Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[ericparoissien]

Once again, you assert and provide no proof. (Unless you're talking about the court document with no surnames on it, with an undecipherable signature, in comic sans serif font!)

More assertions. No facts.

Comic Sans documents (sorry I'm not allowed to post links):

on amandaknoxcase dot com
/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-10-Deposition-Zaccaro.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-12-02-Correspondence-police-DeMaio-Bersano.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-19-Correspondence-police-Aviello-missing.pdf

on themurderofmeredithkercher dot com
/docupl/spublic/filelibrary/2007investigations/arrests/2007-11-06-Police-notification-Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba-arrest.pdf

…after 10 min of research

 

[Samson]

Comic Sans documents (sorry I'm not allowed to post links):

on amandaknoxcase dot com
/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-10-Deposition-Zaccaro.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-12-02-Correspondence-police-DeMaio-Bersano.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-19-Correspondence-police-Aviello-missing.pdf

on themurderofmeredithkercher dot com
/docupl/spublic/filelibrary/2007investigations/arrests/2007-11-06-Police-notification-Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba-arrest.pdf

…after 10 min of research

Really good to see you here ericparoissien, I have followed your video series with fascination, including the one on Cosima Misseri, but regrettably, no one seems interested.

 

[ericparoissien]

Really good to see you here ericparoissien, I have followed your video series with fascination, including the one on Cosima Misseri, but regrettably, no one seems interested.

Ad hominem as soon as new blood arrives, Whack 'em All, wolf-pack, 75-IQ strategy:
- no accepted on most forums
- you have no argument on the issue offered

 

[MichaelB]

Ad hominem as soon as new blood arrives, Whack 'em All, wolf-pack, 75-IQ strategy:
- no accepted on most forums
- you have no argument on the issue offered

Your translations are amateurish and deceptive and you seem to only hear what you want to hear.

 

[Antony]

In the UK we have the Sub judice and contempt of court. TV programmes, publications covering an ongoing court case are not permitted. Indeed a defendant in a murder case would not be allowed to go on TV and talk about their case whilst it is under consideration by the court, to do so would place them in contempt of court, jail.

I am not suggesting that the sub judice rule is superior to other justice systems protocols or procedures but for me the very idea of opposing sides lobbying, courting public opinion to influence an ongoing case, is an anathema.

You must have been horrified by how the media treated Amanda prior to the first trial, definitely an anathema

No!

Coulsdon, kindly explain how the above two posts of yours can be reconciled.

I remain horrified that the Kercher family had to deal with the brutal murder of daughter, sister and friend in a media frenzy, one which I doubt allows them to celebrate Meredith’s short life.

Yet the Kerchers have voluntarily taken part in this "media frenzy", by appearing on TV at every stage expressing satisfaction at guilty verdicts, dismay at the Hellmann acquittal - and John Kercher publishing a book attacking Amanda Knox. This is while their "supporters" in the online blogosphere repeatedly claim that they have "maintained a dignified silence". How do you account for this behaviour?

 

[Samson]

I'd lke to urge you to look at your fallacies here.

First, as a logical point, if truth is a good defence from an accusation of libel, this means that Knox has a possibility to defend herself, but that also implies that, exactly like in 1735, an accusation must moved against her in order to let her defend herself by asserting her "truth".

Second, there is a factual error in your statements. Mignini is not acting against here parents. It's a number of police officers who filed a defamation lawsuit against her parents, not Mignini.

Third, I point out your statement "I know she did because her account stands up to the scrutiny of the reasonable man/woman", because I notice that nobody among the pro-Knoxes accuses you to peddle hearsay as incontrovertible truths or of not providing scientific evidence. You assume a report as truth simply because it seems reasonable to you, and nobody accuses you to only bring unsubstantiated assertions.

Fourth: without questioning the point that Knox's report of being hit, if taken in isolation, itself is reasonable, I must point out there are, however a few other factual elements attached to it, that have their legal value. A factual element is that Ms. Knox did not sublit any legal complaint about being hit, and another fact is that her own lawyers publicly denied she was hit. This is a problem in Knox's defence, since you cannot take the first report in isolation from the other elements, because of the rules of the game. If the victim doesn't complain, that has a value like expressing the position that her rights were not violated and factually bars the allegation from being investigated.

Fifth: Mignini's is not a thuggish behaviour. There is no reason why he should be seen as a thug. He even has no initiative in the prosecution of Knox's parents, and would also have no interest in that (since he was not the defamed party). Thats police officers' initiative to protect their legitimate interest. Anyway it's something they have the right to do, in which Mignini had no power to initiate anything.

Oh Machiavelli, you have furnished me with all the quasi refutations required to help with my well considered dissertation I will forward to all possible arms of the New Zealand government. Immodestly, I consider myself a foremost analyst of the case within our nation. Why would I not therefore do everything in my power to make damn sure there is absolutely no confusion as to the attitude this government should have in their determination that an English family is witch hunting an innocent Italian man, and an innocent American woman?

 

[Samson]

Ad hominem as soon as new blood arrives, Whack 'em All, wolf-pack, 75-IQ strategy:
- no accepted on most forums
- you have no argument on the issue offered

My welcome (belatedly) is well intended. I am truly grateful for your proper and professional subtitling of the Porta videos. This forum is highly respectful of professional contributions. I have praised your videos and work in prior posts. Ad hominem? No, two other people, as Andy Capp once said.

 

[NancyS]

This looks like a citation from Mignini's 2009 closing arguments.
The prosecutor was slightly more articulate.

First, draws a psychological picture of Knox as nurturing a feeling of humiliation/ wounded self because of Meredith's behaviour gradually cutting her out from friendship circle, and suggests Meredith being disturbed by some of Amanda's sexual behaviours, or Amanda feeling offended by Meredith's attitude, may have plaid a role. At least the sexual theme plaid a role as an a trigger of an argument, or somehow as an instrument in Knox's "revenge":



Then Mignini draws a scenario where an argument between them degenerates, and this the context of the presence of Guede high on drugs and alcohol in a sexual ruse situation and Sollecito also high after using extensive drugs. Then draws a picture of what an instigation to sexual violence as a trigger moment could look like:



Mgnini calls Knox's behaviour: "aggressione sessuale da rivalsa" ("a sexual aggression as a revenge"), also suggested Knox may have felt Meredith as "una smorfiosetta" ("prissy").
Mignii suggests Knox may have taken advantage of her abilty to manipulate Guede and Sollecito through the sexual attraction they were both feeling for her, and thus from their "competition" to please Amanda, especially in their condition of being unchained and uninhibited due to use of drugs.

I don't believe Mignini's scenario has any meaningful difference from Nencini's reasoning about motives. Both portray a situation that has a sexual element, but the sexual context is a minor component, only a context and not itself the main motive. Both point out that "motives" are complex, different from each participants and made of multiple reasons. All judges conclude that the crime builds up gradually as an escalation, from a smaller conflict or a smaller aggression and as a degeneration of an argument.

And again this is just plain dirty old man erotic fiction! It says far more about what is going on in the mind of Mignini and those that accept this sexist nonsense, than it does about AK.

There is no evidence that AK had anything but a very average and probably quite vanilla sex life, although why this is relevant is beyond me

And as the only evidence of any drug use is cannabis, which mainly causes the giggles, the munchies and prevents you from being able to store short term memories - it rather points to them staying at Raffaele's. There is no evidence of AK/RS using any other drugs that night.

The rest of this is pure slut shaming and mud slinging nonsense and total invention. Any person with even the most basic belief in the right to a fair trial, would be horrified that this nonsesne was presented in court.

 

[NancyS]

Coulsdon, kindly explain how the above two posts of yours can be reconciled.

Yet the Kerchers have voluntarily taken part in this "media frenzy", by appearing on TV at every stage expressing satisfaction at guilty verdicts, dismay at the Hellmann acquittal - and John Kercher publishing a book attacking Amanda Knox. This is while their "supporters" in the online blogosphere repeatedly claim that they have "maintained a dignified silence". How do you account for this behaviour?

More worrying, is that many of the pro-guilt posting on Twitter, claim that the Kercher family approve of their campaign and what is written on the AK/RS hate sites - and many claim that they are the voice of the Kercher family. I find it impossible to feel anything but sympathy for the Kercher family, but they should have no voice during the trial process - and the jurors being so aware of their feelings towards particularly AK, must have caused huge pressure to convict. This again has prevented access to a fair trial

 

[Planigale]

Good occasion to point out that, in fact:

First, while the lay judges might be influenced by public sentiment like any human being, they can also read the actual trial file and, this way, themselves access material (prints, photos, videos, records) which is far more sensitive, direct and influencing than any press report. The key point is that the courts can access the trial files: they don't need to go drink at the "posoned" well, they can connect directly with a pipe to the poison can.

Second, it's not worthless to repeat that the truth is, there was no media lies campaign against Knox, and there was no evidence of any orchestrating a media campaign by authorities or police in the Italian media. I acknowledge there is a myth about this, a belief of this in the hearts of the pro-Knoxes, and also in some English speaking mainstream media commenters.
But the interesting fact, is that there is no evidence of this. It appears just false, when you actually look back at the Italian media.
It's interesting that, time ago, when I asked some posters to provide actual examples of this, it became evident mostly they had no knowledge about what was actually going on the Italian media (for example they had no clue about what the media actually reported about bleach receipts); while I recall Mary H. cited Sarzanini, putting forward her peculiar cultural theories as argument, but basically also showing a basic misunderstanding or ignoring of what Sarzanini actually said.

Mach I am sensitive to the fact that you are not a native English speaker, and may miss nuances in what you write. So could you clarify the highlighted.

In English 'can' means able to do so, not that something actually happened. I previously asked you (and you failed to repy, entirely excusably since you have many people vying for your attention), what is the process of reviewing the evidence by the lay judges? Do we know they went through all the evidential documentation written statements etc? Do they go through it individually, or do the professional judges lead them through the documents? Do they do this before the court hearings or after? In criminal courts in common law jurisdictions, evidence is limited to evidence presented in court to the jury. So a written report from a forensic scientist or a witness statement would have been gone through in court by the lawyers with the scientist or witness (not necessarily line by line, but the key issues). So the jury will have sat through all the evidence, those sitting in the court will have heard all the evidence, there would not be 'back room' deliberations over e.g. phone records or transcripts not presented in public (if you exclude the rare terrorism / espionage cases).

My worry is a lazy jury, might not trouble to examine the documentary evidence rely on the press for a summary, and the very limited presentation of restricted testimony in court.

 

[Antony]

No. I remain horrified how the Kercher family had to cope in the media glare.

At least they weren't thrown in prison and vilified in the press for a crime they had nothing to do with.

A fate that has befallen many family members of murder victims. Of course, had Stephanie Kercher been in Perugia and been first on the scene instead of Amanda, then she may well have falsely accused and convicted, and the press and blogosphere full of real and invented family tensions.

 

[NancyS]

A fate that has befallen many family members of murder victims. Of course, had Stephanie Kercher been in Perugia and been first on the scene instead of Amanda, then she may well have falsely accused and convicted, and the press and blogosphere full of real and invented family tensions.

And it is quite telling, that many of the people vilifying AK are also attacking the McCann family. There seems to be a bit of a culture of hatred and concrete thinking

 

[Samson]

And it is quite telling, that many of the people vilifying AK are also attacking the McCann family. There seems to be a bit of a culture of hatred and concrete thinking

And only Leila Schnepps could think evidence first in suggesting Pistorius may have killed his valentine love tragically and unintentionally.

Kindly Popper meanwhile suggests

If I were Knox I would have little doubt, I would even try to avoid spending those few months in a US jail before extradition. I would just board a plane and go to a police station in Italy.
Last edited by Popper on 21 Mar 2015, 09:21, edited 8 times in total.

With friends like that.....

By the way Leila Schnepps is truly the only named guilter I can think of that has accepted professional credentials, and believes "knoxisguilty".
Am I forgetting Nancy Grace?
Please name some others anyone, because this is truly important in the critical debate.

 

[codyjuneau]

A fate that has befallen many family members of murder victims. Of course, had Stephanie Kercher been in Perugia and been first on the scene instead of Amanda, then she may well have falsely accused and convicted, and the press and blogosphere full of real and invented family tensions.

And it is quite telling, that many of the people vilifying AK are also attacking the McCann family. There seems to be a bit of a culture of hatred and concrete thinking

.
I am confident that if Amanda and Meredith's fates were reversed, and Mignini was railroading Meredith with one of his sex crime fantasies, then most of the same people now defending Amanda and Raffaele would be defending Meredith, and most of the same people attacking Amanda now would be attacking Meredith.

Cody
.

 

[Diocletus]

Mach I am sensitive to the fact that you are not a native English speaker, and may miss nuances in what you write. So could you clarify the highlighted.

In English 'can' means able to do so, not that something actually happened. I previously asked you (and you failed to repy, entirely excusably since you have many people vying for your attention), what is the process of reviewing the evidence by the lay judges? Do we know they went through all the evidential documentation written statements etc? Do they go through it individually, or do the professional judges lead them through the documents? Do they do this before the court hearings or after? In criminal courts in common law jurisdictions, evidence is limited to evidence presented in court to the jury. So a written report from a forensic scientist or a witness statement would have been gone through in court by the lawyers with the scientist or witness (not necessarily line by line, but the key issues). So the jury will have sat through all the evidence, those sitting in the court will have heard all the evidence, there would not be 'back room' deliberations over e.g. phone records or transcripts not presented in public (if you exclude the rare terrorism / espionage cases).

My worry is a lazy jury, might not trouble to examine the documentary evidence rely on the press for a summary, and the very limited presentation of restricted testimony in court.

There's a much bigger problem than this. The ISC reversed, and Nencini convicted, without hearing any witnesses on several key points. Eg, they held Curatalo to be credible without ever hearing him testify.

That's an ECHR violation.

 

[LondonJohn]

Comic Sans documents (sorry I'm not allowed to post links):

on amandaknoxcase dot com
/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-10-Deposition-Zaccaro.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-12-02-Correspondence-police-DeMaio-Bersano.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-19-Correspondence-police-Aviello-missing.pdf

on themurderofmeredithkercher dot com
/docupl/spublic/filelibrary/2007investigations/arrests/2007-11-06-Police-notification-Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba-arrest.pdf

…after 10 min of research

Huh? You posted this as a response to a post by Bill Williams. But Bill's post wasn't challenging Machiavelli to provide other official documents typed up in Comic Sans font. Bill was challenging Machiavelli to provide the documents which supported his (Machiavelli's) assertions about the link between Knox and a drug dealing syndicate.

 

[NancyS]

.
I am confident that if Amanda and Meredith's fates were reversed, and Mignini was railroading Meredith with one of his sex crime fantasies, then most of the same people now defending Amanda and Raffaele would be defending Meredith, and most of the same people attacking Amanda now would be attacking Meredith.

Cody
.

Definitely, it would have been very easy to have sensationalised her fairly normal student life and turn her into the wild party girl with the drug dealing boyfriend. It is incredibly offensive that the lives of young women can be written about in this way - their sex lives have no relevance

 

[Diocletus]

Comic Sans documents (sorry I'm not allowed to post links):

on amandaknoxcase dot com
/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-10-Deposition-Zaccaro.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-12-02-Correspondence-police-DeMaio-Bersano.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-19-Correspondence-police-Aviello-missing.pdf

on themurderofmeredithkercher dot com
/docupl/spublic/filelibrary/2007investigations/arrests/2007-11-06-Police-notification-Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba-arrest.pdf

…after 10 min of research

The whole point of the "comic sans" issue is that it shows the police to be amateurish. Thanks for the additional examples (not that they're really needed, though).

 

[Antony]

And it is quite telling, that many of the people vilifying AK are also attacking the McCann family. There seems to be a bit of a culture of hatred and concrete thinking

Exactly - it's a huge irony that on the one hand the Kerchers have been given unlimited licence to attack innocent people; while the McCanns, having suffered an equivalent tragedy, have all their actions questioned and used against them.

 

[carbonjam72]

Very welcome

Comic Sans documents (sorry I'm not allowed to post links):

on amandaknoxcase dot com
/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-10-Deposition-Zaccaro.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-12-02-Correspondence-police-DeMaio-Bersano.pdf
wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2010-11-19-Correspondence-police-Aviello-missing.pdf

on themurderofmeredithkercher dot com
/docupl/spublic/filelibrary/2007investigations/arrests/2007-11-06-Police-notification-Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba-arrest.pdf

…after 10 min of research

I appreciate your translation videos, I haven't seen alternatives available for recent programs so readily, so i appreciate your helping to bridge the communication gap (although I should probably just learn Italian, granted).

I did however find one error in watching one of your videos. The subject were talking about the finding I believe, allegedly of Meredith's DNA on Raf's kitchen knife. But your translation has them describing it as "blood", rather than DNA.

Raf's kitchen knife tested negative for blood, so it can't be blood that is alleged to have been found. In addition, the finding of Kercher's DNA has been thoroughly discredited for its method of analysis, failure to disclose controls, low copy quantification to a result indistinguishable from actually zero, and the fact that it was allegedly taken from a scratch that no one else could see, photograph, or has ever found on said knife.

I'm just not sure why you seem to support a view of guilt for Amanda and Raf, when there is overwhelming evidence of Rudy Guede, and ONLY Rudy Guede committing this crime.

I'd be very interested to hear your arguments in favor of guilt, if you'd care to share.