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 !MOD BOX WARNING! , Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 20th November 2017, 05:45 AM   #201
RoseMontague
Published Author
 
RoseMontague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Elon, NC
Posts: 7,103
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
The newest development is that the CSC has issued the motivation report for the decision denying Raffaele Sollecito compensation for unfair detention. I don't know if the CSC short-form verdict on Rudy Guede's request for a revision trial has been issued yet.

Here's a summary of the case, from my previous post #49 in this continuation:

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have been finally and definitively acquitted of the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher by the March, 2015 verdict of the Supreme Court of Cassation of Italy. According to Italian law, they can face no other legal action, criminal or civil, regarding the matters for which they have been acquitted.

Amanda Knox was finally convicted of the crime of calunnia (false accusation) against Patrick Lumumba by the March, 2013 verdict of the Supreme Court of Cassation. However, convictions in Italy are not necessarily definitive, and may be retried by an Italian revision court (a court of appeal) under certain conditions. One such condition, according to Italian law (a judgment of the Italian Supreme Constitutional Court) is a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) that the conviction was the result of an unfair trial, or was otherwise unfair, and that the legal proceedings must be reopened at the request of the convicted person. The ECHR is an international court that hears claims of violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), a treaty to which Italy is a charter signatory. Italy is obligated to follow the terms of the Convention under international and Italian law.

Amanda Knox lodged an application with the ECHR in November, 2013 (within the deadline, which is based on the date of delivery of the motivation report, and not the short-form verdict) claiming that Italy violated her rights under the Convention. The case was communicated to Italy by the ECHR in April, 2015, to allow Italy to prepare a defense, if it so chooses. The ECHR considers this case a "noteworthy pending case", meaning it considers the claims and potential outcome of significance for human rights in the Council of Europe states (that is, all the states that are signatories of the European Convention of Human Rights). A date for the publication of the ECHR judgment has not been announced; the ECHR has tens of thousands of pending cases before it, and it can be quite slow in reaching judgments.

There have also been some satellite cases in Italy related to the main Knox - Sollecito trials. These include, but are not limited to:

1. A case accusing Amanda Knox of false accusation against the police, regarding her statements in court, at her trial, about their behavior toward her during the Nov. 5-6, 2007 interrogation. Knox was finally acquitted on these charges in January, 2016.

2. A case accusing Raffaele Sollecito of criminal defamation against the police, regarding certain statements he had published in a book (which was not publicly available in Italy) he co-authored with Andrew Gumbel. Sollecito and Gumbel were acquitted in October, 2017 on these charges. Prosecutor Mignini had joined this case with a civil lawsuit, as allowed and rather usual in Italian cases. Mignini has withdrawn his suit. I suspect this will be a final acquittal, but I don't believe the time limit for an appeal by the prosecution has run out (I think it will by the end of December, 2017), and I am not sure when the statute of limitations will expire on the charges.

3. There were some additional cases, such as a defamation suit against Knox's parents by Mignini. I am not sure what has happened to those; I suspect the case against Knox's parents and any other such cases have been allowed to expire. But I'm not sure of that.

4. The request by Sollecito for compensation on account of unjust detention was recently finally denied by the Supreme Court of Cassation. His lawyers indicated that this will be taken to the ECHR, because the Convention mandates that there be acknowledgment and compensation for unfair detentions.

5. Rudy Guede, the only person convicted of the murder/rape of Kercher, has appealed the first rejection of his request for revision of his conviction. The Supreme Court of Cassation is expected to issue a ruling on this appeal by the end of November, 2017.
So is Rudy out of prison now, or is it partial (work release)?
__________________
"I have hated the words and I have loved them, and I hope I have made them right".
RoseMontague 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 20th November 2017, 06:53 AM   #202
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
There have also been some satellite cases in Italy related to the main Knox - Sollecito trials. These include, but are not limited to:
There's also the defamation case Mignini brought against Maori and a newspaper for the use of derogatory descriptions of him.

Perhaps Methos could repost Mignini's "brief" in support of this claim - it is a virtual current PGP playbook of recent posts they make. Mignini claims that the defamation Maori and the paper allegedly made against him cannot be understood unless one also sees how bent and potentially illegal the 2015 ISC acquittals of Sollecito and Knox were.

Hence all the recent PGP talking points. The current PGP campaign is really to defend Mignini.

Welcome back Rose!
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 20th November 2017 at 07:50 AM.
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 20th November 2017, 07:51 AM   #203
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Originally Posted by RoseMontague View Post
So is Rudy out of prison now, or is it partial (work release)?
As I understand it, he's on work release of some kind.

"Rudy Guede lavorerà all’esterno del carcere di Viterbo dove sta scontando una condanna a 16 anni di reclusione per l’omicidio di Meredith Kercher. Sosterrà infatti un tirocinio della durata di un anno legato alla laurea in Scienze storiche del territorio e della cooperazione internazionale presso il Centro per gli studi criminologici (Csc). A scriverlo è il sito Tusciaweb in un articolo del portavoce di Guede. ...."

"Rudy Guede will work outside the prison in Viterbo where he is serving a 16-year prison sentence for Meredith Kercher's murder. In fact, he will hold a one-year internship linked to his degree in Historical Sciences of Territory and International Cooperation at the Criminal Studies Center (CSC). To write it is the Tuscia web site in an article by Guede's spokeswoman. ...."

Source: https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/201...rcere/3958876/

Translation by Google translate
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 20th November 2017, 08:06 AM   #204
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
There have also been some satellite cases in Italy related to the main Knox - Sollecito trials. These include, but are not limited to:
Wow. There are others which Mignini brought:

http://knoxarchives.blogspot.ca/2010...efamation.html

Quote:
3. Joe Cottonwood (Fiction Writer): I wrote about this in September of 2009. No U.S. papers picked it up, but some Italian ones did. Joe Cottonwood had the misfortune of being sued by Giuliano Mignini for this quote in an Italian newspaper:

"The Meredith Kercher murder is
one of those mirrors that reflects the prejudices of whoever is looking into it. There is no physical evidence and no credible motive, and yet an egotistical prosecutor is blaming Amanda Knox anyway. In the USA, this would only happen if she were black. Perhaps partying American college kids are so hated in Italy that Amanda will be treated as blacks are treated in the USA, and she will be convicted not because of the evidence but because of general resentment of shallow rich Americans. Personally, from what I've read I don't like Amanda Knox. She sounds spoiled, naive, and shallow. But that's not a crime. I loathe the prosecutor, who has a counterpart in every city in the USA - a preening, intellectually dishonest bully who cares more about making newspaper headlines than in serving justice. It's the same all over the world. Power and prejudice are the enemies of justice."
Mignini charged Cottonwood with criminal defamation, which could have included a jail sentence. Upon Mignini's own conviction for abuse of power, Cottonwood now asks "Am I still a criminal?". Well Mr. Cottonwood, if you're not a criminal now, you will be soon if you don't keep your mouth shut! I expect this case to go nowhere at all.
In 2010 Mignini also brought suit against Luciano Ghirga (Attorney for Amanda Knox), Luca Maori (Attorney for Raffaele Sollecito), Giangavino Sulas (Journalist for Oggi Magazine), Editor and Director of Oggi Magazine. I do not know if this is the same action as the one I mentioned above.

Also Francesca Bene, who worked for a small Italian paper, Giornale dell 'Umbria, who had been interrogated by one of the same police women who had interrogated Amanda Knox and was indicted for causing public alarm by publishing false information.

Lastly, Gabriella Carlizzi also got into his crosshairs: the Roman "Psychic" who Mignini charged with defamation multiple times even though, according to Doug Preston, he used her as a "very important witness in the Monster of Florence Case."
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 20th November 2017 at 08:09 AM.
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 20th November 2017, 08:16 AM   #205
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
If You Are My Enemy

Mignini's philosophy - if you are my enemy, I will indict you!

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/mignini2.html

This is an article from Panorama Magazine that discusses Giuliano Mignini's enemies list. This article was mentioned on the 48 hours CBS blog. The article also briefly discusses why Mignini was convicted. The article was written before Mignini had been eventually cleared of abuse of office allegations.
__________________
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 20th November 2017, 09:51 AM   #206
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Mignini's philosophy - if you are my enemy, I will indict you!

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/mignini2.html

This is an article from Panorama Magazine that discusses Giuliano Mignini's enemies list. This article was mentioned on the 48 hours CBS blog. The article also briefly discusses why Mignini was convicted. The article was written before Mignini had been eventually cleared of abuse of office allegations.
The would be many continuations of this thread if we followed up on all of Mignini's lawsuits for defamation and indictments for criminal defamation.
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 20th November 2017, 10:27 AM   #207
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,766
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
The newest development is that the CSC has issued the motivation report for the decision denying Raffaele Sollecito compensation for unfair detention.
It's worth noting that evidence cited against Raffaele in this decision is evidence that wasn't upheld at any of his trials (112 call after the arrival of the Postal Police).

We should never casually refer to an Italian verdict as if it has any legal legitimacy when it's easy to transparently cite their corruption without regard for any opinion or point of view.
bagels 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 20th November 2017, 12:16 PM   #208
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
It's worth noting that evidence cited against Raffaele in this decision is evidence that wasn't upheld at any of his trials (112 call after the arrival of the Postal Police).

We should never casually refer to an Italian verdict as if it has any legal legitimacy when it's easy to transparently cite their corruption without regard for any opinion or point of view.
I believe the Nencini court held that Raffaele had called 112 for Carabinieri AFTER the arrival of the postal police.
Originally Posted by Nencini
The observation of the Judges of first instance does not appear to this Court to take into account the relevance of a series of verifications of fact which lead it to be held, differently from what has always been maintained by the defendants, who themselves notified the Carabinieri after the arrival of the police officers and not before; and that therefore, when the police arrived, the two defendants were sitting outside the cottage, not waiting for the Carabinieri, but waiting for Filomena Romanelli.
Nencini cites the Postal's 2009 testimony, and accepts the 12:35 arrival time as certain, because, it is, "the normal habit of State Police officers is to note the time when they attend on duty."

Nencini concluded that Raffaele had then waited 15 minutes to call 112. Also acc. to the way Nencini calculated the CCTV clock deficiency, Raffaele still must have called 112 nine minutes after the Postal's arrival.

In any event, all this hinged on the timing of Knox's call to Filomena. That was 12:34. Nencini also entertains doubt because if the Postals had arrived late (eg. "just before 1 pm" as even Massei observed), then what exactly were Raffaele and Amanda doing from 12:24 until 12:51 which is the time stamp of the first 112 call?

Nencini then attempts his own "logical" reconstruction of the events from 12:35 until the finding of the body.

Nencini accuses Knox of lying about where she'd placed the call to Filomena. He says it came from Raffaele's, with the intent to have Filomena find the body - not Knox and Sollecito.

I'm going to stop there. Nencini, in reconstructing this, insists on inventing his own conclusions - rather than follow what had been presented in court. He says that this circumstantial reconstruction merely strengthened the overall notion of guilt, as K and S (acc. to him) devised (on the fly) the "countermeasure" of calling 112 AFTER the arrival of the Postals had created problems for their ability to control the investigation to that point; particularly is the controling of who should have found the body.

Nencini overexplains all of this - when a guilty K and S could have just left for their weekend trip and accomplished all of that, while themselves miles away from the scene.
__________________
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 20th November 2017, 01:00 PM   #209
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
I believe the Nencini court held that Raffaele had called 112 for Carabinieri AFTER the arrival of the postal police.
Nencini cites the Postal's 2009 testimony, and accepts the 12:35 arrival time as certain, because, it is, "the normal habit of State Police officers is to note the time when they attend on duty."

Nencini concluded that Raffaele had then waited 15 minutes to call 112. Also acc. to the way Nencini calculated the CCTV clock deficiency, Raffaele still must have called 112 nine minutes after the Postal's arrival.

In any event, all this hinged on the timing of Knox's call to Filomena. That was 12:34. Nencini also entertains doubt because if the Postals had arrived late (eg. "just before 1 pm" as even Massei observed), then what exactly were Raffaele and Amanda doing from 12:24 until 12:51 which is the time stamp of the first 112 call?

Nencini then attempts his own "logical" reconstruction of the events from 12:35 until the finding of the body.

Nencini accuses Knox of lying about where she'd placed the call to Filomena. He says it came from Raffaele's, with the intent to have Filomena find the body - not Knox and Sollecito.

I'm going to stop there. Nencini, in reconstructing this, insists on inventing his own conclusions - rather than follow what had been presented in court. He says that this circumstantial reconstruction merely strengthened the overall notion of guilt, as K and S (acc. to him) devised (on the fly) the "countermeasure" of calling 112 AFTER the arrival of the Postals had created problems for their ability to control the investigation to that point; particularly is the controling of who should have found the body.

Nencini overexplains all of this - when a guilty K and S could have just left for their weekend trip and accomplished all of that, while themselves miles away from the scene.
Apparently Nencini was unable to figure out that it was impossible for Marco Zaroli and Luca Altieri to have arrived before the 112 call. The police testified that both of the boys were at the cottage when they claim RS "snuck out" to call 112 at 12:51:40. The phone records disprove this. Marco called Luca at 12:45 from his landline at home. Marco then explained to Luca what was happening and asked him to come to his house and pick him up. Then they had to drive to the via della Pergola cottage. Marco testified they arrived at 1:00. There is no physical way that Marco called Luca, Luca drove to his house to pick him up and then drove to the cottage in 6 minutes. Marco testified that it's about 10 min. from Luca's house to his and another 10-12 minutes to the cottage.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 20th November 2017 at 01:24 PM.
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 20th November 2017, 01:19 PM   #210
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 644
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
There's also the defamation case Mignini brought against Maori and a newspaper for the use of derogatory descriptions of him.

Perhaps Methos could repost Mignini's "brief" in support of this claim - it is a virtual current PGP playbook of recent posts they make. Mignini claims that the defamation Maori and the paper allegedly made against him cannot be understood unless one also sees how bent and potentially illegal the 2015 ISC acquittals of Sollecito and Knox were.

Hence all the recent PGP talking points. The current PGP campaign is really to defend Mignini.

Welcome back Rose!
The link is in this post:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11947011

As I wrote back then, I still love to re-read that deposition, because it makes clear that for Mignini it's not about justice, but his very own "bella figura"...

Hi Rose, welcome back
__________________
"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 20th November 2017, 01:30 PM   #211
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
The US gv't uses the Library of Congress, students worldwide use Wikipedia. Mostly we use Methos.
__________________
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 20th November 2017, 03:53 PM   #212
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,766
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
I believe the Nencini court held that Raffaele had called 112 for Carabinieri AFTER the arrival of the postal police.
Nencini also found that Amanda stabbed Meredith to death while Raffaele ripped her bra off.

But as Vixen has pointed out about Hellmann, Nencini is toast, expunged, vanquished, no more.

There is no standing judicial ruling that found Raffaele called 112 after the arrival of the postal police, so the compensation ruling citing this false evidence is transparently fraudulent and lawless.
bagels 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 20th November 2017, 05:40 PM   #213
RoseMontague
Published Author
 
RoseMontague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Elon, NC
Posts: 7,103
Thanks for the updates. I'll try to visit on a regular basis.
__________________
"I have hated the words and I have loved them, and I hope I have made them right".
RoseMontague 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 20th November 2017, 05:58 PM   #214
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
The link is in this post:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11947011

As I wrote back then, I still love to re-read that deposition, because it makes clear that for Mignini it's not about justice, but his very own "bella figura"...

Hi Rose, welcome back
Who translated this?
__________________
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 21st November 2017, 03:34 PM   #215
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
This is a very interesting TIME article on the growing number of exonerations in the U.S.

One of the most interesting things was the number of false drug convictions due to faulty in-field drug testing kits that reacted, not only to illegal substances, but also legal over the counter drugs. Much like luminol, they have a high false positive rate.

http://time.com/wrongly-convicted/?xid=fbshare

In another article, these drug tests reacted to Mucinex, aspirin, chocolate, peppermint, gingko, and even some soap.
https://ncforensics.wordpress.com/20...-testing-kits/


Undoubtedly and most certainly, these studies were run by drug supporters. I mean, what else but drugs could they have been reacting to?

Last edited by Stacyhs; 21st November 2017 at 03:37 PM.
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 21st November 2017, 10:07 PM   #216
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Keeping up with Rudy Guede:

Rudy Guede: ora può lavorare fuori dal carcere
Pubblicato 3 settimane fa il 4 novembre 2017

Rudy Guede lavorerà all’esterno del carcere di Viterbo dove sta scontando una condanna a 16 anni di reclusione per l’omicidio di Meredith Kercher. Sosterrà infatti un tirocinio della durata di un anno legato alla laurea in Scienze storiche del territorio e della cooperazione internazionale presso il Centro per gli studi criminologici (Csc) della stessa città laziale. A scriverlo è il sito Tusciaweb in un articolo del portavoce di Guede.

Nel luglio del 2016, l’ivoriano si è laureato in carcere con il massimo dei voti nell’ambito di uno dei corsi dell’Università Roma Tre.
Guede, che ha già usufruito di diversi permessi premio grazie ai quali è anche tornato a Perugia, sarà nella sede del Csc – scrive il sito – quattro pomeriggi a settimana per tre ore al giorno (probabilmente già da martedì prossimo). Nel corso del tirocinio si occuperà essenzialmente di ricerche bibliografiche e della catalogazione dei libri della biblioteca del centro.

Source: https://www.osservatoreitalia.eu/rud...e-dal-cercere/

Translation by Google translate with my help:

Rudy Guede: Now he can work out of prison
Published 3 weeks ago on November 4, 2017

Rudy Guede will work outside the prison in Viterbo where he is serving a 16-year prison sentence for Meredith Kercher's murder. He will be supported for an internship of one year related to the degree in Historical Sciences of the territory and international cooperation at the Center for Criminological Studies (CSC) in the same city in Lazio. This was written in the Tusciaweb site in an article by Guede's spokeswoman.

In July 2016, the Ivorian graduated in prison with the highest marks for one of the courses of the University Roma Tre. Guede, who has already received several special permits thanks to which has recently returned to Perugia, will be at the headquarters of CSC - writes the site - four afternoons a week for three hours a day (probably [starting] next Tuesday). During the internship he will mainly deal with bibliographic research and library cataloging of the center library.
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 22nd November 2017, 07:39 PM   #217
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Allegations of conspiracies and proven conspiracies among police are a reality, contrary to PGP assertions to the contrary.

Here's an example of an alleged police conspiracy in Baltimore, Maryland:

'The federal grand jury is investigating a group of Baltimore officers who worked together on a firearms crime task force and have been charged with stealing money, property and narcotics from people over two years. An indictment has described the members of the Gun Trace Task Force, a small unit dedicated to getting illegal guns off Baltimore's streets, as using their position to allegedly threaten the innocent, detain people on false pretenses and steal their money. They are also accused of faking police reports, lying to investigators and defrauding their department."

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/baltimo...-with-own-gun/
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 22nd November 2017, 08:10 PM   #218
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Allegations of conspiracies and proven conspiracies among police are a reality, contrary to PGP assertions to the contrary.

Here's an example of an alleged police conspiracy in Baltimore, Maryland:

'The federal grand jury is investigating a group of Baltimore officers who worked together on a firearms crime task force and have been charged with stealing money, property and narcotics from people over two years. An indictment has described the members of the Gun Trace Task Force, a small unit dedicated to getting illegal guns off Baltimore's streets, as using their position to allegedly threaten the innocent, detain people on false pretenses and steal their money. They are also accused of faking police reports, lying to investigators and defrauding their department."

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/baltimo...-with-own-gun/
The PGP have to believe the police would never, ever lie about their actions or to protect themselves. They would never, ever lie about smacking Amanda, withholding water, food or bathroom breaks, feeding her leading questions, threatening her with 30 years in prison, lying to her, denying her a lawyer or not recording the interrogation. Nope. Not ever.
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 24th November 2017, 07:19 PM   #219
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
This is a very interesting article about police not believing women who report being assaulted. Not only did the police, without evidence, decide the women were lying, but they charged the women with the crime of making a false report. One young victim named Marie, age 18, reported a man broke into her apartment and raped her.

Quote:
Police detectives treated small inconsistencies in her account — common among trauma victims — as major discrepancies. Instead of interviewing her as a victim, they interrogated her as a suspect. Under pressure, Marie eventually recanted — and was charged with false reporting, punishable by up to a year in jail. The court ordered her to pay $500 in court costs, get mental health counseling for her lying and go on supervised probation for one year. More than two years later, the police in Colorado arrested a serial rapist — and discovered a photograph proving he had raped Marie.

In Marie’s case, and with some of the other cases, the victims hadn’t acted the way the police thought a victim should act. Their affect seemed off, or they declined help from an advocate, or they looked away instead of making eye contact. As a result, their stories became suspect.
Sound familiar? Amanda Knox and Raffaele didn't "act" how the police thought they should act on Nov. 2 or during interrogations, etc. They relied on their "gut feelings". I can't tell you how many times I've read PGP declaring that they could see guilt in Amanda's eyes or declared her body language indicated she was lying.

Quote:
In 2001, a 13-year-old in White Bear Lake, Minn., reported being abducted and molested. “You keep lying and lying and lying and lying,” a police detective told her. In 2015, a physical therapist in Vallejo, Calif., reported being kidnapped and sexually assaulted. The police called her story a hoax. One lieutenant said that she “owes this community an apology.” In both instances, video footage later surfaced affirming the victims’ reports.
Studies show that police are no better at discerning deception than anyone else, but tend to believe they are. And once they decide a person is lying, that person becomes the suspect in their eyes. As the article states:

Quote:
Some victims will be hysterical, others stoic; police should not measure credibility by a victim’s response. Police should not interrogate victims. They should listen.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/o...=tw-share&_r=0
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 24th November 2017, 08:12 PM   #220
Pacal
Muse
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 861
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
This is a very interesting article about police not believing women who report being assaulted. Not only did the police, without evidence, decide the women were lying, but they charged the women with the crime of making a false report. One young victim named Marie, age 18, reported a man broke into her apartment and raped her.

Sound familiar? Amanda Knox and Raffaele didn't "act" how the police thought they should act on Nov. 2 or during interrogations, etc. They relied on their "gut feelings". I can't tell you how many times I've read PGP declaring that they could see guilt in Amanda's eyes or declared her body language indicated she was lying.

Studies show that police are no better at discerning deception than anyone else, but tend to believe they are. And once they decide a person is lying, that person becomes the suspect in their eyes. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/o...=tw-share&_r=0
Unfortunately this tendency to analyze victims and accused in terms of them acting or speaking "correctly" is a very common one. People look for "signs" in terms of demeanor or speech to indicate whether or not someone is telling the truth or is lying / guilty. Thus if someone is not "acting innocent" they are a suspect. Sadly the fact is the behavior of people is a poor guide as to whether or not someone is innocent or guilty of anything.

For example if someone is all fidgety and nervous when questioned by the police that may indicate nothing more than a bad case of nerves and not guilt at all.

As for speaking correctly some of the guilters have relied on the "science" of Statement Analysis, a pseudoscience based on the notion, quite unproven, that there is a "correct" "proper" way that truly innocent people will talk about the crime they are a accused of being involved in and that all guilty people will talk differently from an innocent person and of course Statement Analysis is a near infallible guide to guilt and innocence.

I have read Statement Analysis analysis which "proves" that Amanda Knox was guilty of a crime, it of course ignores the mountain of evidence that indicates she almost certainly had nothing to do with it.

But then Statement Analysis makes people feel they have a built in lie detector, so of course why bother with actual evidence.
Pacal 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 25th November 2017, 01:47 AM   #221
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
Unfortunately this tendency to analyze victims and accused in terms of them acting or speaking "correctly" is a very common one. People look for "signs" in terms of demeanor or speech to indicate whether or not someone is telling the truth or is lying / guilty. Thus if someone is not "acting innocent" they are a suspect. Sadly the fact is the behavior of people is a poor guide as to whether or not someone is innocent or guilty of anything.

For example if someone is all fidgety and nervous when questioned by the police that may indicate nothing more than a bad case of nerves and not guilt at all.

As for speaking correctly some of the guilters have relied on the "science" of Statement Analysis, a pseudoscience based on the notion, quite unproven, that there is a "correct" "proper" way that truly innocent people will talk about the crime they are a accused of being involved in and that all guilty people will talk differently from an innocent person and of course Statement Analysis is a near infallible guide to guilt and innocence.

I have read Statement Analysis analysis which "proves" that Amanda Knox was guilty of a crime, it of course ignores the mountain of evidence that indicates she almost certainly had nothing to do with it.

But then Statement Analysis makes people feel they have a built in lie detector, so of course why bother with actual evidence.
I agree that statement analysis is a pseudoscience. Much like interpreting body language, it is subject to conscious or subconscious bias and differing skill levels. Two "experts" analyzing the same thing will commonly arrive at conflicting conclusions.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 25th November 2017 at 02:19 AM.
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 25th November 2017, 06:04 AM   #222
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The PGP have to believe the police would never, ever lie about their actions or to protect themselves. They would never, ever lie about smacking Amanda, withholding water, food or bathroom breaks, feeding her leading questions, threatening her with 30 years in prison, lying to her, denying her a lawyer or not recording the interrogation. Nope. Not ever.
If she really was tortured for 54 hours, as she keeps claiming to this very day, and there were changing 'tag teams of twelve' to 'interrogate' her, then why did she not report it to her attorney and the American Embassy representative who visited her regularly?

Under Italian law Dalla Vedova had a duty and obligation to report the police abuse.

The ECHR claim is not moving along because their Directions clearly state that an applicant must prove they have exhausted all internal forms of complaint first (apart from Art 3: torture).

If she was tortured as claimed, where is the medical report describing the trauma?
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 06:10 AM   #223
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
This is a very interesting article about police not believing women who report being assaulted. Not only did the police, without evidence, decide the women were lying, but they charged the women with the crime of making a false report. One young victim named Marie, age 18, reported a man broke into her apartment and raped her.



Sound familiar? Amanda Knox and Raffaele didn't "act" how the police thought they should act on Nov. 2 or during interrogations, etc. They relied on their "gut feelings". I can't tell you how many times I've read PGP declaring that they could see guilt in Amanda's eyes or declared her body language indicated she was lying.



Studies show that police are no better at discerning deception than anyone else, but tend to believe they are. And once they decide a person is lying, that person becomes the suspect in their eyes. As the article states:



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/o...=tw-share&_r=0
It's not so much believing or disbelieving. The police have to consider whether the case will stand up in court. With often only the victim's word against the accused, the conviction rate for rape remains relatively low.

For a case to be accepted as fit for trial, the police do actually have to show 'reasonable grounds of success' (US = 'probable cause'). This is one reason Van Breda didn't go to trial for almost three years, as police struggled to find evidence it was likely Van Breda what dunnit. A strong suspicion is not enough for a court of law.

One minute the PIP are claiming Amanda was terribly respectably middle class and 'on the dean's list', and the next minute they claim she was decidedly 'dodgy' with a criminal demeanour, which gave the cops an understandable 'gut feeling' about her.

Which is it to be? Can't have it both ways.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 06:19 AM   #224
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
Unfortunately this tendency to analyze victims and accused in terms of them acting or speaking "correctly" is a very common one. People look for "signs" in terms of demeanor or speech to indicate whether or not someone is telling the truth or is lying / guilty. Thus if someone is not "acting innocent" they are a suspect. Sadly the fact is the behavior of people is a poor guide as to whether or not someone is innocent or guilty of anything.

For example if someone is all fidgety and nervous when questioned by the police that may indicate nothing more than a bad case of nerves and not guilt at all.

As for speaking correctly some of the guilters have relied on the "science" of Statement Analysis, a pseudoscience based on the notion, quite unproven, that there is a "correct" "proper" way that truly innocent people will talk about the crime they are a accused of being involved in and that all guilty people will talk differently from an innocent person and of course Statement Analysis is a near infallible guide to guilt and innocence.

I have read Statement Analysis analysis which "proves" that Amanda Knox was guilty of a crime, it of course ignores the mountain of evidence that indicates she almost certainly had nothing to do with it.

But then Statement Analysis makes people feel they have a built in lie detector, so of course why bother with actual evidence.
Body language is amazingly accurate and officials are right to pay attention to it.

For example, watch the early tv interviews with Ian Huntley, posing as 'just the humble school caretaker', before he became a suspect and arrested, charged and convicted of the murder of two little girls. He hides his hands behind his back. He frowns in faux concern, he fixes his eyes on the interviewer feigning frankness.

I caught a colleague red-handedly embezzling the company we worked for, and when he realised I knew, it was an astonishing sight as suddenly he began to tremble and sweat poured down his forehead.

These are exactly the signs customs officers and border staff are trained to look out for.

Of course, body language wouldn't be evidence in a court of law, but you'll find the best detectives are those with an ability to judge a person's character accurately, often within minutes. This will be based on body language, including voice, and a highly refined 'BS detector'.

Whilst body language can be faked, things like perspiration, tics and trembling, we have no control over.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland

Last edited by Vixen; 25th November 2017 at 06:28 AM.
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 06:26 AM   #225
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I agree that statement analysis is a pseudoscience. Much like interpreting body language, it is subject to conscious or subconscious bias and differing skill levels. Two "experts" analyzing the same thing will commonly arrive at conflicting conclusions.
It is not a 'pseudo science' as any one who works in advertising and PR will know. I have taken a 'content analysis' module as part of my psychology degree and it soon became clear how advertisers succeed in the art of persuasion, in why we should buy their product, and their clever techniques of imprinting their - often subliminal - messages onto our subconscious.

The reason people will fork out more for a 'brand name' (see Naomi Klein's Logo for example), shows the science of persuasion works.

Thus, nowadays whenever anyone with funds is accused of a serious crime, they will invariably - like Amanda Knox - spend more on the PR agent than the lawyer.

This raises the ethical question: should advertisers be allowed to determine the outcome of a trial, in exchange for money?
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 09:41 AM   #226
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,766
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
and the next minute they claim she was decidedly 'dodgy' with a criminal demeanour, which gave the cops an understandable 'gut feeling' about her.
No PIP has ever claimed this.
bagels 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 25th November 2017, 10:11 AM   #227
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
No PIP has ever claimed this.
The fantasy continues. After a six-month hiatus, the canard of "statement" analysis is back.

Mignini gets humiliated in his defamation claim against Sollecito and Gumbel, Nick van der Leek is humiliated at multiple places.... and Vixen simply waits a while, then starts again on another round of long since discredited stuff.
__________________
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 25th November 2017, 01:31 PM   #228
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
If she really was tortured for 54 hours, as she keeps claiming to this very day, and there were changing 'tag teams of twelve' to 'interrogate' her, then why did she not report it to her attorney and the American Embassy representative who visited her regularly?

Under Italian law Dalla Vedova had a duty and obligation to report the police abuse.

The ECHR claim is not moving along because their Directions clearly state that an applicant must prove they have exhausted all internal forms of complaint first (apart from Art 3: torture).

If she was tortured as claimed, where is the medical report describing the trauma?
Amazingly, but not unsurprisingly, inaccurate and hyperbolic claims.

Amanda has never, ever claimed she was "tortured for 54 hours". What she has said is that she was smacked on the back of the head 3 times during the Nov.5/6 interrogation. It is only during that particular interrogation that she claimed verbal and physical abuse. But why let facts get in the way?

Amanda also never claimed there were "tag teams of twelve" interrogating her. Twelve officers were scheduled for the night of Nov.5/6 (some brought in from Rome)
, but they were divided into interrogating Amanda and Raff. Amanda only says there were sometimes several in the room at the same time and explicitly mentions Ficarra, the "silver haired" officer and a few others. The fact that SEVEN police officer sued her for defamation (and lost) is evidence that there were seven interrogating her that night.

Amanda did report being hit. It's in her memorial of Nov. 6 and she also told the prison doctor and nurse who examined her upon her arrest. Please cite evidence of your claim that "Under Italian law Dalla Vedova had a duty and obligation to report the police abuse".

Your claim that the ECHR case is not moving along is belied by the facts that have been reported here on the case status. This is just another example of you pulling a "fact" right out of thin air (and elsewhere).

There is no medical report of torture because she has never claimed she was "tortured" physically. Since when do three hand slaps to the back of the head result in physical damage? Again, this is just another classic example of your need to grossly exaggerate in an effort to support your position. And it fails miserably.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 25th November 2017 at 01:57 PM.
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 25th November 2017, 01:40 PM   #229
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It's not so much believing or disbelieving. The police have to consider whether the case will stand up in court. With often only the victim's word against the accused, the conviction rate for rape remains relatively low.

For a case to be accepted as fit for trial, the police do actually have to show 'reasonable grounds of success' (US = 'probable cause'). This is one reason Van Breda didn't go to trial for almost three years, as police struggled to find evidence it was likely Van Breda what dunnit. A strong suspicion is not enough for a court of law.

One minute the PIP are claiming Amanda was terribly respectably middle class and 'on the dean's list', and the next minute they claim she was decidedly 'dodgy' with a criminal demeanour, which gave the cops an understandable 'gut feeling' about her.

Which is it to be? Can't have it both ways.
You're missing the point. The article was never about the police having enough evidence to go to trial. It was about the police deciding that a person was lying about being sexually assaulted. Not only making that decision themselves, but then filing charges against the victim for making a false police report. Victims who were later proved to have been telling the truth. Try reading it again.

You're right about one thing; you can't have it both ways. Which is why I've never seen any PIP claim Amanda "was decidedly 'dodgy' with a criminal demeanour, which gave the cops an understandable 'gut feeling' about her".

"Gut feelings" are just that: feelings. And feelings are just as often wrong as they are right.
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 25th November 2017, 01:50 PM   #230
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,654
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is not a 'pseudo science' as any one who works in advertising and PR will know. I have taken a 'content analysis' module as part of my psychology degree and it soon became clear how advertisers succeed in the art of persuasion, in why we should buy their product, and their clever techniques of imprinting their - often subliminal - messages onto our subconscious.

The reason people will fork out more for a 'brand name' (see Naomi Klein's Logo for example), shows the science of persuasion works.

Thus, nowadays whenever anyone with funds is accused of a serious crime, they will invariably - like Amanda Knox - spend more on the PR agent than the lawyer.

This raises the ethical question: should advertisers be allowed to determine the outcome of a trial, in exchange for money?
Statement analysis is not the same thing as the art of persuasion. Nor does it have anything to do with advertising. Thus, your post is entirely irrelevant.

Quote:
Statement analysis, also called investigative discourse analysis and scientific content analysis (SCAN), is a technique for analyzing the words people use to try to determine if what they said is accurate.
Nice try with that last "question", but it was just too glaringly obvious.
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 25th November 2017, 02:13 PM   #231
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 55,698
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
Unfortunately this tendency to analyze victims and accused in terms of them acting or speaking "correctly" is a very common one. People look for "signs" in terms of demeanor or speech to indicate whether or not someone is telling the truth or is lying / guilty. Thus if someone is not "acting innocent" they are a suspect. Sadly the fact is the behavior of people is a poor guide as to whether or not someone is innocent or guilty of anything.

For example if someone is all fidgety and nervous when questioned by the police that may indicate nothing more than a bad case of nerves and not guilt at all.

As for speaking correctly some of the guilters have relied on the "science" of Statement Analysis, a pseudoscience based on the notion, quite unproven, that there is a "correct" "proper" way that truly innocent people will talk about the crime they are a accused of being involved in and that all guilty people will talk differently from an innocent person and of course Statement Analysis is a near infallible guide to guilt and innocence.

I have read Statement Analysis analysis which "proves" that Amanda Knox was guilty of a crime, it of course ignores the mountain of evidence that indicates she almost certainly had nothing to do with it.

But then Statement Analysis makes people feel they have a built in lie detector, so of course why bother with actual evidence.
Embolded and enreddened by me for reasons that are obvious. Most people could not tell whether a person is lying or anything else of that type except for the most blatant (anger, fear, hate)..... If I am being tried for something I know I did not do, hate will be my clear appearance.
fuelair 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 25th November 2017, 02:15 PM   #232
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 563
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is not a 'pseudo science' as any one who works in advertising and PR will know. I have taken a 'content analysis' module as part of my psychology degree and it soon became clear how advertisers succeed in the art of persuasion, in why we should buy their product, and their clever techniques of imprinting their - often subliminal - messages onto our subconscious.

The reason people will fork out more for a 'brand name' (see Naomi Klein's Logo for example), shows the science of persuasion works.

Thus, nowadays whenever anyone with funds is accused of a serious crime, they will invariably - like Amanda Knox - spend more on the PR agent than the lawyer.

This raises the ethical question: should advertisers be allowed to determine the outcome of a trial, in exchange for money?
After Amanda was arrested, her family was bombarded by requests for interviews and the Knox family found themselves in a situation they didn’t know how to deal with. The PR firm was hired to deal with media interviews. PGP makes the ridiculous claims a small PR firm was able to influence trials in a foreign country. In view of the gross stupidity I have seen from PGP, this is exactly the kind of ludicrous claim I have come to expect from them.

There is one aspect PGP are strangely silent about is the highly effective PR machine the prosecution had. The media provided effective PR for the prosecution in numerous ways. As can be seen from the links below the prosecution carried out corruption and misconduct on a massive scale and numerous abuses were committed by the prosecution. To the best of the knowledge the mainstream media have never reported on the abuses carried out by the prosecution. To know about the corruption carried out by the prosecution you have to go on this forum and sites such as Injustice in Perugia . By not reporting the prosecution’s corruption, this was of enormous benefit to the prosecution. As can be seen from the links below, the prosecution used the media to spread falsehoods such as the purchase of bleach receipts, the washing machine running, showering in a bloody bathroom and the Harry Potter books. These lies were very damaging to Amanda and Raffaele and these lies could have influenced jurors. PGP such as Vixen constantly bang on about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies but defend corrupt prosecutors who released umpteen lies to the media and PGP had no problem when corrupt prosecutors spread lies about Amanda and Raffaele. Another example of how PGP show disgusting hypocrisy when they attack Amanda and Raffaele for lying.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contam...bwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredi...ry-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-...irs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com/...ele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11071314

The link below show how the media spread lies about Amanda and Raffaele and how hostile the media coverage was to Amanda and Raffaele. These lies were of immense benefit to the prosecutors and could have prejudiced courts. PGP such as Vixen constantly bang on about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies but had no problem when the media told umpteen lies about Amanda and Raffaele. Another example of how PGP show disgusting hypocrisy when they attack Amanda and Raffaele for lying.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/media.html

On this forum Vixen currently defends corrupt prosecutors and Machiavelli has done the same in the past which provided PR for the prosecution. The TJMK and PMF hate sites have slavishly defended corrupt prosecutors which means that there are two sites which provide PR for the prosecution.

Vixen and other PGP attack Amanda for using a PR firm but PGP have no problem with corrupt prosecutors using PR in their favour and PR working against Amanda and Raffaele. Another example of industrial scale hypocrisy by PGP.

Vixen claims Amanda’s family spent more on the PR firm than lawyers. Can Vixen provide evidence to support and provide exact figures for the money spent on the PR firm and lawyers or is this yet another falsehood.
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 25th November 2017, 02:17 PM   #233
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 55,698
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I agree that statement analysis is a pseudoscience. Much like interpreting body language, it is subject to conscious or subconscious bias and differing skill levels. Two "experts" analyzing the same thing will commonly arrive at conflicting conclusions.
Another reason I do not watch the TV show Bull (****)!!!!!...........
fuelair 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 25th November 2017, 03:27 PM   #234
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You're missing the point. The article was never about the police having enough evidence to go to trial. It was about the police deciding that a person was lying about being sexually assaulted. Not only making that decision themselves, but then filing charges against the victim for making a false police report. Victims who were later proved to have been telling the truth. Try reading it again.

You're right about one thing; you can't have it both ways. Which is why I've never seen any PIP claim Amanda "was decidedly 'dodgy' with a criminal demeanour, which gave the cops an understandable 'gut feeling' about her".

"Gut feelings" are just that: feelings. And feelings are just as often wrong as they are right.
Didn't you say the cops went after Amanda because they were relying on their 'gut instincts'?

In other words, she must have been giving off 'criminal' vibes, rather than the sweet American Pie one you keep trying to push in your other argument as to why she could not have possibly killed her room mate.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 03:33 PM   #235
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Didn't you say the cops went after Amanda because they were relying on their 'gut instincts'?

In other words, she must have been giving off 'criminal' vibes, rather than the sweet American Pie one you keep trying to push in your other argument as to why she could not have possibly killed her room mate.
What "criminal vides" was Giuliano Mignini giving off which caused him to be charged with abuse of office? What "unethical vibes" was Nick van der Leek giving off which caused Peter Quennell to suspect that he was a plagiarist?
__________________
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 25th November 2017, 03:41 PM   #236
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Statement analysis is not the same thing as the art of persuasion. Nor does it have anything to do with advertising. Thus, your post is entirely irrelevant.



Nice try with that last "question", but it was just too glaringly obvious.
Think about it. Advertising, or the 'art of persuasion' is all about telling lies, or at least 'overcoming people's resistance'.

If the plain brown caremelised liquid known as 'coca-cola' was sold in a plain tin, there is no way it would cost >£1 a tin, nor would Coca-Cola have a larger profit that the GDP of the entire state of Mexico.

Extrapolate this into criminal law. Imagine there has been a crime committed. You are interviewed by the police.

If you are innocent, you just tell the truth. If guilty, you have to come up with an 'innocent' script. This involves acting. You have to imagine how an innocent person would act in your position, and what they might say.

Thus we saw a situation in the Kercher murder of all of the other room mates and witnesses immediately seeking an attorney. Knox and Sollecito imagined that an innocent person wouldn't do this, so casually pretended they didn't need one and declined to appoint one.

Now, because a guilty person aiming to evade justice has to dream up a pack of lies, in effect, of course statement analysis is useful, as we can pick out contradictions, changes in stories (Raff changed his five times), changes in reported emotions. One minute Knox claims she was frantic with worry about Mez, banging on her door and shouting her name, in her email to the world, yet all witnesses at the scene when the police arrived report she was entirely laid back about the locked door, even going so far as to telling Battistelli the door was often locked.

The problem with lying is that people forget their lies, so when we examine Knox and Sollecito's babblings, and compare their book, tv and film narratives with what they told the police and the courts, we see a fascinating phenomenon of one lie after another and a fake alibi.

Crini explained in his submissions that a fake alibi was a piece of evidence in itself.

Thus, statement analysis is invaluable to courts and this is exactly what barristers are getting at when they cross-examine. They are aiming to highlight contradictions, fabrications and anomalies, which will go into their closing submissions.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland

Last edited by Vixen; 25th November 2017 at 03:55 PM.
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 03:52 PM   #237
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
Embolded and enreddened by me for reasons that are obvious. Most people could not tell whether a person is lying or anything else of that type except for the most blatant (anger, fear, hate)..... If I am being tried for something I know I did not do, hate will be my clear appearance.
Polygraphs (lie detectors) work, because they measure the rate of perspiration (which we have no control over, although savvy crooks know how to take drugs to suppress this). The sweat arises because lying is stressful. The mositure causes an electronic impulse to register on galvanometer, which can be graphed.

Of course some people are more nervous than others. This is why the pyschologist performing the test will ask a few neutral questions first to discover the individual's baseline. A lie will manifest itself as above the normal baseline, whatever that was.

Psychopaths can often lie without any sweat, and drugs can inhibit a true physiological response, which is why lie detectors are not considered valid evidence on their own. However, for detectives, it can help rule out who is not a suspect. (The WM3 all failed the lie detector on five key questions. One weirdo who insisted he was the killer passed the test despite his fake claims.)
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 04:05 PM   #238
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
What "criminal vides" was Giuliano Mignini giving off which caused him to be charged with abuse of office? What "unethical vibes" was Nick van der Leek giving off which caused Peter Quennell to suspect that he was a plagiarist?
That was Bongiorno vexatiously putting in a complaint.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 25th November 2017, 04:22 PM   #239
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,833
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That was Bongiorno vexatiously putting in a complaint.
Bongiorno had nothing to do with it. You haven't a clue how much trouble Mignini had got into in his predatory prosecutions/arrests in the Monster of Florence debacle.
__________________
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 25th November 2017, 04:28 PM   #240
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Kalevala
Posts: 11,464
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Bongiorno had nothing to do with it. You haven't a clue how much trouble Mignini had got into in his predatory prosecutions/arrests in the Monster of Florence debacle.
I thought this thread was about the Kercher case and the administrative clerical error of forgetting to put Raff's right to a lawyer (which he had anyway) in writing by his back office staff.
__________________
Hyvää itsenäisyyspäivä
100 years Suomi
Happy Independence Day, Finland
Vixen 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 12:06 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.