To be fair, Knox has always come across as a psychopath.
Of course, you are a qualified mental health professional, with a particular grounding in the area of psychopathy, and administered all the prescribed diagnostic tests and interviews to Ms Knox, to make such a declaration.
Of course, you are a qualified mental health professional, with a particular grounding in the area of psychopathy, and administered all the prescribed diagnostic tests and interviews to Ms Knox, to make such a declaration.
Is all that really necessary to say that someone comes across as a psychopath? Because unless one is being pedantic in the extreme I don't see how anyone could read what he wrote as anything other than an opinion of the impression she makes on him.
It's amusing to see people get so defensive on here when someone says they don't like how Amanda Knox comes across.
Of course, you are a qualified mental health professional, with a particular grounding in the area of psychopathy, and administered all the prescribed diagnostic tests and interviews to Ms Knox, to make such a declaration.
Is all that really necessary to say that someone comes across as a psychopath? Because unless one is being pedantic in the extreme I don't see how anyone could read what he wrote as anything other than an opinion of the impression she makes on him.
It's amusing to see people get so defensive on here when someone says they don't like how Amanda Knox comes across.
It's amusing watching you defending a pretty obvious gee-up.
Is all that really necessary to say that someone comes across as a psychopath? Because unless one is being pedantic in the extreme I don't see how anyone could read what he wrote as anything other than an opinion of the impression she makes on him.
It's amusing to see people get so defensive on here when someone says they don't like how Amanda Knox comes across.
People are entitled to their opinions. Goes without saying. But many of these impressions just seem to be coloured by confirmation bias. My own view on this is that it doesn't matter what she does or what she says...it can (and will) always be twisted by people to suit the caricature/image of this person that has been built up in their head.
Both accused and tried for murder,both eventually acquitted.of course there's similarities......in that many people think they are in fact guilty of those crimes.
If you were in the camp that thought that about OJ,how could you possibly object to the same suspicions about knox."by you i mean,the public)
I meant in terms of evidence and motive. For me, there is no comparison.
It's amusing to see people get so defensive on here when someone says they don't like how Amanda Knox comes across.
It's equally as amusing to see not one single person who still thinks she is guilty offer up any kind of tangible evidence or dissection of the case to bolster their point other than "it's how i feel" or "how she comes across".
It's equally as amusing to see not one single person who still thinks she is guilty offer up any kind of tangible evidence or dissection of the case to bolster their point other than "it's how i feel" or "how she comes across".
I'll bite. Explain Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. Then explain the mixture of Knox and Meredith's blood on the basin. Explain, if you will, the total absence of Knox' DNA in Meredith's room. or the blood found on the knife, miniscule, but still there.
Now the third point I can live with. The forensic team were, to be charitable, less than professional, (I don't know if you've ever lived in a female shared house, but trust me, girls share, and I mean everything!) but I cannot reconcile the rest, or the obviously staged break-in.
I'll bite. Explain Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. Then explain the mixture of Knox and Meredith's blood on the basin. Explain, if you will, the total absence of Knox' DNA in Meredith's room. or the blood found on the knife, miniscule, but still there.
Now the third point I can live with. The forensic team were, to be charitable, less than professional, (I don't know if you've ever lived in a female shared house, but trust me, girls share, and I mean everything!) but I cannot reconcile the rest, or the obviously staged break-in.
I've lived in a female shared house, and trust me, girls do not always share anything, and I mean anything. There were at least two of the girls that I lived with who would almost certainly have had none of my DNA in their rooms. I am deeply grateful that neither of them turned up dead or I would surely have been a prime suspect...
Assuming your own girl bonding experience applies to everyone else is utterly misguided and an example of the sloppy projections employed by some many on threads relating to this subject.
Aside from the fact the clasp was recovered 47 days after the initial investigation under a rug next to a pile of garbage, having been moved multiple times, the results of that particular DNA test were discredited at the appeal hearing.
Based on the considerations explained above, we are able to respond as follows to the inquiries posed at the assignment hearing:
"Having examined the record and conducted such technical investigations as shall be necessary, the Expert Panel shall ascertain:
1. whether it is possible, by means of a new technical analysis, to identify the DNA present on items 165b (bra clasp) and 36 (knife), and to determine the reliability of any such identification"
- The tests that we conducted to determine the presence of blood on item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps) yielded a negative result.
- The cytomorphological tests on the items did not reveal the presence of cellular material. Some samples of item 36 (knife), in particular sample "H", present granules with a circular/hexagonal characteristic morphology with a cental radial structure. A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature.
- The quantification of the extracts obtained from the samples obtained from item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps), conducted via Real Time PCR, did not reveal the presence of DNA.
- In view of the absence of DNA in the extracts that we obtained, with the agreement of the consultants for the parties, we did not proceed to the subsequent amplification step.
This also includes the DNA apparently found on the knife - also discredited.
As far as the "total absence of Knox's DNA in Meredith's room" - does this not actually bolster the case that she had nothing to do with the murder since Kercher was murdered in her bedroom ?
As far as the blood in the basin goes, it could have half a dozen different explanations since they all shared a flat. Considering the manner in which the evidence was collected, my own personal feeling has always been that it could never really be credibly used as any kind of proof that she was involved.
Patrick Lumumba is of the same mind as me - that this was a political decision. Yes, I know he has been wronged and may feel negatively towards Knox.
What interested me the most was this part:
Speaking outside the courtroom on Friday, the family’s lawyer, Francesco Maresca, said: “The judges said there is a lack of proof and whoever acted with [Rudi] Guede [the only person found guilty of the murder] has not been found.” Guede, from Ivory Coast, is almost halfway through a 16-year prison sentence after his trial was fast-tracked in 2008.
This suggests that when the report comes out it will uphold that there was more than one attacker, but that there was not enough evidence to convict AK and RS.
That makes me think it was political even more now,
Aside from the fact the clasp was recovered 47 days after the initial investigation under a rug next to a pile of garbage, having been moved multiple times, the results of that particular DNA test were discredited at the appeal hearing.
This also includes the DNA apparently found on the knife - also discredited.
As far as the "total absence of Knox's DNA in Meredith's room" - does this not actually bolster the case that she had nothing to do with the murder since Kercher was murdered in her bedroom ?
As far as the blood in the basin goes, it could have half a dozen different explanations since they all shared a flat. Considering the manner in which the evidence was collected, my own personal feeling has always been that it could never really be credibly used as any kind of proof that she was involved.
There was a report (from the other flatmates?) that Meredith believed Knox had stolen money from her room. It was a shared house. Skin flakes travel. It is absurd to believe that not a single trace of Knox' DNA was found in Meredith's room.
Equally absurd, that despite multiple handling, Sollecito's DNA was still found on Meredith's bra clasp. Was there ever an explanation for this?
The blood on the tap, the blood on the bathmat that Knox ignored. I think I read that Knox was not the most hygienic girl, I may be completely wrong here, but c'mon. You don't shower and step onto a bloody bathmat.
Innocent or not.Knox is clealy a really horrible person.what kind of person tell police she was in the flat at the time of the murder and put her hand over her ears when the murder was taking place....landing someone she knew in jail with her false accusations?
I wonder if she will put that scene in her next big selling book or big budget movie to come...
What I would like to know is what all the pro-Knox people on this thread have to say on the subject of multiple attackers.
If, as you all suggest, that we all must now abide by the court ruling because they know best, just who were the other attackers in this case, bearing in mind that we now must believe there were more than one because the court have ruled it so.
I don't believe there was ever more than one attacker. I also don't believe I ever said that we must all abide by court rulings because courts know best. The case for the prosecution here was never very convincing even when the courts said it was, so obviously courts don't always get everything right.
Innocent or not.Knox is clealy a really horrible person.what kind of person tell police she was in the flat at the time of the murder and put her hand over her ears when the murder was taking place....landing someone she knew in jail with her false accusations?
I wonder if she will put that scene in her next big selling book or big budget movie to come...
Its astonishing the amount of people who don't realise that people can be induced to make false statements by a police interrogation.
Innocent or not.Knox is clealy a really horrible person.what kind of person tell police she was in the flat at the time of the murder and put her hand over her ears when the murder was taking place....landing someone she knew in jail with her false accusations?
I wonder if she will put that scene in her next big selling book or big budget movie to come...
Its astonishing the amount of people who don't realise that people can be induced to make false statements by a police interrogation.
People do realise that. However it is very uncommon for those who do so to name someone responsible and extremely rare to write a confession after the interrogation.
People do realise that. However it is very uncommon for those who do so to name someone responsible and extremely rare to write a confession after the interrogation.
This was no common coercion.
Its not in the slightest bit rare, what planet do you live on? I'll name you half a dozen cases right now where exactly those things happened, and I don't even need to stop and look.
The Norfolk Four
The Guildford Four
The Beatrice Six
The Central Park Five
The West Memphis Three
Ryan Ferguson and Charles Erikson
That's without even bothering to google. If I googled for 30 seconds I bet I could find half a dozen more.
People do realise that. However it is very uncommon for those who do so to name someone responsible and extremely rare to write a confession after the interrogation.
This was no common coercion.
Without a word of a lie, someone maintained that some murderers often defecate and don't flush after killing someone. Go figure.
Comments
Of course, you are a qualified mental health professional, with a particular grounding in the area of psychopathy, and administered all the prescribed diagnostic tests and interviews to Ms Knox, to make such a declaration.
Oh I'll bite, as nobody else seems bored enough, to humour you.
Ohh I'm really annoyed by that comment, I could crush a grape or something...
That OK, do you think you've really got my hackles up there.
Is all that really necessary to say that someone comes across as a psychopath? Because unless one is being pedantic in the extreme I don't see how anyone could read what he wrote as anything other than an opinion of the impression she makes on him.
It's amusing to see people get so defensive on here when someone says they don't like how Amanda Knox comes across.
If indeed it is fact, you must have a link to prove that.
It's amusing watching you defending a pretty obvious gee-up.
Hey ho, this isn't up to much is it.
People are entitled to their opinions. Goes without saying. But many of these impressions just seem to be coloured by confirmation bias. My own view on this is that it doesn't matter what she does or what she says...it can (and will) always be twisted by people to suit the caricature/image of this person that has been built up in their head.
I meant in terms of evidence and motive. For me, there is no comparison.
It's equally as amusing to see not one single person who still thinks she is guilty offer up any kind of tangible evidence or dissection of the case to bolster their point other than "it's how i feel" or "how she comes across".
I'll bite. Explain Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. Then explain the mixture of Knox and Meredith's blood on the basin. Explain, if you will, the total absence of Knox' DNA in Meredith's room. or the blood found on the knife, miniscule, but still there.
Now the third point I can live with. The forensic team were, to be charitable, less than professional, (I don't know if you've ever lived in a female shared house, but trust me, girls share, and I mean everything!) but I cannot reconcile the rest, or the obviously staged break-in.
I've lived in a female shared house, and trust me, girls do not always share anything, and I mean anything. There were at least two of the girls that I lived with who would almost certainly have had none of my DNA in their rooms. I am deeply grateful that neither of them turned up dead or I would surely have been a prime suspect...
Assuming your own girl bonding experience applies to everyone else is utterly misguided and an example of the sloppy projections employed by some many on threads relating to this subject.
Like your uncle, who you couldn't even kill, without slaying poor old Polonius, then getting yourself done in.
Not looking for a "bite".
Aside from the fact the clasp was recovered 47 days after the initial investigation under a rug next to a pile of garbage, having been moved multiple times, the results of that particular DNA test were discredited at the appeal hearing.
This also includes the DNA apparently found on the knife - also discredited.
https://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/conclusions-2/
As far as the "total absence of Knox's DNA in Meredith's room" - does this not actually bolster the case that she had nothing to do with the murder since Kercher was murdered in her bedroom ?
As far as the blood in the basin goes, it could have half a dozen different explanations since they all shared a flat. Considering the manner in which the evidence was collected, my own personal feeling has always been that it could never really be credibly used as any kind of proof that she was involved.
Patrick Lumumba is of the same mind as me - that this was a political decision. Yes, I know he has been wronged and may feel negatively towards Knox.
What interested me the most was this part:
Speaking outside the courtroom on Friday, the family’s lawyer, Francesco Maresca, said: “The judges said there is a lack of proof and whoever acted with [Rudi] Guede [the only person found guilty of the murder] has not been found.” Guede, from Ivory Coast, is almost halfway through a 16-year prison sentence after his trial was fast-tracked in 2008.
This suggests that when the report comes out it will uphold that there was more than one attacker, but that there was not enough evidence to convict AK and RS.
That makes me think it was political even more now,
There was a report (from the other flatmates?) that Meredith believed Knox had stolen money from her room. It was a shared house. Skin flakes travel. It is absurd to believe that not a single trace of Knox' DNA was found in Meredith's room.
Equally absurd, that despite multiple handling, Sollecito's DNA was still found on Meredith's bra clasp. Was there ever an explanation for this?
The blood on the tap, the blood on the bathmat that Knox ignored. I think I read that Knox was not the most hygienic girl, I may be completely wrong here, but c'mon. You don't shower and step onto a bloody bathmat.
I wonder if she will put that scene in her next big selling book or big budget movie to come...
Nauseating
If, as you all suggest, that we all must now abide by the court ruling because they know best, just who were the other attackers in this case, bearing in mind that we now must believe there were more than one because the court have ruled it so.
Its astonishing the amount of people who don't realise that people can be induced to make false statements by a police interrogation.
Can't jail someone just for being a horrible person or hammy actor.
People do realise that. However it is very uncommon for those who do so to name someone responsible and extremely rare to write a confession after the interrogation.
This was no common coercion.
Its not in the slightest bit rare, what planet do you live on? I'll name you half a dozen cases right now where exactly those things happened, and I don't even need to stop and look.
The Norfolk Four
The Guildford Four
The Beatrice Six
The Central Park Five
The West Memphis Three
Ryan Ferguson and Charles Erikson
That's without even bothering to google. If I googled for 30 seconds I bet I could find half a dozen more.
Without a word of a lie, someone maintained that some murderers often defecate and don't flush after killing someone. Go figure.