Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[LondonJohn]

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.

Show evidence of "the Knox groupies" (by which I assume you mean pro-acquittal/pro-innocence commentators for Knox and Sollecito) attacking the victim, her family, friends, trial witnesses etc.

Your views are disgusting, nasty and incorrect.

 

[LondonJohn]

‘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.

Explain exactly why you felt it necessary to include the descriptor "black" in this post.

 

[LondonJohn]

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

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

Explain exactly why you felt it necessary to use the descriptor "black" in this post.

 

[Bill Williams]

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.

In fairness, Nencini's tribunal should at least hold 1 in dissent. Not sure if that dissent was registered or recorded, or even just after-the-fact.

The poll which counts is the 5-0 vote in Section 5, unless someone can show that it was 3-2.

 

[Bill Williams]

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?

I can assure you, we're all seen as nutcases, on both sides. It was said to me that the real difference between the two sets of nutcases was that one side turned out to be right, and the other side was just literally insane.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

FBI investigation into threats

Lawyers on Strike has a post that is pertinent to a discussion of on-line threats. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the Mirror article to which LoS linked.

 

[Bill Williams]

Wow. No, me neither.



Agreed.

At the very least all of us should consider a reset button as of about 2300 hours GMT, March 27, 2015. The admins of some of the sites "over there" recognized this and posted warnings about the sea-change for them and potential libel issues.

It may be time for a reset button. Get screen-shots of actual actionable stuff, rather than irritants.

 

[LondonJohn]

Another interesting insight into pro-guilt logic, this time from "Thoughtful":

Richard thinks, like Greggy, that the DNA evidence should be discounted. Though I don't agree, I do accept that as a premise since like most people here I believe that the evidence is strong even without the DNA.

The inference here is absolutely clear. The use of the word "since" shows that "Thoughtful" is basing her acceptance of a) the idea that the DNA evidence in the case is worthless on b) the separate factor of whether there is (in her view) other strong evidence of guilt. It implies, in other words, that had there been no other "strong" (in her view) evidence, this would have changed the way she viewed the DNA evidence, to the degree that she would not have been prepared to accept the premise that it was flawed and inadmissible.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a pretty good definition of irrational, unsceptical thinking. However one considers the value of the DNA evidence, it should not in any way be contingent upon whether or not one thinks there is other strong evidence of guilt. I'm still a touch shocked at the heavy irony of this view of "Thoughtful" being written in the context of the organisation of an academic conference on the role of mathematics in forensic science.............

 

[LondonJohn]

At the very least all of us should consider a reset button as of about 2300 hours GMT, March 27, 2015. The admins of some of the sites "over there" recognized this and posted warnings about the sea-change for them and potential libel issues.

It may be time for a reset button. Get screen-shots of actual actionable stuff, rather than irritants.

21.40 GMT actually.

And I don't think it's the business of people such as us to "get screen shots of actionable stuff". I think the most that it's the business of people such as us is to be sure that Knox and Sollecito and their legal teams are aware of the possibility of defamation through these channels, and let the legal people do the monitoring and screen-shotting as they see fit.

 

[NancyS]

I can assure you, we're all seen as nutcases, on both sides. It was said to me that the real difference between the two sets of nutcases was that one side turned out to be right, and the other side was just literally insane.

) I do agree with this, the Internet does make people a bit bonkers and there was more than a little of this on both sides.

Although I do think there is something different between questioning a potential miscarriage of justice - and demanding that someone you don't know be punished

 

[analemma]

At the very least all of us should consider a reset button as of about 2300 hours GMT, March 27, 2015. The admins of some of the sites "over there" recognized this and posted warnings about the sea-change for them and potential libel issues.

It may be time for a reset button. Get screen-shots of actual actionable stuff, rather than irritants.

Bill,
Perhaps we should discuss the reset button.
I noticed that the Admin of "Another Blog" site announced that the thread would be closing at noon today to conclude discussion of the case.

 

[Diocletus]

At the very least all of us should consider a reset button as of about 2300 hours GMT, March 27, 2015. The admins of some of the sites "over there" recognized this and posted warnings about the sea-change for them and potential libel issues.

It may be time for a reset button. Get screen-shots of actual actionable stuff, rather than irritants.

Yes, well, what those people don't realize is that their websites continue to host and thus post all of the actionable statements that have bee published in the past. They are being republished all the time by virtue of the continued accessibility of the old posts on the websites.

I predict that the Sollecitos will have PMF shut down within a month and Rome-based Clander brought up on charges. If Carbonjam agrees, then I think my prediction is probably accurate; however, Bill, if you agree then I may need to rethink things.

 

[Diocletus]

I'm still a touch shocked at the heavy irony of this view of "Thoughtful" being written in the context of the organisation of an academic conference on the role of mathematics in forensic science.............

But she can flip coins!

 

[carbonjam72]

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

I have mixed feelings about this. I see both arguments. I was curious to get a look at these miscreants, then felt guilty for looking.

Ultimately, I think they should be held accountable for their slanders, stalking and threats.

But 'holding them accountable' is the function of the legal authorities in their respective countries, or an interested civil parties. Not random people taking it on them (our) selves.

I also acknowledge LJ's point that if you're trying to ferret out someone's info from the web, its kind of creepy and an invasion of privacy. I think civil rights on the internet is behind the curve actually, and we need more control over our information, not less.

So all in all, I think screen-shotting vile comments and posts, and forwarding or reporting to duly authorized parties is in fact a public service, perhaps even a duty as a good citizen helping to prevent an on-going crime in progress.

But taking the further step of trying to become some self-anointed quasi vigilante service, well then no, I think that's crossing the line.

The internet is open to the world, and sadly as Amanda discovered, there are wolves in disguise lurking in the forest, no one should have to be exposed to that fear and those nut bags.

Do I hope they get sued and prosecuted? You Betcha. But society means we believe in the rule of law, and not try to take it into our own hands. Tht's what they do, and its wrong. imo -

 

[Bill Williams]

At the very least all of us should consider a reset button as of about 2300 hours GMT, March 27, 2015. The admins of some of the sites "over there" recognized this and posted warnings about the sea-change for them and potential libel issues.

It may be time for a reset button. Get screen-shots of actual actionable stuff, rather than irritants.

21.40 GMT actually.

And I don't think it's the business of people such as us to "get screen shots of actionable stuff". I think the most that it's the business of people such as us is to be sure that Knox and Sollecito and their legal teams are aware of the possibility of defamation through these channels, and let the legal people do the monitoring and screen-shotting as they see fit.

LJ - isn't that second paragraph what I said?

As for the 80 minute time-lag. That allows for the reality to set in..... I still cannot believe it, really. I even ventured up from here in the basement at my mother's, and noticed I hadn't changed my housecoat in three years. (I also hadn't realized that Obama had won the 2012 election! Is David Cameron still cuddling up to the Lib-Dems?)

 

[lonepinealex]

) I do agree with this, the Internet does make people a bit bonkers and there was more than a little of this on both sides.

Good old 386.

 

[lonepinealex]

LJ - isn't that second paragraph what I said?

As for the 80 minute time-lag. That allows for the reality to set in..... I still cannot believe it, really. I even ventured up from here in the basement at my mother's, and noticed I hadn't changed my housecoat in three years. (I also hadn't realized that Obama had won the 2012 election! Is David Cameron still cuddling up to the Lib-Dems?)

Not while we're heading for an election. They'll be best of friends again on the 8th May.

 

[carbonjam72]

Yes, well, what those people don't realize is that their websites continue to host and thus post all of the actionable statements that have bee published in the past. They are being republished all the time by virtue of the continued accessibility of the old posts on the websites.

I predict that the Sollecitos will have PMF shut down within a month and Rome-based Clander brought up on charges. If Carbonjam agrees, then I think my prediction is probably accurate; however, Bill, if you agree then I may need to rethink things.

Afraid I have to agree, for what its worth. I imagine a flurry of cease and desist letters going out as we type (if they do that sort of thing in Italy), and Raf and GB intentionally picking off any idiots dumb enough to play close to the line in sunny old Italy. They have a case that can't be lost, with the imbeciles footing the legal costs of their own demise - or as lawyers call it, win-win. So yeah, sounds like a sustainable business model, especially if the state fronts the legal costs.

Any die-hard guilters left and active in Italy are likely toast, and will be made examples of, to send a message, and I don't mean a message in Mach's esoteric mafia code.

 

[acbytesla]

Nooo again maybe you're misunderstanding me. Of course, once I concluded that there was a potential miscarriage of justice going on in this case, then of course I had a wish that this would all turn out with acquittals for Knox and Sollecito, and concurrent with that I felt very sad for them and their families for what was happening to them.

What I meant was that any such feelings were strictly generated by an objective, dispassionate analysis of the evidence and the conclusions generated by that analysis. I didn't have any preconceived "need" to think they were guilty or innocent - as, for example, a family member might have a need to think the person was innocent, or someone with other issues might generate a "need" to think the person was guilty.

I didn't really misunderstand you . I feel much as you do. If the evidence for guilt was truly compelling, I would have also been in favor of their conviction and incarceration.
In a minute.

We don't know any of these people so why would any of us ignore credible evidence of their guilt? Because they are attractive? This is the rationale of the guilters. We are all so mesmerized by their looks so we are blind to their guilt. This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard. But that is how they think.

I really do know that you were "emotionally invested in Amanda and Raffaele being acquitted. But that was after you were satisfied that they were actually innocent.

When you have been following the ups and downs of this saga for as long as we have, I can't imagine not empathizing with 2 young people dealing with the torment that they have had to endure.

 

[acbytesla]

Well thanks for taking a crack at it.

The idea is based on Hellman's statement in the CBS article, that once Girlanda made the acquittal a political matter, he "knew the acquittals would be reversed".

Once we accept Hellman's view as accurate, then it follows that a cessation in the underlying political conflict between Burlesconi and the judiciary would naturally pave the way for a reaffirmation of the acquittals, which were unquestionably wholly merited.

The further backstory of a conflict between Mignini & Giuttari attempting to profit from their satanic hoax (by imparting a satanic sect affiliation to fill in the missing motive tying together the wrongfully convicted defendants Vanni and Lotti with Pacciani in the Monster of Florence cases), shows the factors that were constraining the judiciary from moving forwards (fear of undoing the convictions of Vanni and Lotti, the only convictions on record in the MOF crimes), and their intention of pushing back against Mignini in preventing him from ensnaring innocent citizens in his hunt for a non-existant satanic sect in his Narducci trail and this case Kercher case.

In terms of proof, short of recorded conversations, yeah, not likely to surface.

But I do think there's a fairly persuasive circumstantial case to be made, by virtue of the confluence of events. There seems to be a balanced choreography to these cases, the verdicts (Narducci Florence 20 and Hellman reversals in March 2013), and their proximity to one another (Burlesconi appeal- in 2014 - and final acquittal just in the last 2 weeks for his underage sex case). Very odd that they would all cycle through the courts, and come out in paired decisions that seem to tell a story.

Or, maybe I've been reading too many of Mach's posts, which is also a distinct possibility. I have to say about this, my view of a residual "responsible people Italy keeping this all on course" and Mach's view of a deep seated masonic conspiracy are two sides of a coin, much as I hate to admit.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. OTOH, it could all just be a coincidence.