
1. Why did Raffaele lie? (or for you) Did Raffaele lie?
2. Why did I think of Patrik?
3. Is the evidence proving my pressance [sic] at the time and place of the crime reliable? If so, what does this say about my memory? Is it reliable?
4. Is there any other evidence condemning Patrik or any other person?
3. Who is the REAL murder [sic]? This is particularly important because I don’t feel I can be used as condemning testimone [sic] in this instance.
I have a clearer mind that I’ve had before, but I’m still missing parts, which I know is bad for me. But this is the truth and this is what I’m thinking at this time. Please don’t yell at me because it only makes me more confused, which doesn’t help anyone. I understand how serious this situation is, and as such, I want to give you this information as soon and as clearly as possible.
If there are still parts that don’t make sense, please ask me. I’m doing the best I can, just like you are. Please believe me at least in that, although I understand if you don’t. All I know is that I didn’t kill Meredith, and so I have nothing but lies to be afraid of.
Amanda Knox owns her involvement in Meredith’s death with a word: MY. Someone who was not involved in Meredith’s death would not state “my involvement”, because they would not own it.
The same theme continues. I have highlighted the key words as the explanation is the same. Knox can’t tell the truth, as it would cause her consequences; therefore, she seeks to confuse and leave open all sorts of possible explanations. She does not report what happens, but attempts to persuade. This is likely how she got herself out of trouble growing up, and is used to getting her way. The wording suggests her form of lying is lifelong, and not specific to this event.
Amanda Knox would not pass a polygraph. She fails the polygraphy of Statement Analysis and places herself at the scene of the murder and is deceptive throughout her account. She, by her own words, tells us that this is a sexual homicide, not just a homicide, and that she took part in it; present for the activity. She places herself by the crime scene and even though she attempts to deceive, her words give her away. She has nothing to be afraid of but lies, which would appear that she feared her lies were not bought by police.
It is likely that she, Amanda Knox, did not inflict the final death blow, and that she is not sure who’s blow or cut was the final one that caused Meredith’s death. This is why she said she did not “think” that Raffaele killed her, “but”. This was likely a sexual assault that several took place in where they would each blame the other.
She attempts to build an alibi for herself, indicating the need for alibi, and she attempts to explain away the washing away of evidence on her part.
Amanda Knox was part of a sexual homicide. This comes from her own words, and is not changed if prosecutors are corrupt or honorable, nor if evidence was dropped or mishandled. Amanda Knox, herself, has told us that she was part of a sexual homicide, was present, and that she knows hard evidence thus proves it.
If her initial confession is thrown out, this statement itself shows her involvement. It is difficult to imagine anyone trained in interviewing and interrogation claiming that this statement is truthful. Mishandling evidence or dropping something, or not wearing gloves may cause difficulties, but it does not mean that Amanda Knox didn’t take part in the murder. Her own words show that she did.
Archived in Crime hypotheses, Statement analysis
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (45)
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
It Looks Like There Could Be A Major Realignment of Italian Politics In The Near Future
Posted by Peter Quennell
There are at least five good reasons why Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is probably not lying awake at night worrying about how to spring Sollecito and Knox.
First, Perugia’s prosecutors and courts have a very fine reputation for being straight and unbending and doing the right thing.
When the investigations into major misappropriation of funds from the recent winter Olympics and catastrophic earthquake by people in Rome had to be moved out of Rome for that very reason, it was to the Perugia prosecutors and courts that the investigations were moved.
Second, Mr Berlusconi is already among the least popular politicians in Italy, while the popularity of the President of the Italian Republic who is known to dislike and oppose Mr Berlusconi is quite the reverse. His chief rival (image above) is also a lot more liked.
Third, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has more important things on her own mind than using political and diplomatic capital to persuade Mr Berlusconi to intervene to try to reverse a verdict that her own Rome embassy and State Department found quite fair.
Fourth, one of Italy’s firm and unyielding judges slammed Mr Berlusconi a couple of weeks ago and told him that his trial for underage sex had to go ahead soon in a courtroom in Milan. That is only one of four trials that he now faces.
And fifthly as a prime minister he might not last very long for bad policy moves as this terrific article in the UK Guardian explains
The parliamentary opposition is highly up in arms over what they see as his excessive caving to the demands of the European Central Bank because of his and his party’s weakend condition. .Many of Italy’s economic fundamentals are in fact better than those of some other European countries and those of the United States. Investment News just posted this.
Unlike Greece and other peripheral markets, Italy is actually running at a primary budget surplus, its net foreign debt to gross domestic product is relatively low, its current account deficit is modest by European standards and, unlike in Spain, there is little evidence of a housing or credit bubble.
Perhaps Knox’s and Sollecito’s own lawyers have it right. They know their clients will be freed by an open and transparent court process in Perugia - or not at all.
Archived in The wider contexts
Permalink for this post • Tell-a-Friend • Case Wiki • PMF Org Forum • PMF Net Forum • Comments here (31)