Meredith Kercher
Justice Meredith Kercher

The Murder of Meredith Kercher

Forum rules
Please click here to view the forum rules

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators

Page 33 of 34 [ 8375 posts ]Go to page Previous 1 … 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 Next
XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Author Message
Offline hugo

Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 293

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:27 pm Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline jamie

User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:38 pm Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?
Top Profile E-mail

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator

User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4868

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:07 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Has anybody heard any news about today’s court hearing of the Sollecito/Gumbel defamation trial?

Ergon wrote:
[…]The first of the defamation trials against Mignini, that is Sollecito/Gumbel, now moved to March 03, 2017 in Florence under Judge de Cecco.

[…]The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. Giuliano Mignini will be the first witness.

viewtopic.php?style=6&p=130723#p130723
Top Profile

Offline Catnip

User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:23 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Nothing collected into GoogleNews yet.

Just:

Raffaele has something to say about the compensation decision.
AgenziaRadicale, 01 March 2017: Gianni Carbotti and Camillo Maffia, “Raffaele speaks: Justice is not a reality show”

And:
His aunt Sara Achille also has something to say (amongst other things, that he’s living in a drama (that in the context of his Facebook comments)). Raffaele is too naive.
Panorama, Carmelo Abbate, “Pay him”
Top Profile

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:07 am Post subject: SOLLECITO GUMBEL VILIPENDIO.
guermantes wrote:
Has anybody heard any news about today’s court hearing of the Sollecito/Gumbel defamation trial?

Ergon wrote:
[…]The first of the defamation trials against Mignini, that is Sollecito/Gumbel, now moved to March 03, 2017 in Florence under Judge de Cecco.

[…]The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. Giuliano Mignini will be the first witness.

http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic. … 23#p130723
Hi, guermantes, I can only confirm the hearing was held today. (March 03). Beyond that, I’ll have to wait till I get a full understanding of the proceedings.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:11 am Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
jamie wrote:
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?

Hi, jamie,
All three of the McCann children were born through IVF, after Kate McCann had a five year struggle to get pregnant. However, the father confirmed that rumours of a ‘sperm donor’ were untrue, and that he was the natural father of the children. Therefore, they would have shared DNA, and this was confirmed through genetic testing. However, the sample in the car was a 15 out of 19 match with Madeleine’s DNA.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:14 am Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Hi, hugo, corrected to FSS. Thanks.

– The ‘responsible scientist’ who confirmed Madeleine’s DNA (erratum, see below) was Dr. Rosa Maria Espinheira, director of Portugal’s DNA testing laboratory. From Madeleine’s DNA
Quote:
– Regarding your request no. 5, determine if the ‘profile’ obtained by the British laboratory may pertain to a child of the McCann couple.

– We carried out a profile comparison obtained from the autosomal STRs of Kate McCann and Gerald McCann and of the profile sent us.

– The probability of the McCann couple being the biological parents of the female individual in that test is 99,9828 %.

Lisbon, 20th August, 2007

The Director of the Genetic & Biological Forensic Service

Dr. Rosa Maria Espinheira

– Then, Dr. John Lowe of the FSS, wrote:
Quote:
A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.

Why – …

Well lets look at the question that is being asked

“Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab ”

It would be very simple to say “yes” simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.

What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline’s profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline’s profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. it’s important to stress that 50% of Madeline’s profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles.

Therefore, we cannot answer the question: is the match genuine or is it a chance match.

The same applies to any result that is quoted as being too complex for meaningful inclusion/interpretation

– Oddly, similar arguments were made against Raffaele Sollecito’s 15 alleles out of 19 on the bra clasp.

– Some say the FSS was deliberately vague for political reasons.

– The ‘Portuguese officer convicted of perjury in another case’ is Goncalo Amaral who recently won his case against the McCanns in Portugal’s Supreme Court for his book “Maddie-The Truth of the Lie”. The case was about Leonor Cipriano, who was convicted with her brother for murdering her daughter Joanna, since she’d witnessed them having an incestuous affair. She accused the police of beating her and that she’d been interrogated for 48 hours, ahem; they said she’d tried to kill herself by throwing herself down some stairs, hence the bruises. The police were acquitted, and Amaral, who wasn’t even present, received a suspended sentence of 18 months (like Mignini 🙂 for falsifying the reports of the incident.

– Here’s more about Leonor Cipriano (Warning: upsetting details).

– Your point about peer review is correct. I conflated the discussion about peer review in the APA journal with the forensic investigation of the McCann case. However, since many other DNA specialists like John Butler have used formulas to determine the probability ratio of DNA coming from a victim even from a mixed DNA sample, Dr. Lowe should retreat into obfuscation without giving his reasoning? It literally read like what Peter Gill would write, ahem.

ETA erratum: Dr. Rosa Maria Espinheira confirmed the DNA came from a female child of the McCanns. However, since DNA is not transmitted from parents in equal blocks, siblings DO have dissimilar DNA profiles (unless they are identical twins). Since all three children’s samples were on file, it would have been easy for Dr. Lowe to find a perfect match with the female sibling. He did not, and that’s why the police reported it at the time as a match for Madeleine McCann. Nevertheless, in line with my original point, scientists should explain their reasoning and provide the data, not make generalized statements.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Sallyoo

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 98

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:53 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Here is a brief report on the ‘Honor Bound’ hearing in Florence, from Corriere dell’Umbria (who don’t do much accessible content online).

Case deferred until April (I think this means April 2017). Judge hopes the parties will come to an ‘out of court’ settlement by then. The wording of the complaint has been changed to include the passages from the book as published in English, rather than just the passages translated into Italian so far. The Judge is thinking about (ed.note it’s not clear how far he’s gone with this thinking) getting an expert to translate the whole book into Italian. Mignini and Brizioli shouted at each other.

Attachment:
20170304_134755b.jpg

(Edited many times to get the attachment to fit – sorry it’s now a bit small…)

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile

Offline hugo

Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 293

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:05 pm Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
jamie wrote:
Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?

Firstly, you are making an unsourced claim. Secondly, you don’t know anything about IVF and you clearly don’t know anyone who has gone through the procedure. IVF does not commonly involve anonymous donors.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:11 am Post subject: FIREWORKS IN FLORENCE
From Andrea Vogt Tweets:
Quote:
Lively court hearing in Florence Fri as lawyers for Sollecito & “Honor Bound” co-author Gumbel try to deflect defamation trial (April).

Sounds interesting.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 11:29 pm Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
hugo wrote:
jamie wrote:
Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?

Firstly, you are making an unsourced claim. Secondly, you don’t know anything about IVF and you clearly don’t know anyone who has gone through the procedure. IVF does not commonly involve anonymous donors.

Note
Just a Note.
~ Er, civility?. It’s public knowledge Kate McCann had IVF treatments to conceive her children and this was reported widely, so no source required here. I was uncertain whether jamie was thinking of this article in Nature
Quote:
World’s first baby born with new “3 parent” technique
A five-month-old boy is the first baby to be born using a new technique that incorporates DNA from three people, New Scientist can reveal.

but corrected his misunderstanding already.~
~Ergon~
Top Profile E-mail

Offline jamie

User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:16 am Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
Ergon wrote:
hugo wrote:
jamie wrote:
Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?

Firstly, you are making an unsourced claim. Secondly, you don’t know anything about IVF and you clearly don’t know anyone who has gone through the procedure. IVF does not commonly involve anonymous donors.

Note
Just a Note.
~ Er, civility?. It’s public knowledge Kate McCann had IVF treatments to conceive her children and this was reported widely, so no source required here. I was uncertain whether jamie was thinking of this article in Nature
Quote:
World’s first baby born with new “3 parent” technique
A five-month-old boy is the first baby to be born using a new technique that incorporates DNA from three people, New Scientist can reveal.

but corrected his misunderstanding already.~
~Ergon~

I had in mind someone I knew who had his two children by IVF, and it was by donor, as he was infertile. So, it is not self-evident that Maddie had the same DNA as both her parents.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline elisa

Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 152

PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:44 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
The most couples try first an IVF with own eggs&sperma. Have no statistics, but IVF with foreign donors is mostly the last solution. As I read the McCains did have IVF with own fertiliz. sources, so they declared a. ouple of times. Though I believe in Amaral’s conclusions, because he describes other facts towards guilt of. overing up an accident. McCains acting seems to me so suspicious, I even believe there was a sex. assault by friends of the McCains and therefore they had to let the body of M disappear. It is a sad and tragic story but the most unbelievable is the abduction. Just from reading the facts and McCains explanations and acting.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:01 am Post subject: ORIGINAL PHOTO OF KNOX THROAT SCRATCH
Original picture of Knox’s scratch posted in the Photo Album (large picture).

There are some pictures floating around Twitter purporting to show a hand print and others still claiming a hickey, lol, but they’ve been enhanced so I located the original.

This relates to Laura Mezetti’s deposition http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/d … i-1200.pdf but the photo is not attached to the deposition. Found on a Lalli disc not yet in the Wiki. One the many ‘to-do-on the Wiki’ list of things, when we can get around to it.

Date taken: 2007-11-06 1:30 PM according to the EXIF information.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline jamie

User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:23 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Here’s the pic on the police files.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 7:49 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
jamie wrote:
Here’s the pic on the police files.

Thanks, jamie. Your picture is from a PDF Photo book by the Scientific Police therefore is low res and doesn’t have the same color range. The original picture (the only one of her scratch) I posted was taken by a Nikon D50, hence the very accurate detail.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:59 am Post subject: ECHR KNOX V. ITALIE
Always interesting to observe the psychology of some Amanda Knox followers. Anonymous commenter “Numbers” who has made hundreds of posts on Injustice In Perugia and ISF re Knox’s likely triumph at ECtHR and the appeal had been accepted has this to say:
Quote:
Some guilters post misleading information that the case has not been reviewed at all; obviously, a Communicated Case has survived an initial ECHR review.

Er, what I said was communicated directly from the court.
Quote:
No ruling as to admissibility has been made by the court.

So, instead of their haphazard reading of what “admissibility” means, perhaps, they could also ask the court?
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:44 am Post subject: THE PSYCHOLOGY OF A TROLL
A recent Washington Post article How researchers tried to understand one of Twitter’s oldest trolling groups caught my eye hbc)
Abby Olheiser
March 2
Quote:
Three-year-old Madeline McCann disappeared from a resort apartment in Portugal in 2007 while on a family vacation. Her British parents were dining nearby. The McCann disappearance, which has never been resolved, became a major British tabloid story. The daily media frenzy has since faded, but a decade later, a tight-knit group of Twitter trolls who are convinced that they have proven the McCann parents’ guilt in their daughter’s disappearance still discuss the case online every single day.

What you’ll see: a steady stream of chatter from a tight-knit community with a common goal. In a new paper on the #McCann group, Online trolling: The case of Madeleine McCann (Dr.) Synnott and his co-authors tried to shed some light on how this devoted, online trolling community works.

The study was published by Elsevier-Science Direct
Computers in Human Behavior
Volume 71, June 2017, Pages 70–78
Online trolling: The case of Madeleine McCann
John Synnott, Andria Coulias , Maria Ioannou

Highlights:

• Case study analysis of Anti-McCann internet Trolling Group.
• The role of language, group identity and in group cohesion is examined.
• Language is central to Anti-McCann group in the construction of identity.
• Several strategies were employed by Anti-McCanns to provoke outsiders.
• Support for previous research linking trolling to western media culture and ASPD.

Abstract:

Despite the sustained media attention surrounding internet trolling, academic studies investigating its occurrence are rare. This study aimed to provide a case study analysis of the behaviours and strategies of a group of alleged Twitter trolls referred to as the anti-McCanns due to their continual abuse of Kate and Gerry McCann as well as those who support them and thus identify as pro-McCann. The way in which language was used to construct the anti-McCanns group identity, enhance in-group cohesion and facilitate out-group disassociation from the pro-Mccann group was additionally explored, given that previous research has implicated group processes in the propagation of aggressive online conduct. A multi-method approach involving a combination of ethnographic observations and the collection of online commentary was employed. The data was then analysed using quantitative content analysis and discourse analysis, which indicated that language was utilised in a variety of ways by the anti-McCanns to construct a salient group identity and negatively stereotype and disassociate from the pro-McCann group. Findings additionally revealed that several strategies were employed by the anti-McCann trolls to provoke and derogate members of the pro-McCann group, supporting previous findings which have linked trolling to both western media culture and the characteristics of anti-social personality disorder. The implications of these findings both theoretical and practical are discussed, alongside recommendations for future research.

Keywords:
Online trolling; Online abuse; Missing persons; Social media; Cyber psychology

My response to the WaPo article was published:
Quote:
This study is a violation of the British (BPS) and American (APA) psychologist association’s code of ethics.
Psychology Research Ethics
Saul McLeod published 2007, updated 2015
– The purpose of these codes of conduct is to protect research participants, the reputation of psychology and psychologists themselves.”
– Moral issues rarely yield a simple, unambiguous, right or wrong answer. It is therefore often a matter of judgement whether the research is justified or not. For example, it might be that a study causes psychological or physical discomfort to participants, maybe they suffer pain or perhaps even come to serious harm.
– Informed Consent
Whenever possible investigators should obtain the consent of participants.
– Debrief
After the research is over the participant should be able to discuss the procedure and the findings with the psychologist.
– Protection of Participants
Researchers must ensure that those taking part in research will not be caused distress. They must be protected from physical and mental harm. This means you must not embarrass, frighten, offend or harm participants.
– Deception
This is where participants are misled or wrongly informed about the aims of the research. Types of deception include (i) deliberate misleading, e.g. using confederates, staged manipulations in field settings, deceptive instructions; (ii) deception by omission, e.g., failure to disclose full information about the study, or creating ambiguity.

Note:
The post grad researcher set up a Twitter account, did not reveal their identity or purpose of the study, reveal their findings to those who responded, (and) deleted their account afterwards.

The title “Online trolling: The case of Madeleine McCann” is unprofessional and inflammatory.

“Case study analysis of Anti-McCann internet Trolling Group” characterizes a whole group of people as socially maladjusted and opens them to ridicule.

Disclosure: I’m an editor at www.themurderofmeredithkercher.com
——–

Interesting how the group searching for justice for Madeleine McCann had a similar arc as ours: dedicated volunteers translating legal documents for the English-speaking world, attacks from the media, a professional PR campaign arrayed against, biased (background research shows Synnott’s group like Gill, et al, had pre determined their conclusions and did the ‘research’ to confirm) experts, and of course, we are the ‘Amanda Knox Haters Society’ and the ‘Anti-McCann internet Trolling Group’.

The media of course, loves this. They can label whole groups of people now because the psychologists said so. Pity that Brenda Leyland committed suicide because the media wrongly labeled her a troll based on similar internet sleuthing.

Dr. Synnott plans on studying the ‘pro-McCann group’ now, and if the difference in language doesn’t telegraph his bias, well, …

Follows, a bandwagon: Miscarriages of Justice in the Age of Social Media: The Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito Innocence Campaign
The British Journal of Criminology
Lieve Gies
Published: 29 February 2016
Abstract:

The role of the media in exposing miscarriages of justice has not been extensively researched and even less is known about the contribution of the Internet and social media. Drawing on in-depth interviews with innocence campaigners, this article examines the social media campaign to overturn the conviction of Amanda Knox and her co-accused Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia in 2007. It explores the campaigners’ use of different media platforms. It also examines their motivations in joining and supporting the campaign and discusses the campaign’s contributions and social dynamics. Finally, it elucidates the factors that shaped supporters’ belief in the innocence of Knox and Sollecito.

Keywords: wrongful conviction, Internet, media, pressure groups, qualitative research method

—–

Ahem 🙂
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Rumpole

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:46 pm

Posts: 243

Location: Old Bailey

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:29 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Hi Ergon,

your mentioning of Lieve Gies reminded me of this book we (or just I?) talked about last year:

Transmedia Crime Stories. The Trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the Globalised Media Sphere

It was published 3 months ago, and the intro (Foreword: The tragicomedy of Perugia: Power and prejudice, visibility and invisibility in the making of
a transnational, postmodern media story) by Yvonne Jewkes – once again putting Knox next to the child killer Myra Hindley – can be downloaded free of charge here (24 pages), attached also below:

Transmedia Crime Stories -Introduction.pdf

Yvonne Jewkes wrote:
My aim in this Foreword is both to pick up on some of the key themes

introduced by other contributors to the volume and to add my own

thoughts and reflections on the reasons for the case’s enduring fascination.

In relation to the first objective, I found the content of the chapters that

follow as grimly riveting as the events they describe. Examining all aspects

of the story and its key protagonists, Transmedia Crime Stories: the Trial

of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in the Globalised Media Sphere provides

absorbing new insight into the case and its aftermath. Chapters discuss

the arrests, trials, and acquittals; the tactics used by British, American,

and Italian journalists to construct Knox, Sollecito, and Guede in ways

that suited their (and the prosecution’s) narratives about the crime and

about the nations represented by the lead actors; the pivotal role of social

media in many aspects of the case and its reporting; the online communities

that continue to noisily protest Knox’s and Sollecito’s innocence or

guilt; the flawed police investigations; the controversial court trial; and the

slippery, selective, and ultimately double-edged conferment of celebrity

status that has elevated Amanda Knox to a level of fame and notoriety that

has seen her compared to, among others, Diana, Princess of Wales, Lady

Macbeth, and child murderer Myra Hindley.

———————
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057% … 37-59004-6

—————-
I’ve finally been reading Stevie Simkin’s Femme Fatale book about Knox and the other female murderers whose media etc. coverage he compares (mainly Ruth Snyder and Frances Howard; Madeleine Smith and the Basic Instinct character are also discussed). Fascinating book, one also recognizes one’s own behaviour in sometimes viewing Knox the female as the worst and most devious one of the three accused, next I want to properly delve into all these plays and novels (The Woman in White!, need to reread it, I loved it when teenager) he mentions as quite a few of them were unknown to me – I’ve heard of them but have never seen them or read the scripts (Machinal, Duchess of Malfi etc).

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7188

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:35 am Post subject: DECONSTRUCTING MEDIA NARRATIVES ON CRIME
Hi, Rumpole, thanks again for your post. Another from your link:
Quote:
Introduction: Transmedia Crime Stories
Lieve Gies, Maria Bortoluzzi
Abstract
That crime forms the staple diet of media reporting has long been acknowledged. Yet, not every crime sells and even within the same category of offending there are huge variations as to what makes a particular case newsworthy. Some murder stories barely cause a ripple, while others simply will run and run, generating headlines for years to come as the investigation turns into arrest, trial, appeal and, in some instances, retrial and exoneration. What is more, rather than just generating interest in the local or national press, some stories will command worldwide media interest. A few do not even require the spectacle of a trial to keep the media interest alive: the case of Madeleine McCann, the British child who disappeared on holiday in Portugal in 2007, has been making the news globally on and off for nearly a decade, despite the fact that her fate is still unknown and not a single suspect has been put on trial. The Internet and social media are capable of amplifying the geographical reach of such stories, increasing pressure on the police and other authorities to investigate or solve a case, or sometimes reopen it. In December 2015, it was a much-talked-about documentary by Netflix, the US-based on-demand channel streaming over the Internet, that provoked international outcry over the murder conviction of Steven Avery in Wisconsin. Online petitions generating more than 380,000 signatures against his conviction were indicative of a global response to what would have remained a local case with limited topicality without the online exposure.

My own curiosity’s piqued by what I call “false media narrative syndrome”. Used to see the same tactics when whole groups of brown skinned people were demonized to fit pro-war propaganda, now I see it used to fit people’s psychological biases. The “burn the witch” syndrome we are all supposedly affected by, the “investigation and prosecutorial misconduct” which is easy to argue since, Netflix’s Steven Avery, West Memphis Three with the celebrity advocacy effect, Adnan Syed since a popular podcast, then of course the weirder documentaries like “Capturing the Friedmans” and “Roman Polanski-Wanted and Desired” which says more about the film makers than their subjects. Sometimes, a murderer is just a murderer, and a pedophile, just a pedophile.

Regardless of what the academics have to say.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Fast Pete

Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 866

Location: New York

PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:05 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
A tip came in from an Italian reader, they sent just the link.

http://m.dagospia.com/ma-che-simpatico- … one-139676

Have we looked at this at all? Can someone explain what it is all about?
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Sallyoo

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:20 pm

Posts: 98

PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:42 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Yeah, been talked about. (Search on Lucarelli; Guermantes usually is the most lucid poster on Sollecito news, and I think he/she covered it.) Late Jan/Early Feb 2017.

Briefly, Sollecito was being less than discreet (aka effing stupid) in a Facebook group perceived as a tad disrepectful towards the fairer sex, and Lucarelli outed his posts. It just about hit the English language ‘press’, as I recall. Some of his comments could be read as references to his having murdered Meredith (or someone else) and having some expertise in covering up murders. Maybe even eating the meat of Guede! Of course, Raf dismissed all of this as a bit of fun (grabbing pussy?) which all boys together get up to, donchaknow? (I’m now realising that I’m surprised Sollecito hasn’t yet had an audience with The Donald!)
Top Profile

Offline Catnip

User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:30 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Re Gies & co:

I think a general pattern is beginning to appear of, academics that are not legally-trained and do not understand the ethics of court reporting (Lieve Gies and Maria Bortoluzzi are recent examples) showing a “confusion of thought”(1), and a belief and trust that what they read about a legal case is true and correct, and a balanced representation of reality rather than an (adversarial-like, even propagandising) distortion of it.

The authors of that Victimology book(2) likewise take trust in the veracity and unbiased view of the newspaper reports as their starting position.

These writers can hardly do otherwise, not knowing other languages, other legal systems, the actual procedural history of the case, the evidence that was presented or even how to evaluate it in an informed manner – there are several degrees’ worth of knowledge acquisition just there alone, and who would have the time or inclination (not to mention the resources) to do all that work? Especially as there are easy papers to publish.

But not having the skill and knowledge leads them into making elemntary howlers.(3)

So the worth of their contribution to the store of accumulated knowledge is up for questioning. There are nuanced hints, though, that signs of a cognitive dissonance are beginning to surface and be recognised (to some extent, anyway). A full acknowledgement of the cognitive dissonance necessarily entails an annullment and potential negation of the ultimate validity of any thesis based on that dissonance. Any hoped-for validity would have to be salvaged by following a different line of reasoning.

More efficient, collectively, is to leave the shipwreck where it is, and to start fresh work.

The end result will be a secondary wave of academic papers titled, “Misconstructing the news”, “Fakers are not Fakirs”, “Being Lead Astray”, “Outside My Field: I’m not an Expert on THAT, so who do I trust?”, “I read it first on Bruce’s site, and I can’t get it out of my head”, and so on.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *