Continuation Part 11: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[AmyStrange]

-

If I believed they were "probably" guilty, I would push for acquittal on reasonable doubt.

If I believe that conviction is correct, it means I concluded they are certainly guilty.

-

The only way you can be 100% certain they are guilty is if you were there, anything else is just plain speculation,

d

-

 

[Machiavelli]

-

I have to admit that what De Felice said was crazy. Making assumptions before all the evidence is in, is definitely crazy,

-

This is what De Felice is reported to say:

“We are getting a lot of conflicting stories from these people. We are letting them stew in their own juices but we will get to the truth.”

Then the article reports true stuff:

...
In another shocking admission to police Knox claimed Meredith was having sexual relations with Congolese born Lumumba. She said: “Lumumba wanted her. Yes we were in the house.

That evening we wanted to have a bit of fun. We were drunk. We asked her to join us. “Diya wanted her. Raffaele and I went into another room and then I heard screams.” Knox continued: “I can’t remember if Meredith was screaming and if I heard thuds but I could imagine what was going on.

“I want to tell you what happened because its left me really shocked and I am really scared of Patrick, the African guy who owns Le Chic (a bar popular with students) where I sometimes work.”
...

etc

Then again this is what De Felice is reported saying:

Arturo de Felice, head of police in Perugia, said: “The motive appears sexual but Meredith was morally innocent. She was the victim, not a participant.” He added that the killing had not been premeditated. “Meredith was studying at university and there was a university atmosphere, free and open,” he said.

“Lots of people came and went through her house and she was unfortunately at the crossroads when this group came together.” De Felice also confirmed the contents of the statements that had been published in Italian newspapers but refused to add any further detail.

He said that the three had continually changed their stories and that things “just didn’t add up.” He explained:”Initially the American gave a version of events which we knew was not correct. “She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in.

“We have not interviewed them today, they are in prison in solitary confinement reflecting on what they have told us. “The investigation is continuing and we are gathering evidence still which will be presented at a hearing on Thursday.”
.....

I don't see anything particluarly crazy in this.
The newspaper report is certainly incorrect somewhere (De Felice didn't say that "three" people changed their stories).

 

[Machiavelli]

-

The only way you can be 100% certain they are guilty is if you were there, anything else is just plain speculation,

-

Is that a principle you believe for all criminal cases, or just for this one?

 

[acbytesla]

Just like any reckless sociopath.

What behavior have you seen from Raffaele that would make you determine that he was a sociopath? No offense Vibio, but this a perfect demonstration of circular reasoning.

You determine that anyone who callously murders another is a sociopath, which is somewhat reasonable. And then you argue that essentially what would be considered "innocent behavior" is really "sociopathic" behavior. If you looked at his behavior without your guilt sunglasses, you could never call his behavior "sociopathic".

Why do you take this path in your reasoning? I would think any honest unbiased review would come to the conclusion that at best or worst, that one cannot read anything guilty or innocent into his behavior.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

I have to admit that what De Felice said was crazy. Making assumptions before all the evidence is in, is definitely crazy,

d

This is what De Felice is reported to say:

“We are getting a lot of conflicting stories from these people. We are letting them stew in their own juices but we will get to the truth.”

Then the article reports true stuff:

In another shocking admission to police Knox claimed Meredith was having sexual relations with Congolese born Lumumba. She said: “Lumumba wanted her. Yes we were in the house.

That evening we wanted to have a bit of fun. We were drunk. We asked her to join us. “Diya wanted her. Raffaele and I went into another room and then I heard screams.” Knox continued: “I can’t remember if Meredith was screaming and if I heard thuds but I could imagine what was going on.

“I want to tell you what happened because its left me really shocked and I am really scared of Patrick, the African guy who owns Le Chic (a bar popular with students) where I sometimes work.”

Then again this is what De Felice is reported saying:

Arturo de Felice, head of police in Perugia, said: “The motive appears sexual but Meredith was morally innocent. She was the victim, not a participant.” He added that the killing had not been premeditated. “Meredith was studying at university and there was a university atmosphere, free and open,” he said.

“Lots of people came and went through her house and she was unfortunately at the crossroads when this group came together.” De Felice also confirmed the contents of the statements that had been published in Italian newspapers but refused to add any further detail.

He said that the three had continually changed their stories and that things “just didn’t add up.” He explained:”Initially the American gave a version of events which we knew was not correct. “She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in.

“We have not interviewed them today, they are in prison in solitary confinement reflecting on what they have told us. “The investigation is continuing and we are gathering evidence still which will be presented at a hearing on Thursday.”

I don't see anything particluarly crazy in this.
The newspaper report is certainly incorrect somewhere (De Felice didn't say that "three" people changed their stories).

-

I think it's at least a bad investigative technique to jump to conclusions before all the evidence is in, but that's me. And that is what they did. They went out and arrested PL without any investigation and kept him in jail for two weeks, even after they found out he had an alibi.

That's crazy, in my opinion,

d

-
ETA: I just wonder why they went out and arrested PL without any investigation. It just looks to me like they had already done that investigation before they even talked to Knox and went in with that expectation. It just looks all around like they somehow talked Amanda into saying PL did it. Even if Amanda were guilty, it looks like they talked her into naming him.

-

 

[acbytesla]

My opinion differs. If no one on this thread as seen the application then all we can do is speculate about it’s possible merits and discuss theories based on those assumptions.

What opinion Coulsdon? The one thing about you that seems to have been true in the years that I have been reading this post is that you cling to no opinion at all and a total deference to authority.

 

[Kaosium]

I don't see anything particluarly crazy in this.

There isn't anything crazy in Di Felice saying:

”Initially the American gave a version of events which we knew was not correct. “She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in."

That's actually how they do interrogations. What makes the quote germane in this instance is that there weren't any 'facts' (relevant to the murder) in those statements that were correct, thus with Amanda repudiating the statements and claiming coercion, the context of the all-night interrogation and the police refusing to release Patrick the impetus of those 'facts' could only have come from police.

Had those facts stood up then it would have been proper police work, however since they didn't it must be acknowledged that those statements were coerced from her by police, who then compounded their error by failing to admit to it and instead still pretended the both of them were involved in Rudy Guede's murder.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

This is what De Felice is reported to say:

(...)

Then the article reports true stuff:

(...)

Then again this is what De Felice is reported saying:

(...)

I don't see anything particluarly crazy in this.
The newspaper report is certainly incorrect somewhere (De Felice didn't say that "three" people changed their stories).

-

You really should contact John Chapman and Marco and set them straight. I wonder who Marco is?:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/24505/I-heard-Meredith-scream-says-girl-in-student-sex-murder

d

-

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Is that a principle you believe for all criminal cases, or just for this one?

-

All cases.

Don't you think, as a critical thinker yourself, that you should question all assumptions?

d

-

 

[acbytesla]

This is what De Felice is reported to say:




Then the article reports true stuff:




Then again this is what De Felice is reported saying:

Arturo de Felice, head of police in Perugia, said: “The motive appears sexual but Meredith was morally innocent. She was the victim, not a participant.” He added that the killing had not been premeditated. “Meredith was studying at university and there was a university atmosphere, free and open,” he said.

“Lots of people came and went through her house and she was unfortunately at the crossroads when this group came together.” De Felice also confirmed the contents of the statements that had been published in Italian newspapers but refused to add any further detail.

He said that the three had continually changed their stories and that things “just didn’t add up.” He explained:”Initially the American gave a version of events which we knew was not correct. “She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in. “We have not interviewed them today, they are in prison in solitary confinement reflecting on what they have told us. “The investigation is continuing and we are gathering evidence still which will be presented at a hearing on Thursday.”

.....

I don't see anything particluarly crazy in this.
The newspaper report is certainly incorrect somewhere (De Felice didn't say that "three" people changed their stories).

What is crazy about what Felice said is that it is all wrong and false. Meredith was no more "morally innocent" than countless women of her age. Women who have no interest in sex don't have "Brazillians" which is the total removal of pubic hair around the vagina and up the crack of their bums. That alone should have said to Felice that Meredith was a normal sexually active 20 year old woman.

Second, Felice say that Amanda first told them a story they knew not to be true and finally buckled and told them what they knew were correct. The fact is it wasn't correct in any shape, way or form.

That is crazy Machiavelli.

 

[AmyStrange]

-

There isn't anything crazy in Di Felice saying:

”Initially the American gave a version of events which we knew was not correct. “She buckled and made an admission of facts that we knew were correct and from that we were able to bring them in."

That's actually how they do interrogations. What makes the quote germane in this instance is that there weren't any 'facts' (relevant to the murder) in those statements that were correct, thus with Amanda repudiating the statements and claiming coercion, the context of the all-night interrogation and the police refusing to release Patrick the impetus of those 'facts' could only have come from police.

Had those facts stood up then it would have been proper police work, however since they didn't it must be acknowledged that those statements were coerced from her by police, who then compounded their error by failing to admit to it and instead still pretended the both of them were involved in Rudy Guede's murder.

-

And once again, I wish to GAWD we had the video, because I'm not afraid of the truth. I'm willing to be convinced that she wasn't coerced. The video would do it for me. Otherwise everything else is just pure speculation.

Without the video, it's hard to ignore that they went out and arrested PL without any kind of investigation, and even held him for two weeks, and then he lost his business. It just looks really weird to me.

And the accusation had no detail like you said. Not even the mention of a knife anywhere. If she had at least said that PL had a knife, that would change things a little for me, but nothing.

And without the video, it just smells like coercion to me.

Show me the video,

d

-
ETA: That whole accusation still sounds to me like she wasn't even there

-

 

[moije2]

Her statements are ther result of her own free will. The judges found so. Not having a counsel may have made the calunnia (her statements) become possible.
But there is a difference between something possible and something that actually takes place. In this case, there is a decision between the two steps.

What are the "two steps" you refer to? Between the possible and what actually takes place?

I would like to hear what your idea is of the services, the benefits of having an attorney are.

That the judges "found" that "free will" was used by Ms Knox <may> be true. But really, did they specifically find that? Or is that just your interpretation of what calunnia consists of? Is there a finding of fact by the court in this regard? Do statements of the court in their motivations filed constitute a finding? I think you repeatedly rejected the idea of findings with Bill Williams because the words "pathological" were not specifically stated in the court motivation document. Did the court use the words "free will" (Italian equivalent) in its motivation document? Or is this just a legal necessity due to the legal definition of calunnia?

Not that it matters anyway - wouldn't "free will" be vitiated by lack of counsel?

 

[Numbers]

Here's some perspective on the situation at the ECtHR, as of Nov. 30, 2014

Applications allocated to a judicial formation (that is, awaiting further evaluation):

Ukraine_____13,600___19.0%
Italy_______11,200___15.6
Russia______9,850____13.8
Turkey_____9,800_____13.7
Romania____3,300_____4.6
Total (*)__71,000___100.0 *All 47 countries of the Council of Europe

Amanda's application may be still in the 11,200 awaiting further evaluation, or it may be already under some additional review. The point is, it could be a while before there is any news on it.

 

[RWVBWL]

I'm no scientist, Randy, but I'm guessing the red paint won't dry as quickly as the blood you can't find, and therein may lie some truth.

Perhaps an interesting point to make in connection to your general thesis, is that one cannot actually rule much out absolutely. The probability that Elvis or Buddy Holly or Elvis and Buddy together killed Ms Kercher is not zero; firstly, they might not actually be dead. And so it will always be possible that someone other than Guede was involved - it's just not very likely.

I agree the downstairs apartment is relevant and interesting. However in the murder room there is no evidence of anyone other than Guede and Ms Kercher in the room at the time of the crime. You remember the dragon fly theory? It's this or something similar anyone who postulates an accomplice for Guede, must believe in. Where's all the missing evidence of a collaborator, Randy? It's a "mythtery".

There are unattributable fingerprints everywhere, including where you live.

Now, here's something right up your alley! Where's Rudy's knife? Where did he get rid of it? Using maps, imagination, cell tower information, precipitation records etc etc, what can you come up with? I genuinely believe your answers may be helpful.

PS. I am not an "old regular"

Hiya Kaufer,
Why don't you yourself dig up info on where you believe Rudy might have stashed the knife,
don't you believe that he was the only 1 there and that it was he who stabbed Miss Kercher?

I'm not of that same mindset,
so I'm looking more closely at un-explained evidence.


So ah Kaufer,
you've kinda been bustin' my ***** recently,
so I gotta ask, do you speak Italian?

I ask this because Frank Sfarzo does.
Machiavelli today even made mention of the difficulty, so to say,
of Italian to English word translation.

Did you ever attend any of the 1st Trial under Massei and Cristiani?
Sfarzo did, all the time.
Hours and hours of watching, listening and then reporting.

Yet when I quote, years later, what Sfarzo wrote,
and that he wondered about those unattributed fingerprints
or if Rudy Guede even stabbed Meredith,
you innocentisti with the 1-person theory give me ****.
Pffft.

Go read all of Perugia Shock,
there's info in there that you won't find elsewhere .
Heck, as far as I can tell, The Massei Report barely even mentions fingerprints.
I wonder why?

Anyways,
it's finally rainin' again down here in Southern California from this new storm courtesy of the Pineapple Express,
+the surf is comin' up huge in the mornin', I hope the wind is offshore. Time for sleep...

I'll check back in again soon,
and read more of what you new skeptics think, and write about.
Take it easy,
RW


PS - Hey Kaufer,
my moniker is RWVBWL.
Please use it, as we are not on a 1st name basis.
Thank you.

 

[Samson]

Here is what a 48 year old native Italian has to offer this forum.

on the calunnia ... now Machiavelli/Yummi has been trying to explain a very simple point, that the right to lawyer [that she did not have as she was not a suspect for calunnia before she made the calunnia, also because when she made it nobody knew it was a calunnia] is certainly not a shield against her full responsibility for that crime. It is elementary, a no brainer.

Yummi made a great example, that of the stabbing vs the calunnia. If she had stabbed someone instead of committing a calunnia vs someone it would be exactly the same. Calunnia crime was proven and we have now a final judgement and prison sentence, is a voluntary crime committed with malicious intent, a very serious matter. The fact a person may have had right to a lawyer (which she did not) does not authorise her or him to stab another person and certainly does not make the attacker innocent of such crime with the argument that if a lawyer had been there she / he would not have done it. By the way, calunnia was a criminal action carried out over several days, in statements, writings etc. deliberate and malicious and may have harsher penalties than a stabbing.

They do not get it, as I said too stupid and ignorant for my taste ... or they get it but are too biased to admit.

If stupid, they will soon be disappointed by ECHR and rest their case, if only pretending [we must assume they may be pretending as the stupidity level for not getting the above point is uniquely high] they will not be and the ECHR will become their next enemy to fight with idle propaganda.

They should change the name of the forum from International Skeptics to International Stupidest.

Obviously none of them has any idea of what the ECHR really does, its principles and its real life cases, none has written a recourse to ECHR or seriously studied ECHR jurisprudence or history. Similarly, they have no idea of the great history, independence and prestige of the Corte Suprema di Cassazione of Rome or of the fact codified law was practiced for 13 centuries in that same city more than 2,500 years before the US even existed, one of the reasons why they enjoy the rule of law in their countries today instead of living in a tribal society. On second thought, I wonder if they would not prefer that, their attitude vs this case can be safely defined as tribalism.

Like Lewis Caroll he writes good English, but the former intentionally writes nonsense, Popper does it because he has been captured by the great Italian hoax.
I tried to respond to his posts on PMF, but they were never posted. When this repeatedly happened, I emailed four members including him. Two responded with great politeness, but one complained, and I was immediately banned.
Popper did not respond.
Popper, stabbing someone is unequivocally a crime unless in self defence in a knife fight. Agreeing with the police that their proposition may be correct, in this case that Lumuba was at the scene, is a lesser offence, especially outside Italy.

Why not join this forum and help Yummi out?

Responding to posters directly might help you refine your arguments.

 

[anglolawyer]

Ah I see you have found de Felice's press conference statements! Are you going to post them in their entirety?

I do hope so. Maybe they will confirm Malcolm Moore's note (Daily Telegraph reporter, fluent Italian speaker, present at press conference on morning of 6th Nov) that somebody said they found messages on her phone from Patrick fixing a meeting.

 

[Kauffer]

Hiya Kaufer,
Why don't you yourself dig up info on where you believe Rudy might have stashed the knife,
don't you believe that he was the only 1 there and that it was he who stabbed Miss Kercher?

I'm not of that same mindset,
so I'm looking more closely at un-explained evidence.


So ah Kaufer,
you've kinda been bustin' my ***** recently,
so I gotta ask, do you speak Italian?

I ask this because Frank Sfarzo does.
Machiavelli today even made mention of the difficulty, so to say,
of Italian to English word translation.

Did you ever attend any of the 1st Trial under Massei and Cristiani?
Sfarzo did, all the time.
Hours and hours of watching, listening and then reporting.

Yet when I quote, years later, what Sfarzo wrote,
and that he wondered about those unattributed fingerprints
or if Rudy Guede even stabbed Meredith,
you innocentisti with the 1-person theory give me ****.
Pffft.

Go read all of Perugia Shock,
there's info in there that you won't find elsewhere .
Heck, as far as I can tell, The Massei Report barely even mentions fingerprints.
I wonder why?

Anyways,
it's finally rainin' again down here in Southern California from this new storm courtesy of the Pineapple Express,
+the surf is comin' up huge in the mornin', I hope the wind is offshore. Time for sleep...

I'll check back in again soon,
and read more of what you new skeptics think, and write about.
Take it easy,
RW


PS - Hey Kaufer,
my moniker is RWVBWL.
Please use it, as we are not on a 1st name basis.
Thank you.

I've upset you, Randy and I'm sorry. You're definitely good at finding stuff out and I hope you keep looking. I don't know Frank but I'm guessing that where he was with all this all those years ago is different from where he is now and I'm further guessing he would subscribe to the one man one burglar one killer theory in relation to the demise of Ms Kercher today.

A lot of high profile murder cases have the same stamp: frantic, frenzied reporting of half truths, speculation and falsehood. The extent of the craziness is usually in direct proportion to the amount of blood. When the dust settles and people get the chance, calmly to sift the evidence, the picture, which emerges is often rather different from the one originally painted.

One of the most important things I've learned is that there is a difference between the unexplained and the unexplainable.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

I've seen no proof there even is an application.

Applications to the ECHR must be submitted up six months after the completion of a member states judicial process, I assume it was submitted on time and was in order. The confidentiality of the ECHR process makes it difficult to confirm.

I would say it is a complete fantasy to believe the ECHR as a pan European institution are going to use this particular application out of approximately 10,000 pending applications to sort out Italy’s judiciary finally.

ETA: If you factor in events earlier this year concerning the Russia invading the Ukraine, annexing the Crimea continued armed skirmishes along Ukraine border with pro Russian forces and the shooting down or a commercial airplane MH17 over the Ukraine, one could conclude the ECHR are going to see a sharp increase of applications.

 

[Kauffer]

I do hope so. Maybe they will confirm Malcolm Moore's note (Daily Telegraph reporter, fluent Italian speaker, present at press conference on morning of 6th Nov) that somebody said they found messages on her phone from Patrick fixing a meeting.

Machiavelli account has confirmed it doesn't have them. Intruiguingly, it's been reconstructing 7 year old memories in order to challenge published accounts.

 

[Samson]

Applications to the ECHR must be submitted up six months after the completion of a member states judicial process, I assume it was submitted on time and was in order. The confidentiality of the ECHR process makes it difficult to confirm.

I would say it is a complete fantasy to believe the ECHR as a pan European institution are going to use this particular application out of approximately 10,000 pending applications to sort out Italy’s judiciary finally.

This case is totally unique for a number of reasons, for example
1. There is complete proof by multiple pathways of total innocence.
2. Three judges, a senator, and many scientists are vocally supporting this.
3. It is very publicly demonstrating a broken system by the incredible length and contrary findings of the Italian judiciary.

It is an excellent case to focus the minds of intelligent Italians and normal people elsewhere on the need to repair this wreck.