Welcome to the new Injustice in Perugia public forum. Please be patient as we work out the details over the next few days. This is a trial run. Let's see if we can make it work.

A great idea. It is vital that the truth of this case is made known. Injustice thrives in the darkness, in secret, in hiding. Exposing the errors, and worse, in this case to light literally makes it impossible for the purveyors of injustice to escape censure. With the eyes of the world watching, any attempt to mislead or ignore the serious problems with this case will be done at the peril of the reputations of those involved. Sadly, if they continue to try to create a case out of fantasy, their shame will become Italy's shame, and the many good, intelligent and fair people of Italy don't deserve that.

Let's not over-moderate this? It would be nice to attract some guilters who would like to discuss the case without fear of infractions or bannings. I think the rule should be no permanent bans, no matter what.

Our goal is to do very little moderating at all. If everyone follows the general guidelines there will be no need for moderation.

Sounds good. I think both sides are somewhat sick of JREF.

Honestly I think the idea of permanent bans is a terrible one. Meatball wiki has a very good discussion of online communities and talks at length about the problems of long term bans. I think Withnail1969 is absolutely correct in the belief that JREF did a terrible job, in turning what should be a recruitment thread into a losing good members forever thread. Casual permanent bans and deletionism is what turned Wikipedia from an online community growing by huge percentages every year to one that has been shrinking for several years running.

Or on the other side, PMF has done a terrible job in turning what should logically be advocacy board into a community that is too closed to outsiders to reach out effectively causing them become even more closed and thus even less effectual.

Our goal is to do very little moderating at all. If everyone follows the general guidelines there will be no need for moderation.


I like the optimism! Let it be!!

OK, I see this is a public forum anyone can join this.

What? I've already had a post deleted. I'm off to a good start!

Okay first question. Does anyone have a link to a representation of the footprints and shoeprints together?

If anyone does Charlie Wilkes would have it. I've never heard anyone ask for that before though.

i have to say that I am very disappointed with the way JREF was moderated. I was a lurker there for some time and the way it was shut down showed no respect for fairness or natural justice. If this forum can take over it will be providing a public service.

The guilters should come here and we should welcome them. People should be able to heatedly debate and perhaps even throw out a few ad hominems without constantly fearing the moderators. I think they prefer the safety of their PMF castle though, now that the case is seemingly going against them. I don't know what response they can sensibly give to the Curatolo heroin dealing debacle, for example.

Your post fell victim to bad site design. I had to delete that forum and start over. This is a work in progress.

I like the look of this forum. It's low-key and easy to read.

Attached is a photo showing the latent footprints (blue) and the first two bloody shoe prints (red) in the corridor.

The latent footprint outside Meredith's door was oriented with the toes pointing toward the door. This, according to Rinaldi, matches Amanda's foot. The two latent footprints outside Amanda's door were both of a right foot, and were oriented with the toes pointing toward the kitchen. Rinaldi says one of these prints looks like Sollecito's foot. I have never seen anyone even attempt to present a narrative that accounts for the location and orientation of these prints.

The shoe prints, however, form a pattern that began inside the room, and are consistent with Rudy Guede exiting the room and walking toward the exit with blood on the sole of his right shoe - a conclusion his defense does not contest.

I think you may be looking at two different groups. On PMF you have fundamentally a hate group. Just about everything is a celebration of hate. Hatred of various posters, on these forums, hatred of Amanda, hatred of article writers. They do a great job of tracking activity on the internet, they always make it a point to make silly snide comments about the innocentisti like 3rd graders and then compliment one another for on not having outgrown that. That seems to be the core of PMF, though some of the others may be capable of reason. Having reasoned discourse anywhere on the internet would alienate them from the leadership of their forum. So it can't happen. When is the last time you saw PMF discuss anything about the case?

I've had 3 of them drop by the blog and they so far haven't been able to prove any points. Anything about all the new evidence? They haven't come up with a response regarding the autopsy and that's the key to the entire appeal. Toto going plus the autopsy and you have a situation where the court could rule that Meredith died between 9-9:30 and then game over. I haven't seen much discussion of the case there at all. You all have known them longer but so far I'm shockingly unimpressed by the PMF crowd, I've heard prior to Oct there was something of value there. I use them as a link farm for new articles. H9 does useful work still, though interestingly he frequently guts the articles he quotes which means he reads them and feels he has to censor... The PMF group turns on each other all the time. No hint of dissent is tolerated and that drives people off. We'll get them after they leave PMF.

Which at least when you move off PMF is very different then what you find among "guilters" on various other forums. There you find some combination of:

a) An overly high level of respect for authority, a basic belief that police and prosecutors are rarely wrong.
b) Mistakes about the facts of the case.
c) Tremendous anger about her accusations against Patrick.

That group I'd hope to attract here.

Your post fell victim to bad site design. I had to delete that forum and start over. This is a work in progress.


Isn't that what the prosecution should have done in this case


Thanks Charlie, I knew you had posted something like that before, but I looked and couldn't find it.

So Amanda & Raffaele are likely properly deemed "limited public figures" here in the USA because the media made them so and they are involved in a very public or noteworthy trial. That appears to limit their ability to sue for defamation or invasion of privacy unless they show malice in the reporting of the truth. Even though we have First Amendment rights and freedom of speech, at some point shouldn't they be able to stop a private corporation from making big profits by using their unwanted "fame"? A movie is not necessarily news reporting.

Thanks Charlie. I wanted to float a theory out about the footprints. Maybe it's half-baked, who knows.

I think many people agree that Guede was probably in the bathroom when Meredith Kercher came home. Hearing someone arrive, but not knowing who or where, Guede might have removed his shoes to make his way through the house to investigate. He may have paused outside Amanda's room to see if someone was there, then moved to Meredith's door. He would, under this maybe far-fetched scenario, have committed the crime with his shoes off, then put them on. Given the various reconstructions on where he was standing at the time, it's possible, though admittedly unlikely, that he could have avoided blood on the souls of his feet.

Or else they are just normal, run of the mill household footprints...

CD-Host posted: "They (PMFers) haven't come up with a response regarding the autopsy and that's the key to the entire appeal. Toto going plus the autopsy and you have a situation where the court could rule that Meredith died between 9-9:30 and then game over."
____________________________


I agree that the time of death is of paramount importance. However, Judge Hellman has not agreed to any discussion concerning said time.

I had earlier observed that one of the footprints in the hall appeared to have a blood drip associated with it. In reexamining that print and some of the others, they all appear to have the characteristic of a stain created by diluted blood that dried up leaving a dark contour at the periphery.

My theory is that Rudy rinsed blood off his pant leg in the shower and stepped out onto the mat leaving the bare footprint. He then toweled off his foot, put his shoe on and walked back into Meredith's room. Standing in Meredith's room, the bloody water saturating his pants pools at the cuff and drips down on the shoe and this accounts for the prints left at the foot of the bed.

The lack of a second trail of footprints is an indicator that the prints on the pillow are also part of the same continuous trail. This would make Rudy's final sequence in the cottage: wash pants in shower, return to Merediths room, walk on pillow, place pillow beneath Meredith, cover meredith with Duvet, walk out of room closing and locking the door behind him and walk out of the cottage.

It should be possible to line these prints up in a sequence and see a progressive chain as blood is deposited on the floor and new blood is applied to the shoe. This would aid in confirming or busting this theory or even show where there are gaps in the sequence of prints.

On the topic of deletions and bannings, I agree that we should debate as much as possible. OTOH, in every group, board or comments section related to this case there have been examples of conduct that is not debate or even respectful discussion but rather is personal attack, defamatory statements and incitement to hatred and cruelty. A certain level of adult discourse is necessary if people want their views included. People must expect statements to be answered by people who oppose those statements. As long as the discussion is rational and respectful, it contributes to an understanding of this case. Where civility is lost, the purpose of the forum is abrogated. I have too often seen intelligent comments made that attracted abuse which resulted in the contributor falling silent. If that is the purpose of a comment, to make someone else simply fall silent, then it is, in my opinion, inappropriate and at the very least the attack should be flagged and censured by some degree of moderation.

We will approach this day by day. We have no intention of allowing the behavior that you have described. We are optimistic that the general guidelines will be followed and little moderation will be necessary. This forum offers something different. Lets see how it goes before we get too worried about moderation.

There were two bathrooms, the one where Guede used the toilet without flushing before the murder, and the one where he cleaned up after the murder.

I think the totality of the evidence suggests that he went into the bathroom, rinsed his foot and/or the cuff of his pants leg under the bidet, removed his right shoe at some point, possibly because water trickled into it, and put his foot down lightly on the bathmat, leaving a print composed of bloody water. I base this on the location of the footprint relative to a pattern of bloodstains in the bidet.

The past three years have made me far less tolerant than I formerly was. I generally favor keeping the other side off this board, because I don't think they have anything constructive to offer, and I don't think they really care about the facts and the evidence in this case.

Ann Rule wrote about the scene outside the prison in Florida the day Ted Bundy was electrocuted. A group of people had gathered to celebrate. They were waving home-made signs with messages like "Today is Fry-Day!"

Rule was disgusted. She, of all people, knew that if anyone ever deserved to be executed, it was Bundy. But she viewed it as a grim task rather than a cause for jubilation. And I think most people would agree that this kind of behavior, from people who had no connection to Bundy or his victims, is pretty weird.

That is who we are up against on the Internet. Long ago, a group of credulous people convinced themselves, on the basis of media reports, that Amanda is as deserving of hatred and derision as Bundy. They have been vilifying her, her family, and her supporters ever since. They claim to care deeply about Meredith, yet they make light of the case with childish satire, of which I have included a few examples below.

I guess that is supposed to be Meredith's blood on the oversized cardboard Halloween-costume knife.

I see no possibility of productive communication with people who think and behave this way.

You're right, of course. I've never understood what place all this Photoshop mockery has in any discussion of the case. I don't find any of it remotely funny. It just screams 'internet crank'.

Does anyone, any longer, believe that the time of death was not soon after 9.00pm? There has been much discussion elsewhere of stomach contents and time of last meal, but the clincher for me is the aborted phone call from Meredith to her mother. Does anyone believe that she would not have tried to call home again as soon as she could, after the first attempt, but was unable to do so because she was attacked?

I had a very close friend who lived in Florida, at the time. Very rarely sympathetic to anything and he couldn't believe that gathering. I understand that societies must do terrible things to defend themselves, including maintain a penal system. But to celebrate the of that system shows either ignorance or a deep seated sort of hatred.



I agree completely. How is Meredith honored by establishing a hate cult in her name? Meredith is the product or an interracial couple, people who were able to step outside the nasty sectarianism, derision and tribalism that PMF promotes.



I guess here I'm more optimistic. Once the behavior stops being reinforced it drops off rather dramatically. You would be surprised how fast people reform once they leave these hate reinforcing environments. I have a post on my blog where a leader of a group like this apologizes. You have to make some adjustments for the fact that
a) She is doing this in real life, not the internet
b) Its a Shepherding movement and PMF's objectives are different; so for example they don't really need you to tithe.

Also, remember a lot of the hatefulness is coming from the fact that the facts are against them. When they joined this cause there was a trail of bloody footprints from Amanda all over the house, a murder weapon, physical evidence that contradicted the alibi and top notch forensics. Now roughly ever month they've had one key element fall off on the plus column and the evidence of prosecutorial misconduct is irrefutable.

Hello Everyone,
I posted a discussion of the bra clasp DNA at JREF on page 95 of the second continuation thread yesterday. Just to clarify one point. I think if you gave the electronic data files of this sample to several different investigators, they might come to different conclusions about certain peaks. However, there is a good chance that all would say that at least a partial profile matching Raffaele is there. The point of my comment at JREF was more methodological: Tagliabracci argued that he saw instances of what he called "suspect-centered" analysis, and I tend to agree. That having been said, this is a widespread problem in DNA forensics; in this one instance, Dr. Stefanoni has plenty of company.

In undertaking their independent review, to what extent will the court appointed experts dig into the issue of potential contamination of the sample? I guess I've always kind of expected that the bra clasp would test positive Raffaele's DNA, but I thought the real issue was the various means by which the DNA could have gotten there.

wald1900,

I don't know. The presence of the DNA by itself tells us almost nothing about how it arrived there. One might hope that the independent experts would look at the film of how the clasp was collected and declare it improper, but I don't know that their authority extends that far or not.

Another few points about TOD being right after Meredith arrived home at 9pm. Her jacket was found in such a manner suggesting it was being worn when attacked then was pulled off and one arm was inside out. We should look at the DNA on it. Also, Meredith put a load of clothing into the washing machine when she left earlier in the day. The damp clothes were never removed to be hung up for drying. The timeline of being attacked at 11:30pm would mean she was home 2.5 hours and yet still had her jacket on and hadn't removed wet clothing to dry overnight yet. And the witnesses with the broken down car saw no lights on, heard no noises, saw no one enter or leave and the gate already opened between 10:30 pm and 11:35/40pm.

Wald1900, Raffaele's appeal argues that they don't believe the DNA sample is Raffaele's. They have argued that material found on the metal is just over 1,000 pico-grams, but only about 1/8th of it has a Y chromosome indicating it is from a male. There appears to be several females contributing DNA, so DNA from someone else besides Meredith appears present. The prosecution expert conceded that the male portion is only 1/6th of the material. Under either fraction, the male DNA is less than 200 pico-grams and thus should be retested using LCN-DNA procedures. This will include additional amplification and it must be analyzed twice. This will allow much better review of the peaks as they must show clearly in both results or be considered noise. Raffaele's attorneys strongly feel it's not his DNA but do also say if this better testing confirms that it is, then it was transferred via contamination or other means not involving Raffaele touching it the night of the murder. I agree the collection is so sloppy and potential for contamination is so high that it is worthless evidence, but have suggested we be aware of Raffaele's argument, he may be very correct.

I have often wondered about Meredith's profile on the knife. I few things I have wondered are:
1. On single person profiles of more than 100 rtu, how rare is it not to have background noise of less than 100 rtu.
2. On profiles such as the one that they claim is Meredith's. Was there any background noise and how rare would it be if this is the case.?

The alleged double DNA knife had an extremely small amount of material which read "too low" several times meaning it could have been as little as 10 pico-grams, down to zero. Clearly it was under 200 pico-grams and thus required LCN DNA procedures too. This was not done, and the testing destroyed the tiny amount she claimed existed. Two tests are required for LCN DNA along with additional amplification. Two tests would help considerably in determining if peaks are noise or not. We will never know if noise was misread to match Meredith because for several reasons this alleged sample was not tested using the required scientific standards, it just wasn't.

After three plus years the undeniable fact that Amanda Knox is INNOCENT BY COMMON SENSE is still unchallenged!

Amanda is a most IMPROBABLE PARTICIPANT to commit a crime of aggression; Amanda had NO IMAGINABLE MOTIVE. It is so far-fetched to even suggest that Amanda desired a sexual romp with her roommate, boyfriend of six days, and a barely known drifter. Why are there still attempts to invent guilt by hyping nonexistent evidence (going so far as to call it ‘a mountain’ of evidence) and trumpeting so called ‘gotchas’ such as ‘why didn’t Amanda let the call to the victim’s phone ring longer’, ‘why didn’t Amanda/Raffaele call the police sooner’, and ‘why . . .’ ?

The standard reply of those professing Amanda’s guilt is ‘you don’t need a motive to convict’. This may be true in some instances, but certainly doesn’t apply in this case because it is beyond comprehension to think that Amanda participated in this sexual assault/murder with her lover of just six days and a little known drifter. There are individuals who apparently want or need Amanda to be convicted, thus they attempt to invent and/or manufacture guilt.

Michelle Moore received a message from one of the guilters :


PMF, TJMK Open letter signer -
dougcl79PUREHARDROCK / DougPDX / Doug L. Clement

Lovely Lot
:/

This new discussion format is a great idea Bruce! Thank you for all you have done in the fight for justice for Amanda, Raffaele and their families. You are a truly good person.

Wow. That Doug Clement guy is a real sweetheart.

Isn't there a saying that often those that make insults against others do so because they are often rightfully accused of being guilty of exactly that which they complain of. Doug, is in a hole, he himself made

PMF, TJMK Open letter signer -
dougcl79PUREHARDROCK / DougPDX / Doug L. Clement

Lovely Lot

http://img201.imageshack.us/i/1ff453f10a46c544c5326a5.jpg/

For those who haven't seen it, here is a clip of Greg Hampikian on Northwest Nights with Frank Shiers, to which I have added a visual overlay:



As a practical matter, contamination occurs at crime scenes and in labs on a regular basis. When technicians are dealing with microscopic quantities, the smallest error can produce a flawed result. One interesting case involves the Donnah Winger/Roger Harrington murders. This crime was the work of a true psychopath. Mark Winger lured a cab driver with a history of mental problems to his house, after he had already killed his wife, then shot the cab driver and called the police, saying he killed the driver because he came home when the driver was in the act of killing his wife.

There is no doubt of Winger's guilt, but the police initially bought his story, because of Harrington's mental problems and some evidence that Winger had carefully planted in advance. Harrington's family kept after them until they investigated more carefully, at which point they realized the whole thing was a setup. But at the trial, Winger's defense came up with some DNA evidence that simply should not have been there - namely, Donnah Winger's DNA in several places on Harrington's clothing, suggesting that he really did have contact with her before he was shot. Here is a scan from a book about the case, part of the CBS 48 Hours book series:


Image was edited for size

DNA evidence is not like fingerprint evidence, because DNA can be transferred by third parties or by contact with other objects. It can happen even with evidence that is properly handled, but it goes double when the evidence is handled in a sloppy way and/or subjected to testing outside the limits of what a lab usually does, and it ought to go triple when the evidence appears like magic just when the prosecution needs it to protect their theory.

There's an interesting article about Mignini on PMF, which TomM has posted after he or Clander translated it from an Italian news outlet. Mignini, as we know, thinks the Monster of Florence murders were commissioned by a cult that needed female body parts for its rituals. It seems the very man who prosecuted Mignini for abusing his authority was suspected by Mignini of being a cult member, and was therefore someone who would have had a motive to suppress or divert Mignini's investigation.

I have to admit that Mignini's conduct does not seem all that different from what his Florentine adversaries did. They are all a bunch of fools. But reading this article helps me understand why Mignini was convicted. He could have arrested and jailed any number of foreign students or ordinary citizens with impunity, and no court would ever have doubted his claims no matter how idiotic. Mignini's mistake is that he went after the cops themselves, in a different city. Maybe he really believes they are occult consumers of detached genitalia. But I wonder if he has asked himself what they have been doing to supply their grisly rites in the 25 years since the last MOF murder.

Maybe he thinks they have gone to a vegan format, summoning the power of the Dark Lord with chopped-up produce.

That's a nice interview from Greg Hampikian. He sounds very confident in his comments. He discussed a paper submitted for Amanda by another DNA expert, do we know who it is?

Injustice in Perugia is now available in Paperback.

https://www.createspace.com/3473655

Createspace is an Amazon company so you can feel secure about the server.

It won't finish charging my credit card on my iPhone, looks like a JavaScript problem. Dang, will have to crack open the laptop. The estimated shipping times seem a bit delayed, I'm being told the cheapest method won't deliver until March 03, 2011. Oh well, it's more for my mom & sister who just won't accept Kindle versions yet, so it's ok if it take 3 weeks.

It's actually telling you it takes that long? I will look into that. I was told much shorter delivery times.

Oh it's so tempting to put Mignini's office address as the delivery address ))

Here is the TV ad I submitted to Lifetime for the Amanda Knox movie. I was not surprised they rejected it, but I gave it a try...

I'll bet he already has had it translated. I think he follows all this stuff carefully.

Great ad Charlie. To bad it wasn't okd.

I don't take it personally. They have sponsors and agencies who spend millions every year with them. This has generated a lot of controversy, and they are being cautious. But I figured it was worth a shot.

I've heard 15 second ads on Lifetime are, due to their popularity, only $250 per run, it could be featured on their Monday night special in 10 days. It might be that figure is wrong however:)

They just said they don't accept advocacy ads. I'm not surprised, and I don't take it personally. GMA got a "no comment" from them the other day, which sounded pretty harsh at the end of a segment describing how upset the families are.

Executive producer Craig Piligian of the Lifetime movie ‘Amanda Knox: Murder On Trial in Italy’ said he screened the movie internally to his staff, and even in-house there's no consensus on whether or not Knox was involved in the crimes. "Everyone's divided, and the viewing public will likely be divided as well... That's what makes this such a great story."

Maybe Mr. Piligian might consider journeying to Perugia, Italy and personally saying that to the innocent Amanda Knox!

Yeah, thanks for that, Craig Piligian. Just in case anyone was thinking the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele was a bit dodgy, let's inject some uncertainty into the ongoing appeal hearing.

To Bruce

Hey Bruce is excellent works, and your doing a great job, keep up the good works Bruce!!!

From Tom

PMF acted honorably and removed the user from their site that sent Michelle Moore the vile message. Unfortunately it is too little too late. If they remove the childish animated posts of Amanda by "Jester" I may begin to think they are ready to change their ways. In one of these animated disasters "Jester" actually uses an animated figure that appears to be topless. Can someone please tell me how this behavior serves as a memorial to Meredith Kercher?

I don't know how honorably they are acting. I'm glad they distanced themselves from hate emails. Suddenly though my having posted about this along with a half dozen other examples before Skep in response to one of their posters, and then quickly putting a notification that they had taken action (i.e. being honest because I had wrongly blamed them for the string of profanities) means I was in on it with Doug and he is really an FOA plant.

The idea that maybe thousands upon thousands of posts of uninterrupted hate speech might lead someone to do something they don't approve of.... I'm just looney tunes for suggesting such a thing. They have not turned over a new leaf. Michael responded angrily to what he considered my false equivalency between what you and Chris and Charlie do in actually looking at evidence and what they should be doing. In his mind they don't need to look at evidence the trial has already happened. So at least now it is out there.

They still fully approve of what they did to that couple in the much larger sense. Maybe Doug's attack was unauthorized and that's what they are upset about. Who knows? But no, a genuine desire for civil discourse is something they absolutely reject.

I wish to applaud the following post on PMF by 'Solange305' in which she says the following:



That's all we're asking for. Thanks.

CD-Host,

My comment that PMF acted honorably had a touch of sarcasm. I don't think everyone at PMF rejects "civil discourse." Unfortunately they have been heavily influenced by, and in some cases look up to, those who run the site. I read a post from Solange today. He/she feels honestly that their site serves as an honorable tribute to Meredith. I am open to listening as to why this person believes that creating animated characters with Amanda's photoshopped head dancing around topless somehow serves as a tribute to Meredith Kercher.

A majority of PMF's members no longer post. I truly believe they saw exactly what I see. The site is in poor taste and they want nothing to do with it.

You have certainly gotten under their skin in the past few weeks. I will be honest, I haven't had the time to read through all of your blog or your interaction with PMF. I have seen a few posts from both sides that are out of line. I am not one to judge. I have lost my temper from time to time and said things I would later regret. The goal isn't to see who can make the other side more angry. The goal is to expose the honest truth about this case. The truth is clear for anyone willing to see it. Amanda and Raffaele have been wrongfully convicted. I know we will never change the minds of those running True Justice or PMF. Mignini could call and tell them Amanda and Raffaele were innocent. Massei could post a rebuttal stating he was wrong and it wouldn't influence their position. PMF would respond with another brilliant photo collage or cartoon.

I've always wanted Solange305 to start discussing this case. I hope she does pop over. I used her as an example on JREF of a stupid ban of a guilter. And when Skep, Michael and Jools... were going after me personally Solange was one of the ones who said this looked stalkerish.

BTW if you do ever read this. The answer to Pete's first question is:

Yes. Innocent people frequently give conflicting, disoriented and dishonest to questions including changing alibis during intense interrogations. There are innumerable references to this, including the standard textbooks (American) police officers use to train. It is a well known fact about 25% of all confessions the police get are lies. The emotion you felt when you backed down so quickly on that thread (i.e. fear of social disapproval) can be deliberately or accidentally amplified enormously by an interrogator. Comments like the one you got, "I really hope Meredith's family and friends don't read your comments. Vicious sex killers shouldn't be allowed to get away with their sadistic crimes because you have had some issues with the police in the past" are designed to get you to deny your actual thinking.

An interrogation works by creating emotional agitation. In the agitated state an interrogator may get lies that contain elements of truth which can be very useful, you may get a "confession" (which reduces anxiety), you may start getting total garbage like you do frequently from torture. We know they were agitating her by doing things like telling her Raffaele had turned on her and she had AIDS. And frankly I believe she was being roughed up a little too.

So yes. Innocent people do create false stories and lie to police under interrogation all the time. It is a well documented problem that responsible police officers and other investigators have to compensate for. The only time Amanda has ever given a story other than being Raffaele the entire night is under intensive interrogation. There aren't multiple alibis there is one alibi and then one night where she gave several.

You have to decide what to make of the night of November 5th.

OK if you think I've crossed over I respect that. I don't want our side guilty of the same things as their side is. I believe in civility and they've managed to get under my skin. Its certainly possible that I vilified and demonized them as a psychological defense against their harassment. Without giving context, if Rose is game (since both sides consider her civil) I'll extend the same thing to her for the next 90 days with respect to the Knox threads or comments on any other threads that veer into Knox territory (since I have a PMFer who seems active / interested in the translation threads). She says it is out of line I will: delete, edit or retract as possible.

I like the idea that we hold each other to account and since I'm the one they are most targeting lately that makes sense.

Nice to see some of them were decent enough to call for his removal from their group.

I have to admit, they've surprised me.

Lifetime should do a movie on PMF & TJMK but the dark psychological aspects might go so deep and be so complex it would end up a long messed up mini series. It's interesting to look at people who are so closed minded they can't even discuss any other point of view but their own.

The discussion blog on Google that this forum has replaced will now be used for featured articles and videos. I have written a series of articles that I would like to post in the blog format with the ability for readers to post comments. This is the reason I have decided to go with the blog format over the main IIP site for these articles. As always, if anyone has an article that they would like to feature just let me know. The blog will develop over the next couple of weeks. I will post links for new articles when they become available.

The blog now features an excellent article by S. Michael Scadron.

http://injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/

http://www.rickross.com/reference/books ... _list.html

That discussion between Machine and Solange today is just a perfect example of how they achieve that objective. Of course the really ironic thing that Solange kept pointing out was she had originally raised that point to prove me wrong on my claims of cult behavior. If Solange had been the kind to defend herself she would have gotten banned.

Are your good deeds never enough?
Are you motivated by love or fear in not meeting the desired standardss?
Is questioning the group, or the group leaders, discouraged or frowned upon?
Does the group you belong to believe that it is an elite and exclusive organisation which alone has ‘the truth’ and answers to life’s questions?
Does the group pour scorn upon, attack, and mock others and their interpretation of [the evidence]? (I'm replacing scripture here)
Is reading any literature critical of the group discouraged? Many cults will warn members not to read anything critical of the group, especially if written by an ex-member (who are called names by the cult such as “apostate”, “hardened”, or “of the devil” etc.). This is a well known information control technique to stop the member from discovering the clear and documented errors of the cult. Members abilities to think for themselves is effectively disarmed in this way. Instead, they will think more and more as the rest of the group thinks.
Does the group discourage association with non-members
Does the group give you ‘black and white answers’? What the group agrees with is right and what the group disagrees with is wrong.
Does everyone in the group believe exactly the same things (i.e. what the group leaders tell them to believe)? Is there no room for individual belief, or opinion even in minor areas?
Does the group wear ‘two faces’? On the one hand, does it attempt to present itself, to potential converts and the public at large, as a group of people who are like one large family, who have love among themselves, where everyone is equal? But on the other hand, the reality is, that many members inwardly feel unfulfilled and emotionally exhausted?
Have you attempted to disable your own God-given critical thinking abilities by ‘shelving’ various doubts about the group or group’s teachings etc.
Are others in the group, who do not conform to the requirements of the movement’s teaching, treated with suspicion, and treated like second class members?
Does the group tend to withhold certain information from the potential convert? Are the more unusual doctrines of the group not discussed until an individual is more deeply involved in the movement?
Do you feel fearful of leaving the group? Many cults use subtle fear tactics to stop members from leaving. For example, the group may imply that those who leave will be attacked by the Devil, have a nasty accident, or at least not prosper because they have left ‘the truth’.

I don't think we need to get this carried away. I highly doubt the remaining posters at PMF are there due to fear of the devil.

This is a good article posted by Candace.

Lifetime Pulls Disturbing Amanda Knox Video
http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/archives/238817.asp

Fair enough. I meant that more metaphorically. Found my old results from last time. This is the 100 question test result from my blog which works well for secular groups like psychology cults:

I'm treating Mignini as the leader.

1. The Guru is always right. Yes
2. You are always wrong. No.
3. No Exit. No.
4. No Graduates. Yes.
5. Cult-speak. Yes.
6. Group-think, Suppression of Dissent, and Enforced Conformity in Thinking. Yes.
7. Irrationality. Yes.
8. Suspension of disbelief. Yes.
9. Denigration of competing sects, cults, religions... Yes,
10. Personal attacks on critics. Yes.
11. Insistence that the cult is THE ONLY WAY. Yes.
12. The cult and its members are special. Yes,
13. Induction of guilt, and the use of guilt to manipulate cult members. Yes.
14. Unquestionable Dogma, Sacred Science, and Infallible Ideology. Yes.
15. Indoctrination of members. Yes.
16. Appeals to "holy" or "wise" authorities. Yes.
17. Instant Community. Yes.
18. Instant Intimacy. No.
19. Surrender To The Cult. Yes.
20. Giggly wonderfulness and starry-eyed faith. Yes.
21. Personal testimonies of earlier converts. Yes.
22. The cult is self-absorbed. Yes.
23. Dual Purposes, Hidden Agendas, and Ulterior Motives. No.
24. Aggressive Recruiting. No.
25. Deceptive Recruiting. No.
26. No Humor. Yes.
27. You Can't Tell The Truth. Yes.
28. Cloning -- You become a clone of the cult leader or other elder cult members. No.
29. You must change your beliefs to conform to the group's beliefs. Yes.
30. The End Justifies The Means. Yes.
31. Dishonesty, Deceit, Denial, Falsification, and Rewriting History. Yes.
32. Different Levels of Truth. Yes.
33. Newcomers can't think right. Yes.
34. The Cult Implants Phobias. Yes.
35. The Cult is Money-Grubbing. No.
36. Confession Sessions. No.
37. A System of Punishments and Rewards. Yes.
38. An Impossible Superhuman Model of Perfection. No.
39. Mentoring. Yes.
40. Intrusiveness. Yes.
41. Disturbed Guru, Mentally Ill Leader. Yes.
42. Disturbed Members, Mentally Ill Followers. No.
43. Create a sense of powerlessness, covert fear, guilt, and dependency. No.
44. Dispensed existence. 1/2.
45. Ideology Over Experience, Observation, and Logic. Yes.
46. Keep them unaware that there is an agenda to change them. No.
47. Thought-Stopping Language. Thought-terminating clichés and slogans. Yes
48. Mystical Manipulation. No.
49. The guru or the group demands ultra-loyalty and total committment. No.
50. Demands for Total Faith and Total Trust. Yes.
51. Members Get No Respect. They Get Abused. No.
52. Inconsistency. Contradictory Messages. Yes.
53. Hierarchical, Authoritarian Power Structure, and Social Castes. Yes.
54. Front groups, masquerading recruiters, hidden promoters, and disguised propagandists. No.
55. Belief equals truth. Yes.
56. Use of double-binds. Yes.
57. The cult leader is not held accountable for his actions. Yes
58. Everybody else needs the guru to boss him around, but nobody bosses the guru around. No.
59. The guru criticizes everybody else, but nobody criticizes the guru. Yes.
60. Dispensed truth and social definition of reality. Yes.
61. The Guru Is Extra-Special. Yes.
62. Flexible, shifting morality. Yes.
63. Separatism. Yes.
64. Inability to tolerate criticism. Yes.
65. A Charismatic Leader. No.
66. Calls to Obliterate Self. No.
67. Don't Trust Your Own Mind. Yes.
68. Don't Feel Your Own Feelings. Yes.
69. The cult takes over the individual's decision-making process. Yes.
70. You Owe The Group. No. .
71. We Have The Panacea. No.
72. Progressive Indoctrination and Progressive Commitments. No.
73. Magical, Mystical, Unexplainable Workings. No.
74. Trance-Inducing Practices. No.
75. New Identity -- Redefinition of Self -- Revision of Personal History. Yes.
76. Membership Rivalry. No.
77. True Believers. Yes.
78. Scapegoating and Excommunication. Yes.
79. Promised Powers or Knowledge. Yes.
80. It's a con. You don't get the promised goodies. Yes.
81. Hypocrisy. Yes.
82. Denial of the truth. Reversal of reality. Rationalization and Denial. Yes.
83. Seeing Through Tinted Lenses. Yes.
84. You can't make it without the cult. No.
85. Enemy-making and Devaluing the Outsider. Yes.
86. The cult wants to own you. No.
87. Channelling or other occult, unchallengeable, sources of information. Yes (police experts).
88. They Make You Dependent On The Group. No.
89. Demands For Compliance With The Group. Yes.
90. Newcomers Need Fixing. Yes.
91. Use of the Cognitive Dissonance Technique. No.
92. Grandiose existence. Bombastic, Grandiose Claims. Yes.
93. Black And White Thinking. Yes.
94. The use of heavy-duty mind control and rapid conversion techniques. No.
95. Threats of bodily harm or death to someone who leaves the cult. No.
96. Threats of bodily harm or death to someone who criticizes the cult. No.
97. Appropriation of all of the members' worldly wealth. No.
98. Making cult members work long hours for free. No.
99. Total immersion and total isolation. No.
100. Mass suicide. No

____

I scored them 605, which is cultish tendencies. Which is damn high for a group that only exists on the internet.

CD-Host,

I usually describe them as cult-like so I would have to say that your 100 question test is pretty accurate.

Charlie,

Compelling video. Really nice job. While Lifetime chose to pass, I linked your video to my Facebook page for "Friends" to see. The current link takes my "Friends" to youtube, but it would be neat if they could be taken to the IIP or a similar site where other information about the case is readily available to the curious. Is it possible to embed this (and similar) video clips directly to the IIP website or blog?

I will put the video on the front page of IIP. Then you can right click it and copy location. That link will let people view the video and bring them to IIP. Charlie will most likely add it to Friends of Amanda also.

Good idea on this. thanks.

Here is the link that you can use.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/index.html#anchor_184

Many people following this case are simply mistaken, and the main reason they are mistaken is because they don't know enough to differentiate evidence that really proves guilt vs. extraneous data that probably means nothing. For example, Barbie Nadeau has cited the mixed DNA sample from Filomena's room as strong evidence against Amanda. Anyone who is familiar with criminal investigations would realize this test proves nothing.

In contrast, Guede's bloody handprint is proof, in and of itself, that he was present when Meredith was killed. Unless one believes he was there with her consent and left the print when he tried to help her after someone else burst on the scene, committed the murder, and fled, then he is guilty. DNA traces, along with the footprint in the bathroom, the evidence in the large bathroom, the broken window, and the bloody shoe prints all fit together to form a narrative that is plausible and familiar.

A lot of experts have expressed the opinion that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent. John Douglas is the most recent. How many experts outside the Italian justice system are looking at this case and endorsing the official story?

We have facts. We can present the forensic evidence, and we can present the analysis of experts to show what this evidence does and does not mean. That is a productive approach, IMO. We don't have to worry about what is being said by people who are misinformed or uninformed.

Thanks. Definitely, use Bruce's link to drive traffic to IIP.

Many people following this case are simply mistaken, and the main reason they are mistaken is because they don't know enough to differentiate evidence that really proves guilt vs. extraneous data that probably means nothing.

Wait, Raffaele seems to know nothing of importance was stolen, yet they called the police anyways, and Amanda claimed she was really scared Meredith was missing in an e-mail which the police say she really wasn't. I mean WOW, they should be in prison for 25 years for that, shouldn't they? I mean geeez, come on that just really proves a lot to me, who needs DNA or real proof they were in her room or used the knifed when they have such faithful proof as that? Besides I studied law watching Dragnet, so don't try and convince me I'm wrong!

Oh, sorry I just woke up and realized my concerns might be a little over stated and probably means nothing. Nevermind

Nice list of cult characteristics.

I agree with all that has been said here?

Does that mean we are a cult?

The problem with a checklist of cult characteristics is that you could apply many of them to almost any group built around shared beliefs or a shared purpose. What matters are the beliefs themselves. Are the beliefs reasonable? Are they shared by reasonable people outside the group?

If someone were to say that I am a fanatic, obsessed with overturning this verdict, I couldn't dispute that. But, I understand the facts of this particular case, and I am well-informed about the larger problem of which it is an example. And I know Amanda's family. I know her mother. I'm a fanatic in the service of a just and worthy cause.

Just to be clear, my comment refers to a very small group of people online. Charlie is absolutely right about the big picture. A majority of the general public is not fanatical on one side or the other. Those who view Amanda and Raffaele as guilty have been misinformed by hundreds of inaccurate news reports.

Most people are not interested enough in trials to dig below the surface. For an injustice to be corrected a member of the family usually needs to convince a journalist to get the ball rolling. Unless a case is very high profile, like this one, this hardly ever happens.

I have been slightly involved (through work) in a case in England where a man who was found guilty of sexual abuse of a step daughter has always claimed to be innocent. I have visited him in prison and have spoken to him on the phone many times and have read the evidence file. I still don't know whether he is innocent or guilty but there are disturbing things about the case and it is clear that the prosecution, once they were convinced he was guilty, had no hesitation in throwing in irrelevant details to sway the jury e.g. (1) He is foreign (2) His wife owned a vibrator and this was placed on display in court for the duration of the trial, although it had nothing to do with the case. There were arguments about disputed phone records as well - the prosecution said he was phoning the girl a lot - but she was skipping school and his job meant that he was the one who was supposed to check on her - his wife received and paid the phone bills so she could see all the calls anyway. These things can be spun. The existence of reasonable doubt has to be eliminated.

To cut a long story short, his sister has only just got him a lawyer to fight for an appeal after about three years in prison. He will be out next month. Most prisoners who are innocent just have to shut up and serve their time. The average person does not dig below the surface.

The checklist is designed to determine those organizations that have a structure to encourage unreasonable beliefs and to what degree. I suspect every group is definitely going to score higher than 0, very few get over 900. But if someone wanted to do the score for IPP and PMF I think you would see a spread of several hundred points. It would be useful if the same person did both at the same time.

As for guilters in general. I agree. As I said on the 31st there you are (in my experience) looking at some combination of:

a) An overly high level of respect for authority, a basic belief that police and prosecutors are rarely wrong.
b) Mistakes about the facts of the case.
c) Tremendous anger about her accusations against Patrick.

(a) correlates with what's called "right wing authoritarianism" or "authoritarian submission" (link for more information) though only about 1/2-1/3rd of people with a pro police bent will be RWA. (b) probably is uncorrelated and (c) is likely negatively correlated.

I would agree that there were some very angry folks who felt Amanda should have not named Patrick under any circumstances. Her own statements appear to support that she has a somewhat similar view, but she doesn't blame herself. This of course ignores the issues of the cops activities that appear to have lead to this happening, and just how voluntary could it have been. Even if Amanda named Patrick on purpose to cause him some problems because she was mad at him for some reason and wanted the cops to stop bugging her, and yet she knew she had not harmed Meredith, is not 3.5 years in prison now enough to calm these people down. I mean if she did name Patrick on purpose, and wanted to get the cops off yelling at her, but is innocent of killing Meredith, isn't enough, ENOUGH at this point? I have read a lot about false statements and confessions etc....and think that explains it all!

I agree with you 100%. I don't hold her responsible at all for that, Patrick incident. But in my experience that is the #1 argument of not terribly informed guilters. Some are even more mad about that then would be about Meredith. The "blame it on the black man" issue they see as a hate crime and thus she, as a racist, poses a serious threat to society. They want the hate crime aspect punished harshly. The homicide might have been situation or their might have been extenuating circumstances, were it not for the racism. The good thing is the interrogation argument works well for those people. Particularly when they find out the cops were the ones who suggested Patrick. If you need icing, throw in business owner with a white wife... Then its racist cops bullying a white girl into falsely accusing a black man .... and they do a 180. IMHO this is Americans reading way too much American culture into a foreign situation. But that's my experience of the #1 reason joe average guilter doesn't like her.

Federal hate crimes in the US generally are 10 years, I think that's what they have in mind.

Look at her age, given a lack of murderous intent, given no priors, given all sorts of obvious mitigation, given the incredibly high fine her family has paid, my guess is that if she did harm Meredith and we knew the whole story 3.5 years would be more then enough. In her home state the average prison time for 1st degree murder for a first time offender is 121 months. What's happening to her is pure sadism.

It was a coerced statement, like many others. But, beyond that, the police had a lot of options in how they dealt with the situation. A more experienced department would have brought Lumumba in for questioning, and if they really thought he was dangerous, put him under surveillance.

The Annie Le murder at Yale is a good example. The first thing the cops did when she went missing was to examine the security card logs, and Raymond Clark's movements stuck out like a sore thumb. A reasonable person would have very little doubt he must have been involved. And the police were under a lot of pressure. They had the media in their face, telling them they had a duty to keep the public informed about the progress of the investigation. What is more, if Clark was off his rocker, he might be dangerous to someone else. So they kept him under surveillance. They held off the arrest until they had their DNA work and solid evidence.

The difference is that Yale has had other high-profile murders in recent history, including one (Suzanne Jovin) where the police totally screwed up. They had learned from their mistakes. So when people say, "oh, the police had no choice but to arrest Patrick after Amanda accused him," it only shows that they don't know how a competent investigator handles these situations.

The main problem with guilters believing Knox named Patrick because she is racist, is the simple fact that if she is guilty, she committed the crime with a different black man.(Guede)
So if guilters believe she is racist and killed Meredith. Then that same guilter must believe Guede is innocent. Its totally illogical to call Knox racist because she named an innocent black man as the murderer and then in the next breath accuse Knox of commiting the murder with Guede. I would consider those people not knowing what the real meaning of racism is. I was a kid in the 70's in a Southern state and saw what racism looked like. Though its very rare for me to witness racism in todays times, I know what racism looks like. White racists dont have sex orgy's with blacks. Let alone help a black man commit rape against a white woman. If they would only look at their history, whites hung or burned black men for having consensual sex with white woman. Thats racism.

Solid point Chris,

I've seen you write this before. It is indeed completely contrary that Amanda Knox was okay having a party and sex ogry with RG and yet accused PL because she was a racist.

I wonder why 'Stay Strong Mandy' doesn't get this?

After all - American girls are bodacious, not racist.

Chris remember this is about the "not terribly informed guilters". HuffingtonPost was the example I gave. Essentially newspaper sites, conversation if you are reading a book about Knox or her name comes up .... They don't generally know about Guede because Guede hasn't gotten much media coverage. Think about the book covers to get an idea of their mental world:
Darkness Descending: AK, RS, MK
Angel Face: AK
Murder in Italy:AK, MK
Injustice in Perugia: AK, RS
Take me with you: AK
Monster of Perugia: AK + Police
Murder of Meredith Kercher: MK huge (AK, RS, RG small)
University of Strangers: AK (maybe)

Heck it wouldn't shock me if they thought AK, RS and MK murdered some British girl. I agree with everything else you wrote. But I'll stand by my statement that in my experience that's the #1 reason I hear for people believing she's guilty. It may be a stupid argument but its the #1 most common one I run into. The police argument works. I do like the counter argument of pointing to Rudy Guede. I'm a little concerned though because in my experience lots of racists have a few black individuals they were fond of. The saying from a generation ago: In the South white people hate Blacks as a group and like them as individuals. In the North they like Blacks as a group but hate them as individuals. So I'll try and report back.
____

And H9 if you are reading this. You are cutting much too much from the quotes. Too little context. Or just follow through on your threats and ignore me please.

Hi there, it's Michelle here. This is my first time here, and I LOVE the idea. As long as people can be mature enough to be able to agree to disagree (which will, of course, happen) I'm in!

Hi,
I wanted to say that after studying this case, if they truly have, I cannot imagine them not coming to the same conclusion that we have had. I am willing to be it to be favorable towards Amanda in the very end. However that said, I still am very upset about them doing it in the first place, and I'm horribly upset for them showing the brutal murder and rape of Meredith. It's very wrong. It makes me hurt for the family.

I'm sure someone could come up with some kind of Reality Show with discussion threads goin' down. Really interesting stuff I'm sure (NOT). If you could see me in this "Reality Show" you'd see me multitasking quite well. I can manage, somehow, to make dinner and read....clean and check in..I bring my computer for when I'm in the car waiting for kids...it's kinda sick, really! And of course phones are great and easy ways to keep up... jk (btw, I hate reality shows, even though we were in one years ago...it was fun! I would tell you but then I'd have to shoot yo,.so THERE! Guess away, everyone.. Mwa ha ha! Good night.

Regarding her "accusation" of Patrick, what clinched it for me was reading an article by Douglas Preston in which he described his interrogation by Mignini's goons--it was terrifying even for a hard-bitten middle-aged journalist--so Amanda absolutely had no chance. Too bad that whoever was responsible for her preparation for her exchange program, apparently never instructed her that in the event of real trouble, she needed to contact the American consulate, then retain an attorney pronto. I hope this leads to changes in how university foreign exchange programs prepare their students before going.

__________________

Kevad,

It's not known whether Meredith did any laundry on November 1st, either in the afternoon or in the evening. There were exactly two people with Meredith at the cottage in the afternoon, Amanda and Raffaele. (Filomena and her boyfriend, Marco, had left before Meredith came out of her bedroom.) Neither said that Meredith did a load of laundry.

///

She wasn't in a formal program. So there was no Dean of Students calling back to Seattle and acting as loco parentis until the 6th. That's basically the reason this situation spiraled so far out of control. There were no responsible adults involved and the police wanted to keep it that way. The police believed that Amanda had crucial information. And they knew that once an adult was involved things would be very different. Her parents arrived the morning of November 6th, tand so interrogation on the 5th, from their perspective, either had to produce a result leading to an arrest or had to produce an assurance that they had what they needed. A responsible adult would have understood quickly that Amanda and Raffaele were in real peril and the night of the 5th never would have happened. I wrote an article about this topic: Amanda Knox and Prosecutorial Abuse.

The childlike joy, childlike trust that Amanda had in '07 and '08 was a wonderful quality the sort of thing to light up anyone's life. But there is a reason most parents raise their kids to be more skeptical.

In my opinion, in this type of case where they are investigating a murder and may be seeking a life sentence, the laws & treaties between the USA & Italy should require that a US Citizen can not be made a suspect nor can any voluntary statements or other statements be obtained until the person has met with an American consulate representative and obtained an attorney if requested. They should not be able to question non citizens of Italy all night long, without a certified interprter and without an attorney, and especially not until a meeting occurs with a consulate official.

However, they later confirmed a load of damp laundry was in the washing machine that consisted entirely of Meredith's clothes. Correct?

yes, and Amanda addresses this in her email of the 4th, stating that Meredith either put clothes into or took them out of the washer. it was also confirmed at some point that they were only Meredith's clothes and not a mixture of both girls' clothes which was a red herring thrown at one point

The whole issue of the washing machine is a red herring except that, if anything, it pushes TOD back to around 9.00pm. Meredith was found wearing the clothes she was last seen in by her friends. Therefore the clothes that were in the washing machine must have been put in there by Meredith earlier in the day unless there is a suggestion that the murderer would have washed a random collection of Meredith's clothes for no reason. I believe that Kevad is right to say that Meredith would have taken her jacket off and removed the washing if she had time before being attacked. I also believe that she would have tried to phone her Mother again. All this places the attack at close to 9.00pm.

London supporter, I like the way you phrased the details about the washing machine and phone calls and TOD...With your permission I would like to copy most of it into a post on the FB group Free Amanda Knox... With or without attribution to yourself as you prefer.... if it is ok to use as is...

I was just pointing out the flawed thinking of guilters believing Knox is a racist. But to reiterate on Racism. If you are truely a racist, then the thought of interracial sex would disgust you. So there is no way around that. The prosecution claimed that Knox helped Guede rape Meredith. So to believe she is guilty of the crime she is condemned for and also believe she is racist, leads to an irrational conclusion.

McJustice - please be my guest. No attribution necessary.