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

[Chris_Halkides]

a thorough review of the data is still needed

So, here's Stefanoni's testimony on Sept. 6, 2011:

"EXPERT STEFANONI - So, the raw data are not available in the file, because I've never been, say, delivered. Can I explain what they are ..."

My interpretation of this passage (and I am not sure that I am correct) is that Stefanoni is acknowledging that the raw data are not part of the case file, meaning not available to the defense. If that is true, then whether or not she actually supplied data concerning the controls in 2008 is irrelevant. Paper copies are simply not good enough for a proper review. A thorough review of the data is still needed; the need for this is even more apparent than it was before.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Federico Aldrovandi case

We have discussed the Aldrovandi case before on several occasions. I do not believe that it happened inside the station. Federico's mother said that she was sued about ten times, according to Beppe Grillo's blog. She had the audacity to call the police who were involved "delinquents." I had forgotten or did not know that Maresca was involved. Why am I not surprised?

 

[Diocletus]

Not to be obtuse, but what is your interpretation of the (perhaps loosely translated?) "...I've never been, say, delivered"?

Stef had never been delivered the resources from some third party? Or, she's never been "delivered", in the, say, Billy Graham, baptized-in-a-pond-raptured-to-glory, sense?

I couldn't speak directly to the state of perjurious Patrizia's spiritual well-being, but all indications are that it's something along the lines of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwx2ce_AyOE

 

[carbonjam72]

Defense issues on appeal, anywhere to be found, en anglais?

So, the very first argument that Sollecito makes in his appeal is that it was error for Nencini to use "circumstantial evidence" to establish the "reliability" of otherwise unreliable scientific tests. In other words, scientific tests have to stand or fall on their own merit. I like it: they are daring the Italian Supreme Court to decide that science can be authenticated by speculation, and simultaneously suggesting that such a rule is illegal under the ECHR.

Is there a translation of all the points raised by the defense anywhere? ( are there 24 issues?)

(This seems like a great point to start out with - 'the earth is not flat, and being a judge doesn't give you the right to declare it so', more or less.)

 

[js202]

I couldn't speak directly to the state of perjurious Patrizia's spiritual well-being, but all indications are that it's something along the lines of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwx2ce_AyOE

Ha. Yes, no telling how many trips to the confessional the main perps in this travesty will require to set themselves straight.

 

[Planigale]

For those more familiar with the phone evidence than I can someone explain why Nencini concludes

It is indeed ascertained, through the examination of the phone records, that the phone containing the English phone card (of which there will be the occasion to speak abundantly later on) at 00.10,31 on November 2, 2007 gave a signal that was intercepted by cell nr 25622, cell that could not be interested by signals coming from Via della pergola, but that intercepts the signals coming from Via Sperandio, a road in which the mobile phone was abandoned after the crime by the authors of the murder: the latter being an undisputed circumstance of the trial.

Now cell 25622 is Piazza Lupattelli, which Knox subsequently connects to when she outside of the apartment giving directions to the Carabinieri. Nencini concludes the phone has definitely left the apartment by this time. The 22.13 call was via cell 30064 Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia, is there any reason to think that the phone was more likely to be in the apartment if connecting to cell 30064 than 25622?

 

[Bill Williams]

We have discussed the Aldrovandi case before on several occasions. I do not believe that it happened inside the station. Federico's mother said that she was sued about ten times, according to Beppe Grillo's blog. She had the audacity to call the police who were involved "delinquents." I had forgotten or did not know that Maresca was involved. Why am I not surprised?

Acc. to even their admission, it did happen in the station. What they are denying is that it was a homicide.

What is compelling, though, is that this is the arena into which the Kercher murder was adjudicated. What the police say is law - it's called impunity.

It's why to this day the lawyers for Knox and Sollecito cannot point out the obvious - corruption within the Perugian PLE. If they do, then it is calunnia or defamation. By definition.

 

[acbytesla]

Delete

 

[stilicho]

You are not denying the computer evidence. Do you believe Raffaele opened that cartoon or not?

Or would you like to make the case that Amanda left to commit a murder and then convinced Raffaele to help clean up?

Raffaele has not turned on Amanda. A couple of his family members are posting misguided information. You really should read Raffaele's book. He has said nothing publicly to show that his position has changed. If he ever does, it will just show that he has been broken by the system. Nothing will ever surface to show that Raffaele was involved in the murder because he wasn't. Same goes for Amanda. As we both know, they are linked together.

Amanda's defense has stated from the beginning that her DNA was not in the murder room. Your suggestion that similar statements all of the sudden caused Raffaele to turn on Amanda is absurd.

Nothing said on Twitter will change the truth. Of course you latch onto every Tweet that you hope will harm Amanda and Raffaele, regardless of the truth. No surprise there.

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/

So this isn't just something "said on Twitter". The Sollecitos have never been terribly fond of Bongiorno's invention of the "lovebird" tryst between their favoured porn-collecting son and the woman they collectively blame for his legal troubles. They're right, too. Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.

[T]he appeal also notes that the range of the aggression against Kercher was between 21-22 and that Sollecito’s Macbook Pro shows that at 21:26 a multimedia cartoon “Naruto” was opened,which lasted 20 minutes, shows it was impossible that he was involved in the crime.

This is the "computer alibi" that Raffaele has always maintained. He doesn't now nor never has relied on the word of the "quirky" Seattle woman. The Naruto defence is solely Raffaele's; Amanda has never mentioned the cartoon in voluntary statements to the police, in her court testimony, in any of her public appearances since her temporary release, in her book, or anywhere else before or since.

Amanda's appeal is more concise. Fundamentally her defence is that the motive as described is incorrect. That's probably true. Only she will ever know why she descended upon the cottage, armed, and with a pair of male accomplices in tow.

 

[Bill Williams]

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/

So this isn't just something "said on Twitter". The Sollecitos have never been terribly fond of Bongiorno's invention of the "lovebird" tryst between their favoured porn-collecting son and the woman they collectively blame for his legal troubles. They're right, too. Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.


This is the "computer alibi" that Raffaele has always maintained. He doesn't now nor never has relied on the word of the "quirky" Seattle woman. The Naruto defence is solely Raffaele's; Amanda has never mentioned the cartoon in voluntary statements to the police, in her court testimony, in any of her public appearances since her temporary release, in her book, or anywhere else before or since.

Amanda's appeal is more concise. Fundamentally her defence is that the motive as described is incorrect. That's probably true. Only she will ever know why she descended upon the cottage, armed, and with a pair of male accomplices in tow.

What a strange way of putting the "prosecution's case". Which theory, then, do you go with? Or is simply finding an excuse to say slutty things enough?

Are you also claiming premeditation? It sure sounds like you are. You do know, don't you, that no court has ever found premeditation.

But then you don't really care do you? You simply want to say slutty things. You're implying a theory of this crime that no one agrees with, other than the nuts at PMF.

 

[Kaosium]

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

Just like they did appealing the Massei verdict. Yawn. Two separate defendants with two teams of lawyers both wanting to be paid.

 

[acbytesla]

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/

So this isn't just something "said on Twitter". The Sollecitos have never been terribly fond of Bongiorno's invention of the "lovebird" tryst between their favoured porn-collecting son and the woman they collectively blame for his legal troubles. They're right, too. Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.

This is the "computer alibi" that Raffaele has always maintained. He doesn't now nor never has relied on the word of the "quirky" Seattle woman. The Naruto defence is solely Raffaele's; Amanda has never mentioned the cartoon in voluntary statements to the police, in her court testimony, in any of her public appearances since her temporary release, in her book, or anywhere else before or since.

This in fact is false. Amanda however gets it wrong by saying it was "Sailor Moon" another Japanese animated cartoon. That shows that Amanda was there watching but not really watching the animated cartoon but humoring her new boyfriend by probably feigning interest in something she wasn't. (something most of us have done for our significant others...God save me from ever going shopping with a woman again....lol)

 

[Diocletus]

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

OMG! Separate appeal filings! How could that have happened???

Oh, that's right. Two defendants, two sets of lawyers, they've always filed their own legal documents, and it's a way to more effectively get stronger arguments before the court.

 

[Bill Williams]

Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.

I think this is actually the closest you get to a "theory of this crime".

What is unique about this is that it bears no resemblance to the crime they've been convicted of - not by Massei and not by Nencini.

This "theory of the crime" comes from the echo-chamber of PMF, where people convict Knox of crimes based on fantasies of her "being smelly".

I would beg you to at least read the Massei motivations report. Massei in 2010 (four years ago!) had his theory of the crime - on which he convicted them - being Raffaele's and Amanda's alleged last second and inexplicable aiding Rudy Guede in what was essentially Guede's crime. Guede was the one with the motive, according to Massei.

Would you at least read Massei!?

Given that JREF is a skeptics-site, the PMF sites and the echo-chamber they represent bears exposure.... especially the March 2011 split into .NET and .ORG, when a man in Rome by the name of Clander noted that a man in England by the name of Michael was trying to lock out Peggy Ganong of Seattle as administrator of the, then, unified .ORG.

Since, .NET was formed as the alleged "true" representation of preserving Meredith's memory, Michael disappeared, and a Toronto based faith healer took over.

There's more. But this is the context of the PMF echo chamber, where expressing points of view contrary to the off-the-wall stuff results in immediate bannings. Even among themselves!

Every once in a while, someone from PMF (either one) comes here to this Skeptics site with the lunacy.

The lunacy extends to the inexplicable - they do not even believe the convicting judges, or the various convicting judges theories!

 

[NancyS]

As it turns out, Amanda and Raffaele have filed their appeals to the Italian Supreme Court separately:

http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/

So this isn't just something "said on Twitter". The Sollecitos have never been terribly fond of Bongiorno's invention of the "lovebird" tryst between their favoured porn-collecting son and the woman they collectively blame for his legal troubles. They're right, too. Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.


This is the "computer alibi" that Raffaele has always maintained. He doesn't now nor never has relied on the word of the "quirky" Seattle woman. The Naruto defence is solely Raffaele's; Amanda has never mentioned the cartoon in voluntary statements to the police, in her court testimony, in any of her public appearances since her temporary release, in her book, or anywhere else before or since.

Amanda's appeal is more concise. Fundamentally her defence is that the motive as described is incorrect. That's probably true. Only she will ever know why she descended upon the cottage, armed, and with a pair of male accomplices in tow.

Did you steal this plot straight out of Mignini's dirty porn collection? Or are you E L James and just about to write a new novel based on Guede, the murdering rapist that you just can't help loving?

 

[stilicho]

This in fact is false. Amanda however gets it wrong by saying it was "Sailor Moon" another Japanese animated cartoon. That shows that Amanda was there watching but not really watching the animated cartoon but humoring her new boyfriend by probably feigning interest in something she wasn't. (something most of us have done for our significant others...God save me from ever going shopping with a woman again....lol)

No cites? I'm not surprised since you just made this up.

No, Amanda does not mention Sailor Moon or any animated show during her court testimony. She writes twice, in her book, about Sailor Moon but first as a show that Raffaele liked to watch and was teased about and then as a comic book he had read. Neither example referred to the night of the murder.

Amanda doesn't once talk or write about having watched Naruto, Sailor Moon, or any other kind of cartoon that night: not in her court testimony; not in her book; not in any of her handful of tearful televised appearances; not in any voluntary statements; not in her alibi email spammed to her contacts list; not at all.

 

[NancyS]

No cites? I'm not surprised since you just made this up.

No, Amanda does not mention Sailor Moon or any animated show during her court testimony. She writes twice, in her book, about Sailor Moon but first as a show that Raffaele liked to watch and was teased about and then as a comic book he had read. Neither example referred to the night of the murder.

Amanda doesn't once talk or write about having watched Naruto, Sailor Moon, or any other kind of cartoon that night: not in her court testimony; not in her book; not in any of her handful of tearful televised appearances; not in any voluntary statements; not in her alibi email spammed to her contacts list; not at all.

And your point is?

 

[Desert Fox]

No cites? I'm not surprised since you just made this up.

No, Amanda does not mention Sailor Moon or any animated show during her court testimony. She writes twice, in her book, about Sailor Moon but first as a show that Raffaele liked to watch and was teased about and then as a comic book he had read. Neither example referred to the night of the murder.

Amanda doesn't once talk or write about having watched Naruto, Sailor Moon, or any other kind of cartoon that night: not in her court testimony; not in her book; not in any of her handful of tearful televised appearances; not in any voluntary statements; not in her alibi email spammed to her contacts list; not at all.

The simple fact is that no matter how you argue, there is no evidence of her having been in Meredeth's room ever let alone that night. You want to have a real argument of guilt, prove that. Then your argument might get somewhere. There is no DNA, no fingerprints, no eye witnesses, nothing that puts her there at the time.

I think it is interesting how you are suddenly willing to accept that "Knife Boiy" (as you guys like to call him) was not there. Maybe it is bad DNA but we at least have his DNA in the room.

 

[acbytesla]

No cites? I'm not surprised since you just made this up.

No, Amanda does not mention Sailor Moon or any animated show during her court testimony. She writes twice, in her book, about Sailor Moon but first as a show that Raffaele liked to watch and was teased about and then as a comic book he had read. Neither example referred to the night of the murder.

Amanda doesn't once talk or write about having watched Naruto, Sailor Moon, or any other kind of cartoon that night: not in her court testimony; not in her book; not in any of her handful of tearful televised appearances; not in any voluntary statements; not in her alibi email spammed to her contacts list; not at all.

You know, you are right. NEITHER in fact mentions watching Naruto or Sailor Moon that night. But the fact is that Raffaele does download Naruto at 9:26 that night and it does have a 23 minute viewing time. We don't know if it was playing in the background and neither paid it any attention.

Obviously they should have kept a Day-Timer of their entire evening so that we and the cops would not have to speculate about a cartoon. How rude of them to be SO inconsiderate.

 

[Anode]

You know, you are right. NEITHER in fact mentions watching Naruto or Sailor Moon that night. But the fact is that Raffaele does download Naruto at 9:26 that night and it does have a 23 minute viewing time. We don't know if it was playing in the background and neither paid it any attention.

Obviously they should have kept a Day-Timer of their entire evening so that we and the cops would not have to speculate about a cartoon. How rude of them to be SO inconsiderate.

Or maybe a video of their, ah hurrumph, "activities" that night. I'm sure that tape would have not been lost and would have undergone extensive scrutiny to ensure that it was genuine.

And Desert Fox mentioned that there's no evidence of AK being in MK's room during the murder. That's absolutely correct. Some point to the knife as that link. Well there is no evidence that the knife was ever in her bedroom. None! I mean, if it had been found down in the canyon covered in Meredith's blood and DNA, then yes, I'd be right there on the guilt side myself. It would be obvious.

But there's no blood on the knife, and no evidence that there ever was any. The DNA "find" is not repeatable, it was only found by one person, and that person is withholding the raw data from the run. In other words, "trust me, I found it". Not good enough...