• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
NancyS said:
It's now all the rage on twitter, the PMF and pro-Guede posters are taking screen prints of anything even mildly critical of the Kercher family, written on IIP or anywhere else, and are tweeting these to journalists and claiming that AK fans are abusing the Kerchers. These people are seriously unhinged
Click to expand...

Yes they are Nancy. I love it when the attackers play victims. (not really) But this is a common ploy. I've seen it in politics for years. They attack, attack, and attack and the moment their subject demonstrates a backbone and defends themselves, they start whining about it being unfair and how they are the actual victim.

They cloak themselves in righteousness. This is about "justice" for them or about the parents and siblings of a murder victim. Look at Platonov's posts. He mocks Amanda as being the victim, but I'd say that anyone who spent 4 years in prison for something they didn't do is a victim. I'd say anyone who will have spent a decade with the sword of possibly spending another 20 years in prison and not being able to move on is a victim.

Platonov mocks Amanda's supporters by calling them fans, as if we are deluded zombies hypnotized by Amanda's beauty and sexual presence. As he thinks Raffaele must have been and still is for Amanda.

The problem is they can't explain why lawyers, world class forensic specialists and renowned detectives say that this case is a farce. They can't explain why so many smart minds have come to Amanda's defense. So they mock and play the victim. Because they don't come off very well actually talking about the details of the case. I'm sure you have noticed that the these unhinged people don't really want to discuss the evidence..or the lack of it. They have no case, so it has to be about Amanda's sexual appetite, or whether she flushes the toilet or her imperfect memory.

I came to JREF to understand the details of the case. I wanted to learn what actually happened in Perugia. I needed a forum where I could learn the actual evidence as opposed to the tabloid nonsense. I can't tell you just how much false information I had to wade through to get the truth. And this was the best place to learn that. There were people on both sides actually discussing the case mostly without the ad hominem nonsense that I saw in the comment sections of articles or at TJMK or PMF. But over time, those that believe in Amanda's guilt either disappeared from the forum because their arguments didn't hold up to scrutiny or they couldn't refrain from attacking the individual and not the argument.

What we are left with is these wishy washy posts by Coulsdon, and an occasional hit and run post by Platonov or people like him that never really talk about the facts any more.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Yes they are Nancy. I love it when the attackers play victims. (not really) But this is a common ploy. I've seen it in politics for years. They attack, attack, and attack and the moment their subject demonstrates a backbone and defends themselves, they start whining about it being unfair and how they are the actual victim.

They cloak themselves in righteousness. This is about "justice" for them or about the parents and siblings of a murder victim. Look at Platonov's posts. He mocks Amanda as being the victim, but I'd say that anyone who spent 4 years in prison for something they didn't do is a victim. I'd say anyone who will have spent a decade with the sword of possibly spending another 20 years in prison and not being able to move on is a victim.

Platonov mocks Amanda's supporters by calling them fans, as if we are deluded zombies hypnotized by Amanda's beauty and sexual presence. As he thinks Raffaele must have been and still is for Amanda.

The problem is they can't explain why lawyers, world class forensic specialists and renowned detectives say that this case is a farce. They can't explain why so many smart minds have come to Amanda's defense. So they mock and play the victim. Because they don't come off very well actually talking about the details of the case. I'm sure you have noticed that the these unhinged people don't really want to discuss the evidence..or the lack of it. They have no case, so it has to be about Amanda's sexual appetite, or whether she flushes the toilet or her imperfect memory.

I came to JREF to understand the details of the case. I wanted to learn what actually happened in Perugia. I needed a forum where I could learn the actual evidence as opposed to the tabloid nonsense. I can't tell you just how much false information I had to wade through to get the truth. And this was the best place to learn that. There were people on both sides actually discussing the case mostly without the ad hominem nonsense that I saw in the comment sections of articles or at TJMK or PMF. But over time, those that believe in Amanda's guilt either disappeared from the forum because their arguments didn't hold up to scrutiny or they couldn't refrain from attacking the individual and not the argument.

What we are left with is these wishy washy posts by Coulsdon, and an occasional hit and run post by Platonov or people like him that never really talk about the facts any more.
Click to expand...

Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
 
CoulsdonUK said:
I would say 99% of people who post on either side of this case are not spokes people for Kercher, Sollecito or Knox families they largely expressing their own opinions warped or otherwise, took me awhile to understand this, so now I just ignore their comments.
Click to expand...

I would hope that none of them are spokes people for the Kercher family, although a lot of the pro-guilt on twitter, especially those associated with PMF, are claiming to be
 
CoulsdonUK said:
Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
Click to expand...

I think most of the experts have been saying pretty much exactly the same as C&V - so basically backing up what the experts at the trial said
 
By the way the English translation of the Florence appeal is available on PMF and this not discussions here or elsewhere will be the basis of the deliberations of the Italian Supreme Court next March.
 
NancyS said:
I think most of the experts have been saying pretty much exactly the same as C&V - so basically backing up what the experts at the trial said
Click to expand...

This is perfectly true, but beside the point that Coulsdon's question is otiose to the point of being idiotic. John Douglas and Peter Gill do not require the imprimatur of these farcical trials to confirm their opinions as expert.

(There is a bizarre type who watches this case who is so determined to hold onto his or her viewpoint, they have apparently made peace with a willingness to look like blithering fools - and, in the worst cases, much worse - in order to do so.)
 
the mind reels

CoulsdonUK said:
Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
Click to expand...
Wow. This is a weak argument, and the fact that you are asking for a simple yes or no makes it even more open to question. One of many replies I might make is to point out that that other bodies may hear one or more aspects of the case, besides Italian judicial entities. Some of them might be interested when world-recognized experts speak out. Another reply is to point out that the Italian authorities did no more than to accept a letter from Dr. Budowle, who is far more qualified than Dr. Novell. They could have heard his testimony.
 
CoulsdonUK said:
Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
Click to expand...


That was not the suggestion - the suggestion was that those experts should not be ignored.

I assume acbytesla was including C & V in his reference to numerous experts anyway, and yes, they were somewhat involved in the first appeal.

The point you seem to be missing is that the pro-innocent posters and campaigners believe this to be a miscarriage of justice within a broken judicial system, so why would you expect so much deference to the Italian courts from them?
 
Draca said:
Generation Why Podcast:

The Case For Amanda Knox – 86 – Generation Why

"Why does Amanda Knox have support? Because no matter how much you believe that she had a hand in her roommate’s death, there remains contradictory evidence that casts some doubt on her conviction. For some, the evidence doesn’t just cast doubt, but completely removes her from the equation altogether. If you are not familiar with this case, we would urge you to read up on it before listening to this episode."


http://raasnio.com/GenerationWhyPodcast/the-case-for-amanda-knox/
Click to expand...

They are idiots in areas like suggesting that it is hard to kill with a pocket knife.
 
lonepinealex said:
That was not the suggestion - the suggestion was that those experts should not be ignored.

I assume acbytesla was including C & V in his reference to numerous experts anyway, and yes, they were somewhat involved in the first appeal.

The point you seem to be missing is that the pro-innocent posters and campaigners believe this to be a miscarriage of justice within a broken judicial system, so why would you expect so much deference to the Italian courts from them?
Click to expand...

Should we accept the Norfolk Four or the West Memphis Three are gulty because the courts say they are?
 
-

CoulsdonUK said:
Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
Click to expand...
-

Yes to your first question.

As far as your second question, yes this happens all the time. The most recent example:

FROM: http://www.eji.org/node/956

NORTH CAROLINA MAN EXONERATED AND RELEASED AFTER 30 YEARS ON DEATH ROW - NC USA
September 4, 2014

"After three decades on North Carolina's death row, Henry Lee McCollum was declared innocent of the murder of a young girl and released yesterday, along with his half brother, Leon Brown, who was serving a life sentence... "
-

You don't think people just get exonerated out of the blue do you?

d

-
 
-

CoulsdonUK said:
By the way the English translation of the Florence appeal is available on PMF and this not discussions here or elsewhere will be the basis of the deliberations of the Italian Supreme Court next March.
Click to expand...
-

Do you have a link c?

d

-
 
-

Desert Fox said:
They are idiots in areas like suggesting that it is hard to kill with a pocket knife.
Click to expand...
-

I don't remember them saying it was hard to kill with a pocketknife,

d

-
ETA: I'm listening to the podcast again, so I'll let you know if I'm wrong.

-
 
Last edited:
CoulsdonUK said:
Were any of the people you are referring called as expert witnesses in their field to the trial or subsequent appeals, a simple yes or no? What some people seem to be suggesting is events outside of the judicial proceedings should have some bearing on a ongoing case, now where in the western world has this ever happened in an ongoing court case?
Click to expand...

What? You think the only people that count are the ones who appeared at trial? That other people might have access to the same information and can make up their own minds? I'd say John Douglass knows about the case and knows about violent crime. I'd say Peter Gill also has access to all the data and is an expert in the field.

Sometimes the courts get it wrong Couldson. Sometimes VERY WRONG. It happens in the US, it happens in the UK and it happens in Italy.

And guess what? Outside people often have a huge impact on the judiciary and court cases. This is why trials are PUBLIC. So the public can oversee the courts. The authority actually resides in the people. They are the ones that provide power to the government. Not the other way around as you seem to suggest.

Is this what happens to your thought process when you live in a Monarchy? You think they are better and know more than you? I don't. Sometimes government officials and judges and Kings are as ignorant and clueless as laymen. Sometimes more so.
 
I've just been reading about the latest Ebola case in Spain

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/07/ebola-crisis-substandard-equipment-nurse-positive-spain

And the latest outbreak possibly caused by substandard equipment and not following protocol - I dread to think what would happen if Stefanoni was in charge of public health :eye-poppi

I was also wondering how many of the pro-guilt would have happily have lunch with someone with Ebola, based on the theory that DNA can't fly and that following protocols is just a load of old nonsense?
 
Nencini translation

-

Desert Fox said:
It is being discussed on IIP and appears to be a mess (the report) from page one.
http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1520
Click to expand...
-

I didn't even get past page 4 before I came across something I don't remember from the autopsy report:

FROM (PDF Page 4): http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/download/file.php?id=1520

"(A) of the crime to which articles 110, 575, 573 paragraph 1 section 5 of the Criminal Code apply, in relation to the crime listed under count (C), and 577 paragraph 1 section 4, in relation to article 61 sections 1 and 5 of the Criminal Code, for having, in complicity amongst themselves [in concorso fra loro]1 and with Rudy Hermann Guede, killed Meredith Kercher, by strangling her, fracturing the hyoid bone... "
-

I don't remember in the autopsy report that the hyoid bone was broken. I don't have the autopsy report in front of me, so I'm going to have to find it to verify my impressions here,

d

-
 
farfetched

-

Desert Fox said:
Near the end of the discussion
Click to expand...
-

You are right d, and I'm wrong. One of them does say, "Killing somebody with a pocketknife, is not uhm... I don't know, is farfetched to me."

So you are right and I am wrong. Sorry,

d

-
ETA: I'm surprised they don't have it at IIP, but I do remember someone here posting a copy.

-
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom