• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
christianahannah said:
Maybe that's it (Britney is confusing). I have trouble understanding what you ask sometimes. Whose fault that is I dont know but I try to answer your questions even if they don't produce the answer you want (or understand).
Click to expand...

I thought I understood your answer.
You apparently didn't understand my Q.

platonov said:
What.

It’s all very well being reasonable in the face of complete nonsense but you think that there is a chance that the fact of the prosecution itself (actually placing them before the court, forget the verdict) was wrong.
That argument is as nonsensical as the one you are opposing even if it lacks the ‘Britney’ element.
Can you defend it? On what basis? How large is this chance?
Click to expand...

It's obviously down to my poor command of the English language.
Don't feel bad for showing me up - it happens a lot in cartwheel world :)
 
Machiavelli said:
No, not "a man" and "a woman", and not just having his number. It's one specific woman in a specific context, Amanda Knox, who exchanges phone calls with with Italian drug dealers, btw specialized at selling cocaine to students in the Perugia area, a woman who was found to have certainly dated Federico and admits it and exchanged phone calls with Lorenzo even after the murder.
Click to expand...

And apart from mud slinging and slut shaming the witch, what does this 'erotic fiction' actually have to do with the murder of MK?

As AK did not test positive for cocaine and not one person in the whole world has ever claimed to have seen her taking cocaine, this is just one naked helicopter ride away from being a bestseller!
 
Machiavelli said:
No, the police paper doesn't say "because it was stored", it only says that they found certain proof ("si appurava" = we found to be certain) that Federico had met with Amanda Knox. And because of this they started to investigate Federico.
Phone contacts between Knox and drug dealers are not the topic of this police paper. But they are a topic of newspaper articles reporting of Luciano, Lorenzo and Federico's trials.
Click to expand...
The relevant portion of the "Police Report":
si appurava che una persona italiana a nome "Federico" avrebbe fornito saltuariamente di sostanze stupefacente la nota AMANDA KNOX oltre ad avere presumibilmente avuto con lei dei rapporti di tipo sessuale."
Click to expand...
Translation:
"it was verified that an Italian person with the name of “Federico” allegedly supplied drugs occasionally to the [person] known as Amanda KNOX, and also presumably had relations with her of a sexual nature."
Click to expand...
So the "Police Report" is nothing more than speculation, but the "newspaper articles" about the calls "before and after the murder" are "evidence"? :confused:
 
lonepinealex said:
Who the hell cares who Amanda had sex with? It's got nowt to do with the price of fish.
Click to expand...

Favorite tactic. . . . .How David Ray Camm was convicted the first time.
There was a former stripper in Alaska convicted the same way (reversed on appeal however)
She might have been guilty but the evidence used was just bad.
 
Machiavelli said:
No, not "a man" and "a woman", and not just having his number. It's one specific woman in a specific context, Amanda Knox, who exchanges phone calls with with Italian drug dealers, btw specialized at selling cocaine to students in the Perugia area, a woman who was found to have certainly dated Federico and admits it and exchanged phone calls with Lorenzo even after the murder.
Click to expand...

So? What does it have to do with anything? It's only a specific woman and a specific context by a process of circular reasoning (the same circular reasoning that concludes that the other profiles on the bra clasp are irrelevant). Your suggestion is that it's obvious she's a sex crazed drug addict because she has these numbers in her phone, but that necessarily implies that any woman who had a man's number in her phone could only have it for sex or drugs. Circular argument. And irrelevant.
 
christianahannah said:
Many (maybe most) of these convictions were not done willfully because a prosecutor wanted to win at all costs but because he thought justice was being done.
Click to expand...

Official and prosecutorial misconduct is a frequent cause or contributing factor to wrongful prosecutions. Ask the guys at Northwestern.
 
Methos said:
The relevant portion of the "Police Report":
Translation:

So the "Police Report" is nothing more than speculation, but the "newspaper articles" about the calls "before and after the murder" are "evidence"? :confused:
Click to expand...

No woman could have a man's number in her phone unless she was having sex with him. All women are whores. WHORES!!
 
Machiavelli said:
She says that in her prison diary, but who cares what they did?
Click to expand...

It sounds like you spend a lot of time thinking about AK's sex life? It wouldn't be even remotely relevant to the murder of MK, even if she had a rampant orgy with the entire Italian football team! It's one very weird and incredibly offensive view, to equate being a sexually active woman with having a propensity to murder
 
Dougm said:
I appreciate your reasonable tone, although I am having trouble understanding your reasoning on the case.

Would you mind telling me what part of the current case you find to be rational proof that Knox and Sollecito committed a crime? I understand your idea that some future evidence or new science could come along, but what about the current evidence, as presented in court, convinces you that they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

I'd honestly love to understand this. I don't see any reliable evidence or believable narrative at all.
Click to expand...

It would have to be the science. And that is tentative until I read more documents from both sides (by science I don't mean only Stefanoni).

It is not their demeanor, their quirkiness, their looks, their family, their friends, their extracurricular activities, their sexual activities and so on. And as much as I don't think the characterization of Mignini and Stefanoni is fair by many innocents I also don't think the characterization of Amanda and Raffaele by many guiltys is fair either.
 
Samson said:
There is a very serious issue arising if they jail Sollecito, and decline to seek extradition for Knox as Burleigh predicts.
This must be politically impossible, therefore I predict they will either order a new trial, or find a judicial loophole that puts Sollecito's situation in permanent limbo. This would suit everyone (or noone), no winners no losers.
Click to expand...

I see it differently, though obviously I don't know doodleysquat.

I see the Italian authorities softening up the public for a full acquittal. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
 
carbonjam72 said:
I see it differently, though obviously I don't know doodleysquat.

I see the Italian authorities softening up the public for a full acquittal. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
Click to expand...


How have they been softening up the public? Have they been saying anything about it?
 
NancyS said:
And apart from mud slinging and slut shaming the witch, what does this 'erotic fiction' actually have to do with the murder of MK?

As AK did not test positive for cocaine and not one person in the whole world has ever claimed to have seen her taking cocaine, this is just one naked helicopter ride away from being a bestseller!
Click to expand...

Well it didn't have anything to do with Meredith's murder. And Mignini didn't use it against Amanda at trial. So how was it mud slinging and slut shaming? Maybe on the part of journalists who dug up the information in the files recently.

As for Machiavelli I would not put him in that category either. He has repeatedly written he doesn't care about people's sex lives. I don't think he is focused on the sexual aspect as others appear to be.
 
christianahannah said:
Well it didn't have anything to do with Meredith's murder. And Mignini didn't use it against Amanda at trial. So how was it mud slinging and slut shaming? Maybe on the part of journalists who dug up the information in the files recently.

As for Machiavelli I would not put him in that category either. He has repeatedly written he doesn't care about people's sex lives. I don't think he is focused on the sexual aspect as others appear to be.
Click to expand...


Wut. You mean apart from when he leaped to the conclusion that the crime was a satanic sex game? You know, right at the start of this whole debacle.

ETA it's always the self-proclaimed puritans who turn out to be the biggest perverts. Mignini can write all he likes about his lack of interest in people's sex lives - his actions speak louder.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom