ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 28th February 2020, 08:22 AM   #1521
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Some information on a US legal point that has previously come up in discussions here: what does "actual" mean, specifically in the term "actual innocence". For example, what is the difference, in US legal terminology, between "actual innocence" and "presumed innocence".

There is in fact a recent US Supreme Court opinion that sheds light on this issue, based on the use in a US federal law of the term "actual knowledge". Here's an excerpt from an article discussing the opinion*:

Quote:
The term knowledge refers to “familiarity” or “awareness” or “understanding.” Meanwhile, actual indicates this comprehension is “real” or “in existence” as opposed to “constructive” or “possible,” or “presumed.”

He {US Supreme Court Justice Alito in a unanimous opinion} pointed out that in everyday speech actual knowledge might seem like a redundant phrase—either you know something or you don’t. But in the law the “actual” qualifier distinguishes this understanding from an awareness that’s imputed or assumed based on the context.
So apparently the US legal term "actual innocence" means an innocence that is supported by objectively known facts (evidence) rather than one that is only presumed.

Thus, using US legal terminology, Knox and Sollecito were effectively found "actually innocent" of the murder/rape charges by the final judgment of the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation because there was absolutely no credible reliable evidence of them found in the murder room or on the body of the victim, nor was there any other credible reliable evidence of them having any involvement in committing the charged crimes against Kercher. The type of crime and the limitations of the size of the room would essentially require that such evidence be extant. Indeed, such evidence was left by another person, Guede, who was convicted of the murder/rape.

Source: https://qz.com/1809617/intel-loses-a...otus-decision/

* The context of the opinion was a case related to a law requiring "actual knowledge" of certain contractual provisions. In rough summary, it appears that the US Supreme Court found that a company merely requiring an acknowledgement that one has read a document online does not satisfy a legal requirement that the presumed reader has gained "actual knowledge" of the contents of the document.

Last edited by Numbers; 28th February 2020 at 08:29 AM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 08:57 AM   #1522
AnimalFriendly
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 191
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
One of the prominent ideas the PGP promoted was that Amanda was some kind of she-devil and manipulated Raffaele and Rudy to fulfill some crazy violent sex fantasy. Of course there is no evidence of that.
And that idea of manipulation would have been ridiculous enough even if Raffaele and Rudy had actually known each other, even casually. But there's no credible evidence that they had ever so much as been introduced. It would have possibly benefited Guede to at least have claimed "yeah he & I knew each other... we hung out a few times..." The PGP would have of course taken his word there as gospel. But he has never claimed this. Some people might have found that at least a little more believable than "I used the toilet in the middle of our date and, shucks, somebody came in at that moment and killed her!"
AnimalFriendly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 09:41 AM   #1523
TomG
Critical Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 263
forensic records

Sorry if I appear a bit dim on this one but can someone tell me what the significance of Stefanoni's "RTIGF" and "State of Work in Progress" reports are? I get the impression that the RTIGF report was a running record of the items forensically tested with the State of Work in Progress being a documentation of the findings, though I'm not sure.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 10:44 AM   #1524
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
Sorry if I appear a bit dim on this one but can someone tell me what the significance of Stefanoni's "RTIGF" and "State of Work in Progress" reports are? I get the impression that the RTIGF report was a running record of the items forensically tested with the State of Work in Progress being a documentation of the findings, though I'm not sure.

Hoots
The RTIGF is (in English) "Technical Report on the Forensic Genetic Tests".

Source: https://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/...ing-item-165b/

The abbreviation SAL is (in English) "Work Status Report" (or, literally, "Work Progress Status").

Here's an example of the use of these abbreviations:

Quote:
Exhibit 165B is described as follows on p. 13 of the RTIGF: “Clasp of bra with small portion of white-colored fabric attached, stained with presumed blood, found in the room of the victim (formerly Exhibit Y)”.

The Work Status Report (SAL) [Stato Avanzamento Lavori] card [scheda] reveals that Exhibit 165B (No. 2 Traces) was given an identifying code (Sample ID Code) as recorded below:

Sample ID Code = 48896

Furthermore, the following information is reported (cf. SAL):

Type of Trace: PRESUMED SALIVA
Trace Description: Presumed flaking cells – B (hooks)
Extract quantity: 50
Extract location: 271/F1
Analyses performed
Extraction date: 12-29-07

The SAL shows that the generic test for blood using tetramethylbenzine (TMB) was not performed on Exhibit 165B, and nor was any laboratory test performed to show the presence of biological material other than blood.
Source: https://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/...tory-analysis/

Last edited by Numbers; 28th February 2020 at 12:31 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 02:00 PM   #1525
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 44,887
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Stacyhs' post is correct. In addition, Italy has provided the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which is the organ of the CoE that supervises the execution of judgments of the ECHR, a preliminary communication (dated 10 January 2020) that acknowledges the ECHR judgment by summarizing it and goes on to cite some preliminary general measures, such as translating the ECHR judgment to Italian, distributing the translation to the Italian courts, and posting the translation on the Ministry of Justice and CSC websites.

Thank you. So is Amanda still technically guilty of a felony callunia? Against the police? Or against Patrick? I'm losing track of this a bit but I know the PGP got a lot of comfort from being able to refer to her as a "convicted felon".

What proceedings are still outstanding? And does Raffaele still have an outstanding appeal against the refusal to grant him compensation?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 02:46 PM   #1526
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,419
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Thank you. So is Amanda still technically guilty of a felony callunia? Against the police? Or against Patrick? I'm losing track of this a bit but I know the PGP got a lot of comfort from being able to refer to her as a "convicted felon".

What proceedings are still outstanding? And does Raffaele still have an outstanding appeal against the refusal to grant him compensation?
Amanda was acquitted of defamation against the police and Mignini withdrew his complaint. I do not believe there is any outstanding litigation against Amanda at this point.

She is technically still guilty of calunnia against Lumumba. Although the ECHR has effectively nullified it, AFAIK it still stands until Italy revises the conviction.

Raffaele's appeal for denial of compensation was refused. I do not think he has any other options at this point. Amanda has never tried to get compensation. I would hope right now she would be focused on getting Italy to quash her calunnia conviction. If/when that happens she might then try to get some compensation, though when you consider the heavily biased verdicts against Raffaele, I would imagine the same approach should Amanda try.

And BTW, her calunnia conviction is NOT a felony. That irritates the PGP, because that was the only thing they thought they could take away from this case, but as with everything else, they are wrong on this point.

....and now Numbers will step in and correct me, which is fine.
TruthCalls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 03:40 PM   #1527
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Amanda was acquitted of defamation against the police and Mignini withdrew his complaint. I do not believe there is any outstanding litigation against Amanda at this point.

She is technically still guilty of calunnia against Lumumba. Although the ECHR has effectively nullified it, AFAIK it still stands until Italy revises the conviction.

Raffaele's appeal for denial of compensation was refused. I do not think he has any other options at this point. Amanda has never tried to get compensation. I would hope right now she would be focused on getting Italy to quash her calunnia conviction. If/when that happens she might then try to get some compensation, though when you consider the heavily biased verdicts against Raffaele, I would imagine the same approach should Amanda try.

And BTW, her calunnia conviction is NOT a felony. That irritates the PGP, because that was the only thing they thought they could take away from this case, but as with everything else, they are wrong on this point.

....and now Numbers will step in and correct me, which is fine.
Well, since you invoke me by name, how can I resist?

Not only is calunnia not a felony, I don't believe Italy has any crimes that it legally defines as "felonies".

"Felony" is a term that originated in English common law. Under US federal law and that of some of the states, crimes punishable by a prison sentence of not less than one year or by the death penalty are considered "felonies".*

Since Amanda Knox was convicted in Italy, it seems absurd to apply the US terminology to her case. On the other hand, her retroactive prison sentence for calunnia was indeed more than 1 year. On yet another hand, her conviction for calunnia was a violation of international law, under some of the most basic principles of the European Convention of Human Rights, as judged by the European Court of Human Rights, so perhaps it is the State of Italy that is the convicted felon.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony

Last edited by Numbers; 28th February 2020 at 03:42 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 05:32 PM   #1528
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
In the US, Amanda is NOT a 'convicted felon' even for the calunnia conviction as here defamation is not considered a crime but a civil matter. The PGP and TJMK have never been able to produce Amanda's alleged felony criminal record for the "crime" of calunnia/defamation because it simply does not exist. A criminal record is public and you can bet that if Amanda had one, the PGP/TJMK would have fallen all over themselves getting it.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 06:52 PM   #1529
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,575
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
In the US, Amanda is NOT a 'convicted felon' even for the calunnia conviction as here defamation is not considered a crime but a civil matter. The PGP and TJMK have never been able to produce Amanda's alleged felony criminal record for the "crime" of calunnia/defamation because it simply does not exist. A criminal record is public and you can bet that if Amanda had one, the PGP/TJMK would have fallen all over themselves getting it.
Instead, the guilter-nutters just fell all over themselves.

When Knox came to Canada to speak at the University of Windsor law school, they predicted that she would be arrested by Interpol at the Canadian border. When CBSA let her in, the guilter-nutters accused the Canadian government of being in on the conspiracy.

When Knox went to Italy to speak at an innocence conference, the guilter-nutters predicted she'd be arrested at the Italian airport. When she was let in, they accused elements of the Italian judiciary and police of being in on the conspiracy.

The one thing for sure, their obsession with all things Amanda Knox has them falling all over themselves.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 07:13 PM   #1530
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Instead, the guilter-nutters just fell all over themselves.

When Knox came to Canada to speak at the University of Windsor law school, they predicted that she would be arrested by Interpol at the Canadian border. When CBSA let her in, the guilter-nutters accused the Canadian government of being in on the conspiracy.

When Knox went to Italy to speak at an innocence conference, the guilter-nutters predicted she'd be arrested at the Italian airport. When she was let in, they accused elements of the Italian judiciary and police of being in on the conspiracy.

The one thing for sure, their obsession with all things Amanda Knox has them falling all over themselves
.


Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2020, 10:49 PM   #1531
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Instead, the guilter-nutters just fell all over themselves.

When Knox came to Canada to speak at the University of Windsor law school, they predicted that she would be arrested by Interpol at the Canadian border. When CBSA let her in, the guilter-nutters accused the Canadian government of being in on the conspiracy.

When Knox went to Italy to speak at an innocence conference, the guilter-nutters predicted she'd be arrested at the Italian airport. When she was let in, they accused elements of the Italian judiciary and police of being in on the conspiracy.

The one thing for sure, their obsession with all things Amanda Knox has them falling all over themselves.
It amazes me that they care after all this time. I don't think people like Peter or Vixen or any of the hard core guilters will ever have an epiphany. It really is a religion for them. Facts be damned, they're going to believe.

I find this sad. But then again, I feel it is sad that any does this for whatever reason.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2020, 05:04 AM   #1532
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Thank you. So is Amanda still technically guilty of a felony callunia? Against the police? Or against Patrick? I'm losing track of this a bit but I know the PGP got a lot of comfort from being able to refer to her as a "convicted felon".

What proceedings are still outstanding? And does Raffaele still have an outstanding appeal against the refusal to grant him compensation?
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Amanda was acquitted of defamation against the police and Mignini withdrew his complaint. I do not believe there is any outstanding litigation against Amanda at this point.

She is technically still guilty of calunnia against Lumumba. Although the ECHR has effectively nullified it, AFAIK it still stands until Italy revises the conviction.

Raffaele's appeal for denial of compensation was refused. I do not think he has any other options at this point. Amanda has never tried to get compensation. I would hope right now she would be focused on getting Italy to quash her calunnia conviction. If/when that happens she might then try to get some compensation, though when you consider the heavily biased verdicts against Raffaele, I would imagine the same approach should Amanda try.

And BTW, her calunnia conviction is NOT a felony. That irritates the PGP, because that was the only thing they thought they could take away from this case, but as with everything else, they are wrong on this point.

....and now Numbers will step in and correct me, which is fine.
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Well, since you invoke me by name, how can I resist?

Not only is calunnia not a felony, I don't believe Italy has any crimes that it legally defines as "felonies".

"Felony" is a term that originated in English common law. Under US federal law and that of some of the states, crimes punishable by a prison sentence of not less than one year or by the death penalty are considered "felonies".*

Since Amanda Knox was convicted in Italy, it seems absurd to apply the US terminology to her case. On the other hand, her retroactive prison sentence for calunnia was indeed more than 1 year. On yet another hand, her conviction for calunnia was a violation of international law, under some of the most basic principles of the European Convention of Human Rights, as judged by the European Court of Human Rights, so perhaps it is the State of Italy that is the convicted felon.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
In the US, Amanda is NOT a 'convicted felon' even for the calunnia conviction as here defamation is not considered a crime but a civil matter. The PGP and TJMK have never been able to produce Amanda's alleged felony criminal record for the "crime" of calunnia/defamation because it simply does not exist. A criminal record is public and you can bet that if Amanda had one, the PGP/TJMK would have fallen all over themselves getting it.
The problem with the above discussion is the careless use of words which have specific legal definitions in different jurisdictions, and then carelessly applying the words from one jurisdiction to the legal system of the other one.

The problem of "mistranslating" crimes and torts or judicial methods in the US (or other) legal system and the Italian legal system has caused and continues to cause confusion in the discussion of the Knox - Sollecito case.

1. There are no "felonies" in Italy. Italian law does not define any crime that way. "Felony" as a legal term is defined and applies in only some jurisdictions, such as under US federal law. It has historical roots in English common law, and Italian law is not based on English common law. (Similarly, there is no distinct crime of "conspiracy" in Italy, a crime which is defined, for example, in US federal law.)

2. If one examines the legal definition of the crime of calunnia, it is indeed a criminal act in Italy, not the civil tort of "defamation". "Defamation" itself is a crime in Italy. The two crimes in Italy differ primarily in that "calunnia" (CP Article 368) is a false accusation against someone stated before the police, a prosecutor, or a judge, by a person who knows that the accusation is false, while "diffamazione" (CP Article 595) is the crime of abusing another person's reputation. Under US federal law, there is a crime (18 USC Section 1001) of willfully and knowingly making a false statement (which need not be an accusation) to a federal agent; that crime is in some ways similar to calunnia.

3. Criminal acts in Italy are frequently tried together with civil torts alleging the same acts. The criminal and civil parts are distinct in their consequences (for example, imprisonment and/or fines for criminal conviction, while the civil liability is a monetary award to a winning plaintiff). When the civil tort is tried with the criminal case, acquittal in the criminal case ends the civil case in favor of the accused who was the civil defendant, if the formula for the acquittal is, for example, that the accused did not commit the act or that the act did not occur.

4. Knox was accused, under Italian criminal law and civil tort law, of calunnia against Lumumba, and in a separate case, of calunnia against the police and Mignini. She was not accused of defamation in either case. She was convicted of calunnia against Lumumba and acquitted of calunnia against the police and Mignini. The latter acquittal was explained by the court as the result primarily of the fact that the actions of the police and prosecutor during the 6 November interrogation were irregular procedures in violation of Italian law and Constitution and there was no evidence to show that Knox's statements accusing them of mistreatment were false.

5. A US national who is convicted of a crime in a country, for example, Italy, acquires a criminal record in that country, that is, Italy, but does not acquire a criminal record in the US. Thus, Amanda Knox does not have a criminal record in the US for calunnia or, AFAIK, for any other crime. Italy does not have a legal system with "felony" defined. It is therefore absurd to claim that Knox is a "felon" in the US or even in Italy.

6. The ECHR final judgment in Knox v. Italy makes it clear that Knox was wrongfully convicted of calunnia by Italy as a result of violations of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - by the Italian authorities.

7. Knox's legal status with respect to the conviction for calunnia in Italy, under international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - is that she was a victim of violations by Italy of that Convention. The ECHR found in its final judgment that she was the victim of three such violations. Italy has not resolved those violations as of this date, and it remains under an international law treaty obligation, under its own Constitution, to redress those violations. Under international law, Knox remains a victim of those violations until Italy fully redresses them.

Last edited by Numbers; 29th February 2020 at 05:24 AM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2020, 10:31 AM   #1533
TomG
Critical Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 263
Illusory Truth Effect?

One thing that is noticeable on YouTube comments sections is how many times the same half-truths, factoids and lies get repeated over and over by the same people and get picked up by others as absolute facts. The theories of Mixed blood and bloody footprints are the main culprits. These factoids are repeated to an extent that it becomes so entrenched in the pro-guilt mind and almost impossible to debunk.

Even though I've referred to Stefanoni's testimony ruling out mixed blood and the "State of Work" in progress reports that rule out bloody footprints Harry Rag simply won't accept it. However, Rag constantly refers to Stefanoni's work as exemplary. It seems to me that the theories of mixed blood and bloody footprints have become so seared in Rag's mind that it's impervious to logic even though they have no basis in fact. Could it be that even contemplating the possibility that he could be wrong would result in cognitive dissonance that would be intolerable for him?

"Illusory Truth Effect" is a well-known phenomenon that was used by Joseph Goebells prior and during WW2, so it's not new. It seems to me that many factoids were formed in the very early stages of the case, leaked to the press, to become actual facts by repetition AS A DELIBERATE TACTIC.

https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/repe...2#rebelltitem2

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2020, 11:51 AM   #1534
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Numbers, the only thing the PGP could rightfully claim is that, in Italy, Knox is convicted of a crime (calunnia) but not that she is a 'felon'. And they won't even have that for much longer. But be prepared for the usual "But it's the equivalent of a felony"!

Today, Amanda and Chris are having their wedding celebration with family and friends.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2020, 12:03 PM   #1535
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
One thing that is noticeable on YouTube comments sections is how many times the same half-truths, factoids and lies get repeated over and over by the same people and get picked up by others as absolute facts. The theories of Mixed blood and bloody footprints are the main culprits. These factoids are repeated to an extent that it becomes so entrenched in the pro-guilt mind and almost impossible to debunk.

Even though I've referred to Stefanoni's testimony ruling out mixed blood and the "State of Work" in progress reports that rule out bloody footprints Harry Rag simply won't accept it. However, Rag constantly refers to Stefanoni's work as exemplary. It seems to me that the theories of mixed blood and bloody footprints have become so seared in Rag's mind that it's impervious to logic even though they have no basis in fact. Could it be that even contemplating the possibility that he could be wrong would result in cognitive dissonance that would be intolerable for him?

"Illusory Truth Effect" is a well-known phenomenon that was used by Joseph Goebells prior and during WW2, so it's not new. It seems to me that many factoids were formed in the very early stages of the case, leaked to the press, to become actual facts by repetition AS A DELIBERATE TACTIC.

https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/repe...2#rebelltitem2

Hoots
"Could it be that even contemplating the possibility that he could be wrong would result in cognitive dissonance that would be intolerable for him? "

Absolutely. They are so emotionally invested in their very public years long campaign that to even think they might be wrong is inconceivable to them. They no longer see Knox as a real person, but as the 'creature' they have created themselves.

We see the Big Lie tactic being used by Trump all the time. His constantly repeated use of 'witch hunt' and 'hoax' are great examples. He's used it referring to the Mueller investigation, the impeachment investigation, the impeachment itself, and now the Corona virus situation. And just as the PGP/TJMK crowd have accepted their version of the crime and Amanda as 'truth', so Trump's base embrace Trump's version of 'truth'.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 12:13 AM   #1536
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
The problem with the above discussion is the careless use of words which have specific legal definitions in different jurisdictions, and then carelessly applying the words from one jurisdiction to the legal system of the other one.

The problem of "mistranslating" crimes and torts or judicial methods in the US (or other) legal system and the Italian legal system has caused and continues to cause confusion in the discussion of the Knox - Sollecito case.

1. There are no "felonies" in Italy. Italian law does not define any crime that way. "Felony" as a legal term is defined and applies in only some jurisdictions, such as under US federal law. It has historical roots in English common law, and Italian law is not based on English common law. (Similarly, there is no distinct crime of "conspiracy" in Italy, a crime which is defined, for example, in US federal law.)

2. If one examines the legal definition of the crime of calunnia, it is indeed a criminal act in Italy, not the civil tort of "defamation". "Defamation" itself is a crime in Italy. The two crimes in Italy differ primarily in that "calunnia" (CP Article 368) is a false accusation against someone stated before the police, a prosecutor, or a judge, by a person who knows that the accusation is false, while "diffamazione" (CP Article 595) is the crime of abusing another person's reputation. Under US federal law, there is a crime (18 USC Section 1001) of willfully and knowingly making a false statement (which need not be an accusation) to a federal agent; that crime is in some ways similar to calunnia.

3. Criminal acts in Italy are frequently tried together with civil torts alleging the same acts. The criminal and civil parts are distinct in their consequences (for example, imprisonment and/or fines for criminal conviction, while the civil liability is a monetary award to a winning plaintiff). When the civil tort is tried with the criminal case, acquittal in the criminal case ends the civil case in favor of the accused who was the civil defendant, if the formula for the acquittal is, for example, that the accused did not commit the act or that the act did not occur.

4. Knox was accused, under Italian criminal law and civil tort law, of calunnia against Lumumba, and in a separate case, of calunnia against the police and Mignini. She was not accused of defamation in either case. She was convicted of calunnia against Lumumba and acquitted of calunnia against the police and Mignini. The latter acquittal was explained by the court as the result primarily of the fact that the actions of the police and prosecutor during the 6 November interrogation were irregular procedures in violation of Italian law and Constitution and there was no evidence to show that Knox's statements accusing them of mistreatment were false.

5. A US national who is convicted of a crime in a country, for example, Italy, acquires a criminal record in that country, that is, Italy, but does not acquire a criminal record in the US. Thus, Amanda Knox does not have a criminal record in the US for calunnia or, AFAIK, for any other crime. Italy does not have a legal system with "felony" defined. It is therefore absurd to claim that Knox is a "felon" in the US or even in Italy.

6. The ECHR final judgment in Knox v. Italy makes it clear that Knox was wrongfully convicted of calunnia by Italy as a result of violations of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - by the Italian authorities.

7. Knox's legal status with respect to the conviction for calunnia in Italy, under international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - is that she was a victim of violations by Italy of that Convention. The ECHR found in its final judgment that she was the victim of three such violations. Italy has not resolved those violations as of this date, and it remains under an international law treaty obligation, under its own Constitution, to redress those violations. Under international law, Knox remains a victim of those violations until Italy fully redresses them.
A good explanatory summary of the elements of and defenses against a charge under 18 USC Section 1001 is at:

https://www.pagepate.com/experience/...ement-charges/

Here are relevant excerpts for comparison to the Italian crime of calunnia:

Quote:
Under 18 USC Section 1001, it is a felony to make a “false statement” to an agent or agency of the federal government in connection with a federal matter. False statements can be spoken or written and do not have to be made under oath to violate the law, applying equally to misrepresenting income to the IRS or lying to the FBI during an interview. The government can’t convict a person simply for telling a lie. In addition to proving that the defendant made the statement in question to a federal agent or officer, the government must also prove three things {that is, the elements of the crime}:

1. That the defendant’s statement was “materially” false. Lying by itself is not illegal, including lying to a federal agent. A statement must be “materially” false to be illegal. A statement is material if it has a “natural tendency to influence or is capable of influencing” the agent the statement is made to. In other words, a material statement is important and relevant to the subject matter being discussed. .... It’s irrelevant whether the government believes the false statement. The law still applies even if the federal agent knows the statement is false.

2. That the defendant “knowingly and willingly” made the false statement. The government generally has to prove that the person making a false statement is being intentionally dishonest. In most jurisdictions, the government only has to prove that the person making the false statement knew it was untrue when they made it. Some courts go a step further, however, and require the government to prove that a defendant knew it was unlawful to make a false statement when he made it. The Department of Justice has recently indicated this is the preferred definition of “knowingly and willingly.” ....

3. That the statement was made regarding a matter within the federal government’s jurisdiction. ....

There are three common defenses to a false statement charge [under] 18 U.S.C. Section 1001:

1. The person making the statement did not know it was false. There is a valid defense when a person makes a false statement because of an honest mistake, their poor memory, or a simple misunderstanding.

2. The statement was not material. This defense challenges whether a statement is important or relevant enough to be considered “material” to a federal matter. ....

3. There was an illegal interrogation. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects your right to be silent and avoid making self-incriminating statements. Whenever a person is in the government’s custody, the government must advise them of their right to remain silent and their right to counsel. If the government fails to advise a person of their rights, and they make self-incriminating statements, those statements cannot be used against that person. Sometimes, however, the government can successfully argue that the person gave up their right to remain silent and voluntarily made the statements, so it is important to retain an attorney with experience in constitutional defenses.
Conviction of violation of 18 USC Section 1001 may result in a sentence not exceeding 5 years imprisonment; if the false statement is related to an act of terror, human trafficking, or certain sex offenses, the maximum sentence increases to 8 years.

Quote:
Articolo 368 Codice penale
(R.D. 19 ottobre 1930, n. 1398)
[Aggiornato al 27/11/2019]

Calunnia

Chiunque, con denuncia [c.p.p. 333], querela [c.p.p. 336], richiesta [c.p.p. 342] o istanza [c.p.p. 341], anche se anonima o sotto falso nome, diretta all'AutoritÓ giudiziaria o ad un'altra AutoritÓ che a quella abbia obbligo di riferirne o alla Corte penale internazionale, incolpa di un reato taluno che egli sa innocente, ovvero simula a carico di lui le tracce di un reato, Ŕ punito con la reclusione da due a sei anni.

La pena Ŕ aumentata [64] se s'incolpa taluno di un reato pel quale la legge stabilisce la pena della reclusione superiore nel massimo a dieci anni, o un'altra pena pi¨ grave.

La reclusione Ŕ da quattro a dodici anni, se dal fatto deriva una condanna alla reclusione superiore a cinque anni; Ŕ da sei a venti anni, se dal fatto deriva una condanna all'ergastolo; [e si applica la pena dell'ergastolo, se dal fatto deriva una condanna alla pena di morte].*
Google translation with my help:

Quote:
Article 368 Criminal Code
(Enacted 19 October 1930, n. 1398)
[Updated on 11/27/2019]

Malicious False Accusation

Anyone, by means of a report [CPP Art. 333], complaint [CPP Art. 336], request for prosecution [CPP Art. 342] or petition for criminal proceedings [CPP Art. 341], even if presented anonymously or under a false name, addressed to the judicial authority {police, prosecutor, or judge} or to another authority that has an obligation to report it or to the International Criminal Court, who accuses anyone that he knows to be innocent of any crime , or simulates {fabricates) evidence of a crime {which may or may not have occurred and may or may not be directed against an innocent person}, is punished with imprisonment of from two to six years.

The sentence is increased {according to the penalties for aggravated circumstances} [CP Art. 64] if {the falsely accused person} is charged with an offense under which the law establishes a maximum ten-year prison sentence, or another more serious sentence.

The sentence is from four to twelve years, if the {false accusation} leads to a prison sentence of more than five years; it is from six to twenty years, if the sentence results in a life sentence; [{the following does not apply as the death penalty was abolished:} and the sentence of life imprisonment applies, if a death penalty sentence derives from the fact].
Comments:

Calunnia and 18 USC 1001 share the concept of the intentional (knowing) transmission of false material information to law enforcement. Calunnia is, however, specific to the false information being the accusation of a criminal act. Calunnia also covers the fabrication of evidence of a crime, and that appears to be whether or not a crime has actually occurred or whether the fabrication is directed against an innocent person.

Under Italian law CPP Article 63, a person questioned as a witness who makes an incrimination statement is to be warned (told that she has become a suspect and may remain silent) and told to get a lawyer. The incriminating statement may not be used against her.

Under CPP Article 188, methods or techniques which may influence the freedom of self-determination of alter the capacity to recall and evaluate facts shall not be used.

Under CPP Article 192, evidence gathered in violation of the prohibitions set by law shall not be used.

Thus, under Italian law, applied as written, Amanda Knox should not have been charged with or tried for calunnia against Lumumba. The interrogation was illegal. This defense is similar to what would be a defense against a charge under 18 USC Section 1001.

Of course, since Knox did not participate in the murder/rape of Kercher, and was not at the cottage at the relevant time, she could not know whether or not Lumumba was innocent of the crime.

Regarding the charge leveled against Knox of calunnia against the police and Mignini, it is interesting that one of the crimes implied by her testimony, according to the Italian prosecutor, was a charge leveled against the police and prosecutor of calunnia against her. This can be understood as not only the formal allegations against Knox by the authorities, but also the simulation or fabrication of the evidence - Knox's coerced statements - by the police and prosecutor of a crime during the 6 November 2007 interrogation.

* Source: https://www.brocardi.it/codice-penal...-i/art368.html

Last edited by Numbers; 2nd March 2020 at 12:24 AM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 01:50 PM   #1537
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 754
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
A good explanatory summary of the elements of and defenses against a charge under 18 USC Section 1001 is at:

https://www.pagepate.com/experience/...ement-charges/

Here are relevant excerpts for comparison to the Italian crime of calunnia:



Conviction of violation of 18 USC Section 1001 may result in a sentence not exceeding 5 years imprisonment; if the false statement is related to an act of terror, human trafficking, or certain sex offenses, the maximum sentence increases to 8 years.



Google translation with my help:



Comments:

Calunnia and 18 USC 1001 share the concept of the intentional (knowing) transmission of false material information to law enforcement. Calunnia is, however, specific to the false information being the accusation of a criminal act. Calunnia also covers the fabrication of evidence of a crime, and that appears to be whether or not a crime has actually occurred or whether the fabrication is directed against an innocent person.

Under Italian law CPP Article 63, a person questioned as a witness who makes an incrimination statement is to be warned (told that she has become a suspect and may remain silent) and told to get a lawyer. The incriminating statement may not be used against her.

Under CPP Article 188, methods or techniques which may influence the freedom of self-determination of alter the capacity to recall and evaluate facts shall not be used.

Under CPP Article 192, evidence gathered in violation of the prohibitions set by law shall not be used.

Thus, under Italian law, applied as written, Amanda Knox should not have been charged with or tried for calunnia against Lumumba. The interrogation was illegal. This defense is similar to what would be a defense against a charge under 18 USC Section 1001.

Of course, since Knox did not participate in the murder/rape of Kercher, and was not at the cottage at the relevant time, she could not know whether or not Lumumba was innocent of the crime.

Regarding the charge leveled against Knox of calunnia against the police and Mignini, it is interesting that one of the crimes implied by her testimony, according to the Italian prosecutor, was a charge leveled against the police and prosecutor of calunnia against her. This can be understood as not only the formal allegations against Knox by the authorities, but also the simulation or fabrication of the evidence - Knox's coerced statements - by the police and prosecutor of a crime during the 6 November 2007 interrogation.

* Source: https://www.brocardi.it/codice-penal...-i/art368.html
I am curious how calunnia laws work in Italy. Could Numbers answer the following questions

1) Is the punishment for calunnia the same regardless of how serious the offence someone is being falsely accused of. For instance, one person falsely accuses someone of shoplifting and another falsely accuses someone of murder. Would both receive the same punishment.
2) Does Calunnia apply if there is a general accusation someone has committed crimes but no allegations of specific offences. For instance, someone calls someone a thief but there are no allegations of specific instances of stealing.
3) Does calunnia cover false witness testimony such as given by Curalto and Quintavalle.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 04:30 PM   #1538
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
I am curious how calunnia laws work in Italy. Could Numbers answer the following questions

1) Is the punishment for calunnia the same regardless of how serious the offence someone is being falsely accused of. For instance, one person falsely accuses someone of shoplifting and another falsely accuses someone of murder. Would both receive the same punishment.
2) Does Calunnia apply if there is a general accusation someone has committed crimes but no allegations of specific offences. For instance, someone calls someone a thief but there are no allegations of specific instances of stealing.
3) Does calunnia cover false witness testimony such as given by Curalto and Quintavalle.
Welshman, thanks for your questions, which are challenging for me because my knowledge of Italian law and legal practice is superficial and based only on my readings for the Knox - Sollecito case. But I believe I can provide reliable answers:

1. As the law CPP Article 368 states, the punishment for the crime of calunnia is based on the severity of punishment that would be assigned for the falsely accused crime. Since the statutory sentence for murder is 21 years, according to CP Article 575 while that for theft (including shop-lifting?) is imprisonment for from 6 months to 3 years and a fine of 154 to 516 euros (CP Article 624), the statutory sentence for calunnia would be longer as detailed in the text of Article 368.

It should be noted that statutory sentences in Italy are modified at trial: increased by aggravating circumstances or decreased by mitigating circumstances, and significantly reduced if the accused requests an abbreviated (fast-track) trial.

2. The wording in the text of CPP Article 368 states that calunnia requires a report, complaint, or other specific method accusing someone of a crime. Simply claiming someone commits criminal acts, without giving enough detail of a specific act suitable to give rise to a criminal proceeding, would apparently not be enough, according to explanatory information on the Brocardi website.

For the simulation or fabrication of evidence, according to the Brocardi website explanation, this must also falsely point to a particular individual as being involved in a crime and not merely consist of faking a crime (contrary to my earlier statement) in order to be the crime of calunnia.

3. Falsity in testimony would only be covered if there were the equivalent of a specific accusation. I don't think the testimony of either Curalto or Quintavalle was accusatory in the sense of "I saw X commit a crime". However, giving false testimony, in whole or in part, is punishable by imprisonment of from 2 to 6 years, according to CP Article 372.

Last edited by Numbers; 2nd March 2020 at 05:02 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 05:06 PM   #1539
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
I think the problem with charging either Curatolo or Quintavalle (besides Curatolo being dead ) is that neither could be shown to have been lying rather than just mistaken. Curatolo also could have claimed he was confused, not lying, due to his being on heroin at the time. Quintavalle could have just claimed he remembered later although that would have been a bit harder to swallow considering how he claimed how struck he was by her blue eyes, etc.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 05:44 PM   #1540
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I think the problem with charging either Curatolo or Quintavalle (besides Curatolo being dead ) is that neither could be shown to have been lying rather than just mistaken. Curatolo also could have claimed he was confused, not lying, due to his being on heroin at the time. Quintavalle could have just claimed he remembered later although that would have been a bit harder to swallow considering how he claimed how struck he was by her blue eyes, etc.
Of course, Curatolo would not be charged after he died.

The problem is that a prosecutor would need to charge either when he was alive and before the statute of limitations was passed. I don't believe that prosecutor Mignini or one of his colleagues would charge a prosecution witness with perjury (false testimony, CP Article 372) for testimony in favor of the prosecution. Similarly, there was no independent investigation of the police or Mignini launched by any prosecutor or ordered by any judge on the basis of Amanda Knox's testimony that she had been mistreated during the interrogation of 6 November and her interrogation statements obtained under coercion.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 06:39 PM   #1541
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,997
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Of course, Curatolo would not be charged after he died.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 06:50 PM   #1542
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
I wouldn't be so sure about that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 10:48 PM   #1543
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
A Tale of Four Countries

Sometimes, the ECHR awards Just Satisfaction - a cash payment - as part of its judgment of a violation of the Convention. The award in any one case is often relatively small, perhaps 10,000 to 30,000 euros. There are also cases in which the ECHR finds a violation of the Convention but makes no Just Satisfaction award.

There are four large western democracies among the Council of Europe (ECHR) states. These are Italy, France, Germany, and the UK. Comparison of the amounts of Just Satisfaction awarded against each of these states is a measure of their performance in ECHR cases; larger total amounts of Just Satisfaction may suggest some issue with conforming to the Convention.

Here are the means (arithmetic averages), maximums, and minimums for Just Satisfaction awards against each of the four states for the years 2011 - 2019. Results are rounded to the nearest thousand euros.

ITALY mean: 30,236,000 max: 119,558,000 min: 1,763,000

FRANCE mean: 2,486,000 max: 7,668,000 min: 88,000

GERMANY mean: 261,000 max: 1,126,000 min: 26,000

UK mean: 273,000 max: 1,140,000 min: 6,000

Source: https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution/country-factsheets
PDF for each of the four countries, last graph on last page

Last edited by Numbers; 2nd March 2020 at 10:50 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2020, 11:00 PM   #1544
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
A Tale of Four Countries

Sometimes, the ECHR awards Just Satisfaction - a cash payment - as part of its judgment of a violation of the Convention. The award in any one case is often relatively small, perhaps 10,000 to 30,000 euros. There are also cases in which the ECHR finds a violation of the Convention but makes no Just Satisfaction award.

There are four large western democracies among the Council of Europe (ECHR) states. These are Italy, France, Germany, and the UK. Comparison of the amounts of Just Satisfaction awarded against each of these states is a measure of their performance in ECHR cases; larger total amounts of Just Satisfaction may suggest some issue with conforming to the Convention.

Here are the means (arithmetic averages), maximums, and minimums for Just Satisfaction awards against each of the four states for the years 2011 - 2019. Results are rounded to the nearest thousand euros.

ITALY mean: 30,236,000 max: 119,558,000 min: 1,763,000

FRANCE mean: 2,486,000 max: 7,668,000 min: 88,000

GERMANY mean: 261,000 max: 1,126,000 min: 26,000

UK mean: 273,000 max: 1,140,000 min: 6,000

Source: https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution/country-factsheets
PDF for each of the four countries, last graph on last page
Italy: so much WINNING!
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2020, 11:32 AM   #1545
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
....
6. The ECHR final judgment in Knox v. Italy makes it clear that Knox was wrongfully convicted of calunnia by Italy as a result of violations of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - by the Italian authorities.

7. Knox's legal status with respect to the conviction for calunnia in Italy, under international law - the European Convention of Human Rights - is that she was a victim of violations by Italy of that Convention. The ECHR found in its final judgment that she was the victim of three such violations. Italy has not resolved those violations as of this date, and it remains under an international law treaty obligation, under its own Constitution, to redress those violations. Under international law, Knox remains a victim of those violations until Italy fully redresses them.
I am calling attention to the above to show that the terminology "victim" is contained in the text of the international treaty, the European Convention on Human Rights (a short-form name for "The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms", the binding treaty of the Council of Europe states). The relevant text is in Article 34 of the Convention*:

Quote:
ARTICLE 34

Individual applications

The Court may receive applications from any person, nongovernmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Parties of the rights set forth in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. The High Contracting Parties undertake not to hinder in any way the effective exercise of this right.
Thus, Knox's legal status after her final conviction for calunnia by Italy was that of a person claiming to be the victim of a violation of the Convention by Italy. Following the final judgment of the ECHR finding that Italy had violated her rights under the Convention by convicting her of calunnia, Knox's legal status is that of a victim of a violation of the Convention by Italy. She will remain a victim of a violation of the Convention until such time as Italy fully redresses the effects of the violations found by the ECHR, as verified by a final resolution of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

* Source: https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home....=basictexts&c=

PDF European Convention on Human Rights

Last edited by Numbers; 3rd March 2020 at 11:35 AM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd March 2020, 08:03 PM   #1546
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Amanda and Chris are on their honeymoon now. I hope they are having a lovely time.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 06:35 PM   #1547
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Amanda and Chris are on their honeymoon now. I hope they are having a lovely time.
Me too. Any idea where they went? I read that her bridal gown was a Princess Leia outfit. I love that.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 07:12 PM   #1548
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Me too. Any idea where they went? I read that her bridal gown was a Princess Leia outfit. I love that.
I have no idea where they went. Here's a pic of what she wore. Of course, there was the usual criticism because she dared to be different. She's never denied being quirky.

Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 07:20 PM   #1549
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I have no idea where they went. Here's a pic of what she wore. Of course, there was the usual criticism because she dared to be different. She's never denied being quirky.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...06020c14d9.jpg
It doesn't fit my tastes. But I love that she can embrace that side of her. I remember reading that she was always a bit kooky and that she had lost that side of her for a while after she was released from prison. Looks like she found her former self.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 07:23 PM   #1550
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It doesn't fit my tastes. But I love that she can embrace that side of her. I remember reading that she was always a bit kooky and that she had lost that side of her for a while after she was released from prison. Looks like she found her former self.
It's not what I would wear (nor did!), but as long as she and her husband were happy who are we (or anyone) to judge? But you know they will.....
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2020, 08:45 PM   #1551
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
It's not what I would wear (nor did!), but as long as she and her husband were happy who are we (or anyone) to judge? But you know they will.....
Well **** them! I think he's a goofball too. He has a crazy look about him.

But what counts is how they feel about each other. What we think absolutely does not matter. Amanda deserves her happiness. It is my sincerest wish that she finds and continues to find it in her life.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 4th March 2020 at 09:02 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 08:37 AM   #1552
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 16,274
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I have no idea where they went. Here's a pic of what she wore. Of course, there was the usual criticism because she dared to be different. She's never denied being quirky.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...06020c14d9.jpg

There might be a slight Princess Leia resemblance in the hairstyle, but that's as far as it goes.

What are those dark blobs on the culottes? Alien skulls? Black jack-o-lanterns?

But regardless, she looks good overall. It's a young look. Considering the years that were taken from her, she has every right to rock it.
__________________
A z°mbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 12:19 PM   #1553
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
There might be a slight Princess Leia resemblance in the hairstyle, but that's as far as it goes.

What are those dark blobs on the culottes? Alien skulls? Black jack-o-lanterns?

But regardless, she looks good overall. It's a young look. Considering the years that were taken from her, she has every right to rock it.
They don't seem to be anything at all...just a blob of colors.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 01:26 PM   #1554
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 791
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
There might be a slight Princess Leia resemblance in the hairstyle, but that's as far as it goes.

What are those dark blobs on the culottes? Alien skulls? Black jack-o-lanterns?
But regardless, she looks good overall. It's a young look. Considering the years that were taken from her, she has every right to rock it.
A lot easier :


I wondered elsewhere, if I'm the only one who "gets" this joke.
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."

Last edited by Methos; 7th March 2020 at 01:33 PM.
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 01:34 PM   #1555
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
A lot easier :
https://d31wxntiwn0x96.cloudfront.ne...ef9d8d0d6f9%22

I wondered elsewhere, if I'm the only one who "gets" this joke.
I don't get it. Hufflepuff was one of the Houses of Hogwarts. Like Gryffindor and Slytherin.

What's the joke?
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 01:45 PM   #1556
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 791
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I don't get it. Hufflepuff was one of the Houses of Hogwarts. Like Gryffindor and Slytherin.

What's the joke?
Knox says she's a Hufflepuff on social media.
IIRC some sharp eye noticed that she wore "Gryffindor" PJs in the "proposal video" urging "someone to get that woman her "Hufflepuff PJs"
Looks Amanda Knox finally got them

(Stuupid little things )
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 01:52 PM   #1557
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Knox says she's a Hufflepuff on social media.
IIRC some sharp eye noticed that she wore "Gryffindor" PJs in the "proposal video" urging "someone to get that woman her "Hufflepuff PJs"
Looks Amanda Knox finally got them

(Stuupid little things )
Cool. The more I read about Amanda, the more I like her.

Funny, I read all the Harry Potter books and I've never watched any of the movies. I've seen clips, but always felt that watching the movies would spoil the books for me. I wish people would at a bare minimum, read the books first.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 01:57 PM   #1558
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
A lot easier :
https://d31wxntiwn0x96.cloudfront.ne...ef9d8d0d6f9%22

I wondered elsewhere, if I'm the only one who "gets" this joke.
Great detective work there! Those pictures from the DM were so poor. I guess that's what happens when you stalk someone and have to take pics from so far away.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 05:50 PM   #1559
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,942
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Knox says she's a Hufflepuff on social media.
IIRC some sharp eye noticed that she wore "Gryffindor" PJs in the "proposal video" urging "someone to get that woman her "Hufflepuff PJs"
Looks Amanda Knox finally got them

(Stuupid little things )
It's so weird to watch that proposal video. On the one hand, it is great to see Amanda so joyful and happy. But it also feels wrong to watch it. Like you're a Peeping Tom peeking through your neighbor's windows. Like haven't we invaded her life enough already?
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2020, 08:40 PM   #1560
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 12,822
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
It's so weird to watch that proposal video. On the one hand, it is great to see Amanda so joyful and happy. But it also feels wrong to watch it. Like you're a Peeping Tom peeking through your neighbor's windows. Like haven't we invaded her life enough already?
If she had not wanted others to share in that experience, she would not have posted it...unlike those who took pictures of her guests arriving and her at her wedding party with telephoto lenses who were uninvited.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:45 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.