• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 30

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bill Williams said:
Except that the Massei court does not uphold that part of it. The Massei court, even in eventually convicting, was presented with prosecution theories which changed frequently - so much so that the Massei motivations report explaining the guilty verdict had to invent a completely different motive.

The motive for the killing was Guede's and Guede's alone, acc. to Massei. Massei specifically wrote that he could see both no evidence and no motive for AK and/or RS to initiate an attack on the victim.

But Massei theorized that eventually, both AK and RS joined in on the attack. In theorizing about that, did Massei return to anything that the prosecution had presented at trial? Satanic rite? Sex-game gone wrong? No.

Massei said it had been a "choice for evil", a choice made while AK had been away from her otherwise normal home, and far from the normal moral strictures she had otherwise been used to. Massei theorized that it was a one-off evil choice made by an otherwise non-evil person - or at the very least with nothing in her background to explain the choice.


Me to. It has occurred to me that if I had been in on it since the beginning, my own confirmation biases could have developed differently.
Click to expand...

TruthCalls said:
While that might be technically correct, I would imagine >95% of the people who knew of the case and then heard of the conviction ONLY paid attention to the conviction, and that, in turn, confirmed that everything they had heard about Amanda must be true.

I agree... we all have confirmation bias. It could not have been easy to read/listen to the media those first couple of years and NOT conclude anything other than the worst about Amanda. To change your opinion after that would require major commitment to accepting facts and dismissing rumor and innuendo.
Click to expand...

I question whether we truly all have confirmation bias, if "confirmation bias" is defined as a dysfunctional persistence in supporting an original judgment or hypothesis by, for example, unfairly (unconsciously or, as sometimes used, consciously) dismissing contrary evidence.*

I believe many persons are aware that one must consider both any contrary as well as supportive evidence, including the validity of the evidence, in evaluating a hypothesis. On the other hand, there are certainly others who ignore valid contradictory evidence in order to support an initial or favored hypothesis.

It's clear that in the Knox - Sollecito case, the police and prosecutors exhibited confirmation bias, if one accepts that this term may be used for conscious decisions to ignore contrary evidence and to accept clearly invalid supporting evidence. (Instead, some may call this method of evaluation of evidence "unfairness" or "cheating", thereby avoiding a complex psychological concept that itself must be empirically demonstrated as "real".)

* In the 1960 experiments apparently first demonstrating confirmation bias, at least 6, but possibly 16, of the 29 subjects did not show confirmation bias, according to this article:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ont/201905/the-curious-case-confirmation-bias
 
Last edited:
Numbers said:
I question whether we truly all have confirmation bias, if "confirmation bias" is defined as a dysfunctional persistence in supporting an original judgment or hypothesis by, for example, unfairly (unconsciously or, as sometimes used, consciously) dismissing contrary evidence.*

I believe many persons are aware that one must consider both any contrary as well as supportive evidence, including the validity of the evidence, in evaluating a hypothesis. On the other hand, there are certainly others who ignore valid contradictory evidence in order to support an initial or favored hypothesis.

It's clear that in the Knox - Sollecito case, the police and prosecutors exhibited confirmation bias, if one accepts that this term may be used for conscious decisions to ignore contrary evidence and to accept clearly invalid supporting evidence. (Instead, some may call this method of evaluation of evidence "unfairness" or "cheating", thereby avoiding a complex psychological concept that itself must be empirically demonstrated as "real".)

* In the 1960 experiments apparently first demonstrating confirmation bias, at least 6, but possibly 16, of the 29 subjects did not show confirmation bias, according to this article:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...ont/201905/the-curious-case-confirmation-bias
Click to expand...

Also, an Italian prosecutor has a legal obligation of finding evidence in favor of a suspected person, according to CPP Article 358:

The Public Prosecutor shall carry out any activity necessary for the purposes referred to in CPP Article 326 and shall also carry out ascertainments on the facts and circumstances in favor of the suspected person.

CPP Article 326 states:

The Public Prosecutor and the criminal police, within their respective responsibilities, shall conduct the investigations necessary for decisions on criminal prosecution.
 
There is a report on TJMK that Meredith's mom, Arline Kercher, has died and been laid to rest beside her daughter in Croydon.

May they rest in peace.
 
Bill Williams said:
Maybe the report was wrong and withdrawn. If so I apologize for forwarding it.
Click to expand...

It must have been. Just another example of their accuracy in reporting. :D

ETA: The comment is still there but I've looked online and there is nothing. If she supposedly died on June 11th, there certainly would have been something mentioned in the Brit tabloids.
 
Last edited:
I was reading through the comments under the body language video that Vixen posted and I was struck by a couple of things: 1) the amount of misinformation about the case posted by those who think Knox is guilty (like Kercher was wrapped in a blanket and stuffed in the closet, Knox only knew Kercher for two weeks, etc) and 2) the complete lack of any forensic evidence connecting Knox to the murder was never once mentioned. Not once. It was all about her body language, how she acted, etc. Actual, hard evidence wasn't worth a mention. God save anyone from ever having idiots like these on a jury.
 
whoanellie said:
As promised, the behavioral panel has posted a 2nd video on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DOkwE53hEQ

One of them keeps calling Raphael "Raphael the wuss" because he didn't break down the door. Christ on a cracker.
Click to expand...

That alone reveals the bias held and lack of professionalism. This panel of "experts" has as much relevance as a panel of astrologers. What next? Presenting the Man from Atlan, Naseer Ahmad, as an 'expert' with his astrological chart on Knox and Sollecito?
 
Ahhhh the Man from Atlan! The memory of that monumental manifestation of grandiose delusion and fraud had passed from my consciousness!!

(Wonder if he's "treated" any desperate and vulnerable people recently? Or perhaps whether he's been criminally prosecuted recently?)
 
Yes, he's something else. Talk about delusional.

Something else that was brought up in the video's comment section by more than one person (including a person who claimed to be an MD and another who claimed to be someone who worked with people with autism) is whether or not Knox's facial expressions, behavior etc could be explained by autism. As someone who has a close family member with mild autism, I have to say that I've also wondered if Amanda could be on the autism spectrum. This family member is 3-4 years younger than Amanda, female, and very bright. I see many similarities between her and Amanda, including not reacting to situations in the same way that you'd expect. She also does not express emotions openly or easily and has had to learn how react in a socially 'correct' manner. The older she gets, the better at this she's become but among strangers she can still be somewhat socially awkward. Small talk will never be easy for her. IF Amanda is mildly autistic, this would explain Amanda's sometimes rather odd reactions to things.
 
Stacyhs said:
Something else that was brought up in the video's comment section by more than one person (including a person who claimed to be an MD and another who claimed to be someone who worked with people with autism) is whether or not Knox's facial expressions, behavior etc could be explained by autism. As someone who has a close family member with mild autism, I have to say that I've also wondered if Amanda could be on the autism spectrum. This family member is 3-4 years younger than Amanda, female, and very bright. I see many similarities between her and Amanda, including not reacting to situations in the same way that you'd expect. She also does not express emotions openly or easily and has had to learn how react in a socially 'correct' manner. The older she gets, the better at this she's become but among strangers she can still be somewhat socially awkward. Small talk will never be easy for her. IF Amanda is mildly autistic, this would explain Amanda's sometimes rather odd reactions to things.
Click to expand...

As a reluctant public person, she'd been called quirky. Truly, though, (and this is where my biases hang out) she was normal for Seattle. To be a millennial from Seattle IS to be quirky to the rest of the world.
 
Bill Williams said:
As a reluctant public person, she'd been called quirky. Truly, though, (and this is where my biases hang out) she was normal for Seattle. To be a millennial from Seattle IS to be quirky to the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I'm not so sure about that. Are you familiar with anyone who is mildly autistic?
 
I hate to say it but I agree with Bill here. I've never seen any evidence to suggest Amanda is particularly weird, much less "on the spectrum".
 
Well, I'm not saying she is but I'd be dishonest if I said I've never wondered if she wasn't. And apparently I'm not the only one.

I wouldn't use the word "weird" but rather "different", Whoanellie.
 
Last edited:
Arline Kercher

The story about Arline Kercher is back on TJMK. So it seems that Bill is right. It's a shame that Quennell couldn't even report her death without using it as a catalyst to keep the pro-guilt pot boiling.

Hoots
 
There is absolutely nothing about Arline Kercher's alleged death to be found online nor does TJMK provide any evidence of her death except for Raper's say so. John Kercher's death was widely reported in the media. I find this highly suspicious. Until evidence of Arline's death can be provided, I wouldn't put much stock in Raper's claim.
 
Last edited:
TomG said:
The story about Arline Kercher is back on TJMK. So it seems that Bill is right. It's a shame that Quennell couldn't even report her death without using it as a catalyst to keep the pro-guilt pot boiling.

Hoots
Click to expand...

From TJMK:
" Father John was killed in a still-unsolved hit-and-run at night in Croydon four months before."

Didn't the authorities ultimately rule that John Kercher died from an accidental fall?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom