Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Chris_Halkides]

falsehood or lie

Posts like this keep me clicking on this thread.

tsig,

About a month ago you claimed to have no animosity toward Ms. Knox and claimed not to be active on other discussion boards about this case. Yet on another discussion board your "tsit" alter ego made 60-70 comments, including some that harshly criticized Ms. Knox's personal life. All of your statements here should be judged accordingly.

 

[Bill Williams]

I am not defending Mignini nor the police, I am defending the truth. And I am defending justice.
While you are a person who is defending Spezi and Preston, two proven liars, and you believe the worst covering-ups on the Narducci case, getting engaged in the most blatant denial of justice, evidence and truth on the Narducci case.

And btw, inside the cottage there are actually two clearly vidsible sets of physical traces with opposite features, including two sets of footprints, showing two different modus operandi on the scene.

Of course you are defending Mignini and the police. Your comment about Spezi and Preston being "proven liars" is an appeal to the very same authority, thus rendering your reasoning suspiciously circular.

It is also a very strange claim, to claim to be representing the truth, when you, yourself, lie. (See your photoshopped pic of a knife overlapping the bedsheet stain. LOL!)

 

[Planigale]

If the defence experts were present during testing why would they have been unaware of what the SAL records disgorged (disclosed only after defence application and in the teeth of fierce resistance from Comodi)? Surely, if they had seen her use the Qubit fluorometer to quantify and seen her write down 'too low' and seen her conduct negative blood and species tests and seen her omit cytology entirely they would have piped up earlier, perhaps during the prelim before Micheli at which she lied about or omitted mention of all those things and more.

My worry is just being there it is hard to know what was not done that should have been. Ideally defence and prosecution should agree a program of testing. But the inadequacy of the system and inequality can be seen in the failure to test the possible semen stain despite the defence request. The prosecution can vet defence requests but the defence cannot veto prosecution tests.

Equally since the prosecution choose what to present in evidence. It is not until the defence sees the documents presented in court they know what evidence is being presented and what concealed.

 

[Machiavelli]

This is naiive. If Maresca had let it be known that the Kerchers were no longer supporting the prosecution after Hellmann, that would have been the end of it. Can you imagine these people being prepared to listen to the family publicly critiquing the investigation, the lack of discovery and the leniency handed to Guede? Can you imagine the effect of their saying that Ms Knox and Mr Sollecito had been victims of a wrongful conviction? In Italy, if you haven't saved face, you haven't got anything.

Completely ridiculous. The truth: the judiciary have pursued their lines on dozens of high profile cases totally disregarding criticism from civil parties. On the Cucchi case, for example, the prosecution and the victim's civil parties had divergent opinions. On the Monster of Florence case the victims and the prosecution on one of the trial pursued opposite beliefs. On the Ilaria Alpi murder the prosecution managed to convict a suspect while the victim family believed he was innocent and was the wrong suspect.
You really really have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Bill Williams]

1. I didn't manipulate absolutely anything. I overlapped pictures. Not manipulated them (except mild contrast enhancement)

2. Why is the overlapping absurd?

Think about it Machiavelli.... the pic of the stain on the sheet is on an angle, an aspect peculiar to the way the photographer held the camera.

The overlapping knife is suspiciously from exactly the same vantage point?

Wow, that must be the most incredible stroke of luck for you, that you could, without changing a pixel, simply overlap.

Sir - this is perhaps the biggest whopper you've tried to pawn off on this, or any, thread. Any idiot who has done any photoeditting knows the problems associated with accomplishing what you've accomplished.

LOL! It is now officially hard to take you seriously. I can't believe I've ever responded to any of your posts.

 

[Machiavelli]

Of course you are defending Mignini and the police. Your comment about Spezi and Preston being "proven liars" is an appeal to the very same authority, thus rendering your reasoning suspiciously circular.

It is also a very strange claim, to claim to be representing the truth, when you, yourself, lie.

You are wagin insulting accusations with no evidence.

Spezi and Prestn are proven liars based on evidence, not on the very same autority (but anyway I believe Mignini).
Spezi was convicted by the Appeals Court of Milan, with a territory jurisdiction of 8+ millions it is one of the largest judicial offices in Europe. I doubt Perugia could stretch its power over it.
I believe Mignini, because he happens to be a credible person, but he is not the object of my defence, I defend truth, this is the purpose not this or that person or authority.

 

[Bill Williams]

Your manipulation of the picture of the knife imprint is comically absurd.

<........... sinister deletia ..........>​

And while they are about it, why don't they toss the bathmat?

You want us to believe that your murderers are devious sociopaths on the one hand and dumb boobies on the other - all at the same time.

It's absurd.

Why didn't they, as part of a pseudo-clean-up, bundle up the bedsheet and burn it?

The Swiss cheese industry is about to sue Machiavelli for having more holes in his theory than in their product.

 

[Machiavelli]

Think about it Machiavelli.... the pic of the stain on the sheet is on an angle, an aspect peculiar to the way the photographer held the camera.

The overlapping knife is suspiciously from exactly the same vantage point?

Wow, that must be the most incredible stroke of luck for you, that you could, without changing a pixel, simply overlap.

Sir - this is perhaps the biggest whopper you've tried to pawn off on this, or any, thread. Any idiot who has done any photoeditting knows the problems associated with accomplishing what you've accomplished.

LOL! It is now officially hard to take you seriously. I can't believe I've ever responded to any of your posts.

Bill, I took all measurements, of both stain and knife.

 

[Bill Williams]

I believe Mignini, because he happens to be a credible person, but he is not the object of my defence, I defend truth, this is the purpose not this or that person or authority.

LOL!

 

[Kauffer]

Completely ridiculous. The truth: the judiciary have pursued their lines on dozens of high profile cases totally disregarding criticism from civil parties. On the Cucchi case, for example, the prosecution and the victim's civil parties had divergent opinions. On the Monster of Florence case the victims and the prosecution on one of the trial pursued opposite beliefs. On the Ilaria Alpi murder the prosecution managed to convict a suspect while the victim family believed he was innocent and was the wrong suspect.
You really really have no clue what you are talking about.

Oh sure I do. This case has caught the Italian judiciary in the headlights of the world. And the response so far, to quote Diocletus, has been for the CSC to double down on stupid. The case could not have survived the Kerchers signing up with the defence, which is what they should have done post Hellmann, and at least unshackled themselves from Mignini's madness from the beginning and acted like the seekers of truth they have erroneously purported to be.

 

[Bill Williams]

Think about it Machiavelli.... the pic of the stain on the sheet is on an angle, an aspect peculiar to the way the photographer held the camera.

The overlapping knife is suspiciously from exactly the same vantage point?

Wow, that must be the most incredible stroke of luck for you, that you could, without changing a pixel, simply overlap.

Sir - this is perhaps the biggest whopper you've tried to pawn off on this, or any, thread. Any idiot who has done any photoeditting knows the problems associated with accomplishing what you've accomplished.

LOL! It is now officially hard to take you seriously. I can't believe I've ever responded to any of your posts.

Bill, I took all measurements, of both stain and knife.

I believe you, Machiavelli. That you think this is serious forensic work is the most laughable part!!!!!

You are not only an expert on how translators must become mediators and diplomats, you are not only an expert in sleep deprivation isssues, you are not only an expert on the nuances of delaying declaring someone a suspect until the very last possible moment.....

You now photoshop evidence. I am so glad I logged in today. If someone at IIP had told me you'd done this I wouldn't have believed them.

LOL! You actually do not have any awareness of the issues in that photo, do you!?

 

[Machiavelli]

I will tell you why. I just had to log in because of that picture you posted. You line up the one edge and the rest of the spots and splats, well, they are just all over the blade for some reason. How convenient.

More of those lines mean something. They are not just spots which happened to be on the blade. For example, the one square-ish spot is clearly the hilt of the knife, yet in your example it is just arbitrarily on the blade.

(...)

The blade happens to intercept precisely all the most external lines and spots.
I just don't believe this is by chance.

I know the innocentisti beliee the square-ish stain is the "handle mark". It's just a belief though, and it's not less arbitrary than locating it along the edge of any surface.

 

[Numbers]

Bill,

I understand your concerns.
However, the ECHR is not a domestic court, and does not function like one.

There are distinct qualities to the ECHR, which includes:

1) A human rights organization - the ECHR does not judge anyone guilty or not guilty. Its primary job is to determine whether or not a respondent Council of Europe State has violated the Convention rights of an applicant.

2) Supranational - ECHR is not tied to any State's domestic judicial or national politics.

3) Rational - ECHR judgments follow generally accepted rules of logic.

4) Procedural - ECHR strictly follows the Convention, ECHR case-law, its Court Rules, and common-law principles.

5) Practical - ECHR maintains, according to the Convention, that rights must be "practical and effective" not "theoretical and illusory" ( that is, not imaginary).

6) Adversarial - a respondent State must defend its position with credible evidence, not by fiat or "judicial truth".

7) Adaptive - ECHR interprets the Convention and ECHR case-law and thus advances ECHR case-law to meet new situations or to accomodate new understanding of human rights principles.

Comparison of the Italian courts (as in the AK-RS case) and ECHR (above):

1) An organization devoted to serving the prosecution and police.

2) Domestic and parochial - political interests abound, and are not clear to outsiders.

3) Not rational - unconventional, arbitrary, and willful, not logical.

4) Procedures are arbitrary; work-arounds such as simultaneous civil suits and criminal cases; procedures ignored when necessary to support prosecution, the codes of civil law are followed only arbitrarily

5) Rights are theoretical and illusory.

6) Inquisitorial - despite the words in the Italian constitution that a trial is to be adversarial, the reality is that the bias toward the prosecution is so great that the defense is not heard in any practical or effective way.

7) Not applicable - civil law does not allow for new situations.

8) Minimal to no transparency (ECHR has a measure of transparency, in that the ECHR Convention and case-law are published and are followed).

 

[Machiavelli]

I believe you, Machiavelli. That you think this is serious forensic work is the most laughable part!!!!!

You are not only an expert on how translators must become mediators and diplomats, you are not only an expert in sleep deprivation isssues, you are not only an expert on the nuances of delaying declaring someone a suspect until the very last possible moment.....

You now photoshop evidence. I am so glad I logged in today. If someone at IIP had told me you'd done this I wouldn't have believed them.

LOL! You actually do not have any awareness of the issues in that photo, do you!?

I note that your post contains no argument.

It seems like you are only attempting to attack the poster.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

The blad happens to intercept precisely all the most external lines and spots.
I don't believe this is a chance.

I know the innocentisti beliee the square-ish stain is the "handle mark". It's just a belief though, and it's not less arbitrary than locating it along the edge of any surface.

No. You could take a knife with a blade 5cm longer, or 5cm shorter, line up the edge with the linear part of the stain and then just figure all the rest of the splats were on the flat blade. Your way is too imprecise because you ignore the spots you want to ignore and use only those you want to use to prove your case.

 

[Machiavelli]

Oh sure I do. This case has caught the Italian judiciary in the headlights of the world. And the response so far, to quote Diocletus, has been for the CSC to double down on stupid. The case could not have survived the Kerchers signing up with the defence, which is what they should have done post Hellmann, and at least unshackled themselves from Mignini's madness from the beginning and acted like the seekers of truth they have erroneously purported to be.

It's an ufounded illusion. And I note you also have a strange concept about assuming a thought of importance of the "world's hearlights" in the Supreme Court's mind, and a contradictory concept about how the Supreme Court would feel somehow intimidated and how (contradictorily) they would "react" along a theory that makes no sense. All this should depend, in your opinion, from the Kerchers and Maresca.
Your theory not deserve comments actualy.
I'll shelve it close to the "DNA evidence-of-Knox-in-the-room-is-required" theory.

 

[Machiavelli]

No. You could take a knife with a blade 5cm longer, or 5cm shorter, line up the edge with the linear part of the stain and then just figure all the rest of the splats were on the flat blade. Your way is too imprecise because you ignore the spots you want to ignore and use only those you want to use to prove your case.

But the outline of the blade intercepts the most external line of drops of the stain on one side, and the most external spots on the other side, doesn't it?
The spots that I "ignore" are the ones "in the middle" of the area, which I don't consider borders of the imprint, I think legitimately..

The overlapping is certainly not a definitive piece of evidence, but its shows compatibility with a theory.

 

[Kauffer]

It's an ufounded illusion. And I note you also have a strange concept about assuming a thought of importance of the "world's hearlights" in the Supreme Court's mind, and a contradictory concept about how the Supreme Court would feel somehow intimidated and how (contradictorily) they would "react" along a theory that makes no sense. All this should depend, in your opinion, from the Kerchers and Maresca.
Your theory not deserve comments actualy.
I'll shelf it close to the "DNA evidence-of-Knox-in-the-room-is-required" theory.

Not "DNA evidence of Knox in the room is required" No, no, no!

ANY evidence of Knox in the room is required - anything; anything at all?

No? What? Nothing? You have nothing!!??

They just ran out the room, right? Ha Ha Ha!

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)

There is no blood on the kitchen knife. How do you bleach clean the knife of blood and leave DNA and starch?

The argument is the typical defence argument, it's based on just ignorance of anatomy. The depth is determined by the transverse process of the C1 (or maybe C2) vertebra. The blade halts there (about 8 cm deep) and rotates around the point.

How and why did the knife get to the cottage?

Why would murderers so intricate in their approach to the post crime situation that a meticulous clean up is carried out, take the risk of returning the knife to the kitchen drawer at Mr Sollecito's apartment - transporting it back? Why don't they toss the knife?

And while they are about it, why don't they toss the bathmat?

You want us to believe that your murderers are devious sociopaths on the one hand and dumb boobies on the other - all at the same time. (...)

These questions are all just about murderer's intentions and have been shown to be pointless long ago.

 

[Machiavelli]

Not "DNA evidence of Knox in the room is required" No, no, no!

ANY evidence of Knox in the room is required - anything; anything at all?

No? What? Nothing? You have nothing!!??

Nothing at all of Knox is required in the murder room. (Btw, actually not even her own presence in the murder room is required in order to be guilty of the crime).
But anyway we happen to have her table light inside the room, and the murder weapon - that was in the room too - with her own DNA on it. And her boyfriend's DNA inside the room too (plus their evidence in corridoor and bathroom as bloody and luminol prints, blood stains etc.).