Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
This is the reason I get so frustrated with Grinder. I really have no problem with his forcing us to be accurate. I think that is fine.

The problem I have is that he thinks that Rudy's pattern is meaningless.
Click to expand...

I think Rudi's pattern could be very meaningful but I don't see that we know what it was. I would love to see the phone records that must exist if RW report from the Spanish kids is accurate.

I don't believe the Nina story without supporting sources. I'm not sure of CT as he didn't report it was Rudi until after he saw his picture in the paper, even though he alleges he recognized him shortly after the break-in, which I'm sure did occur. I'd like to know why the head of the Flying Squad was working in the middle of the night to take his report, if that's actually true. I doubt CT for some of the same reasons I doubt Curatolo, Nara et al.

What I know of his pattern is that he was involved in stolen items and that he was let into the nursery on a Friday night and was caught by a surprise visit by the owner. He had taken a knife from the kitchen, for protection according to him (is this something that is allowed to be believed?) which surely indicates he didn't travel with a knife at all times.

We don't know what his financial situation was. Was he desperate for rent money? Did he have hundreds of Euros worth of electronics in his flat when he left for Germany?

We have anecdotal stories about his behavior with women but no women that came forward to substantiate these claims. Did the crack defense team have a PI investigate Rudi's background? Didn't the defense have a clue how the courts would work regarding establishing facts in one trial for another? Is there precedent for this kind of fact transference?

But we have a rule that if enough people believe something then it must be accepted. Therefore Rudi's history need not be verified just voted on.
 
Grinder said:
As far as motive goes, I just don't believe that it is an area that will significantly help getting the kids out of this mess. I don't like hearing good kids, no motive and railroad job from hell. Not that I don't agree that no solid motive has been put forward nor that no significant behavioral issues have been identified, I just think there are more important and definitive issues to set them free, like the lack of credible evidence.

The PGP sites can't allow a Grinder because people questioning their base beliefs would ruin their fun.
Click to expand...

acbytesla said:
Wow, I couldn't disagree more. As far as Italy is concerned, I agree. But to a certain degree this is a PR battle now..particularly when it comes to what happens to Amanda. The PGP wants to portray her to be some deranged demonic psycho. Your expression..a "stone cold killer". That way no one will care about her if the Italians ask the US to extradite her.

The flip side of course is that the PIP needs to make sure that everyone knows that Amanda is their little sister or the quirky girl next door. Sweet and kind. Raffaele is Harry Potter, mild mannered, wouldn't hurt a fly. There is NO WAY that they could do this. People can and will relate to this. The same is true about the "railroad job from hell". It is a clear catch phrase that describes what is happening.

This stuff makes a difference with people...does it make a difference with the law per se? Probably not. Does it make a difference. I think so...ABSOLUTELY.
Click to expand...

Where I agree with Grinder is that he'd last 30 seconds on any of the hate sites. Hell, I'm likeable and I lasted all of 7 posts on TJMK!!!!

Where I disagree with Grinder is that this is no longer about evidence. Nencini's report has proven that. He brings up issues as if he'll get back to them (seemingly to prove something), then he never gets back to the issue. He has women with Y-Haplotypes. He says that in the two hour window of 9 pm to 11 pm Amanda and Raffaele are in Amanda's room messing around, Meredith is in her room doing.... well, what? Calling her ailing mother? Rudy apparently has the run of the upstairs, which at one point in those two hours (acc. to Nencini) Rudy takes a dump in the wrong toilet!

All the while Curatolo is to be believed because Curatolo sees Amanda and Raffaele not once, not twice, not three times but FIVE times in the square. Nencini seems tone deaf to that this actually gives AK and RS and alibi against the allegation they'd hung around inside the cottage for 2 hours messing around....

If this were about "evidence", then Nencini would not have cherry picked ONE element of Guede's ever-changing stories that Meredith was mad enough about stolen rent money that Meredith had gone in and searched Amanda's room. Amongst other things, believing THAT, means that Amanda was NOT there.... and that it was Meredith who had let Guede in, not Amanda. And the fight about the rent money tends to portray Meredith as an argumentative bitch where no one believes that about her.

If this were about "evidence" cartwheels, eating pizza and saying "Oooop-la" when wearing little paper shoes would not have been decisive. If this were about "evidence" guilters these days wouldn't go about how suspicious Amanda Knox was right from Nov 2 onwards, while at the same time, she was not a suspect when Rita Ficarrra shoved the SMS message from Lumumba into her face in the wee hours of Nov 6.

This has never been about evidence, and here we are in May 2014 STILL arguing the obvious. The climb in Filomena's window is doable (but acc. to Nencini Rudy was too much of a professional to ruin his pièce de résistance, artistic triumph of picking the front-door's lock). And NO professional would crap in a toilet unless invited into the home..... just don't let it stop you that there is no known communication ever in the history of civilization between Knox and Guede.... and it is Guede who is the sole source who says that Meredith let him in.....

We don't need no stinkin' evidence!
​
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Compare the bonehead comments by Ergon (who doubles as "God" during the day, while being a Knox-hater by night) and Peter Quennell....

.... with this blogger who's just recently happened upon all this....
I'm quite sure now that this blog is known, Lenroot Mays will start getting "hate" email. Edward McCall will defeinitely relapse....
Click to expand...


Wow, that is some excellent writing and some excellent reading.

I would like to draw some parallels with the other case I'm interested in, which has also frequently been compared to the Dreyfus case, and in which the role of the authorities in wilfully ignoring concrete evidence in favour of pursuing fairy-tales is underappreciated.

But I'm not allowed to, so I won't. Perhaps some day we'll understand what was done by the investigators in the early stages of that case that led to the eventual miscarriage of justice, as well as it's now understood in the Knox/Sollecito case.

Going back to finish reading that blog now.

Rolfe.
 
Bill Williams said:
Where I agree with Grinder is that he'd last 30 seconds on any of the hate sites. Hell, I'm likeable and I lasted all of 7 posts on TJMK!!!!

Where I disagree with Grinder is that this is no longer about evidence. Nencini's report has proven that. He brings up issues as if he'll get back to them (seemingly to prove something), then he never gets back to the issue. He has women with Y-Haplotypes. He says that in the two hour window of 9 pm to 11 pm Amanda and Raffaele are in Amanda's room messing around, Meredith is in her room doing.... well, what? Calling her ailing mother? Rudy apparently has the run of the upstairs, which at one point in those two hours (acc. to Nencini) Rudy takes a dump in the wrong toilet!

All the while Curatolo is to be believed because Curatolo sees Amanda and Raffaele not once, not twice, not three times but FIVE times in the square. Nencini seems tone deaf to that this actually gives AK and RS and alibi against the allegation they'd hung around inside the cottage for 2 hours messing around....

If this were about "evidence", then Nencini would not have cherry picked ONE element of Guede's ever-changing stories that Meredith was mad enough about stolen rent money that Meredith had gone in and searched Amanda's room. Amongst other things, believing THAT, means that Amanda was NOT there.... and that it was Meredith who had let Guede in, not Amanda. And the fight about the rent money tends to portray Meredith as an argumentative bitch where no one believes that about her.

If this were about "evidence" cartwheels, eating pizza and saying "Oooop-la" when wearing little paper shoes would not have been decisive. If this were about "evidence" guilters these days wouldn't go about how suspicious Amanda Knox was right from Nov 2 onwards, while at the same time, she was not a suspect when Rita Ficarrra shoved the SMS message from Lumumba into her face in the wee hours of Nov 6.

This has never been about evidence, and here we are in May 2014 STILL arguing the obvious. The climb in Filomena's window is doable (but acc. to Nencini Rudy was too much of a professional to ruin his pièce de résistance, artistic triumph of picking the front-door's lock). And NO professional would crap in a toilet unless invited into the home..... just don't let it stop you that there is no known communication ever in the history of civilization between Knox and Guede.... and it is Guede who is the sole source who says that Meredith let him in.....

Click to expand...

The contradictions with Nencini, Massei etc will drive any one crazy. At one point in either motivation, they seem logical and they just flip it on its head

Your point about Nencini and Curatolo is just one example The evidence or testimony is fine, until it stop supporting the prosecution. Curatolo is used only to demolish Amanda and Raffaele's alibi, but as it strolls into the realm of providing an alibi, then it is ignored?

Rudy is a liar, but Rudy is not lying about Amanda stealing Meredith's money? It is the almost upside down world of this case that keeps us interested. In reality, this is the most boring, mundane everyday kind of horrible tragedy. Yet in Italy they have to spice it up and turn it into some bizarre backwards logic spectacle??
 
Bill Williams said:
Compare the bonehead comments by Ergon (who doubles as "God" during the day, while being a Knox-hater by night) and Peter Quennell....

.... with this blogger who's just recently happened upon all this....


I'm quite sure now that this blog is known, Lenroot Mays will start getting "hate" email. Edward McCall will defeinitely relapse....

Here's the summary of the injustice in Perugia acc. to Lenroot Mays....

- A bogus indictment, the tapping of telephones, the conversations (often doctored) fed to the press to start a smear campaign, a spectacular arrest, prolonged preventive detention under the worst possible conditions, third-degree interrogations, and finally a trial that lasts many years....

- Trial Length as War of Attrition

- Abuse of Preventive Detention Laws

- You’re My Enemy? Then I will Indict You!

- The case against Amanda Knox has never been a search for the truth. Nowhere is this clearer than in the extraordinary “fluidity” with which prosecutors (and now judges) have changed their theories and facts.

- Far from being scandalized by all this, the judges who have convicted Amanda Knox have accepted it calmly and with the greatest complacency. Facts are not stubborn things in Italian courts; they are infinitely malleable things, changeable at whim. Evidence disappears or is withheld. Theories that are advanced one day, disappear the next. Powerful, fact-driven defense arguments are simply ignored altogether.​

I won't redo the whole thing here.... better that you read it in situ.
Click to expand...

Thanks for referring me to this Bill. Mays is excellent. I'm impressed with how articulately he writes about this nightmare.
 
The presumed seminal fluid found under Meredith's hips on the pillow.

Was it EVER tested? According to this conversation by Patrizia Stefanoni, it was intended to be tested.....


However, by the time the 2009 Massei trial comes around, Massei does not think it strange that Stefanoni said she did NOT test it. Massei invents the reason that......

...... Meredith had an active sex-life, and if it was to be tested it would probably be her boyfriend's. Then again, since DNA deposits "cannot be dated", it would do no good to test the DNA because Massei would not know "when" it had been deposited.

(Yet, after living at the cottage for a couple of months - Massei reasons that ANY DNA found belonging to Amanda MUST have been deposited as a result of the murder.)

What does Nencini do with the tested and then untested presumed semen? He doesn't even discuss it. Three Hundred thirty-three pages, and not one mention.

Why is it that the Perugian police get a "get out of jail free" card.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
The presumed seminal fluid found under Meredith's hips on the pillow.

Was it EVER tested? According to this conversation by Patrizia Stefanoni, it was intended to be tested.....


However, by the time the 2009 Massei trial comes around, Massei does not think it strange that Stefanoni said she did NOT test it. Massei invents the reason that......

...... Meredith had an active sex-life, and if it was to be tested it would probably be her boyfriend's. Then again, since DNA deposits "cannot be dated", it would do no good to test the DNA because Massei would not know "when" it had been deposited.

(Yet, after living at the cottage for a couple of months - Massei reasons that ANY DNA found belonging to Amanda MUST have been deposited as a result of the murder.)

What does Nencini do with the tested and then untested presumed semen? He doesn't even discuss it. Three Hundred thirty-three pages, and not one mention.

Why is it that the Perugian police get a "get out of jail free" card.
Click to expand...
Contradictions don't matter. Or anything that supports innocence.
 
Planigale said:
Looking at other sites to is interesting how certain memes recur such as that Knox has some form of psychiatric disorder, despite the fact that unlike internet observers a professional assessment was done when she was in prison that identified no such thing. The other recurrent claim is that she was some form of heavy drug user, again despite the fact that assessment for drug use was done when she was arrested and hair analysis and medical assessment were negative and she clearly had no withdrawal issues.

Thank goodness we have Grinder who would not allow any of us to get away with a non factual statement. (I suspect I will now be challenged to reference the out come of the drug analyses and psychological assessment).
Click to expand...

I endorse this. Grinder is a very valuable contributor here as he challenges us to be absolutely factual. He has made me eat crow from time to time.
 
From Lenroot Mays' blog.... the exact reason why defence complaints don't get very far, not in the Sollecito/Knox defences...

"A classic example occurred during the most recent trial. When Amanda Knox’s lawyer, Carlo dalla Vedova, mentioned the fake HIV test during his summation, he found himself rudely interrupted, bullied, and threatened from the bench. Judge Nencini had him to understand that unless he could provide proof –in the form of medical records–he was exposing himself to legal jeopardy. The judge was being utterly disingenuous, of course, because he knew very well that the police and prison officials who committed the outrage would never release incriminating information to the defense. But the message from on high was chillingly clear: they can do whatever they want to your client in prison and if you complain you will face charges."​
Click to expand...

I remember dozens of post here in this thread by Machiavelli, who would start with, "well, the defence never complained...." or, "the defence never objected...."

It assumed that the playing field was level. It's the problem with a system where the judges and the prosecutors are equal, and part of the same side.

As Amanda Knox herself recently blogged.... in relation to the use of draconian precautionary detention against herself and Raffaele....

"By ordering detention based on such questionable logic, the judges reduce the protections embodied within the precautionary detention law to a mere formality. Detention can be ordered by simply mentioning the key phrases embodied within the law and agreeing that they have been satisfied. This is not the intent behind the law, nor is it in accordance with international understandings."​
Click to expand...

They should never have been detained.

See this piece from 2010 about how the two should never have been detained according to laws more suited to where governments have suspended civil rights and invoked a state of emergency.

 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
From Lenroot Mays' blog.... the exact reason why defence complaints don't get very far, not in the Sollecito/Knox defences...


Click to expand...


Would it be fair to ask who these people are in the McCall vein?

Lenroot? Now May is yam backwards and the last name is root hmmmm.

His last post is the best with the least amount of FOA spiel. I say undermine the Italian system first and then show how it worked in this trial and then follow it up with how unlikely it would be to suspect them outside Italy.

It is very important to show the risk Italian lawyers face. I hope Marriott one of these writers finds specific cases where the defense lawyer was shafted for asking the wrong questions.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
From Lenroot Mays' blog.... the exact reason why defence complaints don't get very far, not in the Sollecito/Knox defences...

​

I remember dozens of post here in this thread by Machiavelli, who would start with, "well, the defence never complained...." or, "the defence never objected...."

It assumed that the playing field was level. It's the problem with a system where the judges and the prosecutors are equal, and part of the same side.

As Amanda Knox herself recently blogged.... in relation to the use of draconian precautionary detention against herself and Raffaele....

​

They should never have been detained.

See this piece from 2010 about how the two should never have been detained according to laws more suited to where governments have suspended civil rights and invoked a state of emergency.

Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with this Bill, it is not uncommon in the US for defendants in Capital crimes to be denied bail. Robert Blake for example was denied bail in the US for a year. Was finally allowed after a year to post a 1.5 million dollar bond.

In fact, in the US defendants in capital crimes like murder are denied the ability to post bond frequently.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
While I don't disagree with this Bill, it is not uncommon in the US for defendants in Capital crimes to be denied bail. Robert Blake for example was denied bail in the US for a year. Was finally allowed after a year to post a 1.5 million dollar bond.

In fact, in the US defendants in capital crimes like murder are denied the ability to post bond frequently.
Click to expand...

But here they can confer with their lawyers and be confident, I think, that the convos are confidential. In Italy,not so much whether they were listening legally or illegally.
 
Last edited:
Grinder said:
But here they can confer with their lawyers and be confident, I think, that the convos are confidential. In Italy,not so much whether they listening legally or illegally.
Click to expand...

Is there any evidence that they were listening to the conversations between Amanda/Raffaele and their lawyers Grinder? Even anecdotal??
 
acbytesla said:
While I don't disagree with this Bill, it is not uncommon in the US for defendants in Capital crimes to be denied bail. Robert Blake for example was denied bail in the US for a year. Was finally allowed after a year to post a 1.5 million dollar bond.

In fact, in the US defendants in capital crimes like murder are denied the ability to post bond frequently.
Click to expand...

Grinder said:
But here they can confer with their lawyers and be confident, I think, that the convos are confidential. In Italy,not so much whether they listening legally or illegally.
Click to expand...

Wow. . . Grinder arguing for the Defense :D

While the US court system has its own peculiarities, such as innocent is not always a valid reason for dropping convictions, this horrid can of worms is very different than what we get in the US.

The motivations for the guilty verdict are also not what we are used to as well. Doesn't seem to be a tough on crime issue.
 
Grinder said:
Would it be fair to ask who these people are in the McCall vein?

Lenroot? Now May is yam backwards and the last name is root hmmmm.

His last post is the best with the least amount of FOA spiel. I say undermine the Italian system first and then show how it worked in this trial and then follow it up with how unlikely it would be to suspect them outside Italy.

It is very important to show the risk Italian lawyers face. I hope Marriott one of these writers finds specific cases where the defense lawyer was shafted for asking the wrong questions.
Click to expand...

For someone who leads the league in demanding citations, you certainly are not shy about communicating innuendo yourself.

You'd probably last longer on the hate sites than I gave you credit for....
 
Last edited:
The motivations makes the Italian system..or at least in this case a judicial system that is easy to criticize. In the US, a jury can come back with a guilty verdict that makes little sense at all, and you hardly know why the jury decided the way they did. Except, the media has a tendency to seek out jurors and ask them about the deliberations. In a way in major cased this can work out to be a defacto motivation for the court. Lawyers in appeals can point out the mistakes that the jurors made.
 
acbytesla said:
Is there any evidence that they were listening to the conversations between Amanda/Raffaele and their lawyers Grinder? Even anecdotal??
Click to expand...

Very good grasshopper.

Only things I can think of off the bat ( think wheelhouse) is that Mignini was prosecuted for tapping calls of journalists and police as well as the recording of conversations between Amanda and her parents when she was in jail. As I recall the parents were aware that their conversations were being monitored hence the "I was there" kerfuffle.

Perhaps Anglo has something on this specifically from his wide reading.

Or maybe an Italian could give us an idea on this.
 
What is completely gobsmacking....

Is the contention that when anyone takes a look at this case by themselves, and then expresses an opinion about complete innocence and complete lack of eivdence........

...... someone will play the Gogerty-Marriott card. Yessirree Bob, the only reason someone would think that Sollecito and Knox are innocent is if they're on the payroll of a second-tier Seattle PR firm.

I mean, it's not as if there hasn't been a PR Supertanker on the other side.... Harry Rag comes to mind, completely anonymous, but there at each on-line newspiece comment's section to cut and past "mixed blood" and the so-called "overwhelming evidence" that points to guilt.

(If it's overwhelming, why does Nencini have to invent that women have Y-genetic material? But I digress.)

Yup - if it weren't for accusations that pro-innocence people must be in the employ of Gogerty-Marriott of Seattle, some would have nothing to post to forums about.
 
Grinder said:
Very good grasshopper.

Only things I can think of off the bat ( think wheelhouse) is that Mignini was prosecuted for tapping calls of journalists and police as well as the recording of conversations between Amanda and her parents when she was in jail. As I recall the parents were aware that their conversations were being monitored hence the "I was there" kerfuffle.

Perhaps Anglo has something on this specifically from his wide reading.

Or maybe an Italian could give us an idea on this.
Click to expand...

Someone was listening in on the conversation about the tennis shoes being wrong...but I don't think a lawyer was involved. You can count on your conversation with the exception of a conversation with a lawyer or a priest/psychologist being recorded in the US. But it is my understanding that the police had tapped Raffaele's father's phone as well. That would have been pretty much a no no in the US...well usually. (There are always seems to be an exception..usually when they suspect the parents as suspects as well.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom