Continuation Part 13: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

Let's not be silly. The problem is precisely that Amanda Knox was not exactly normal. And this not because of her sexual habits, but because of her personality, her narcissistic self.
You realy decide that you want to misunderstand things. She was not a witch, nor a bitch nor a slut. She was just an unfortunate sick individual, a person suffering from a health condition.

Mach,
You (or an earlier version of whoever you may be) went over some of this material some months ago, in particular the alleged negative statements about Amanda Knox from prison.

I can only tell you that your attempts at character assassination totally remove any credibility your arguments may have among reasonable people. You and those who wish to claim that Amanda Knox is guilty of murder have no credible evidence to produce, so you resort to these misogynistic fantasies and nonsense about conflicts between Amanda and Meredith. Considering that these two young women signed off their texts to each other with Os and Xs (meaning "hugs and kisses") and went to a number of events together, including the chocolate festival in Perugia and a concert where Amanda met Raffaele, and Meredith borrowed condoms from Amanda. Meredith's boyfriend Giacomo testfied that Amanda and Meredith had normal friendly relations.

As with the slanders about Amanda's prison book reading, your comments do not lend any credibility or honor to your arguments.

 

[Machiavelli]

This is all Mignini's fantasy, built on his "may haves". It looks to be your fantasy as well. There is NO evidence at all to support those 5 things. Massei, for instance, heard what Mignini said about these sexual fantasies in court, and rejected it all.
(...)

It's just not true that such things were "rejected", and I think you know it. But I think it's not relevant as for evidence. Motive and explanation was not relevant at all for Massei, psychological reasons were not relevant to Crini, he only cared about speculation on possible trigger events.
All those elements are unnecessary. Evidence is elsewhere.
Those thoughts about relation between motives, scenario and Knox's personality are just for us, only for our understanding.

 

[Diocletus]

No, let's not be hypocritical beyond grotesque, it's not the equivalent. And it's not "noise", we know rock throwing across the road is not just a matter of noise.
And by the way it's not just a ticket, there's also a police report, which included the note of a verbal warning given by the officer to Amanda Knox besides the fine.
And also we have the officer's description of the event, some details are different from parking in the wrong place.

OMG! A verbal warning!

 

[Desert Fox]

"Nothing" is an important absolute quantificator, not always suitable.

Actually, as I have written before, I work in a peripheral law enforcement position. I have seen my share of parties and what the police report describes is no different than plenty I have seen.

One place I have worked in Norfolk State University and see a fair share of parties. It could have been me at either the University or when I have worked hotels in the same position as the officer.

As such, it is my professional opinion that it is "Nothing."

 

[acbytesla]

"Nothing" is an important absolute quantificator, not always suitable.

Is this the ticket?



I think a witness described the inside as:

"bedlam, with drink, drugs and bodies everywhere".

"Some people were naked inside the bedrooms".

"There were people draped over each other".

"I've been to a lot of student parties in my time, but I've never been to a party like that".

"Everyone just wanted to get drunk, get high and get laid. There was also a lot of violence because everyone was so pumped up."

I think officer Bender described the surrounging area "like a scene from Baghdad"

It is also reported that there was a court hearing for the fine and thus and a court record in which the thing I find most interesting is reported, that is:

Officer Bender reported that the excuse that Knox presented for her behaviour was that "she was moving abroad".

I find this link between the disturbance caused by a wild party and her moving abroad quite surprising, to me this link is actually the most revealing element.




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-498853/The-wild-raunchy-past-Foxy-Knoxy.html#ixzz3V4nSuJjX
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

It is interesting that the Daily Mail author never quoted a single name in his entire article. This of course is common for the Daily Mail. I am thoroughly confident that he made his description up. I believe this because I know that the author never even contacted the police officer who wrote the ticket and that information was publicly available. How could he find one of party goers months later?

 

[Bill Williams]

It's just not true that such things were "rejected", and I think you know it. But I think it's not relevant as for evidence. Motive and explanation was not relevant at all for Massei, psychological reasons were not relevant to Crini, he only cared about speculation on possible trigger events.
All those elements are unnecessary. Evidence is elsewhere.
Those thoughts about relation between motives, scenario and Knox's personality are just for us, only for our understanding.

LOL!

No they are not. You said that Mignini speculated about all this at trial, in his closing. At a trial where two innocents were fighting for their freedom.

Are prosecutors in Italy allowed to bring their sexualized fantasies about other people to court, with NO proof to back them up?

Massei rejected them, obviously, because he described Knox and Sollecito as normal, who in Massei's mind made an inexplicable "choice for evil" while under the influence of drugs. If Migini said what you summarized him as saying, Massei rejected it, because it appears nowhere in Massei's report.

That's what Massei wrote, for Pete's sake. Did Massei sleep through Mignini's closing, the sexualized closing you summarized upthread?

 

[js202]

OMG! A verbal warning!

Yes, and some twit tabloid writer in the Daily Mail got sufficiently wound up to read between the lines with lots of hysteria and plenty of references to "Foxy Knoxy." Of course, when it suits him, Machiavelli sets himself up on a promontory above such sensationalism.

I mean, certainly such things never go into print in the *Italian* tabloids; hungry Italian readers of sensationalist, unfounded trash hop on over to the UK sites, exclusively for that.

 

[Desert Fox]

It is interesting that the Daily Mail author never quoted a single name in his entire article. This of course is common for the Daily Mail. I am thoroughly confident that he made his description up. I believe this because I know that the author never even contacted the police officer who wrote the ticket and that information was publicly available. How could he find one of party goers months later?

I seriously doubt the officer can remember anything about the incident either.

 

[Bill Williams]

"Nothing" is an important absolute quantificator, not always suitable.

Is this the ticket?

In the city of Seattle

I was on uniformed patrol in the marked unit as 3U5. At approximately 0028 hours, I responded to the report of a loud party in the listed location. The complainant relayed to dispatch that participants from the party were throwing rocks at his house and at passing cars. The complainant requested officer not contact him. Upon arrival, I noted loud amplified music coming from the listed address. The music could be heard from a distance greater than 75 ft from the source. I also noted several rocks in the street. I did not locate any damage at that time. I contacted a party participant and had them retrieve a resident.

S1/Knox contacted me (in front of the house). She stated that she was one of the current residents. She stated that she was the one who was hosting the party (as she was moving out). She stated that she was not aware of any rock throwers at the gathering.

I issued S1/Knox this infraction for the noise violation and a warning for the rock throwing. I explained how dangerous and juvenile that action was.

See Cad event 264012 for further.

No further action taken at this time.

I think a witness described the inside as:

"bedlam, with drink, drugs and bodies everywhere".

"Some people were naked inside the bedrooms".

"There were people draped over each other".

"I've been to a lot of student parties in my time, but I've never been to a party like that".

"Everyone just wanted to get drunk, get high and get laid. There was also a lot of violence because everyone was so pumped up."

I think officer Bender described the surrounging area "like a scene from Baghdad"

It is also reported that there was a court hearing for the fine and thus and a court record in which the thing I find most interesting is reported, that is:

Officer Bender reported that the excuse that Knox presented for her behaviour was that "she was moving abroad".

I find this link between the disturbance caused by a wild party and her moving abroad quite surprising, to me this link is actually the most revealing element.

This is laughable. This "scene from Baghdad" resulted in the attending officer issuing.....

1) a warning shot to fend off rioters?
2) a stream of tear-gas
3) water-cannon to quell the crowd?, or
4) a verbal warning and a tongue-lashing to not be so juvenile?​

Machiavelli - cut to the chase. It was #4. Are you setting out to look foolish?

 

[toto]

It is interesting that the Daily Mail author never quoted a single name in his entire article. This of course is common for the Daily Mail. I am thoroughly confident that he made his description up. I believe this because I know that the author never even contacted the police officer who wrote the ticket and that information was publicly available. How could he find one of party goers months later?

Someone called Philip Setran is quoted, but if you google his name the only match is that Mail article, or a copy of it on another website. It does interest me that so many years later and there is astonishingly little on the record gossip about Amanda Knox (astonishing if she were considererd guilty by her fellow Americans).

 

[AmyStrange]

-

You and your Italian pals aren't in a good position to judge what is a wild party. Sounds to me like every Friday night in college.

-

I lived in the U District (Where the University of Washington's main campuses is located) before on the end of the Ave (University Way), not really that far from Frat Row (as it's called), and had many a chance to walk through that neighborhood. I worked security at the Alaska Airline's Arena. It's crazy out there on the weekends and something like Amanda's party wouldn't surprise me, except for the rock throwing.

The rock throwing is probably what got the police out there, more than anything else.

But, unless someone is saying that Amanda threw the rocks herself, I'd need to see some proof of that, the cops wouldn't have anything else to do at night on the weekends except answer disturbance calls on Frat Row.

Frat Row, by the way, is around 17th Ave NE and NE 45th Street,

d

-

 

[Samson]

Is this a tipping point?


Although Knox is American, she's being tried in Italy, where double jeopardy is not something that can save someone from being re-tried for the same case. Due to the extremely high profile and international nature of this case, it's expected that the Italian high court will call for another retrial. It's not uncommon for murder trials to go on for several years through Italy's judicial system, with one famously going back and forth from trial to trial for 22 years.


"[...] In a murder case, if it goes back [to appeal] for a third time, it generally points to enough reasonable doubt to acquit them in the eyes of the court," said Francesco Maresca, the Kercher family's attorney.


http://www.gospelherald.com/article...-has-doubts-that-knox-is-guilty-after-all.htm

 

[Machiavelli]

LOL!

No they are not. You said that Mignini speculated about all this at trial, in his closing. At a trial where two innocents were fighting for their freedom.

Are prosecutors in Italy allowed to bring their sexualized fantasies about other people to court, with NO proof to back them up?

Massei rejected them, obviously, because he described Knox and Sollecito as normal(...)

Massei never stated that the defendants were "normal", this is you making up stuff, as you well know and as I reminded you many times.

Judges are not tasked to tell about defendants' health conditions - unless expert reports are ordered to that purpose - and Massei court never cared about whether the defendants were "normal". They only noted if charachters had qualities that may make them entitled to generic mitigation.

 

[MichaelB]

Posted on Remo Croci's Facebook page.

Per gli errori ed orrori commessi in questa vicenda investigatori e giudici andrebbero rimossi. Addirittura la Corte d'Appello di Firenze ha trasformato un'impronta di scarpa in un'orma di piede femminile e addirittura attribuito un Dna a Sollecito sul coltello quando nessuna perizia lo ha mai accettato.For the mistakes and atrocities committed in this matter investigators and judges should be removed. Even the court of appeal of florence has turned a shoe impression in a footprint of Foot female and even given a dna to urge on the knife when any expertise it has never accepted.

Google:

For the mistakes and atrocities committed in this matter investigators and judges should be removed. Even the court of appeal of florence has turned a shoe impression in a footprint of Foot female and even given a dna to urge on the knife when any expertise it has never accepted.

Per la prima volta da quando seguo casi di cronaca sento il dovere di fare delle scuse ad uno degli indagati. Nel caso specifico si tratta di Raffaele Sollecito. Nel novembre del 2007 seguii per conto del tg5 il delitto di Meredith Kercher e fin dai primi giorni avevo maturato la convinzione che il giovane allora studente pugliese fosse coinvolto nel delitto. Il mio convincimento era dettato esclusivamente dalle informazioni che venivano fornite da parte degli inquirenti. Un castello di accuse che sembrava inattaccabile. Il mio errore fu quello di credere a tutto ciò che gli stessi investigatori mi fornivano in materia di informazioni. Non avevo la controprova degli atti. L'elemento determinante fu quando il pm Mignini ( che pur convinto che Mez fosse stata uccisa dopo un'orgia non chiese l'esame delle tracce biologiche sul cuscino vicino al corpo della vittima ) ci racconto' che Amanda nell'attesa di essere interrogata confido' alle amiche di Mez che era stata uccisa con un taglio alla gola. Come poteva saperlo se non aveva mai visto il corpo? Era dunque la prova che la studentessa stesse mentendo e che avesse partecipato al delitto. Quando pero' alla prima udienza del processo i volontari del 118 raccontarono che erano stati loro ad informare Amanda e Raffaele di come fosse stata uccisa Meredith iniziai a capire che ci avevano raccontato una marea di informazioni 'pilotate' a cui seguirono molte altre. La contaminazione del gancetto del reggiseno è la punta dell'Icerberg. Dopo 46 giorni duranti i quali in quella stanza entrarono tutti e di tutto come poteva non essere contaminato il gancetto? E quelle immagini girate dalla Scientifica sul rinvenimento a distanza del gancetto? Roba da film comico se non fosse per la drammatica vicenda di Meredith. Come potevo credere che uomini dello Stato potessero giungere a tanto? La risposta è' arrivata qualche anno dopo con molti di questi uomini e donne in divisa che sono stati rimossi dai loro incarichi.Ora attendo che le scuse ufficiali siano pronunciate da una sentenza mercoledì prossimo. Sarebbe il giusto riconoscimento ad un ragazzo al quale sono stati tolti 8 anni della propria vita.

Google:

For the first time since i have been following cases of record i feel obliged to do an apology to one of the Suspects. In this case it comes to raffaele sollecito. In november 2007 i followed on behalf of the tg5 the murder of meredith kercher and from the early Days i had become convinced that the young then student pugliese was involved in crime. My conviction was dictated exclusively by the information that were provided by the investigators. A castle of charges that seemed airtight. My mistake was to believe everything that the same investigators they provided me with in the field of information . i did not have the controprova acts. The deciding factor was when the pm mignini ( although convinced that mez had been killed after a Orgy not churches the examination of biological evidence on the pillow next to the body of the victim ) told us ' that amanda while waiting to be questioned i trust ' to the friends of mez that she was killed with A cut the throat. How could you know that if he had never seen the body? It was so proof that the student was lying and that had participated in the crime. When but to the first hearing of the process the volunteers from 118 they told that had been to them Inform amanda and raffaele of as had been killed meredith started to realize that we were told a lot of Information ' also be fraudulent ' to which followed many others. The contamination of the bra clasp is the tip of the icerberg. After 46 days during whichgenerous in that room entered everyone and everything how could it not be Contaminated the gancetto? And those images turn by the scientific on finding distance of the gancetto? Stuff from comedy movie if it were not for the tragic fate of meredith. How could i believe that men of the state could achieve so much? The answer is ' arrived a few years later with many of these men and women in uniform that have been Removed from their posts. Now i am waiting for the apology officers are made by a judgment next wednesday. It would be the right recognition to a boy to which were taken out 8 years of their lives.

Here's a human translation:

For the errors and horrors committed in this story, the investigators and judges should be removed. Incredibly the Appeal Court of Florence transformed a shoe print into a woman’s bare foot print and they actually attributed Sollecito’s DNA being on a knife when no expert report ever reported it.

For the first time since following murder cases I feel the obligation to apologize to one of the accused. In this specific case I’m referring to Raffaele Sollecito. In November of 2007 I followed the Meredith Kercher murder case through the news program TG5 and from the first days I developed the conviction that the young man and then student from Puglia was involved in the crime. My conviction came exclusively from the information that was being provided by the investigators. It was a castle of accusations that seemed insurmountable. My error was to believe all the information that those investigators provided to me. I didn’t have the counterproof of the evidence. The decisive element was when the Prosecutor Mignini (who though convinced that Mez had been killed after an orgy, didn’t ask for the analysis of biological traces left on the pillow near the victim’s body) told us that Amanda, while waiting to be questioned confided to Mez’s friends that she had been killed by having her throat slit. How could she know that if she hadn’t seen the body? It was therefore the proof that the student was lying and that she had participated in the murder. However, when the volunteers of 118 [Emergency Medical Services] told us in the first hearing of the trial that they had informed Amanda and Raffaele how Meredith had been murdered, I started to understand that they had recounted to us a heap of manipulated facts of which many more were to follow. The contamination of the bra clasp is the tip of the iceberg. After 46 days during which everybody and everything entered that room, how could that clasp not be contaminated? And those videos aired by the Scientific Police of the late discovery of the clasp? It would be making of comedy film if it hadn’t been a dramatic case about Meredith. How could I believe that public officials could stoop so low? The answer arrived a few years later when many of these men and women in uniform were removed from their positions. Now I expect that the official apologies will be pronounced in the sentence next Wednesday. It would be the right acknowledgement to a young man who has had 8 years of his life taken from him.

 

[Numbers]

Massei never stated that the defendants were "normal", this is you making up stuff, as you well know and as I reminded you many times.

Judges are not tasked to tell about defendants' health conditions - unless expert reports are ordered to that purpose - and Massei court never cared about whether the defendants were "normal". They only noted if charachters had qualities that may make them entitled to generic mitigation.

The individuals in this case who are not normal are the Italian police, prosecutors such as Mignini, and a number of judges: Massei, Nencini, and Chieffi among them. By not normal, I mean they hold positions in the police or the judiciary but do not know or obey the laws of their own country, including the human rights laws of the ECHR. So their abilities to read, to learn, or to reason must be impaired. Such impairments should make them ineligible to serve in those roles, yet they continue to do so. Possibly Italy has a shortage of persons who can fulfill those roles who are of normal ability to read, to learn, or to reason, and that explains the presence of individuals who cannot follow the law in such sensitive positions that require the skill to follow the law and to serve as police or judge.

 

[Bill Williams]

Massei never stated that the defendants were "normal", this is you making up stuff, as you well know and as I reminded you many times.

Judges are not tasked to tell about defendants' health conditions - unless expert reports are ordered to that purpose - and Massei court never cared about whether the defendants were "normal". They only noted if charachters had qualities that may make them entitled to generic mitigation.

Machiavelli - you have to stop this. Massei described them as normal young adults, who in his view only became "abnormal" when they made a choice for evil to assist Rudy in his lust. An inexplicable choice, which Massei said could only be explained (not by abnormality) but by their drug use.

Otherwise there is nothing in the Massei report at all which suggests anything remotely as severe as you quoted Mignini saying.

You summarized Mignini as saying that, "Knox had a psychological profile of a "humiliated/wounded self," an abnormal psychological assessment.

Massei must have rejected Mignini's sexualized fantasies or he would have included it in his report.

You are simply playing with words, and always have.

 

[kwill]

Specifically, Sophie Purton stated on Nov. 08. 2007 that there were "many things of Amanda that Meredith didn't like", and in Feb 2009 she stated that Meredith felt annoyed by some things, one topic she remembers well is of Amanda's bathroom habits.

Amy Frost on Nov. 08. pointed out that Meredith was annoyed by the fact that she had found toilet paper dirty with menstrual blood and had to tell her to be more careful because she really couldn't stand that, and mentioned again the habit of not flushing the toilet.

Robyn Butterworth on Nov. 08. declared that Meredith and Amanda had a discussion because the latter had the habit of not flushing the toilet not even when she had her period. Therefore Robyn said she was stunned when she heard Knox commenting repeatedly about "****" in the toilet at the police station.

This testimony goes to Meredith's feelings about Amanda. Where is the testimony that says Amanda resented Meredith? Where is the evidence that Amanda even knew Meredith was talking to her English friends about Amanda?

Just one witness, or diary entry, or letter home, or email, or carrier pigeon, or smoke signal . . . just one. You don't get to say that because Meredith clearly talked a little smack about Amanda behind her back, Amanda must have known it and been angry about it.

 

[kwill]

Here's a human translation:

For the errors and horrors committed in this story, the investigators and judges should be removed. Incredibly the Appeal Court of Florence transformed a shoe print into a woman’s bare foot print and they actually attributed Sollecito’s DNA being on a knife when no expert report ever reported it.

For the first time since following murder cases I feel the obligation to apologize to one of the accused. In this specific case I’m referring to Raffaele Sollecito. In November of 2007 I followed the Meredith Kercher murder case through the news program TG5 and from the first days I developed the conviction that the young man and then student from Puglia was involved in the crime. My conviction came exclusively from the information that was being provided by the investigators. It was a castle of accusations that seemed insurmountable. My error was to believe all the information that those investigators provided to me. I didn’t have the counterproof of the evidence. The decisive element was when the Prosecutor Mignini (who though convinced that Mez had been killed after an orgy, didn’t ask for the analysis of biological traces left on the pillow near the victim’s body) told us that Amanda, while waiting to be questioned confided to Mez’s friends that she had been killed by having her throat slit. How could she know that if she hadn’t seen the body? It was therefore the proof that the student was lying and that she had participated in the murder. However, when the volunteers of 118 [Emergency Medical Services] told us in the first hearing of the trial that they had informed Amanda and Raffaele how Meredith had been murdered, I started to understand that they had recounted to us a heap of manipulated facts of which many more were to follow. The contamination of the bra clasp is the tip of the iceberg. After 46 days during which everybody and everything entered that room, how could that clasp not be contaminated? And those videos aired by the Scientific Police of the late discovery of the clasp? It would be making of comedy film if it hadn’t been a dramatic case about Meredith. How could I believe that public officials could stoop so low? The answer arrived a few years later when many of these men and women in uniform were removed from their positions. Now I expect that the official apologies will be pronounced in the sentence next Wednesday. It would be the right acknowledgement to a young man who has had 8 years of his life taken from him.

His pen to God's ears.

 

[ericparoissien]

Machiavelli - you have to stop this. Massei described them as normal young adults, who in his view only became "abnormal" when they made a choice for evil to assist Rudy in his lust. An inexplicable choice, which Massei said could only be explained (not by abnormality) but by their drug use.

Agreed: young, a bit wild, took drugs, but we have to account for the diversity of human beings and their psychology before sending the "pathology" signal that would reduce the responsibility of one's acts.

 

[ericparoissien]

After 46 days during which everybody and everything entered that room, how could that clasp not be contaminated?

This doesn't make sense, the correct wording is:

After 46 days during which everybody and everything entered that room, how could that clasp not be dirty/dusty(if you wish)?

Contamination is a rare process, one star among billions. The logic above is like saying, "I'm a young beautiful teenage girl, how come for my 18th birthday i haven't received a love letter from a celebrity actor.