Amanda Knox: What's in a face?

Post Reply New Topic

I've always been interested in crime stories, partly because of the body language component. I know I would do really poorly in that sort of setting. I've also seen many times where failure to make eye contact also makes a person seem guilty. It's unfortunate. the hope is that some day we as people can find more effective ways of finding criminals that don't rely just on impressions.

Yet most of the information I've come across indicates she was exonerated because the "many strands of evidence" were debunked during the appeal.



The ironic thing here is that Amanda Knox was convicted in the court of public opinion by sensationalistic journalism.



She had no interpreter and was interrogated for hours. The interrogation was not recorded, and the prosecutor was present.

Yikes...no interpreter! No wonder her facial expressions were said to be off. Even people who are very good at a foreign language (and I read her Italian was okay for conversation, but not really great) may not do as well under a lot of pressure. I know I do well in Spanish and Romanian in normal conversation, but if I were to be INTERROGATED by the police in one of those languages and my roommate had just been murdered, it would be a whole different story. Combine that with my tendency not to make eye contact and I fear I'd be in the exact same situation. wow...just wow...

~Kate

This.

If these guys saw the facial expressions I make and how fidgety I get in some really bad situations (in most cases I just shrug them off) then they'd think I killed Kennedy or somethin'.

Random digression:

This is the phrase that ruled out an ASD diagnosis for me last year. I'm probably going to see the same person again this Friday, so I wonder what will happen.

Here's another digression though it fits in the context of this forum:
http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/30/c ... -disorder/

Not exactly sure if I believe that she may have an autism spectrum disorder, but it is food for thought, I suppose.

Also, random question, Verdandi, but is your username from Ah! My Goddess by any chance?

The confession is easily explained by having been interrogated over several days, for hours at a time:

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/TheInterrogation.html

As for her behavior, from what I've read it wasn't particularly bizarre or unusual. It was treated that way by exaggerating certain elements and ignoring others.

Moog's avatar is cuter than mine. And I didn't write "Amanda Knox" in the title either

I think the article is way more interesting than just Miss Knox though because he moves onto making more general points about reading people and how people have an over inflated opinion on their abilities at reading the thoughs of others.

I guess I can feel a bit better about being pathologically bad at this. I think I'd rather have to make the extra effort to work people out when I need to than be blinded by "facile intuitions about what other people are thinking" that I'm not aware I'm making

This is the reason why aspies can be so easily misread and probably convicted of crimes if they were in court. We dont make the correct body language.

See for my work, I had this online computer training. See they covered a section on shoplifters and the types of body language they exhibit. I learned 1 thing that day(it wasnt the job), that my normal body language always makes it seem like theirs something up when many times theirs not?? unfortunetly.

It would scare me if I ever ended up in a criminal investigation.

mm, I was wrongly accused of stealing a large amount of money from someone once and my shock at being accused was seen as obvious signs of guilt by my accuser.

I've had similar happen.

My roommate back in January or February of 1987 walked into my workplace and asked me if I was planning to pay the rent on time - I wasn't late, had never been late, and had never indicated I didn't plan to pay any rent. So she asks, and then says "You weren't going to pay me, were you? I can see it in your eyes!"

I wouldn't want to end up in a criminal investigation. My responses or more likely my lack of them would be interpreted wrong and who knows what they would think.

When people die I generally have no response and feel nothing. There was only one person ever where I felt something when they died. No one said anything but some nts would probably think it was bad and I didn't care because I didn't go to look at their dead body in the hospital and because I went to the laundromat within hours of their death. I did that because I needed to get out of the house and I wanted to be alone, or at least where no one would bother me.

She's a beautiful girl. Meredith was murdered likely during an erotic game that got out of hand. I can imagine how far investigator's imaginations has gone. A male investigator... She has not to do something to cause this, her appearance is enough and to be a foreigner enhances her charme.
Didn't you notice her appeal?

We won't know what was rejected, if anything, until the judges report is made public. In interviews he was pretty non-committal saying it was still very possible Knox and Sollecito were there, doesn't sound like they were exonerated more than benefitting from the raising of doubt.



You don't think she is majorly responsible for that by blaming an innocent man, avoiding the memorial service, giving different stories about where she was, kissing in the lingerie department the following day, writing a fictitious email home saying the panic she felt when she realised the door was locked yet all witnesses present said she said the door being locked did not seem to her in the least bit odd, telling the Postal Police they had reported the break-in when they actually reported it after they had arrived, I could go on...

[/quote]

That is not true, her interpreter's name that night was Anna Bonino, she even testified at the trial. You say further down that she was interrogated for days when she 'confessed' on her first night of questioning after hearing that Raffaele had 'come clean' about Knox not being at his house. She repeated the accusations the following day of her own accord, even asking for the paper and pen to write it all down (all admitted during the trial).

Her claim went like this: 'I am telling you I wasn't there, but if there is proof that I was then it was a black man that did it while I sat covering my ears in the kitchen'. Neat trick.

It wasn't just the papers and prosecutors that thought her behaviour was inexplicable, the two boys who drove pair to the police station said they were so concerned about the conversation and their behaviour that when the pair got out they searched their car for any incriminating evidence they might have planted. We all saw her playing up to the cameras at the trial, wearing an 'All you need is Love' T-Shirt to the court, writing in her diary how cool it was that men writing to her in jail wanted to have sex with her.

After reading her diaries and observing her testimonies, I think she is a good candidate for a serious psychological evaluation, a view expressed by Sollecito in a letter to his father saying she is completely out of touch with any firm reality.

We won't know what was rejected, if anything, until the judges report is made public. In interviews he was pretty non-committal saying it was still very possible Knox and Sollecito were there, doesn't sound like they were exonerated more than benefitting from the raising of doubt.



You don't think she is majorly responsible for that by blaming an innocent man, avoiding the memorial service, giving different stories about where she was, kissing in the lingerie department the following day, writing a fictitious email home saying the panic she felt when she realised the door was locked yet all witnesses present said she said the door being locked did not seem in the least bit odd, telling the Postal Police they had reported the break-in when they actually reported it after they had arrived, I could go on...

[/quote]

That is not true, her interpreter's name that night was Anna Bonnino, she even testified at the trial. You say further down that she was interrogated for days when she 'confessed' on her first night of questioning after hearing that Raffaele had 'come clean' about Knox not being at his house. She repeated the accusations the following day of her own accord, even asking for the paper and pen to write it all down (all admitted during the trial).

Her claim went like this: 'I am telling you I wasn't there, but if there is proof that I was then it was a black man that did it while I sat covering my ears in the kitchen'. Neat trick.

It wasn't just the papers and prosecutors that thought her behaviour was inexplicable, the two boys who drove pair to the police station said they were so concerned about the conversation and their behaviour that when the pair got out they searched their car for any incriminating evidence they might have planted. We all saw her playing up to the cameras at the trial, wearing an 'All you need is Love' T-Shirt to the court, writing in her diary how cool it was that men writing to her in jail wanted to have sex with her.

After reading her diaries and observing her testimonies, I think she is a good candidate for a serious psychological evaluation, a view expressed by Sollecito in a letter to his father saying she is completely out of touch with any firm reality.

Last edited by GreyDay on 11 Oct 2011, 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The curious thing about the claims in that link is that Amanda directly contradicted them in her own testimony and in phone calls from prison. They falsely suggest it was only after days of intensive interrogation that she 'broke down', it was the first night. She did not have a lawyer as she was not called for questioning, she was waiting for Sollecito when her strange behaviour made the police suspicious. They answers she gave were not admissible because of this, therefore the claim this was an illegal interrogation are spurious. The answers were not presented at the trial. The letter she wrote of her own accord was admissible.

It was Amanda that suggested Lumumba was the killer, her testimony is documented in the Massei report, both she and her parents were Indicted for slander for making the claims repeated in that article about abuse and deprivation of food and water. She made a big problem for herself and yet again tried to shift the blame to someone else. She told her mother on the phone she alone was responsible for Lumumbas arrest yet she let him sit in prison for two weeks, ruining his business and reputation. She is a fairly nasty piece of work for that alone.