Comments on: American Girl, Italian Nightmare

A 48 Hours Investigation Raises Questions About The Case Against A U.S. College Student On Trial For Murder In Italy

[FawltyLogic]

dictionary.com
half-assed? ?/?hæf?æst, ?h?f-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [haf-ast, hahf-] Show IPA
?adjective Slang:
1. insufficient or haphazard; not fully planned or developed.
2. incompetent; lacking sufficient ability or knowledge

:)

[unixwiz]

FawltyLogic:

I know you can write more precisely than this! Your choice to use the idiom "half-assed" (I assume that's what you meant by the use of ass-terisks instead of "ss") makes your argument less clear, rather than more, as the idiom "half assed" is ill-defined and much subject to interpretation.

Because of that, my first preference would be to take the roots of the idiom literally, ie it's use would refer to some property of one possessing only one buttock. What property might that be? Could you be suggesting, that Peter Van Sant had been born a conjoined twin, and separated sometime after birth? What point would this make? Maybe it's something less extreme? Did he have a war correspondence accident? Does he have an artificial hip?

Still other questions might arise from less literal interpretations.

Exaggerated Regards,

Michael

[FawltyLogic]

It is certainly correct that the case has become a "tabloid nightmare" to some extent in the print media on both sides of the Atlantic. However, there have also been media outlets that, while not being biased or opinionated in one way or the other, have continued to report as accurately as possible on the case--including the investigation and witnesses testifying at trial. These include the BBC and Times Online in Europe and, in the US, Newsweek/Nadeau, Seattle PI/Vogt, NBC with former FBI profiler Van Zant--a knowledgeable "heavyweight" compared to Ciolino's featherweight status. Most serious readers will know and recognize both the overt tabloid reporting as well as spin, advocacy and deception by omission packaged as a "report."

[T_Mininger]

I hope the people accusing the American press of bias have also been criticizing the bias of the British and Italian presses over the past year and a half. This has been a tabloid nightmare.

[FawltyLogic]

Van Sant--sloppy, inexperienced, half a**ed, biased "report" consisting almost entirely of gratuitous spin with no serious investigation or journalistic effort or integrity.
Ciolino--buffoon, whether paid or not for his vehement (and factually deficient) theories.
CBS--hopefully ashamed at presenting this sloppy, biased, xenophobic piece on the same network that gave us Cronkite and Rather.

All of the above---not even an ATTEMPT at objectivity. NO sensitivity for a victim and her family who, irrespective of the guilt or evidence of the "American girl", are entitled to some thought and respect. NO mention of Amanda's repeated lies, bizarre behvior, or admitted history of sexual promiscuity and sex fantasies (myspace). No rational analysis of the dna/knife issue or various versions of events (lies) told by Knox or of the timeline of events (which is admittedly complex and requires mental horsepower sadly lacking in the people featured in this "piece").

CBS' reputation as a reliable source of news is, has and will be blighted by this kind of unmitigated twaddle.

[sassalin31]

CRIMSON_H and Others,

You should really research forensics and I don't mean CSI (NONE OF THAT SHOW IS REAL).

The chances of finding any usable DNA after a wash in bleach or soap is small. Bleach and soap alter the material and testing cannot be done, normally.

If this crime was a bloody as the media and law enforcement make us believe there WOULD be more evidence against these people.

This case is based on a cop with a gudge. No usable evidence has been found that leads to Amanda or her former boyfriend. Any evidence that they say leads to their guilt was not handled properly and should not be used in court.

I am all for justice but this case, the story and the motive don't make any sense and most of the time that means it's not true.

[unixwiz]

Oops. I accidentally omitted a name in the passage that reads:

"but later found in apartment."

That should have read:

"but later found in Sollecito's apartment."

Sorry.

[unixwiz]

CRIMSON_H:

Good job! You caught me in the act of (unintentionally, but still carelessly) committing the same kind of offense that I've been railing against others committing - and in a post attempting just that too.

I had caught an assertion that Knox had used the knife to cut a cake at her house. Unfortunately I sloppily punted using the word "allegedly" to avoid making it appear as though I was stating a fact rather than chasing down the details. This is how a lot of conjecture ends up being taken as gospel.

I did look up the CNN reference, dated 2007, before the emergence of controversy.

The knife seems to have moved around a lot, being used in Kercher's house, but later found in apartment. I'm looking for something that would confirm which of them it really belongs to, but haven't found it yet. (And I'm red-faced about saying it originated in Kercher's house based on an assumpton rather than on a confirmable assertion. I'm leaning toward the possibility that it was Sollecito's, but just calling it Sollecito's does not necessarily make it so. I don't think CNN knew of the cake-cutting assertion at the time that article was written, so it was easy to "assume" it belonged to Sollecito. Gee. Even the big guys occasionally commit the offense I did. I don't feel so bad, now.

- Michael

P.S. I note in the CNN article that Knox's criticized drug usage was that of smoking hashish (a derivative of marijuana), not the abuse of narcotics (drugs like oxycodone hcl , morphine sulfate, diacetyl-morphine hcl (aka Heroin?), and so on). Not quite as severe an offense!

Ironic Trivia time: Did you know that Heroin? was originally marketed by Bayer as a cough syrup and as a "cure for morphine addiction". They stopped marketing it in 1910 after discovering that it works essentially by being metabolized into morphine. About a decade later, they lost most of their trademark rights to the name Heroin? together with rights to the name Aspirin under the Treaty of Versailles.

[alexaUK]

Michael, your post was hilarious.

[CRIMSON_H]

The knife did NOT belong to Knox or Kercher - it was NOT part of the cutlery at the girls' cottage - it belonged to Sollecito.

It was found back at Sollecito's apartment, washed down in bleach - the victim, Kercher, had NEVER been to his apartment.

Amanda's DNA is on the handle, the victim's DNA is on its tip.

My source? CNN.

Here's the quote from CNN's archives - you can confirm it for yourself via a simple Google search:

"Tests showed DNA belonging to both Knox and Kercher was found on Sollecito's knife, which was retrieved from Sollecito's apartment, police said. Kercher's DNA was found near the tip of the knife, while Knox's DNA was found near the base. Police also found the knife had been washed, authorities said, but in-depth testing was able to recover the DNA."

[unixwiz]

CRIMSON_H:

I've had second thoughts over my parody of your postings. It's tone really did not belong here. Not one of my finer moments. Would you accept my apology?

[unixwiz]

"The fact remains: Amanda's DNA is on the handle of a knife that has the victim's DNA on its tip."

Were it not for such strong forensic evidence, ...."

OK, let's take a quick look:

The knife allegedly came from the victim's own kitchen drawer. The victim and the accused shared the same kitchen. Either of them could have accidentally cut her own finger on the blade. Most people hold a knife by it's handle. Both had the opportunity to do do, having shared the common domicile.

I seem to be missing the link that transforms this "Why would it be so surprising that both their DNA is present as described?" circumstance into "such strong forensic evidence".

Please fill in the missing datum/data that led to your certainty, and cite your source for what you fill in, Thanks.

- Michael

P.S. By "cite your source", I mean "where did you obtain the missing data from?". If you got it from a newspaper article, please cite the name of the paper, the publication date, page number and article title. If you obtained it from an online publisher, or blog, please provide a URL, so that one could make at least an attempt to verify the accuracy of the report. If you got it from your cousin Sarah, please post her phone number so that one could call her to find out where /she/ got the data from. This is the point I've tried multiple times to present: If you want to convince people, you need to provide data that they can verify for themselves. Citing your sources makes it possible for them to do so]

Please also try to apply the same critical thinking approach to the other points you are trying to examine.

For example, Was she permitted bail? If so, was she able to make the bail (one might presume so, in such circumstance, based upon the alleged wealth of her parents).

Try asking questions such as:
Was she denied bail? If so, was she permitted to bring much of her wardrobe from home into her cell? If so, did she have the opportunity to change into more appropriate clean attire than that "All you need is love" T-shirt? Was she in fact wearing that shirt? Did you see a photo of it? If so, did you personally consider it disrespectful? Would you have the same opinion if you knew that she had no other clean shirt to change into? If you did not see a photo of that shirt first hand, what instilled in you an awareness of it? A newspaper article? A blog?

What is the basis for saying that the letters were 5 inches high? Assuming glyphs that are 5 inches high by 5 inches wide, the twenty letters and spaces in "All you need is love" would occupy a width of 100 inches. That's over eight feet wide. Even if folded to two lines, that would still be 4 feet wide. Picture a T-shirt huge enough to accommodate all that text draped upon her slim torso. It would probably look more like a desert dishdasha than a T-shirt. Do you think it would be at all readable?

Now that you have attempted such critical examination, do you still trust your source for the description of her attire?

[lawbster]

Laurence Smith,

This report was fundamentally biased, it begins from the premise that Italy and its courts are corrupt and Americans can't get a fair trial. If you want to seriously find out the facts of the case, I suggest you read some of the reports of Andrea Vogt in the SeattlePI , Barbie Nadeau in Newsweek or Nick Pisa in the British Press or better still go to the site www.truejustice.org.

Mr. Preston wants to sell his book and it's clear that neither Mr. van Sant nor his producers actually bothered to invetigate the facts of this case. There is no travesty of justice, the only travesty is that CBS allowed this trash to air.

[casionova]

I think the real nightmare is being experienced by the victims family, not the suspects

[CRIMSON_H]

Even if you buy that the 'bra clasp' evidence is contaminated, that only helps Amanda's boyfriend, not Amanda.

The fact remains: Amanda's DNA is on the handle of a knife that has the victim's DNA on its tip.

Were it not for such strong forensic evidence, Mignini would have released Amanda long ago (just as he released Preston & Spetzi when there was no evidence to support their conviction).

[CRIMSON_H]

No mention of Amanda's abuse of illicit narcotics to the point of (convenient) memory loss.

No mention of her boyfriend's collection of knives & violent Japanese "manga" comics depicting rape at knife-point.

No mention of Amanda's repeatedly changing alibis (she's on her 4th version of events at this point.)

No mention of how the police arrived at the murder scene to find Amanda & her boyfriend standing in front of the cottage with a mop & a bucket, looking very "surprised."

No mention of her boyfriend's lies (eg. stating that he called the police before they arrived at the scene, when cell phone records prove this to be false)

No mention of the many witnesses that have now testified so as to contradict sworn statements made by both Amanda & her boyfriend.

Not even one picture of that terribly disrespectful "ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE" T-shirt (printed in letters about 5 inches high) that Amanda wore to court.

This is all "spin." It is NOT 'fair & balanced' journalism.

[harryrag1]

Hi serene1205,

I agree with everything you've written. Please read

CBS Report Sets New Record For Trashing Of Meredith, Xenophobia, Multi-Inaccuracies, Possible Libels

on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher website:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

Cheers,

Harry

[unixwiz]

Actually, the TRUE story is that CRIMSON_H and kc629 and cizinka31000 are the real SATANIC co-conspirators. After all, they have been trying as hard as possible to deflect suspicion away from themselves with a concerted effort to use what they call FACTS (for which they are unable to cite concrete sources) to PROVE that Knox is guilty. Isn't this a CLASSIC TECHNIQUE used by guilty parties?

By getting together to convince others of the TRUTH of what they call the FACTS of Amanda's GUILT, they get others to parrot their own words (also without citing sources), just as they are parroting the words of those who came before them. If enough people say it's true, then it must be, right? Dozens of people can't be wrong!

But the fact that they are doing this with such ferocity is PROOF of their own GUILT. Would they display such powerful patellar reflexes if they weren't guilty? They must be. Each of them should be jailed for 30 years for their part in the murder. The mere fact that they have actively participated in this conspiracy of misdirection proves not just their guilt, but that they *feel* guilty!
Why would they try so hard to generate a chorus of people singing the words of uncitable FACTS if they weren't in fact ABSOLUTELY GUILTY? Those are not the acts of innocent people! Especially in the case of CRIMSON_H. He is as guilty as they come, and any denials he might make are at least as absurd as those being offered by Mignini in defense of his own prosecutorial conduct!!! I would never allow my daughter to set foot in the same city as CRIMSON_H, let alone the same campus. Would you? Not me. The things he might say or do to deflect suspicion scare the becheeses out of me!

Lets not hear any more from those who keep parroting those unbacked "facts". I'm getting so-o-o tired of reading such specious arguments, not to mention the simply ridiculous ones, that one result they have is that I'm starting to feel sympathy for Knox despite knowing that I don't have sufficient factual basis for such sympathy.

- Michael

[alexaUK]

I don't know what the truth is. You don't know what the truth is. Amanda knox doesn't know what the truth is. Maybe we're all guilty.

[CRIMSON_H]

Those are NOT the words of an innocent woman.

Amanda is as guilty as they come.