Were either AK or RS showing symptoms of, or receiving treatment for, depression or anxiety? Abnormal hormonal and/or blood sugar levels?
Were any of those things presented in the trial as a possible explanation of the shared confusion and memory issues?
Unless specified otherwise and linked, my posts are simply random thoughts of mine, in no particular order, not directed at any post or poster, including but not limited to the ones directly above mine. My opinion only, yours may vary. IMO. JMO. IMHO. JMHO. MOO. Disclaimer, small print, asterisk, and etc.
Do any thumps result in suspects repeating what thy are told to say after two hours of questioning? Children? Mentally defective? Anyone? Who confesses to murder after two hours of questioning ... forget about the thumps on the head - which appear to be fiction. We must keep in mind that Amanda thumped herself in the head not only during those two hours of questioning, but also at the cottage while pointing out the knife drawer in the cottage kitchen.
We can only surmise, Meredith laying back on her bed against her pillow, swinging her feet, giggling and randomly punching numbers on her cell phone -- dialing her mother (oops) dialing her v.mail (oops/giggle) dialing her bank (oops) rejecting photo from friend so no fees are incurred (doubt it)
what about xanax? xanax abuse can definetely cause memory loss like that.I've been suspecting that for the longest time now.
What was the catalyst for that change? Is it possible that ILE believed they had video surveillance of Amanda entering the cottage that night and told Raf this? If Amanda is guilty and she was actually confessing to being present during the murder, isn’t it a bit strange that her statements contain nothing about the events of that night that weren’t already assumed by police and that the story is only consistent with their belief that she had met Patrick that night – a theory of theirs that turned out to be completely wrong?
If she was already confessing to being there why does the story suddenly stop at the murder, and not continue with what they did following it, like the alleged clean-up or what they did with the keys? Why was nothing new or relevant deduced from that interrogation if we’re to believe she was actually there?
What does it tell you that instead of just bringing in Patrick for questioning and see if he had an alibi, police immediately arrested him despite Amanda’s letter stating her doubts about her statements which implicated him? Is it just another coincidence that ILE told the press the same day of the interrogation that "It is not excluded that in the next few hours one of the many persons interviewed in recent days might be converted into a suspect." And that the next day they announced “case closed” and that Knox had "buckled and made an admission of facts we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them all in.”
If Amanda was so willing to accuse Patrick, why did it take ILE’s misinterpretation of the text message to get her to do so, and why did she continue to deny it until the point where they convinced her she’d been traumatized and didn’t remember?
These are most, but not all of the strange circumstances surrounding the interrogation on the night of November 5th.
2. Funny you mention Reefer Madness. We all know of and laugh at how ridiculous that old movie is. Ironically, it's exactly the same ridiculous notion that Mignini and Massei argue is the catalyst for Meredith being killed, when everybody knows that marijuana has the opposite effect on people.
http://www.falseconfessions.org/cases-the-incarceratedKarl, an impressionable street kid with no family and few friends, was easier to break. After only two hours the police had another confession, one suspiciously similar to Tommy's. Problem was that the confessions shared some of the same wrong information.
I recommend reading the stories from the linked site. I know incredulity plays a large part in not believing that something like what Amanda claims could happen, until you see that it's happened before.
Fontenot wasn't mentally all there to put it mildly. AK is a bright young college student. You can't really compare these 2, IMO. I totally agree that Fontenot is innocent and his confession was coerced.
Unfortunately, a tape of AK approaching the cottage at 9 is contradicted by RS and AK watching a DVD until 9:46, and does nothing to explain the presence of RG. I am reasonably certain that is not AK in that video.
(ETA otto posted a cite from the Motivation Report that has the DVD ending at 9:10 rather than 9:46. Still not early enough to put AK at the cottage "around 9", but closer.)
Last edited by Nova; 02-09-2011 at 12:13 PM.
I.e., AK doing a cartwheel in the police station does not prove she ran around Perugia with a heavy, unsheathed 12" knife just for fun.
The cases against AK and RS are very consistent: weak to non-existent forensic evidence that when challenged somehow always turns into evidence of inappropriate demeanor. The end result is that AK gets a quarter-century in prison for allegedly doing cartwheels; RS gets the same for, I don't know, knowing AK, I guess.
Last edited by Nova; 02-09-2011 at 12:15 PM.
The reference to parsimony at 9:58 makes no sense whatsoever, unless MK was calling someone else's voicemail. If so, why isn't that person identified? If she was checking her own messages, maybe she hung up the phone when she heard "no new messages"; otherwise, it makes no sense to call your own voicemail, but hang up before you hear the messages to save minutes.
1. AK kissed her boyfriend. This is unusual how? I've never heard that kissing is forbidden after a death.
2. AK allegedly stuck out her tongue. How many times? Once? In what context? How many hours after the discovery of the body? Since this is such important evidence to to you, I'm sure you can give us the specifics.
3. AK bought a change of underwear. We now know she went to a general store, not a store specializing in exotic lingerie. Her own clothes were locked in a crime scene, so she bought a change. How is changing one's underwear inappropriate?
4. AK allegedly did one or more cartwheels at the police station. How many times? Once? In what context? How many hours after the discovery of the body? Again, I'm sure you have the specifics since this seems so important to you.
Multiple weapons to the point of the ridiculous carried by an individual are not unusual as evidenced in the pages of this site.
Young, impulsive [imo sociopaths] giddy with the thought of the possibilities with the reinforcing load adding bravery….impetus…..
Maybe RS’s regular pocket knife was not adequate for the possibilities or the eventuality.
I don’t mean to interrupt the conversation but I think if an understanding of the knife is to be had the closer examination of the fetish associated with knives and their role in the act is called for.
A knife lover is going to want bigger not smaller and carrying it and any associated discomfort is all part of the attraction.
The carrying of an unwieldy knife is a reminder of the move from thought to action.
It also may have had some sort of significance to the couple.
Obviously I feel the right people are in jail. I felt it even stronger seeing tape of the two sort of unexpectedly on high def on a huge TV. Chills ran through me. I wouldn’t want to run into either of them in a dark alley.
I do feel for AK’s mother but her father and AK have a lot in common, imo.
Per the evidence posted above (by otto, IIRC), RS had any number of knives that would have done just as well and were easier to transport. There is no testimony that he or AK fixated on a particular steak knife. (And, as I'm sure you know, there is no blood on the knife in question and very little DNA from the victim.)
There is no testimony that AK and RS ran around Perugia with unconcealed (and unconcealable) knives.
Ascribing actions to nonspecific and undiagnosed sociopathy is like blaming "satanism": it removes the alleged actions from the realm of human behavior and puts them in a place where "anything is possible" and therefore anything may be believed with or without proof. IMO, it isn't a coincidence that Mignini has tried both approaches.
As per perugiashock below
Technically none at all, since Amanda basically tested negative for drugs (only low traces of cannabis), therefore, didn’t need rehab therapy in jail. So useless you’re trying to say that she was a drug addict when it’s already acknowledged she was not.
These tox screens they do now are much more sensitive and these can be detected for much longer that stated (they just dont want the bad guys to know)
There is a bit of misinformation out there and that is cocaine is out of your system in 2-3 days. Well while that might be true LABS DON'T TEST FOR THE DRUG ITSELF. Yes, that is true, they look for the metabolite. A metabolite is something that the body produces when it ingests something, in the case of cocaine it is "benzoylecgonine" that will stay around long after the drug is gone, up to 30 days for a frequent user. THE DRUG ITSELF can stay in your bloodstream up to 72 hours. It can stay in your urine for about 2 or up to 7 days after single use. Habitual or chronic use can be detected in urine for up to 12 weeks depending on quantity, duration, and frequency of use.
Cocaine can stay in your hair up to about 90 days. But there are also information that cocaine can stay in your hair for about 25 years after you only take it once
very hard to make those facts fit the hypothesis
These are tox screens folks. They are highly sensitive tests
Yes Nova Xanax is from the same group of drugs, thus no cocaine, no xanax, there is a long list of these drugs under that category and i think they have tried to fit many of them in
The fact remains she was tested, and these are very sensitive tests, she did not have any type of benzoylegonine in her system
Only trace amounts of cannabis
If anyone thinks they did not test her for just about anything under the sun they did. They were trying to find anything they could on her even to the point of telling her that she had HIV, thus we know they even went that far with the drug tests. They then gave her a false result to find out whom she had slept with so that they in turn could be tested when in fact she never tested positive and the test was given to her 2 times. The simply wanted a list of whom she had slept with
Last edited by Allusonz; 02-09-2011 at 01:47 PM. Reason: add info
Below: Originally posted by Miely (sorry Miley i hit the wrong type of quote i apologize)Originally Posted by Allusonz
Many things can cause short term memory loss which include but are not limited to:
Alzheimer’s disease and dementia
Low blood sugar levels
Most which could be exasberated from stress from an interrogation or repeated questioning
12 angry Italians screaming gibberish/"stupid liar"
a brown nosing interpreter that insists inflicted trauma and repressed memory
Lack of food or water over any period of time
the Alzheimer’s disease and dementia
These i put in cuz i thought they might be appropriate in some instances
Last edited by Allusonz; 02-09-2011 at 01:52 PM.
If I understand you correctly, the same test for metabolites produced by cocaine usage would also show xanax usage, yes?
Because I understand claudicici's question re xanax. I can say from personal experience that one doesn't have to "abuse" xanax to produce short-term memory loss. Combining it with even small quantities of alcohol can do the trick.
But you are saying we can conclude AK had not used xanax, based on the tests LE would have performed on her.
Of course, as Malkmus points out, neither AK nor RS claimed memory loss until that 4th day when they both suddenly changed their testimony to confirm a police theory that later proved incorrect. Thereafter, both defendant reverted to their original stories.
Although marijuana use can produce a haziness of memory, I think the memory "gaps" in this case are a result of coerced testimony and the effort to mitigate that testimony rather than drug usage.
Giving a confession after about 2 hours sort of knocks out all these theories/false hope that it was sleep, food, or water depravation that was the cause of it .
The Seeker / Sports Freak /
A comparison to Satanism is not equivalent or relevant and shuts down a conversation that to ignore is naive.
To take the point of the post then my opining that they are sociopaths is giving them the benefit of doubt.
Ok, so if they had conscience that would inhibit their actions it was a case of wilding which would explain why they have no defense to speak of.
Either way it came to bad end for poor Meredith.
And expecting there to be honest testimony on behalf of knives and their feeling towards them would be pretty stupid for the accused of a knife attack to partake in would it not?
There is nothing stupid about those two I will give them that!
But those are merely aggravating factors. The primary motivation in coerced testimony is a desire to accommodate the interrogators, either to end the pressure of the interrogation itself or to avoid whatever punishment is threatened for non-cooperation.
I guess the question is, are AK and RS 'sociopaths?'
If they didn't do this crime, are they still 'sociopaths?'
Yes, yes I know many are convinced they did, but just consider the question for a moment.
If they still acted the same way (hug, kiss, smile, buying underwear), but you had 100% proof they were not involved in MK's murder at all, would you still affix the same label to them?