Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.

Skeptic Ginger

Nasty Woman
Skeptic Ginger
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
96,883
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091205/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_student_slain

The reason I bring this up here is this trial was based on a criminal (as in he's a criminal) prosecutor and involved cultural face saving rather evidence of guilt. I heard an interview of a reporter who understood the issues and he said they would find her guilty despite the fact there is no evidence, because once the prosecutor stuck his neck out he had to continue to "save face". Apparently she might get out in ~2 years when the appeals court overturns the conviction.

I'll look for some more links with the rest of the story.


The cartwheel BTW, for those of you not familiar with the case, was what Knox did in the police station when she was being questioned. That made the police think she was too casual and made her guilty.
 
Last edited:
skeptigirl said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091205/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_student_slain

The reason I bring this up here is this trial was based on a criminal (as in he's a criminal) prosecutor and involved cultural face saving rather evidence of guilt. I heard an interview of a reporter who understood the issues and he said they would find her guilty despite the fact there is no evidence, because once the prosecutor stuck his neck out he had to continue to "save face". Apparently she might get out in ~2 years when the appeals court overturns the conviction.

I'll look for some more links with the rest of the story.


The cartwheel BTW, for those of you not familiar with the case, was what Knox did in the police station when she was being questioned. That made the police think she was too casual and made her guilty.
Click to expand...

And the prosecutors, police, jury and judge all say she's guilty.

Fancy that. To think that you might*** be wrong. :rolleyes:


***Are
 
Last edited:
The Central Scrutinizer said:
And the prosecutors, police, jury and judge all say she's guilty.

Fancy that. To think that you might*** be wrong. :rolleyes:


***Are
Click to expand...

But didn't you read? Skeptigirl heard a reporter say that she's innocent! Good enough for me!

And the whole thing was based on a cartwheel. Well, that and motive, opportunity, DNA evidence, faking a burglary and falsely accusing an innocent man.
 
skeptigirl said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091205/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_student_slain

The reason I bring this up here is this trial was based on a criminal (as in he's a criminal) prosecutor and involved cultural face saving rather evidence of guilt. I heard an interview of a reporter who understood the issues and he said they would find her guilty despite the fact there is no evidence, because once the prosecutor stuck his neck out he had to continue to "save face". Apparently she might get out in ~2 years when the appeals court overturns the conviction.

I'll look for some more links with the rest of the story.


The cartwheel BTW, for those of you not familiar with the case, was what Knox did in the police station when she was being questioned. That made the police think she was too casual and made her guilty.
Click to expand...

She is guilty as can be....there won't be anything overturned. She will spend the next 20+ years in jail.

Sounds to me like you have some kind of chip on your shoulder or something.....not that it matters anyway, she is going to prison. End of story.
 
I've followed this case in local papers and over the web. "Innocent victim of unfair, corrupt foreign legal system" just doesn't wash.
 
lionking said:
I've followed this case in local papers and over the web. "Innocent victim of unfair, corrupt foreign legal system" just doesn't wash.
Click to expand...


No way, it fits perfectly.

Oh wait, they convicted the girl instead of the Congolese dude she tried to frame for the murder? Never mind.
redface.gif
 
Ok, maybe I'm missing something here, but I thought the case against Knox sounded extremely shady. Particularly the fact that, as I understand it, prosecutors were sure they had their killers within days, only to pick up a vagrant months later who had fled to Germany, who was tied to the crime scene by DNA evidence, and who claimed that while he was making out with Kercher, he went to the bathroom due to eating some bad food, was listening to his iPod while in the bathroom, and came out to find Kercher dying. That seemed extremely shady to me, and I never heard a plausible motive for Knox to have murdered Kercher (the whole "thrill sex murder" or whatever term they used seemed horribly contrived). I was unaware of any physical evidence tying her to the scene.

Was the case against her more solid than I'm understanding it to be?
 
skeptigirl said:
The reason I bring this up here is this trial was based on a criminal (as in he's a criminal) prosecutor and involved cultural face saving rather evidence of guilt. I heard an interview of a reporter who understood the issues and he said they would find her guilty despite the fact there is no evidence, because once the prosecutor stuck his neck out he had to continue to "save face". Apparently she might get out in ~2 years when the appeals court overturns the conviction.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure that I'd go as far as to say she was found guilty because of a cartwheel, but (with my very limited knowledge of Italian law) I do think that the intense media attention, coupled with an non-sequestered jury, is a tailor-made appeal.

After reading Douglas Preston's book The Monster of Florence, I don't have the best impression of Italian police, so I probably have some bias. The prosecution case didn't make a lot of sense to me, from what I've read of their theory for motive and how the victim was actually killed. On the other hand, Amanda Knox's stories don't seem to make a lot of sense either (though on Nightline today, one of her lawyer's seemed to claim the police literally fed her the story of being home and covering her ears, etc. but who the heck knows).
 
She reportedly gave a confession while in police custody for 30 hours with no lawyer present, so I'm not sure how trustworthy that would be.
 
Having not heard of this before, the biggest red flag that I can see is the 'DNA contamination' silliness that OJ used. If the sample is of poor quality it won't come back with a match. Of course it could actually be a plant, so who knows.

Other than that, I'm having trouble finding much verifiable besides the media divide of American media saying she's innocent and Italy the opposite.
 
Last edited:
tyr_13 said:
Having not heard of this before, the biggest red flag that I can see is the 'DNA contamination' silliness that OJ used. If the sample is of poor quality it won't come back with a match.
Click to expand...

Yep. If Joe's DNA is on the shoe, and Bill picks the shoe up, then that magically converts Joe's DNA to Sam's. Which is also what OJ's lawyers argued. Sadly, the idiot jury in that case bought it.
 
I just did a little Googling and realized the prosecutor that Douglas Preston tears into in his book The Monster of Florence is the person who was in charge of the Knox case. That makes me considerably more sympathetic to what skeptigirl is saying (for those unfamiliar, Preston is a fairly popular thriller/action writer, though the above title is non-fiction).

Here is an interview with Douglas Preston about both his experience with this same prosecutor and his take on the Knox case. Granted -- Preston has one point of view on the guy, and he certainly isn't an expert on real-life crime. Here is a fairly pertinent part of what he says about the prosecutor, though:

Giuliano Mignini is a prosecutor who just falls in love with conspiracy theories. Nothing is simple. Nothing is what it seems.

Let me give you an example of this. My co-writer Spezi and I believe the Monster of Florence is a lone psychopath. He killed seven couples, fourteen people. He mutilated the women and cut off their sex organs. Really horrifying.

A psychological profile prepared by the American FBI of the Monster stated that he is a lone killer. All the Italian forensic psychologists stated he was a lone killer. And all the evidence gathered at the crime scenes pointed to a single perpetrator.

But this is too simple for Mignini. He believes the Monster killings were the work not of a lone killer but a satanic sect dating back to the Middle Ages. His theory, based on nonexistent evidence, supposition and conspiracy logic, was that this sect was operating in high places in government and they needed female body parts to perform Black Masses.
Click to expand...

Of course, this doesn't mean Knox is innocent. It could very well be that the prosecutor is a nut, but that she is nevertheless guilty. I don't know. But skeptigirl's...well, skepticism has some foundation here, IMO.
 
Last edited:
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
Of course, this doesn't mean Knox is innocent. It could very well be that the prosecutor is a nut, but that she is nevertheless guilty. I don't know. But skeptigirl's...well, skepticism has some foundation here, IMO.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it that, and that's kind of the point. Or my point, at least. I haven't followed the case all that closely. But skeptigirl's OP is hardly an exercise in skepticism. She links to an article that cites numerous items of evidence of Knox's guilt, yet concludes that Knox was found guilty "all because of a cartwheel," citing a unnamed reporter's opinion that the prosecutor is biased.
 
I've followed this closely and it has all the markings of being a wrongful conviction. There just isn't much in the way of evidence to point to her. There isn't really even a decent motive. Add to that the completely whack prosecutor and the painfully broken italian legal system and you have the makings of a mistake.
 
Dunstan said:
I wouldn't call it that, and that's kind of the point. Or my point, at least. I haven't followed the case all that closely. But skeptigirl's OP is hardly an exercise in skepticism. She links to an article that cites numerous items of evidence of Knox's guilt, yet concludes that Knox was found guilty "all because of a cartwheel," citing a unnamed reporter's opinion that the prosecutor is biased.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. That's why I provided the Preston link prior to my comments. The OP link itself doesn't do much of anything to show what skeptigirl claimed (and I certainly don't think Knox was convicted "because of a cartwheel") -- not sure why she chose that article to lead this thread -- but there is at least some "smoke" out there regarding the person who prosecuted this case (he was indicted for abuse of power, amongst other things). Like I said -- that's certainly not proof that Knox is innocent, but the idea that there might have been some shenanigans seems at least plausible.
 
Both sides are shady. I don't trust either one but especially Knox who lied, misled, falsely implicated, and generally acted in a suspicious manner after the murder.
 
But ... I read it in the Interwebs, so it must be true!
 
For a few more details about the Mignini-Preston thing, here is a copy of a letter Preston wrote to journalist organizations after his writing partner was arrested. It contains a pretty good rundown of his version of events -- this was from 2006, so a couple years prior to the Knox case. (The letter is published in the book, but I could only find its full text on the Internet on this blog).

The Committee to Protect Journalists also wrote a letter to the Italian government regarding Mignini.

Interestingly, the prosecutor's original theory of this crime was that Kercher was killed in a Satanic rite (which appears consistent with Prestons's characterization of how he defaults to wild theories).

Amanda Knox, an American exchange student, stabbed her British fellow student and flatmate Meredith Kercher in the neck at the culmination of a satanic rite, a prosecutor told a Perugia court yesterday.

Winding up his case against Rudy Guede, another suspect in the killing of 21-year-old Kercher last November, the prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, added that Mr Guede then strangled her while the third accused, Ms Knox's boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, held her down.
Click to expand...


Incidentally, Amanda Knox's parents are now under investigation for defamation, stemming from an interview they gave in 2008. The prosecutor earlier attempted to charge an American newspaper with defamation (or file a lawsuit, not sure which) for reporting on a story about a fundraiser for Knox.
 
Last edited:
skeptigirl said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091205/ap_on_re_eu/eu_italy_student_slain

The reason I bring this up here is this trial was based on a criminal (as in he's a criminal) prosecutor and involved cultural face saving rather evidence of guilt. I heard an interview of a reporter who understood the issues and he said they would find her guilty despite the fact there is no evidence, because once the prosecutor stuck his neck out he had to continue to "save face". Apparently she might get out in ~2 years when the appeals court overturns the conviction.

I'll look for some more links with the rest of the story.


The cartwheel BTW, for those of you not familiar with the case, was what Knox did in the police station when she was being questioned. That made the police think she was too casual and made her guilty.
Click to expand...
Once again, I find myself wondering exactly what the "skepti" in "skeptigirl" stands for.

Granted, there are questions about the prosecution's motivations here. However, they have DNA. And far more damningly, they have a woman who not only blatantly lied about what happened, but tried to frame another man in the process!

So this poor, sweet, innocent girl thinks, "Oh, gee, I'm innocent, so I'll just make up a bunch of bull-crap and say that actually another guy was responsible...and when it turns out that he actually has an iron-clad alibi, I'll just take it back and say I was 'confused'."

I will agree with you about one aspect of this -- so long as one ignores absolutely everything that indicates she may be guilty, then yes, it is quite easy to see this as a blatant miscarriage of justice against an innocent woman.
 
maxpower1227 said:
She reportedly gave a confession while in police custody for 30 hours with no lawyer present, so I'm not sure how trustworthy that would be.
Click to expand...

They have a different system, and that is going to be part of the critique.

But then parts of the US judicial system are also sort of using unbounded confessions (some extracted under duress) to possibly convict people.

If this is accurate, then it is worse than i would have thought:http://www.justlanded.de/english/Italy/Articles/Visas-Permits/Legal-System

I mean worse in the sense that it does not seem rational to me, but it is their system.
 
I haven't followed the story recently.
But I get from the posts here that that Congolese bloke was completely cleared.

If she wove a story around him being the perp, that's very fishy.
She has no consistent story of what happened that night? Fishy.
Claiming she all confused because she smoked dope? Fishy.

However, these things may be caused by a bad and intimidating interview method on the part of the police.

We had a couple of cases here in the Netherlands where people gave false confessions after many hours of being questioned in threating manner. Confessing to raping and killing a child, in one case. The guy turned out to be completely innocent.

A forced confession will also lead to an inconsistent story. So, I'm still not sure about this case.
 
I was unaware that there was any DNA evidence found in the room. In fact, I had heard that there was no physical evidence whatsoever linking Knox to the bedroom where the murder occurred.

I still want to know what her motive was supposed to have been, and how Rudy Guede fits into a coherent narrative that has Knox also participating in the killing.

Her behavior seems very bizarre and aloof, but that does not constitute physical evidence of guilt. And if her false accusation was coerced while she was in police custody, then I wouldn't see it as especially damning either. In any case, a false accusation is not physical evidence anyway. There should still be SOME of that.
 
Wolfman said:
so long as one ignores absolutely everything that indicates she may be guilty, then yes, it is quite easy to see this as a blatant miscarriage of justice against an innocent woman.
Click to expand...

I haven't been paying enormous attention to this case as it progressed through the court so I've probably missed the mountain of evidence that indicates she may be guilty. The only things I can remember off-hand are (a) the testimony of the man who was already found guilty of the crime (though since his testimony was also that he was innocent there must be a doubt as to how reliable he is as a witness); (b) DNA on a knife that may possibly have been the murder weapon but this has not been demonstrated with certainty and as it was a knife from the shared home of the victim and alleged perpetrator there may be an innocent explanation for the presence of her DNA); and (c) fingerprints on something or other (ditto).

Could anyone give a quick rundown of what the rest of the evidence is, please?
 
maxpower1227 said:
I was unaware that there was any DNA evidence found in the room. In fact, I had heard that there was no physical evidence whatsoever linking Knox to the bedroom where the murder occurred.
Click to expand...

Here is an ABC News rundown of the evidence in the case.

It appears correct that there was not any physical evidence (or witnesses) placing Knox in the bedroom. Some of her boyfriend's DNA, however, was found on the clasp of the victim's bra, so that would seem to place him at the scene -- though that clasp was apparently misplaced by the police, found, and then tested some 40+ days later.
 
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
Giuliano Mignini is a prosecutor who just falls in love with conspiracy theories. Nothing is simple. Nothing is what it seems.

Let me give you an example of this. My co-writer Spezi and I believe the Monster of Florence is a lone psychopath. He killed seven couples, fourteen people. He mutilated the women and cut off their sex organs. Really horrifying.

A psychological profile prepared by the American FBI of the Monster stated that he is a lone killer. All the Italian forensic psychologists stated he was a lone killer. And all the evidence gathered at the crime scenes pointed to a single perpetrator.

But this is too simple for Mignini. He believes the Monster killings were the work not of a lone killer but a satanic sect dating back to the Middle Ages. His theory, based on nonexistent evidence, supposition and conspiracy logic, was that this sect was operating in high places in government and they needed female body parts to perform Black Masses.
Click to expand...

The conspiracy theory sounds pretty out there, but remember this is being written by a novelist who makes his living by finding the drama in stories. This quote isn't great evidence of what Minini really believed.

As for FBI profiling, it's pretty full of woo and contradicting it isn't the same as contradicting evidence, see the article in the skeptics dictionary.
 
Cavemonster said:
The conspiracy theory sounds pretty out there, but remember this is being written by a novelist who makes his living by finding the drama in stories. This quote isn't great evidence of what Minini really believed.
Click to expand...

True, but here is a direct Mignini quote on the Knox case:

The murder, Il Tempo newspaper reported him telling the court, “was premeditated and was in addition a ‘rite’ celebrated on the occasion of the night of Hallowe’en. A sexual and sacrificial rite ... In the intention of the organisers, the rite should have occurred 24 hours earlier” – on Hallowe’en itself – “but on account of a dinner at the house of horrors, organised by Meredith and Amanda’s Italian flatmates, it was postponed for one day. The presumed assassins contented themselves with the evening of 1 November to perform their do-it-yourself rite, when for some hours it would again be the night of All Saints.”
Click to expand...


And here and here are BBC articles from 2004 talking about the "Satanic Cult" theory in the serial killer case. They don't quote Mignini directly, but he is/was the prosecutor in charge of the case.
 
Last edited:
Drudgewire said:
No way, it fits perfectly.

Oh wait, they convicted the girl instead of the Congolese dude she tried to frame for the murder? Never mind. [qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/redface.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...
That is not what occurred.

And, in fact, the actual murderer was convicted and is in jail in Italy at the moment. There was overwhelming physical evidence he was guilty.
 
Last edited:
maxpower1227 said:
Ok, maybe I'm missing something here, but I thought the case against Knox sounded extremely shady. Particularly the fact that, as I understand it, prosecutors were sure they had their killers within days, only to pick up a vagrant months later who had fled to Germany, who was tied to the crime scene by DNA evidence, and who claimed that while he was making out with Kercher, he went to the bathroom due to eating some bad food, was listening to his iPod while in the bathroom, and came out to find Kercher dying. That seemed extremely shady to me, and I never heard a plausible motive for Knox to have murdered Kercher (the whole "thrill sex murder" or whatever term they used seemed horribly contrived). I was unaware of any physical evidence tying her to the scene.

Was the case against her more solid than I'm understanding it to be?
Click to expand...
No, it was not.
 
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
I'm not quite sure that I'd go as far as to say she was found guilty because of a cartwheel, but (with my very limited knowledge of Italian law) I do think that the intense media attention, coupled with an non-sequestered jury, is a tailor-made appeal.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was referring to the initial act that possibly made the police believe certain things. Of course there were many many factors involved in this case.

The cartwheel symbolizes the cultural misunderstandings. The police seemed to have decided Knox's behavior in the police station suggested she was guilty. I half to wonder if a cross cultural mis-read of behavior wasn't one of the things which set the rest of everything into motion.

ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
After reading Douglas Preston's book The Monster of Florence, I don't have the best impression of Italian police, so I probably have some bias. The prosecution case didn't make a lot of sense to me, from what I've read of their theory for motive and how the victim was actually killed. On the other hand, Amanda Knox's stories don't seem to make a lot of sense either (though on Nightline today, one of her lawyer's seemed to claim the police literally fed her the story of being home and covering her ears, etc. but who the heck knows).
Click to expand...
We can make a reasonable assessment of this very public trial just as the public mostly knows OJ Simpson was guilty in that very public trial. Knox's initial interview makes sense in that we have examples of many people who've signed false confessions after intense police interrogations. Such false confessions are a well known-phenomena.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Yep. If Joe's DNA is on the shoe, and Bill picks the shoe up, then that magically converts Joe's DNA to Sam's. Which is also what OJ's lawyers argued. Sadly, the idiot jury in that case bought it.
Click to expand...

That's not the kind of contamination they are talking about. The knife being called the murder weapon was collected 3 weeks after the murder. There's no reason to think it wasn't handled at all during that time for normal use.
 
tyr_13 said:
Having not heard of this before, the biggest red flag that I can see is the 'DNA contamination' silliness that OJ used. If the sample is of poor quality it won't come back with a match. Of course it could actually be a plant, so who knows.

Other than that, I'm having trouble finding much verifiable besides the media divide of American media saying she's innocent and Italy the opposite.
Click to expand...
Except in the OJ trial some of the contamination was supposedly purposeful. The claim the glove was planted and the fact the detectives carried OJ's blood around in their pocket after collecting it thus giving them a sample to use to spill on things are examples.

There was additional overwhelming evidence in the OJ trial so the two cases here are not comparable.

One thing that did compare was a film of the crime scene evidence collection in which many errors of procedure are found.

How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
Video footage from the crime scene of British student Meredith Kercher's murder flickers on a laptop screen as Bremner points out what she deems critical flaws in the collection of evidence. After placing rulers on the sides of a bloody shoeprint, for example, a blue-rubber-gloved hand reaches down with a piece of white cloth and scrubs the bloody mark off the tile floor before putting the cloth into an evidence tube. This happens three times for three separate footprints. In film footage taken at least a day later, another team of investigators attempts, using photographs, to place where the footprints had been. "They should have lifted the tile," Bremner says, shaking her head.
Click to expand...


As for Knox's DNA on the murder weapon:
The prosecution, she says, is most likely relying on a knife found at the house of Knox's then boyfriend and fellow accused Rafaelle Sollecito. That knife has Knox's DNA on the handle and what some forensic scientists say is Kercher's DNA on the tip. But Bremner dismisses the idea that it is the knife that killed Kercher: "They never found the murder weapon." Bremner claims that a bloody print on the bed linens conveys the shape of the actual murder weapon and that the knife in question "doesn't match an outline of the knife on the bed." Additionally, Bremner says, expert testimony has already indicated that at least two of the wounds on Kercher's neck couldn't have been made by that particular blade. That aside, she points out, it's not surprising that Knox's DNA would be on its handle; she prepared dinner with Sollecito in his apartment.
Click to expand...
It was Kercher's DNA on the knife that was questionable, not Knox's. And Kercher's blood was everywhere at the crime scene so contamination of the supposed murder weapon was very possible.
 
Dunstan said:
I wouldn't call it that, and that's kind of the point. Or my point, at least. I haven't followed the case all that closely. But skeptigirl's OP is hardly an exercise in skepticism. She links to an article that cites numerous items of evidence of Knox's guilt, yet concludes that Knox was found guilty "all because of a cartwheel," citing a unnamed reporter's opinion that the prosecutor is biased.
Click to expand...
The article I linked to in the OP was just to get the thread going. I didn't put anything else there including the evidence supporting my conclusions. And I explained why I put the cartwheel in the thread title in a post above.

I find it, as a separate but related issue, fascinating to read the reactions in the thread which seem more concerned with attacking me as somehow not really knowledgeable about the case rather than discussing the actual case.
 
skeptigirl said:
The cartwheel symbolizes the cultural misunderstandings. The police seemed to have decided Knox's behavior in the police station suggested she was guilty. I half to wonder if a cross cultural mis-read of behavior wasn't one of the things which set the rest of everything into motion.
Click to expand...

So, what exactly is a cartwheel in a police station supposed to mean in American culture?

(this ought to be good)
 
Wolfman said:
Once again, I find myself wondering exactly what the "skepti" in "skeptigirl" stands for.

Granted, there are questions about the prosecution's motivations here. However, they have DNA. And far more damningly, they have a woman who not only blatantly lied about what happened, but tried to frame another man in the process!
Click to expand...
The DNA is not what it seems. See my last post.

It might be nice if people paid more attention to what I actually said in my OP:

"I'll look for some more links with the rest of the story." IE, of course I didn't yet post all the facts in the case.

AND:

"The cartwheel BTW, for those of you not familiar with the case, was what Knox did in the police station when she was being questioned. That made the police think she was too casual and made her guilty." IE the cartwheel symbolized the cross cultural influence that is part of what I think has influenced the trial. It's the key reason this case deserves to be discussed in a skeptic forum.

Any miscarriage of justice might be worthy of a thread. But this one in particular has all sorts of "why people believe strange things" permeating through it. I think we can add some preconceived feelings about skeptigirl to the list in terms of how some people have replied in the thread so far.
 
skeptigirl said:
I think we can add some preconceived feelings about skeptigirl to the list in terms of how some people have replied in the thread so far.
Click to expand...

:v:

Now that our musical interlude is over, care to inform/entertain us with your theory on what a cartwheel in a police station means in American culture?
 
skeptigirl said:
The cartwheel symbolizes the cultural misunderstandings.
Click to expand...
I'm American, and doing cartwheels in a police station after you've been brought in for questioning in a murder case is quite bizarre behavior IMHO.
 
WildCat said:
I'm American, and doing cartwheels in a police station after you've been brought in for questioning in a murder case is quite bizarre behavior IMHO.
Click to expand...

I think it means you're innocent.

Generally, at that point, the police will usually drop the charges. At least in America.
 
WildCat said:
I'm American, and doing cartwheels in a police station after you've been brought in for questioning in a murder case is quite bizarre behavior IMHO.
Click to expand...
I totally agree and it's hard to imagine the circumstances where one would have done the cartwheel. It conjures up images that are easy to draw all sorts of conclusions from. Yet the conclusions could easily be false.

OTOH, it is also not so hard to imagine what one culture expects in terms of behavior can easily be misread when observing the reaction of someone from another culture. Much of this trial has been based on cultural misreading of cues and assumptions drawn from cultural misunderstandings. When one sees a MiddleEastern man in a courtroom for example, who doesn't speak English, all sorts of false conclusions can easily be drawn simply because of the expectation of behavior based both on the concluder's culture and on the concluder's biases of belief based on the culture of the suspect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom