Headsup: To those many lawyers amazed that Knox did not get on the witness stand to head off a certain re-conviction: the best guess among Italian lawyers is that Knox's own lawyers feared ANOTHER calunnia charge if she repeated the crackpot and highly disprovable claims that she was tortured. The tough calunnia law is primarily a pushback measure against mafia meddling which is widely suspected in this case.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Trial: Knox Claimed Not To Have Been At The House On The Night

Posted by Peter Quennell

[click for larger image]

New York’s Daily News from various wire services.

Knox said she last saw Kercher on the afternoon of Nov. 1. Knox testified the two talked about what they had done the night before “” a Halloween night out “” and Knox said Kercher still had a bit of her vampire makeup on, the AP reports.

Knox went on to say Sollecito then arrived at the house; he and Knox had something to eat while Kercher remained in her room.

“She left her room, said ‘bye,’ walked out the door,” Knox said, who switched from speaking English to Italian. “That was the last time I saw her.”

Her testimony on the stand was markedly different than the statement she gave police days after her roommate was found dead.

Originally Knox claimed to have been at the house she shared with Kercher on the night of the murder. She later retracted that story and said she was not there.

Sollecito flip-flopped on his story as well. He had told police he was at his apartment watching a movie with Knox and she spent the night with him. Later, he claimed to not remember if she had spent the night.

Defendant Testifies: Is This A Prosecutor’s Dream Come True?

Posted by Arnold_Layne

[click for larger image]

To my knowledge, in the past when Amanda has spoken on her own behalf she was not challenged by the prosecution.  Friday will be different.  On Friday, she will be asked to reconcile discrepancies in her statements.  She will not be a sworn-in witness so it is not clear which lines of questioning will be allowed but the prosecutor will certainly try to impeach her.  If she is a psychopath, things could get knarly.

You’ve all seen it many times on crime shows.  On cross examination, the witness offers some testimony, for example, the fact that she has never been married.  The lawyer then asks to offer into evidence a marriage certificate.  Reducing the credibility of a witness in this fashion is known as impeaching the witness.  There are special rules that apply which allow the attorney to ask questions not normally allowed.  To discredit a claim made by the witness, the prosecutor could, for example, enter new evidence not presented previously during the prosecution phase of the trial.  The jury is then instructed to use the evidence only as it reduces the credibility of the witness but to ignore it when otherwise considering the guilt or innocence.  That’s expecting a lot.

One characteristic of a psychopath is the ability to lie with facility.  This does not mean the ability to spin a yarn or to make up a good story.  Most of us can do this.  It also doesn’t mean that the lie is particularly bad (a boldface lie).  When asked a question when the truth is not going to yield a desirable outcome, most of us will pause a little, maybe lift our eyes upward, as we weigh the consequences of the lie.  Someone who can lie with facility speaks the lie as fast as they would the truth and with the same conviction.

The problem, of course, is that without the pause there is no weighing of the implications of the lie.  There is little checking for consistency.  In social situations this can easily be maneuvered around by saying something along the lines of, “Aw, I was just jokin’”.  Guede adjusted his story to meet the facts as they emerged.  Amanda now also knows the evidence against her and she’s had plenty of time to create a story to match it.  She will be on stable ground here as the Judge and jury weigh her statements against those put forth by the prosecution.  This is a good reason to only have one of the two defendants testify.  They can’t trip each other up.

Cross, on the other hand, is going to be a minefield for her.  Not only will the prosecution point out discrepancies but they will challenge her on them and she will be under pressure to correct them.  She will be up against a trial lawyer’s strong suit.  Mignini will be trying to impeach her.  If she steps on one of his mines, she will probably step on many ““ and he’ll be laying even more as she speaks.

Other incendiaries include her basking in the attention and notoriety she is getting.  Additionally, she is a creative writer.  Who can say what this might lead her to say if she strays from the straight and narrow.

I give her credit for doing this but I certainly don’t envy her.  I can’t say that I have ever done anything tougher myself.  I wouldn’t eat for two days, just as a precautionary measure. Btw “can you smoke on the witness stand?” I’d bring a carton, of Luckies.

Trial: Lunchtime Video Report From The Daily Telegraph

Posted by Peter Quennell

Trial: BBC Posts Video Of First Words Of Knox Testimony

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above. Preceded by a brief bit of advertising.

After the testimony shown (it was in the first two minutes) all cameras had to leave the court.

Trial: Reuters And Getty Images Of The Defendants In Court Today

Posted by Peter Quennell

Trial: CNN Reports Defendant Claimed Questioned While On Drugs

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for the report by CNN Rome’s Hada Messia.

Trial: Richard Owen Reports First Knox Testimony With Nick Pisa Video

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for the report in the Times, and once there click on the video.

When questioned in court today, the American said that when under “police pressure” she had “imagined many things”.

She said she had made her accusation against Mr Lumumba “against my will”. Asked if the police had suggested to her that the murder had taken place during a party at which Ms Kercher had had sex she replied: “Yes”.

Asked if she had been struck by police, she again replied “Yes”. Police have testified that Ms Knox was treated well during her questioning and have denied that she was hit

She said: “They called me a stupid liar and said I was trying to protect someone”.

By the way, no lawyer following the trial that we know thinks the evidence is “flimsy"as the TV anchor seems to think.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Two Great Cliff-Hangers In This Week’s Proceedings

Posted by Peter Quennell

[courtesy AP: Ms Knox last Saturday when the Kerchers were in court]

These will have the press corps pouring into Perugia in record numbers tomorrow

• Will Amanda Knox actually get up and testify, or conclude differently as the appointed time approaches?
• Will Amanda Knox once again claim to have been at Sollecito’s place all of the night which he contradicts?

She also faces a very tough time with these issues and these issues and for that matter these issues.

Andrea Vogt has excellent reports on the possibilities in last Sunday’s Independent and yesterday’s Seattle P-I.

The situation does seem to be fraught with downsides and, we presume, upsides.

Tuesday, June 09, 2009

Newsweek On What Knox Will Face On The Stand This Friday And Saturday

Posted by Peter Quennell

Click above for the report from Newsweek’s Barbie Nadeau.

On Friday, Knox will finally get her day in court, taking the stand as a “communal” witness for the prosecution, civil plaintiffs and her own defense. Her testimony is expected to last at least one day….

Witness-jury interaction is one of the most critical aspects of a criminal trial, especially for the prime suspects. Not talking often implies the suspect has something to hide. But taking the stand can be far riskier.

“The biggest risk is that she doesn’t follow the advice of her lawyers,” says Alessandra Batassa, a criminal-defense lawyer in Rome who has served on defense teams in similar crimes. “The court will be absolutely influenced by nonjudicial factors like her demeanor. Her image has been painted in a very bad light in the trial so far, so she has to portray that she has normal sexual relationships and that she is just a normal girl. She has to be very convincing.”

In the past, Knox has not always proved herself a competent speaker””especially under pressure. As heard in audiotapes obtained by NEWSWEEK from a January 2008 prosecutorial interrogation, she speaks in a steady, low voice that is calm and confident, but she makes basic mistakes. When asked about specifics of the morning after the murder, she clearly stammers and stutters, undoubtedly damaging her case in the eyes of the prosecutor. At times she is indignant, answering questions with her own questions.

On the tape she is either serious or arrogant, even laughing at the prosecutor’s line of questioning. When she has addressed the court in spontaneous declarations, she has waffled between confidence and calamity. She has spoken about her vibrator and about being interrogated by police and about being disappointed by what Kercher’s friends have said about her. She will almost surely be less cavalier this time, as her lawyers prepare her for what will be a grueling day. The jury will be listening attentively, but more important, they will be watching her every move.

She will be questioned by the prosecutor about specific elements of the case, including why her DNA and Kercher’s blood were found around the house, especially in a back bedroom where police believe she and Sollecito staged a break-in. Other questions will include why her DNA was discovered on the handle of a knife that had Kercher’s DNA on the blade.

She will likely have to provide a believable alibi for the night of the murder, something that she and Sollecito have yet to do. And she has to be careful not to accidentally blame Sollecito, who is waiving his right to testify. “The biggest mistake she can make is to accuse or unload the responsibility on the other suspect,” says Batassa. “And she should not accuse or blame the court or those deciding this case.”...

How Knox physically interacts with the jury could play an even bigger role in how they perceive her. Body-language experts agree that nonverbal communication affects a listener even more than words. Very erect and even stiff posture or the sudden crossing of the arms or legs often indicates that a person is uncomfortable with what he is saying.

When people lie, gesticulation will also slow down””those covering something up tend to overcompensate by trying not to draw attention to themselves. Some go to the extreme, even putting their hands in their pockets, sitting on them or trying to keep them from moving. Experts agree that touching the mouth or face””especially scratching the nose, touching the ear or the chin””is the most obvious body-language lie detector.

Newsweek’s Reporter Cam: Amanda Knox Enters The Courtroom

Posted by Peter Quennell

Also last Friday. The Kercher family arrived later in the day, but did not testify until Saturday.

The start button of this video is on the left, and the sound button is on the right There appears to be no way to full-screen it.