Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[MichaelB]

Which makes that website seem even more pointless and vindictive.

I don't really care one way or the other. I just saw the blog and posted it like I post other blogs and articles everyday.

If you feel that strongly about peoples images on some website then go over to PMF and tell them to remove all the ones of supporters in their "gallery".

 

[anglolawyer]

And from Sallyoo over at the cesspit:

http://www.prounblock.me/index.php?...1bWJyaWEuaXQvZ3J1cHBvZWRpdG9yaWFsZXVtYnJpYS8=

Mignini: "I have never seen two sentences like this from the Cassazione"
"The case is over, but we wait for the motivations to find out what reasoning the judges used".
"The case is finished, we wait for the motivations of this decision which it is difficult to put into context from the judicial point of view. (...difficilmente inquadrabile dal punto di visto giuridico.)""

Mignini reminds us that of the 45 judges (lay and togaed, all processes) who have made decisions on the case, 34 of them found the defendants guilty. Mignini: "For the public it is (always) difficult to understand the overturning of judicial decisions, but in this case we have two sentences issued by two different sections of the Cassazione which are in open conflict. I have never come across anything like this in my career."

"This is unique, a conflict within the same process. (c'è un fatto unico, un conflitto nello stesso processo). How is it possible that in the same Court of Cassation one section can be so far away from another? One (section) sent the case back to Florence after annulling the appeal held in Perugia which they (the section) considered inadequate; the second (section) annulled this Florence appeal sentence which had addressed all the of the concerns expressed by the previous section. We shall see in the motivations report what route these judges took."

How does he get to that number? Massei is what, 8? Nencini another 8? I make that 16. Is he perhaps counting Matteini, Micheli and Chieffi none of whom found them guilty. And what a stupid point anyway. It's like the occasional claim that a majority in Italy think they're guilty. So what? Maybe a PGP can help me with the maths here.

 

[Strawberry]

Well I think it's needless stirring that adds nothing to the debate and puts whoever created it in a morally questionable position.

Raffaele's lawyers don't need any help sueing people who defame him, which is apparently not what that site is for anyway (since it's called Amanda Knox Haters).

It seems especially pointless when it's followed up by a load of posts claiming that many of the haters have shut up shop anyway.

Maybe it'll serve as a little warning to anybody thinking of copying them.

 

[anglolawyer]

It's necessary.

It makes 'us' look like 'them', a perception which should be avoided at almost any cost IMO.

 

[lonepinealex]

I don't really care one way or the other. I just saw the blog and posted it like I post other blogs and articles everyday.

If you feel that strongly about peoples images on some website then go over to PMF and tell them to remove all the ones of supporters in their "gallery".

I couldn't give a monkeys about PMF or any of those nutter sites. I'm just disappointed that someone's gone for the tit for tat approach - seems undignified and unnecessary in victory.

I wasn't accusing you of being behind it btw, I appreciate your updates and links very much

 

[Diocletus]

Well I think it's needless stirring that adds nothing to the debate and puts whoever created it in a morally questionable position.

Raffaele's lawyers don't need any help sueing people who defame him, which is apparently not what that site is for anyway (since it's called Amanda Knox Haters).

It seems especially pointless when it's followed up by a load of posts claiming that many of the haters have shut up shop anyway.

Well, it is what it is, and the site is there. For purposes of this board, I see no problem with a link to publicly-available information relevant to a topic that has been discussed on this board many times and is the subject of major media/publication scrutiny: Time Magazine

 

[Diocletus]

It makes 'us' look like 'them', a perception which should be avoided at almost any cost IMO.

I don't think so. I can easily distinguish us from them. It's as simple as right and wrong.

 

[Diocletus]

And from Sallyoo over at the cesspit:

http://www.prounblock.me/index.php?...1bWJyaWEuaXQvZ3J1cHBvZWRpdG9yaWFsZXVtYnJpYS8=

Mignini: "I have never seen two sentences like this from the Cassazione"
"The case is over, but we wait for the motivations to find out what reasoning the judges used".
"The case is finished, we wait for the motivations of this decision which it is difficult to put into context from the judicial point of view. (...difficilmente inquadrabile dal punto di visto giuridico.)""

Mignini reminds us that of the 45 judges (lay and togaed, all processes) who have made decisions on the case, 34 of them found the defendants guilty. Mignini: "For the public it is (always) difficult to understand the overturning of judicial decisions, but in this case we have two sentences issued by two different sections of the Cassazione which are in open conflict. I have never come across anything like this in my career."

"This is unique, a conflict within the same process. (c'è un fatto unico, un conflitto nello stesso processo). How is it possible that in the same Court of Cassation one section can be so far away from another? One (section) sent the case back to Florence after annulling the appeal held in Perugia which they (the section) considered inadequate; the second (section) annulled this Florence appeal sentence which had addressed all the of the concerns expressed by the previous section. We shall see in the motivations report what route these judges took."

Keep talkin' Mig.

Wouldn't it be something if the ISC's motivation report has an aside to the effect that you failed to conduct a proper investigation of Knox's slapping allegation.

 

[anglolawyer]

I don't think so. I can easily distinguish us from them. It's as simple as right and wrong.

You can and I can but neutral onlookers (the court of public opinion) cannot. What exactly is the objective served by this vilification?

 

[lonepinealex]

You can and I can but neutral onlookers (the court of public opinion) cannot. What exactly is the objective served by this vilification?

I think the objective is "ner ner ner-ner ner".

 

[carbonjam72]

And from Sallyoo over at the cesspit:

http://www.prounblock.me/index.php?...1bWJyaWEuaXQvZ3J1cHBvZWRpdG9yaWFsZXVtYnJpYS8=

Mignini: "I have never seen two sentences like this from the Cassazione"
"The case is over, but we wait for the motivations to find out what reasoning the judges used".
"The case is finished, we wait for the motivations of this decision which it is difficult to put into context from the judicial point of view. (...difficilmente inquadrabile dal punto di visto giuridico.)""

Mignini reminds us that of the 45 judges (lay and togaed, all processes) who have made decisions on the case, 34 of them found the defendants guilty. Mignini: "For the public it is (always) difficult to understand the overturning of judicial decisions, but in this case we have two sentences issued by two different sections of the Cassazione which are in open conflict. I have never come across anything like this in my career."

"This is unique, a conflict within the same process. (c'è un fatto unico, un conflitto nello stesso processo). How is it possible that in the same Court of Cassation one section can be so far away from another? One (section) sent the case back to Florence after annulling the appeal held in Perugia which they (the section) considered inadequate; the second (section) annulled this Florence appeal sentence which had addressed all the of the concerns expressed by the previous section. We shall see in the motivations report what route these judges took."

Is there a source on where these quotes from Mignini came from? I haven't seen anyone interview Mignini anywhere, and of course the look on his face must be similar to the look on his face at the last acquittal before Hellman.

 

[anglolawyer]

I think the objective is "ner ner ner-ner ner".

And irresistibly tempting that is, too, but it should not be done by descending to their level.

 

[Diocletus]

You can and I can but neutral onlookers (the court of public opinion) cannot. What exactly is the objective served by this vilification?

I can't speak for the author's objective, but it seems to me that the objective is to make people understand that they are personally responsible and answerable for their conduct, and thus hopefully tamp down the ongoing defamation/smear campaign against two innocent people.

 

[Sergei Walankov]

If we've learned nothing else from this - and it would seem some haven't - it's that it's not the job of online mobs to take it upon themselves to dispense justice.

 

[Diocletus]

If we've learned nothing else from this - and it would seem some haven't - it's that it's not the job of online mobs to take it upon themselves to dispense justice.

Right. Except no one is purporting to dispense justice. I think the Sollecitos will take care of that part.

 

[lonepinealex]

And irresistibly tempting that is, too, but it should not be done by descending to their level.

It's always more fun to heap burning coals on their heads by pretending to be magnanimous anyway

 

[platonov]

Given that the much of the activities of the Knox groupies involves attacking the victim, her family, friends, trial witnesses etc it’s hardly a surprise that they attack pro victim posters.

Par for the course and nothing new.

 

[platonov]

No I think that's unfair. It would be fair to say there's something rotten in the state (sic) of Perugia, but not the whole of Italy.

Neither Rome nor Florence is in Perugia, nor indeed in Umbria.

C’mon even a stupid black person like PL knows that.

 

[platonov]

That’s a turn up

Hopefully we'll never have to hear from Lumumba again.

http://www.fanpage.it/lumumba-amanda-e-colpevole-se-la-incontrassi-le-chiederei-i-soldi/

‘Fans of woman who falsely accused black guy of rape/murder and did time for it never want to hear from him again’

I am shocked.

 

[Strawberry]

Well, it is what it is, and the site is there. For purposes of this board, I see no problem with a link to publicly-available information relevant to a topic that has been discussed on this board many times and is the subject of major media/publication scrutiny: Time Magazine

So the mods at PMF and TJMK were sending threatening e mails to a journalist - how surprising. Not.