The only evidence we have that she was abused by police are Amanda’s own statements, which were also contradicted by the police. Given the multiple contradictions in her stories, her claims about the police might or might not be true, but are certainly not strong evidence of anything at all.
This is one reason why police record interrogations, to avoid people making false accusations of coercion to get out of confessions. Alas, first we were told the tape had gone missing. And then later told no tape had been made at all! We don’t even have a transcript of the interrogation, just a signed statement Knox obviously didn’t write herself. It really is a shame they lost the tape, er, I mean, that no tape was ever made. Then the Italian police could show the world that she was lying all along!
… You’re right of course that Knox isn’t reliable. But coerced false confessions are fairly routine as I understand it and the police have every incentive to lie.
It is odd that after 4 days of taping all their phone calls and also the interviews during that time that they completely forgot to record the big one the night of the 5th & 6th. The one where Mignini was orchestrating the proceedings, and Giobbi was in the next room (presumably working his pseudo-science Behavioral Analysis Interview demeanor magic interpretation of the whole thing. 36 police were in the room along with Mignini...they all signed as witnesses… the typewritten Italian police legalese “spontaneous confession” doc.(why so many? to keep her company?) Mignini running out of time (he knew from the telephone calls that Amanda’s mother was coming and that she might possibly get Amanda to the US embassy or out of the country. they had no grounds to hold her… they needed a confession and they knew they could get one and they did. The police had the investigator’s hunch leading them to believe that they had a guilty person to break down… even though there was no physical evidence. And that was the problem they had the theory before any evidence and seem to have been stringing the interviews along while they waited for the strong evidence they were convinced was there… and yet no DNA, no fingerprints… nothing… but they were so sure… Giobbi the mindreading expert from Rome and Mignini the famous Prosecutor and the policewoman duo were so convinced and they set the tone and the rest of the police believed them… nobody was trying to railroad innocent people Miginini and the rest took off running based on a gut feeling and pseudo science. (and add to that an African hair sample and a misinterpreted text message from an African)
The police do tend to cut corners when they are convinced a person is guilty… that is when they can justify putting the screws on and they if they were really sure about someone they could make you or I or anyone seem “unreliable”, a person who changes their story… a liar…
In this case, much of the “coerced false confession” was independently corroborated by other witnesses and evidence, while her original alibi was proven false (i.e. by computer and cell phone records.) This would tend to support the police. Although I agree with Alicorn there there isn’t much strong evidence either way in regard to how the police treated her.
The false confession consisted of Knox’s semi-hallucinated memory of her boss killing Kercher… who couldn’t possible have done it. The police coerced that particular confession because they saw Knox’s text message to him. That fact alone is enough to render the interrogation suspect. I don’t recall reading that Knox confessed details which could reliably be confirmed independently. But I may have missed that.
This link suggests that she testified to some things that were independently confirmed. Even regarding the confession about her boss, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that this testimony was coerced (although it was surely untrue.)
Here’s the counter-argument; Knox was voluntarily in the station when Sollecito was being questioned. They hadn’t risen to the official level of ‘suspect’ yet. They started questioning Knox when Sollecito said Knox wasn’t as his place for some of the evening. She started providing a statement against the bar owner; they still had her as a ‘witness’ instead of a ‘suspect.’ Even the written statement that was inadmissible against Knox was still initially a statement against the bar owner.
What are the circumstances under which we might expect the police to admit to abuse? I doubt their lack of confession there is strong evidence for anything either.
Other evidence of mistreatment are Raffaele’s and Patrick’s prior statements of similar treatment. They said it before the defamation claim by the police, which by the way, was made much time after the incident and was the day before the closing arguments by the defense.
The only evidence we have that she was abused by police are Amanda’s own statements, which were also contradicted by the police. Given the multiple contradictions in her stories, her claims about the police might or might not be true, but are certainly not strong evidence of anything at all.
This is one reason why police record interrogations, to avoid people making false accusations of coercion to get out of confessions. Alas, first we were told the tape had gone missing. And then later told no tape had been made at all! We don’t even have a transcript of the interrogation, just a signed statement Knox obviously didn’t write herself. It really is a shame they lost the tape, er, I mean, that no tape was ever made. Then the Italian police could show the world that she was lying all along!
… You’re right of course that Knox isn’t reliable. But coerced false confessions are fairly routine as I understand it and the police have every incentive to lie.
It is odd that after 4 days of taping all their phone calls and also the interviews during that time that they completely forgot to record the big one the night of the 5th & 6th. The one where Mignini was orchestrating the proceedings, and Giobbi was in the next room (presumably working his pseudo-science Behavioral Analysis Interview demeanor magic interpretation of the whole thing. 36 police were in the room along with Mignini...they all signed as witnesses… the typewritten Italian police legalese “spontaneous confession” doc.(why so many? to keep her company?) Mignini running out of time (he knew from the telephone calls that Amanda’s mother was coming and that she might possibly get Amanda to the US embassy or out of the country. they had no grounds to hold her… they needed a confession and they knew they could get one and they did. The police had the investigator’s hunch leading them to believe that they had a guilty person to break down… even though there was no physical evidence. And that was the problem they had the theory before any evidence and seem to have been stringing the interviews along while they waited for the strong evidence they were convinced was there… and yet no DNA, no fingerprints… nothing… but they were so sure… Giobbi the mindreading expert from Rome and Mignini the famous Prosecutor and the policewoman duo were so convinced and they set the tone and the rest of the police believed them… nobody was trying to railroad innocent people Miginini and the rest took off running based on a gut feeling and pseudo science. (and add to that an African hair sample and a misinterpreted text message from an African)
The police do tend to cut corners when they are convinced a person is guilty… that is when they can justify putting the screws on and they if they were really sure about someone they could make you or I or anyone seem “unreliable”, a person who changes their story… a liar…
In this case, much of the “coerced false confession” was independently corroborated by other witnesses and evidence, while her original alibi was proven false (i.e. by computer and cell phone records.) This would tend to support the police. Although I agree with Alicorn there there isn’t much strong evidence either way in regard to how the police treated her.
The false confession consisted of Knox’s semi-hallucinated memory of her boss killing Kercher… who couldn’t possible have done it. The police coerced that particular confession because they saw Knox’s text message to him. That fact alone is enough to render the interrogation suspect. I don’t recall reading that Knox confessed details which could reliably be confirmed independently. But I may have missed that.
http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/our_take_on_the_case_for_the_prosecution_4_amanda_knoxs_multiple_conflictin/
This link suggests that she testified to some things that were independently confirmed. Even regarding the confession about her boss, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that this testimony was coerced (although it was surely untrue.)
Here’s the counter-argument; Knox was voluntarily in the station when Sollecito was being questioned. They hadn’t risen to the official level of ‘suspect’ yet. They started questioning Knox when Sollecito said Knox wasn’t as his place for some of the evening. She started providing a statement against the bar owner; they still had her as a ‘witness’ instead of a ‘suspect.’ Even the written statement that was inadmissible against Knox was still initially a statement against the bar owner.
All very rational. :)
Her alibi was not proven false. Where did you read that her alibli was proven false? Just curious.
What are the circumstances under which we might expect the police to admit to abuse? I doubt their lack of confession there is strong evidence for anything either.
Other evidence of mistreatment are Raffaele’s and Patrick’s prior statements of similar treatment. They said it before the defamation claim by the police, which by the way, was made much time after the incident and was the day before the closing arguments by the defense.