Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[NancyS]

Another edition of Radio 4's The Report covering the case is due for broadcast on Thursday:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jkr1q

I think this will be a follow up to the previous episode they did (rather than a repeat with amendments), as I got some insider info on this and know the producer was planning to make another one once the ISC had made a decision. I don't think she was expecting this decision, so it will be interesting to hear the new programme! The last one was pretty pro-innocence.

I'll definitely listen - I remember the last show being reasonably balanced (especially after the BBC3 nonsense), although it was still going on about Raffaele phoning the police after the arrival of the postal police - and gave a surprising amount of airtime to Guede's lawyer.

 

[TruthCalls]

If there is anything to that at all, that 'pressure' probably amounted to little more than 'we'll call fraud.'

I still wanna see those EDFs released, dammit. Now that there could be no possible tactical reason for them to keep them concealed, what is keeping them from being released? If Maresca and the Kerchers are serious about questioning the police and Italy about other attackers wouldn't the obvious first step be demanding the release of the entirety of the DNA work so it could be determined if there were other possible suspects?

I'd love to see just one of those reporters ask the Kerchers or Maresca this, perhaps as a follow-up to the question: 'what exactly is the evidence that leads you to conclude there were any other attackers in the first place?'

There isn't any (evidence of other attackers) so it must be they bought into Massei's argument despite six of seven expert witnesses claiming the injuries were consistent or compatible with a lone attacker. It's the same up and down this case. Why not ask them about 36B, all the tests that proved it wasn't Meredith's DNA, and why do they still think it was. How about the Luminol print logic of "it must be because what else could it be?" or maybe get their take on Curatolo's contradictory testimony or Quintavalle's change of heart a year later.

If I were to fault the Kercher' it would be because they never seemed to question any of the utterly questionable "evidence" in this case. They did not behave, IMHO, as people who demanded to know the truth.

 

[lonepinealex]

I'll definitely listen - I remember the last show being reasonably balanced (especially after the BBC3 nonsense), although it was still going on about Raffaele phoning the police after the arrival of the postal police - and gave a surprising amount of airtime to Guede's lawyer.

Yeah I'm hoping this will be an actual new programme, but the turnaround is short so it'll probably be some sort of reversion with the new info added. Hopefully some new analysis and comment though!

The last one was by no means perfect, but it was about as balanced as the mainstream media got and IIRC concluded that the convictions were probably unsafe.

 

[acbytesla]

On the contrary. Please point out the sentences that made no sense.

Thank you for being kind. But I edit them as soon as I see my glaring errors. (actually the tablet's errors)

 

[Anode]

I dunno. You're never the "victim" when you do the right thing. Just because there are consequences (unfair as they may be) to doing the right thing, doesn't make one a victim.

Seems that doing the right thing regardless is the way to avoid being a victim. The consequences can be harsh and unfair, but the way to avoid being a victim is to say, "screw the consequences".

Read Raffaele's book, and the riff he has on "turning the other cheek." He rejected that "turning the other cheek" was passive acceptance of one's lot. For him he realized it was the purest form of resistance to the evil being done to him. He said with no words, "You will not define me."

Point taken. Perhaps "victim" was the wrong word. My feelings are that Hellmann and Raffaele are cut from the same cloth. Both willing to accept consequences, no matter how dour, for doing the right thing.

 

[platonov]

Serious question: why do you keep calling her Britney? Nobody named Britney is the topic of this thread. Is it a typo, or what?

If you were familiar with these threads the reasons for its usage would be clear.
My posts on page 62 or 63 of the previous thread should provide the explanation you seek.

I suspect however you won’t like it.

 

[platonov]

One Q remains perhaps – can a few more dollars be made or has the gravy train that was MK’s murder run its course.
There might be a market for the images of the victims naked corpse. Given the nature of Britney’s fan base it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility.

Actually, based upon your posts, it appears that the only ones who have any interest in Ms. Kercher's naked corpse are hard core guilters and the Kercher family's lawyer, Maresca. You might want to distance yourself from Maresca these days.

What – I was referring to the images of the victim in the possession of AK’s fans.
And why should I ‘distance myself’ from Maresca, whatever that means

I was only joking when I hinted that I was ‘The mayor of Perugia’ or an ‘Italian cop’
Or do you think I am a member of the Kercher family. Is that it?
Bizarre.


But no more bizarre than the underlying argument; That it’s appropriate that gentlemen of a certain age who are devoted fans of a woman convicted of sexual assault/murder should have possession of these images of the victim whilst their use in an actual criminal trial by the lawyer representing the victims family is not.
That argument rather neatly encapsulates the nature of the campaign.

 

[Kaosium]

There isn't any (evidence of other attackers) so it must be they bought into Massei's argument despite six of seven expert witnesses claiming the injuries were consistent or compatible with a lone attacker. It's the same up and down this case. Why not ask them about 36B, all the tests that proved it wasn't Meredith's DNA, and why do they still think it was. How about the Luminol print logic of "it must be because what else could it be?" or maybe get their take on Curatolo's contradictory testimony or Quintavalle's change of heart a year later.

If I were to fault the Kercher' it would be because they never seemed to question any of the utterly questionable "evidence" in this case. They did not behave, IMHO, as people who demanded to know the truth.

A good portion of that blame falls on Maresca, but also PMF/TJMK for running a painfully dishonest propaganda campaign complete with a false wiki to fool the unwary--and validate the beliefs of the Kerchers who may well have stared into that abyss like so much of the media has been doing lately.

 

[acbytesla]

I think a real analysis of how misinformation proliferates in the media and how forums and social networking reinforce those misimpressions. I'd love to see a scholarly article examine this in detail. I'd take it up, but I'm not very scholarly.

 

[Diocletus]

I still wanna see those EDFs released, dammit. Now that there could be no possible tactical reason for them to keep them concealed, what is keeping them from being released? If Maresca and the Kerchers are serious about questioning the police and Italy about other attackers wouldn't the obvious first step be demanding the release of the entirety of the DNA work so it could be determined if there were other possible suspects?

Word is that they are going to be made available any day now. In fact, the were all sent over Hillary Clinton's email server for safe keeping.

 

[RoseMontague]

Oh, erm, wow. This just in from "Yummi":


Sources confirm that the has been a direct intervention from political forces. The ploy was Bruno within the panel, while Marasca tried to resist for several hours.

The interference came from the American Embassy, and the power who enforced it is the Italian Partito Democratico.

The problem was not to embarrass the Democratic candidate at the next presidential elections.

There are two people, one American and one Italian, who worked to the solution, and they are people related to US intelligence. The political interference is similar under some aspects to the Shalabayeva affair, but more extended and complex.


All I will say by way of comment is that those look like incredibly serious accusations of massive corruption. Not only is it alleged here that the most senior level of the Italian judiciary was susceptible to extreme corruption from other parts of the Italian Government, but also that the Italian Government and US Government were acting in concert to corrupt the Italian Supreme Court in order to meet US Government demands.

I certainly hope that "Yummi" can support these incredible accusations with reliable evidence. I guess we might soon find out...........

All this from a country that won't pick up the phone and call when a Marine is rotting in a jail in Mexico and from an Embassy that failed to even do their duty when this American was charged. I thought that according to the experts over there, the US wasn't even going to fight an extradition. I'll add this to list of wild Conspiracy Theories from this poster. Just more of the same, Let's Pretend. At least it's a change from the Hellmann bribed by US media people with the help of the evil Masons.

 

[acbytesla]

What – I was referring to the images of the victim in the possession of AK’s fans.
And why should I ‘distance myself’ from Maresca, whatever that means

I was only joking when I hinted that I was ‘The mayor of Perugia’ or an ‘Italian cop’
Or do you think I am a member of the Kercher family. Is that it?
Bizarre.


But no more bizarre than the underlying argument; That it’s appropriate that gentlemen of a certain age who are devoted fans of a woman convicted of sexual assault/murder should have possession of these images of the victim whilst their use in an actual criminal trial by the lawyer representing the victims family is not.
That argument rather neatly encapsulates the nature of the campaign.

Again, you should now keep in mind that Ananda Knox in fact is NOT..I repeat NOT CONVICTED of sexual assault/murder. I expect that from now on, you will refrain from usin this language.

 

[carbonjam72]

Ok, I'm sorry..... I should have limited the pool of correct-analyzers to those who are the hero of upcoming mediocre Winterbottom films.

When you can post of picture of yourself between Kate Beckinsale and Cara Delevingne, we will start showing you the respect you (obviously) deserve!!!

Does using photoshop count?

 

[TruthCalls]

A good portion of that blame falls on Maresca, but also PMF/TJMK for running a painfully dishonest propaganda campaign complete with a false wiki to fool the unwary--and validate the beliefs of the Kerchers who may well have stared into that abyss like so much of the media has been doing lately.

Agreed. Arline said in her statement (referring to Guede);

"His sentence made it clear he did not act alone," she said. "Who was with him that night?"

She (they) can not get beyond the belief that there were multiple attackers. No doubt PMF/TJMK had a significant impact on public perception but still it comes down Micheli ruling Guede did not act alone and the Kercher' apparently inability to reconcile this with the facts of the case.

 

[RoseMontague]

If you were familiar with these threads the reasons for its usage would be clear.
My posts on page 62 or 63 of the previous thread should provide the explanation you seek.

I suspect however you won’t like it.

I see we are still missing tags on this thread. Maybe they will add that one.

 

[Kaosium]

It changes words..doesn't really understand contractions or possessive nouns, and corrects proper names. I try and make sure I'm not making mistakes...but inevitably I read a previous post and see sentences that make no sense at all. I keep expecting someone to mock me...but thankfully, most of you are giving me a break.

Heh, I was re-reading a few of my old posts and noticed some painfully embarrassing brain-farts. I don't even have the excuse of it being the equipment I use to post, my brain or my fingers did it all by themselves! Part of that is when I sit here posting I might be listening to music and I lose my train of thought when I have to start a new song, (or something else distracts me) and I end up mixing up what I was saying, but another part is probably that I have made these same arguments so many times the last four years my brain is tired of it, perhaps it's rebelling!

Apologies for sometimes mailing it in, I've been off my game recently. Here are two cringeworthy ones I'd like to correct:

Then post the cite. I know the prosecution must have rebutted, I also know Massei didn't see fit to include it. He did that a lot with dubious prosecution statements and arguments, the idiocy that Raffaele called 1-1-2 before the Carabineri got there didn't get anything more than a parenthetical aside.

That should read '...the idiocy that Raffaele called 1-1-2 after the Postales got there.'

and:

She could not have determined that the luminol hits were 'false negatives' without a confirmatory test and those weren't done--or if they were those also were omitted and never discovered.

'...TMB tests were false negatives...' I also misunderstood Machiavelli's point, but I think I covered that later.

 

[Kauffer]

What – I was referring to the images of the victim in the possession of AK’s fans.
And why should I ‘distance myself’ from Maresca, whatever that means

I was only joking when I hinted that I was ‘The mayor of Perugia’ or an ‘Italian cop’
Or do you think I am a member of the Kercher family. Is that it?Bizarre.


But no more bizarre than the underlying argument; That it’s appropriate that gentlemen of a certain age who are devoted fans of a woman convicted of sexual assault/murder should have possession of these images of the victim whilst their use in an actual criminal trial by the lawyer representing the victims family is not.
That argument rather neatly encapsulates the nature of the campaign.

You can't be. They, as we know, only maintain a 'dignified silence'.

 

[Kaosium]

Word is that they are going to be made available any day now. In fact, the were all sent over Hillary Clinton's email server for safe keeping.

Heh, wouldn't it be nice if someone would ask one of them about it? Especially considering how their lawyer, the jackal Maresca, supported the prosecution in keeping so much data secret and refusing to do more tests while they kept telling the press how they just wanted the truth?

How about testing that semen stain now? Wouldn't you think that would have to be a first step if they're looking for additional attackers?

 

[Strozzi]

Yes, they obviously believed that there was never going to be enough evidence to convict, even if they sent the case back yet again.

Guilters should blame Stefanoni for being in the pay if the Masons and CIA and throwing the case! If only she had not deliberately destroyed the bra clasp to prevent further testing by storing it in a fluid-filled tube, we could have it retested and find out for sure that it had Raf's DNA on it along with another male accomplice and two female accomplices. The authorities could have bagged the lot, if it were not for Stefanoni deliberately destroying this key piece of evidence!

 

[Diocletus]

Ohhhh no you weren't. Long before you showed up, Mr Johnny-come-lately, quite a few of us were over there bright and early of a Tuesday morning to cross swords with the enemy. Let's see: me, Rose, geebee2 and others I momentarily forget.

Well, I'm glad we can't help them out anymore--will probably keep us from getting accidentally swept into the lawsuit.