Your life as a poster is in a world populated by straw men. The thoughts expressed as conjectures to descrbe possible details of a motive - on a crime where, btw, there is obviously no rational motive - are, to any reasonable person, irrelevant. But if you can't see that, what can we do? The reversal of logical value of things, as a pervasive practice, seems to me one among the distinguished features of your modus operandi as a poster, seems very deeply rooted and maybe it's part of your charachter, who knows. I'm not saying this as a snarky comment but as a consideration, for why I believe the reasonable impossiblity for me to explain something to you. It's not the only remarkable aspect of your method, but one of them, in my opinion, and may be a cognitive method rather than a calculated strategy. You think the case was based on Halloween and Manga and on a Satanic ritual theory, and based on this kind of assumption you think the prosecution "lost". You think that Nencini attributes Y-haplotypes to women and that Massei found that the suspects where psychologically normal. It's your world that works like that. You love this freedom to pick bits and crooked fragments and draw new pictures of the world rom them. I will not attempt to change your perception of the world. I note: evidently Judge Micheli must have seen things very differently from you, as. as you did remark, he accepted Mignini's case entirely, convicted and sent to trial all three as charged, as you well know.
Now you are an amateur psychologist.
First things first. Did Micheli, or did Micheli not describe the Hallowe'en ritualistic motive as a fantasy?
Please point to the post I made where I said the case was based on these sorts of things? In my view, the case was based on DNA analysis, which was only convincing because Massei refused to allow independent review of Stefanoni's work. Massei tried to make it a judicial fact that Stefanoni's work must be correct, because that's what she told him. It also included three superwitnesses recruited many months after the event itself. That's the case.
The Hellmann court, in my view, came to the right conclusions based on an independent review of the DNA, and saw the three superwitnesses for what they were. That's where this case should have ended.
Your life as a poster is to minimalize everything damning to Mignini - in this case, to suggest that Mignini's Hallwe'en ritual motive is now unimportant. Strange - did you think that way before or after Micheli described it as fanstasy.
Still, Micheli did send AK and RS off to trial. This is not about me, this is about a system where a judge can describe a prosecutor as having fantasies, and still send the case on to trial. (I note in your ad hominem against me, you have not disputed the claim of what Micheli said about Mignini.)
There is no rational motive? I agree that one is not necessarily needed to convict - but that leaves it as even more strange that judges and prosecutors seem to need to have one, to fit around their ever-changing analysis of the facts. So it is no wonder that someone like you would post that motive is irrelevant; because that is part of the weakness of this wrongful prosecution.
Hallowe'en ritual killing, which even Micheli said was fantasy.
A sex-game gone wrong, which even Massei said was wrong, Massei said the motive was Rudy's, Rudy's lust hardly needed encouragement.
An argument over pooh in the toilet - that was Crini's in Florence in 2013.
An argument over rent money, this one was Nencini: the sole source of this motive was none other than Rudy Guede who never gave testimony.
So it it no wonder you, as a poster, would argue against motive being important in this case: there are just so many of them to choose from.
And lastly, when cornered, you lapse into ad hominem. It simply is not "strawman" that Micheli said what he said about the Hallowe'en ritual - he said it was fantasy. You haven't even addressed that!
It's so "Machiavelli" to argue this way.
