Continuation Part Nine: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

I LOL'ed loudly reading your response.... this is the very definition of shooting the messenger!

I'm pushing it!?!?!?!???!!!!

Read Barbie Nadeau's book. The sex angle is the very core of the case according to her. The "sex game gone wrong" theory, endorsed by no less than Cassazione, is dependent on the undue sluttification of a crime that even Judge Nencini concluded was only a dispute over rent money.

The "dispute over rent money" has problems of it's own - the ONLY person who ever suggested that was Rudy Guede, and he's hardly a reliable source.

But I LOL'ed over your comment that it is now ME pushing this?

LOL.

All I can suggest is that we keep to the facts, show how the pro guilt position is not based on any sort of evidence and leave it at that.
Beyond that, what can you do? Granted, I would like to use ridicule at times.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't believe Curatolo actually remembered anything. I believe his "testimony" was entirely fictional, he didn't see anyone that night - not Amanda nor Raff nor anyone else, its just made up goo. I think he was just happy to be a part of another big trial, and having been a super-witness twice before he was just going for the ha-trick.

He only came forward, what was it, 6 months after the murder, at the urging of the same journalist who unearthed Quintavalo, also 6 months after the fact (after he had first denied he saw anything at all).

Curatolo first said something like, "I'm, not here to destroy young people's lives", which tells me he kind of knew he was, in the finest tradition of an 'Italian are terrible liars' moment of accidental honesty. I actually believe he deliberately torpedoed his own testimony to avoid providing damning evidence against two innocent people. In his own way, an honorable junkie.

The issue isn't Curatolo's accuracy, because the event he claims to have witnessed never existed. Like the phony DNA tests, it has no validity because its not real.

I'm with you on this. What could be more irrelevant than a homeless junkie? And the one thing I guaranty you is that all people want to be be needed. They want others to be interested in them and what they have to say. This is no different for Curatolo as it is for Bill Clinton. But people stopped really listening to Toto a long time ago if they ever did.

The attention is what he wanted and needed. This kind of thing helped him stay sane. The fact that this happened so close to his park bench put him close enough to the action to allow him to be a part of it. To feel even marginally important. That people were actually interested for once what he had to say.

I wouldn't believe the most upstanding person on this earth coming forward six months after the fact with Curatolo's story, let alone a junkie. It's far too long and the actions of the so called couple are far too inconsequential for anyone to accurately remember these kind of details. If he had known the couple and had talked to them on multiple occasions, then you might think it was reasonable for him to recognize them.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't high on that particular evening. It's just not a believable story.

 

[tsig]

This is mendacious rubbish. The Seattle police officer was almost certainly pushed into agreeing to sensationalist language to describe that party. It's abundantly clear from the actual evidence that it was nothing more - or less - than a rowdy student party that got slightly out of hand. I 100% guarantee that there will be at least five such parties tonight within a half-mile radius of where I live.

And the "stages burglaries to scare her roommates" is also arrant nonsense. You're either ignorantly unaware of the April Fool's tradition, or you are aware of it but are choosing to overlook it in favour of a ludicrous misinterpretation of what actually happened.

Either way, these are intellectually-bankrupt attempts to shoehorn these two inconsequential events into some sort of warped, vindictive demonisation of Knox. I know I shouldn't be surprised at such poor and unpleasant thinking, but even so.........

Is there no end to the evil the Italian police will do?

 

[acbytesla]

http://www.umbria24.it/mez-lo-show-...nda-e-raffaele-visti-ad-halloween»/31273.html

This article from Umbria24 gives summary plus quotes from the day's testimony of Curatolo during the appeal trial.

In the first paragraph is a summary of his remarks concerning drug use during the period of his witnessing Raffaele and Amanda in piazza Grimana. Down further in the fourth paragraph is his direct quote of which you have found concerning the drug he used and his response it is not a hallucinogen.

I imagine each will take to their own impressions as to what Curatolo said and meant. The court transcript of his testimony may help clear up exactly what he said.

Very good christianahannah. And now that it has been proven very clearly, I am left wondering if Vibio, will now come to the conclusion that yes indeed Curatolo took drugs that evening. Somehow, I doubt it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Is there no end to the evil the Italian police will do?

When it comes to Sollecito and Knox, apparently not. For instance, why was Marco Chiacchiera moved to another assignment after he suggested to Napoleoni and Mignini that neither Knox, Sollecito NOR Lumumba be arrested, that they be released and observed?

Chiacchiera's suggestion was not "evil", but the way this has worked out seven years later, it is beginning to look like both Napoleoni and Mignini were intent on that very concept.

 

[Kaosium]

As far as my research leads, I conclude that the exchange in the injustice web site article is false.

Curatolo never said he was high that night. Not in the Hellman trial, nor in the first trial.

And the quote appears in no news reports from the court room.

If I can find that exchange in anything other than that article (from a legit source), I'd be happy to see it and have this cleared up.

What's posted there is a transcript of the questioning between Zanetti and Curatolo the day he testified before the appeals court. What's written in the Hellmann Report is a paraphrase (with quotes) of that exchange rather than quoting it verbatim. Being as you speak Italian you could find that transcript and check the translation if you like, but I don't see the relevance.

Curatolo didn't just testify to being high the night of the murder, he testified to being high all of those nights.

That's what always means.

 

[acbytesla]

This is mendacious rubbish. The Seattle police officer was almost certainly pushed into agreeing to sensationalist language to describe that party. It's abundantly clear from the actual evidence that it was nothing more - or less - than a rowdy student party that got slightly out of hand. I 100% guarantee that there will be at least five such parties tonight within a half-mile radius of where I live.

The police officer did NOT use the sensationalist language that Machiavelli is using. There were no naked people throwing rocks when he arrived. He could not find any damage. He issued a noise citation.

There was a loud party and nothing else. A neighbor complained about the noise and someone throwing rocks at her house. Maybe an idiot did throw a rock or two outside the party. Who knows? I've had a few friends in my lifetime that got drunk and did something stupid. Does that mean I'm the reason for their behavior? Considering that Amanda was hosting the party it is more than likely that she wasn't outside when this may have happened.

College parties can get a little wild and it is impossible to be responsible for every single person's behavior at one.

 

[LondonJohn]

Is there no end to the evil the Italian police will do?

What are you talking about? I'm referring to the UK newspapers, not the Italian police. I'm guessing you're ignorant of the basis for this part of the discussion? (Hint: it was the interview given by the Seattle PD officer to a certain UK newspaper that has - shall we say - considerable form in hyperbolising stories and manipulating interview subjects into providing sensationalist quotes)

 

[LondonJohn]

The police officer did NOT use the sensationalist language that Machiavelli is using. There were no naked people throwing rocks when he arrived. He could not find any damage. He issued a noise citation.

There was a loud party and nothing else. A neighbor complained about the noise and someone throwing rocks at her house. Maybe an idiot did throw a rock or two outside the party. Who knows? I've had a few friends in my lifetime that got drunk and did something stupid. Does that mean I'm the reason for their behavior? Considering that Amanda was hosting the party it is more than likely that she wasn't outside when this may have happened.

College parties can get a little wild and it is impossible to be responsible for every single person's behavior at one.

I seem to remember an officer being quoted in the Mail. I'll try and dig it out.

In the meantime, here's another Mail piece on that party, published in early December 2007 when it was open season on "Foxy Knoxy". Note the wholesale rewriting of history in this piece to fit the desired agenda that's readily given away in the headline:

"The wild, raunchy past of Foxy Knoxy"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-498853/The-wild-raunchy-past-Foxy-Knoxy.html

 

[Chris_Halkides]

remind me

As far as my research leads

Vibio,

What research was that?

 

[Desert Fox]

The police officer did NOT use the sensationalist language that Machiavelli is using. There were no naked people throwing rocks when he arrived. He could not find any damage. He issued a noise citation.

There was a loud party and nothing else. A neighbor complained about the noise and someone throwing rocks at her house. Maybe an idiot did throw a rock or two outside the party. Who knows? I've had a few friends in my lifetime that got drunk and did something stupid. Does that mean I'm the reason for their behavior? Considering that Amanda was hosting the party it is more than likely that she wasn't outside when this may have happened.

College parties can get a little wild and it is impossible to be responsible for every single person's behavior at one.

I have trouble with "rowdy partying" meaning "she will mastermind the rape and murder of her roommate" and people actually believe it

 

[carbonjam72]

I'm with you on this. What could be more irrelevant than a homeless junkie? And the one thing I guaranty you is that all people want to be be needed. They want others to be interested in them and what they have to say. This is no different for Curatolo as it is for Bill Clinton. But people stopped really listening to Toto a long time ago if they ever did.

The attention is what he wanted and needed. This kind of thing helped him stay sane. The fact that this happened so close to his park bench put him close enough to the action to allow him to be a part of it. To feel even marginally important. That people were actually interested for once what he had to say.

I wouldn't believe the most upstanding person on this earth coming forward six months after the fact with Curatolo's story, let alone a junkie. It's far too long and the actions of the so called couple are far too inconsequential for anyone to accurately remember these kind of details. If he had known the couple and had talked to them on multiple occasions, then you might think it was reasonable for him to recognize them.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't high on that particular evening. It's just not a believable story.

It's also not believable, because he was a super-witness in two other mignini cases. So either he's the luckiest junkie in the world to keep being in key positions to provide key testimony to obtain convictions for Mignini, or hi's an Mother F'in liar who never saw ◊◊◊◊.

So take you're pick; lucky once and lying twice; lucky twice and lying once; never lucky at all and lying three times; or just straight up the luckiest junkie on earth with perfect recall for meaningless events.

He never saw anything and its insulting to pretend he did.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's also not believable, because he was a super-witness in two other mignini cases. So either he's the luckiest junkie in the world to keep being in key positions to provide key testimony to obtain convictions for Mignini, or hi's an Mother F'in liar who never saw ◊◊◊◊.

So take you're pick; lucky once and lying twice; lucky twice and lying once; never lucky at all and lying three times; or just straight up the luckiest junkie on earth with perfect recall for meaningless events.

He never saw anything and its insulting to pretend he did.

And add to this that if anyone, including defence attorneys, complained and insinuated this in court, Mignini would simply SLAPP them with either calunnia or defamation suits..... and Mignini has a permanent, unassailable witness, made to order.

You cannot accuse a PM of lying in Italy. Even if it's true.

 

[anglolawyer]

Vibio,

What research was that?

Vibio's research consists of posting questions in this thread and then ignoring the responses. The PGPs cling to bombproof opinions (it's called a 'bunker mentality' for a reason) that are entirely immune to facts. Recent examples of the pointlessness of these exchanges:

A Mach being corrected on the 'I was there' recording
B someone or other (Griffinmill?) on the infinitesimal possibility that the blood was in the quantity needed to react with luminol but not TMB
C Vibio obsessing about whether Curatolo said he was high that night
D Mach (again) appearing to query whether Amanda's hair was tested

All these have at least two things in common. First, the closer you look at each issue the worse it gets for the pro-guilt position and second, no matter how completely the PGPs are routed it does not make a blind bit of difference to them. They are literally beyond reason.

 

[acbytesla]

I seem to remember an officer being quoted in the Mail. I'll try and dig it out.

In the meantime, here's another Mail piece on that party, published in early December 2007 when it was open season on "Foxy Knoxy". Note the wholesale rewriting of history in this piece to fit the desired agenda that's readily given away in the headline:

"The wild, raunchy past of Foxy Knoxy"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-498853/The-wild-raunchy-past-Foxy-Knoxy.html

LJ,

A Seattle Police officer would not be free to give an interview as to what happened that evening without consent from the PR department of the Seattle Police department. They are not likely to comment and refer the press to the actually police report. So I seriously doubt that anyone actually spoke with the officer from the Daily Mail.

This story proves just how much the writers at the Daily Mail are willing to make up to get the clicks on their websites and sell advertising.

Here is what the Daily Mail wrote in their article

The officer suspected "some kids" were just playing their music too loud, but what he found was no run-of-the-mill summer student party: he later told colleagues it was like a scene from Baghdad.

Gangs of students, high on drink and drugs, were hurling rocks into the road. Cars were swerving to avoid them. Debris littered the road. It was mayhem.

Fearing reprisals, neighbours who had called the police refused to give their names. The police officer called for back-up as the youths began throwing rocks at the windows of houses on the neat, tree-lined streets.

Eventually, after reinforcements had arrived, the students calmed down. Police made only one arrest: the person they held responsible for the party and the disorder.

Her name? Amanda Knox, or, as she prefers to be known, Foxy Knoxy.

According to the court records, the first officer on the scene, Patrolman Bender, said the only excuse that Knox gave for her behaviour was that she was moving abroad.

Yet this was not a simple case of mischief at a party getting out of hand: according to police sources, it is rare for a party incident involving a 20 year-old to end up in court unless police believe a serious crime has been committed.

Those present that night say the scenes on the street were as nothing compared to what was going on inside Knox's rented house, less than a mile from where she studied English, German and Italian amid the calm, regulated life at one of America's greatest universities.

It was, according to one party guest, "bedlam, with drink, drugs and bodies everywhere.

"Some people were naked inside the bedrooms.

"There were people draped over each other.

"I've been to a lot of student parties in my time, but I've never been to a party like that.

"Everyone just wanted to get drunk, get high and get laid. There was also a lot of violence because everyone was so pumped up."

Four months ago in Seattle, Knox was fined $269 (£135) at the Municipal Court after the incident - Crime No: 071830624 - and warned that any repeat of her behaviour would lead to much stiffer punishment.

Now here is what actually happened according to the police officer. There was no call for reinforcements, there were no arrests. The officer didn't go inside the party. There were no naked guests. It

Seattle police officer Jason Bender:
In the city of Seattle

I was on uniformed patrol in the marked unit as 3U5. At approximately 0028 hours, I responded to the report of a loud party in the listed location. The complainant relayed to dispatch that participants from the party were throwing rocks at his house and at passing cars. The complainant requested officer not contact him. Upon arrival, I noted loud amplified music coming from the listed address. The music could be heard from a distance greater than 75 ft from the source. I also noted several rocks in the street. I did not locate any damage at that time. I contacted a party participant and had them retrieve a resident.

S1/Knox contacted me (in front of the house). She stated that she was one of the current residents. She stated that she was the one who was hosting the party (as she was moving out). She stated that she was not aware of any rock throwers at the gathering.

I issued S1/Knox this infraction for the noise violation and a warning for the rock throwing. I explained how dangerous and juvenile that action was.

See Cad event 264012 for further.

No further action taken at this time.

What I find interesting beyond the total fabrication of this story with absolutely just a narrative and no quotes from any of Amanda's friends or acquaintances is that it says Amanda lived in a house on Greek Row.

Now I don't know if that is actually where Amanda lived. But if that is true no one living around there could legitimately say who may have been throwing rocks were actually attending the party. As noted, this is Greek Row. I spent a lot of time on Greek Row at the UW. I've been to many parties in that neighborhood and it is true that they do throw some wild parties.

These are many are stately houses where a hundred or so 20 year old Frat boys live together It is right across the street from the University of Washington campus where 40,000 students go to school. That street is a 4 lane road with a lot of traffic. On one side are the Frat houses and on the other are the dormitories. There are people walking to and from everywhere in that neighborhood. This would be like saying that the man that lives in the penthouse apartment on the Upper East Side of New York is responsible for what some idiot did outside on 5th Avenue. The only thing anyone actually knows for sure about this party is that Amanda and her roommates had a band and it got loud and the officer wrote a noise citation.

Finally, let me say the following. This article was written in 2007 by Andrew Malone, a journalist from the Daily mail. He doesn't actually quote a single person from Seattle. Not one. He pulls a couple of quotes from the incident report and just makes the rest up.

 

[Desert Fox]

Added to what I wrote earlier "Noise Citation" becomes "Arrested"
That is like going from "Speeding Ticket" to "Arrested for reckless driving"

 

[carbonjam72]

And add to this that if anyone, including defence attorneys, complained and insinuated this in court, Mignini would simply SLAPP them with either calunnia or defamation suits..... and Mignini has a permanent, unassailable witness, made to order.

You cannot accuse a PM of lying in Italy. Even if it's true.

Especially if it's true, and they're lying.

 

[JREF2010]

Is there no end to the evil the Italian police will do?

Its an evil coincidence the heroin junkie witness who embarrassed the Persecution in Hellmans courtroom, was living a typical heroin junkies bum life before all this witnessing was requested of him.

It is odd, after placed in the Italian police custody, he died while incarcerated.

We dont need to bring up Napoleoni's and other Italian police recent behavior during her divorce issues.

How about the flip side, what have they done that deserves respect?

 

[carbonjam72]

Freedom of the Press?

LJ,

A Seattle Police officer would not be free to give an interview as to what happened that evening without consent from the PR department of the Seattle Police department. They are not likely to comment and refer the press to the actually police report. So I seriously doubt that anyone actually spoke with the officer from the Daily Mail.

This story proves just how much the writers at the Daily Mail are willing to make up to get the clicks on their websites and sell advertising.

Here is what the Daily Mail wrote in their article



Now here is what actually happened according to the police officer. There was no call for reinforcements, there were no arrests. The officer didn't go inside the party. There were no naked guests. It



What I find interesting beyond the total fabrication of this story with absolutely just a narrative and no quotes from any of Amanda's friends or acquaintances is that it says Amanda lived in a house on Greek Row.

Now I don't know if that is actually where Amanda lived. But if that is true no one living around there could legitimately say who may have been throwing rocks were actually attending the party. As noted, this is Greek Row. I spent a lot of time on Greek Row at the UW. I've been to many parties in that neighborhood and it is true that they do throw some wild parties.

These are many are stately houses where a hundred or so 20 year old Frat boys live together It is right across the street from the University of Washington campus where 40,000 students go to school. That street is a 4 lane road with a lot of traffic. On one side are the Frat houses and on the other are the dormitories. There are people walking to and from everywhere in that neighborhood. This would be like saying that the man that lives in the penthouse apartment on the Upper East Side of New York is responsible for what some idiot did outside on 5th Avenue. The only thing anyone actually knows for sure about this party is that Amanda and her roommates had a band and it got loud and the officer wrote a noise citation.

Finally, let me say the following. This article was written in 2007 by Andrew Malone, a journalist from the Daily mail. He doesn't actually quote a single person from Seattle. Not one. He pulls a couple of quotes from the incident report and just makes the rest up.

Didn't the Daily Mail also fabricate quotes and reactions from the Knox's at the Hellman appeal hearing when they mistakenly thought the guilty verdict for Calumnia was actually for the murder charges?

Also, I believe the Daily Mail has been caught before fabricating entire court proceedings just to gin up articles for publication.

Is that still freedom of the press? I don't think so. Intentionally false reporting designed to boost sales at the expense of innocent people is just plain old garden variety fraud, and the journalistic perps should be in prison with their more pedestrian criminal cohorts.

 

[Bill Williams]

Didn't the Daily Mail also fabricate quotes and reactions from the Knox's at the Hellman appeal hearing when they mistakenly thought the guilty verdict for Calumnia was actually for the murder charges?
Also, I believe the Daily Mail has been caught before fabricating entire court proceedings just to gin up articles for publication.

Is that still freedom of the press? I don't think so. Intentionally false reporting designed to boost sales at the expense of innocent people is just plain old garden variety fraud, and the journalistic perps should be in prison with their more pedestrian criminal cohorts.

The editor of the Daily Mail addressed this at the UK hearings into the phone hacking scandals, the Leveson Inquiry.

He basically said that despite the complete embarrassment of getting it so spectacularly wrong, including factoid quotes from the courtroom of Amanda reacting to Hellmann's faux-guilty verdict....

.... the Editor said there was absolutely no need for it. The people on-duty that night in the Daily Mail simply pressed "send" without waiting for even the most initial verification, all for beating out other news services (on the internet) by a few seconds.

It is perhaps strange to say, "in fairness to the Daily Mail," this was perhaps the least of their tabloid sins; and somewhat completely understandable in what many perceive to be a cutthroat business where scoops need to be put to air before others have it.....

The Daily Mail has many other sins worse that this one.