Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Kauffer]

Standard contract for a PR agent.

Do you have any idea whatsoever how utterly fatuous that reply is?

You were asked for evidence for your bizarre allegations of Gogerty Marriott's influence over the press and your response is "Standard contract for a PR agent"!

Do you seriously believe this is an answer to the questions you were asked that provides the proof your allegations are true?

 

[anglolawyer]

Well this is rather the problem, and why i asked for a paragraph from Hellman. Your substituting your own interpretation of Hellman's writing, hides the brilliance of judge Hellman"a reasoning.

Why not just lay out a Hellman paragraph in its original and full form, and then we're all looking at the same thing?

So, still waiting.

Btw, the masons fake police unit in California is a must see, I can only shudder at mâch's take on it.

For my own curiosity, I just re-read Hellman on Curatolo and I frankly don't think quoting the odd paragraph will do. This one would seem to support Vixen:

Moreover, once it is concluded that the reality surrounding [events] was 31 October and not 1 November, it would seem more logical to reconsider the sighting of the two youths in that context, therefore on 31 October, because it is contemporaneous with the sighting, rather than the next day which is the day preceding the arrival of the Scientific Police, but thus necessarily extrapolated from context.

but only if one ignores the rest. The following (concluding) paragraph says:

Therefore, this Court does not consider credible the testimony of witness Curatolo, it being impossible to reliably verify his account [non potendo essere riposte alcun affidamento sulla verificazione dell’espisodio] and, above all, the identification of the two youths as being the current defendants.

The fact that Curatolo wove the disco buses into his story only adds to his unreliability. Hellman does not find he saw them on the 31st or at all. He finds Curatolo was unreliable in general and for a host of reasons. Vixen's approximation is very wide of the mark. Why she seems incapable of copying and pasting the text she thinks supports her 'critique' only she can say. Fear of looking like an idiot probably gas something to do with it.

 

[Katody Matrass]

What? Mignini clearly pointed this out.

Richard Owen
Published at 12:00AM, November 28 2007
Amanda Knox, the American student being investigated over the murder of Meredith Kercher, was definitely at the crime scene and even left a bloody fingerprint, Italian prosecutors said last night.
Giuliano Mignini, the Perugia prosecutor, said that Ms Knox’s blood had been found on a tap in the bathroom despite her alleged attempts to “clean up” all traces of herself.
In a report opposing an appeal by defence lawyers for the release of Ms Knox, 20, from Seattle and her Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito, 23, Mr Mignini said that initial “grave indications of guilt” in both cases had been reinforced during the inquiry.
He said that the pair, who are being held in separate cells and are allowed to have no contact, had made a series of “contradictory and absurd” statements in a tortuous attempt to exonerate themselves during the inquiry into the death of Ms Kercher on November 1.

The citation you added doesn't support your blunder. You need to get your facts straight.

 

[Sonia]

This really is patronising nonsense. The police's job is to investigate the crime, do detective work, gather evidence, interview witnesses and suspects, reconstruct the crime, etc.etc.

They do NOT decide the case. It is up to the prosecutor, and even then, the defense is also heard.

Your claim the multiskilled police force - many of them highly educated, highly trained graduates - are all corrupt incompetents, reveals you to be deluded.

Your arrogance is breathtaking. Either that or you are ignorant as to how the police operate.

Not at all. I know how the police operate. And you have just restated my point. Criminal investigators are supposed to follow the trail of evidence wherever it leads, not put blinders on and look only at what might fit into their personal beliefs. Their personal beliefs are at best a distraction and at worst an ongoing sabotage that runs an investigation off the rails.

For this reason, PLE should have shut up about their beliefs and gotten on with the investigation, instead of leaking their beliefs to muckraking journalists and declaring case closed. For starters, they should have DNA tested all the blood stains downstairs, DNA tested all the stains on Meredith's pillowcase, collected all the data from every CCTV camera in the neighborhood by the end of November 2nd, and preserved the contents of all the hard drives confiscated from Meredith's house and Raffaele's apartment, instead of destroying them. Then the courts would have been able to form a much clearer picture of what happened the night of Nov. 1st.

 

[Kauffer]

It is good research material. Lots of lawyers, historians and journalists scour newspaper archives.

How crass. They don't scour archives in search of factual evidence, when the information in the archives is known to be wrong - when the correct factual evidence is discoverable from impeccable up to date sources.

Still waiting for your witness to Amanda leaving Raffaele's flat at 8:40!

I'll give you some assistance - Richard Owen can't help you

I'll give you even more assistance - check the right sources for the right material. 2007 newspaper reports are useful to an understanding of the history of the case's development. They are not useful as a reliable source of probative material.

 

[Katody Matrass]

+1. A lot of helpful advice for an aspiring journalist in this thread.

 

[RWVBWL]

Got a link?

He did not trouble himself to discover Raf was at his IIRC brother-in-law's graduation party, on 31.10.2007. Doh_!

Hey Vixen,
I've followed the case for years,
and have never read that Raffaele was not at home on the night of Oct. 31, 2007, which was Halloween...

Do you have a link for this information?

For I seem to recall that Raff stayed home that night to work on his thesis...
And I do not seem to recall ever reading that Vanessa Solecito was married at the time...

Feel free to help inform me of this fact...
RW


PS - Here's an old interview with Raff's sister Vanessa:
http://groundreport.com/stolen-dreams-an-interview-with-vanessa-sollecito-2/

 

[Vixen]

Well, of course this is the ridiculous reasoning employed by the Chieffi court to "rehabilitate" Curatolo. The evening that Curatolo refers to in his testimony is clearly 31 October. So, if Raff was provably not there, then the rational conclusion is that the 2 people he claims to have seen were not him and Amanda. So there's no "Hellmann concludes Curatolo must have seen" anyone identifiable.

And, in fact, there is no way he could reliably have claimed to have recognised the 2 students - not on 31 October, not on 1 November. He did not know who they were at the time and had no reason to recognise them.

How would Curatolo have known about the scientific police going in next day?

He accurately described them.

 

[RWVBWL]

Greetings,
I must say that I just luv this discussion between "the tramp" Curatolo(*)
and Judge Massei in the 1st Trial:

MASSEI: And that day. Do you remember if this was the day before the morning that you saw…

CURATOLO: I don’t know if it was Friday or Thursday.

MASSEI: Regardless of whether it was Friday or Thursday, was it November 1st, October 31st, or do you not remember?

CURATOLO: I don’t remember well now.

* * *

Antonio Curatolo was, in my humble opinion, a joke of a witness,
yet pro-guilters still believed him.
Hahahaha...



(*) - I'll betcha that "the tramp" is PM Mignini's,
not my own, description of Antonio Curatolo...

 

[Vixen]

Well this is rather the problem, and why i asked for a paragraph from Hellman. Your substituting your own interpretation of Hellman's writing, hides the brilliance of judge Hellman"a reasoning.

Why not just lay out a Hellman paragraph in its original and full form, and then we're all looking at the same thing?

So, still waiting.

Btw, the masons fake police unit in California is a must see, I can only shudder at mâch's take on it.

Brilliant? In a left field way as cocking a snook at the Establishment, it's hashtag #awesome. Can't deny that.

 

[Vixen]

How crass. They don't scour archives in search of factual evidence, when the information in the archives is known to be wrong - when the correct factual evidence is discoverable from impeccable up to date sources.

Still waiting for your witness to Amanda leaving Raffaele's flat at 8:40!

I'll give you some assistance - Richard Owen can't help you

I'll give you even more assistance - check the right sources for the right material. 2007 newspaper reports are useful to an understanding of the history of the case's development. They are not useful as a reliable source of probative material.

Maybe. Maybe not.

However, in the years to come - history - the evidence remains the same, regardless of the political verdict.

 

[carbonjam72]

Brilliant? In a left field way as cocking a snook at the Establishment, it's hashtag #awesome. Can't deny that.

Everything but an actual paragraph from the magnificently well reasoned opinion of judge Hellman.

So our wait continues.

Btw, the fraxtiplasm klinginbop in the melon dropped gerblizzabob.

 

[Vixen]

Moreover, once it is concluded that the reality surrounding [events] was 31 October and not 1 November, it would seem more logical to reconsider the sighting of the two youths in that context, therefore on 31 October, because it is contemporaneous with the sighting, rather than the next day which is the day preceding the arrival of the Scientific Police, but thus necessarily extrapolated from context. Hellmann on Curatolo.

Discuss.

 

[acbytesla]

How would Curatolo have known about the scientific police going in next day?

He accurately described them.

So? He didn't accurately describe the night of the murder. He describes a night that sounds like Halloween, not November 1st. What this demonstrates is just what you would expect from a shift less bum. Are dates and times important to someone who's life has no schedule? Hardly. And hundreds of young students walk past that park every day. Why would he take notice of any of them? Strangers walk past me every day. Would I have any reason to remember any of them 6 months later? And I have never taken heroin. Unlike Toto who said he did that night and every night.

Nothing about the bum's testimony is credible, especially the homeless junkie.

 

[Dan O.]

I can give you one example of sloppy reasoning, now.

Curatolo: Hellmann concludes Curatolo must have seen Raf and Amanda on 31.10.2007, not 1.11.2007.

He did not trouble himself to discover Raf was at his IIRC brother-in-law's graduation party, on 31.10.2007. Doh_!

BTW the same party he would later claim to journalist, Kate Mansey, of the DAILY MIRROR was his and Amanda's alibi for the murder night.

He also bragged to Ms Mansey Amanda had found the body.

. LMAO

Have you got the original recording of Mansey's interview with Raffaele? The Mansey article is only evidence of what Mansey wrote. That it is factually erroneous and inconsistent with Raffaele's previous and subsequent declaration is a strong indication that Mansey got it wrong.

Again we see Vixen relying on a single unreliable source for his evidence instead of trying to reconcile the truth from all available sources.

 

[Kauffer]

Maybe. Maybe not.

However, in the years to come - history - the evidence remains the same, regardless of the political verdict.

What on earth is this response supposed to mean. It is incoherent.

You are presenting reports from old newspaper reports as the facts in this case when they are plainly not. You've been called out for it.

Where is the witness for Amanda leaving Raffaele's flat at 8:40?

Or do you want to withdraw your claim?

 

[Dougm]

Moreover, once it is concluded that the reality surrounding [events] was 31 October and not 1 November, it would seem more logical to reconsider the sighting of the two youths in that context, therefore on 31 October, because it is contemporaneous with the sighting, rather than the next day which is the day preceding the arrival of the Scientific Police, but thus necessarily extrapolated from context. Hellmann on Curatolo.

Discuss.

My take is that you really don't understand how crime accusations or trials work. The point on Curatolo is that his testimony was confused and conflicting. Massei had to twist and cherry pick what Curatolo actually said to give it credence. Hellmann said no, if he gives conflicting testimony, and isn't sure what day it is, says he was on heroin at the time, says there were disco buses but also says he saw the men in white suits that day, that testimony is useless.

It's as if I were called to testify in a case charging you with robbing a bank. They call me in, because I sleep on a bench outside the bank, and I claim to have seen you. I say, "I saw Vixen rob the bank! It was right around 1 PM. It was dark out, and I had to use my flashlight. I know it was Vixen because he ran right past me, and jumped on a bus that was there (except that bus I describe in detail didn't run that day). I also know it was that day because it was Valentine's day, and I saw the couples out on dates with flowers and hearts!" (but it turns out Valentine's Day was two days before).

This type of testimony is complete rubbish. You can't pick out the parts you like and throw out the parts you don't like.

 

[Dan O.]

No mention of the evidence against her found at the scene.

For example, Meredith's blood on the tap mixed with hers.

?!​

You posted this same factoid before and was asked to back it up. You failed thes as you will fail now.

 

[Grinder]

I can give you one example of sloppy reasoning, now.

Curatolo: Hellmann concludes Curatolo must have seen Raf and Amanda on 31.10.2007, not 1.11.2007.

He did not trouble himself to discover Raf was at his IIRC brother-in-law's graduation party, on 31.10.2007. Doh_!

BTW the same party he would later claim to journalist, Kate Mansey, of the DAILY MIRROR was his and Amanda's alibi for the murder night.

He also bragged to Ms Mansey Amanda had found the body.

. LMAO

Oh you are sooooo clever.

Here's what Hellmann wrote and an explanation why if he saw anything or anybody it had to have been the 31st. Curatolo described in detail the 31st not the first. Clearly Hellmann doesn't believe him for good reason

In fact he stated that on the evening when he saw the two youths there were a lot of masks, young people [giovani] that were joking about, that there was pandemonium [“un casino”] (quoting from the hearing of 3.28.2009 “…There were other people however that were messing about a bit, it was a holiday period…”) and again he confirmed the presence of masks, of young people joking about and pandemonium [“un casino”] at the hearing of 3.26.2011 in front of this Court (and in fact he responded affirmatively to the question of Ms. Bongiorno, formulated exactly in these terms) and also recalled (at both the hearing of 3.28.2009 and in front of this Court in the hearing of 3.26.2011) that there were the buses taking the young people [giovani] to the discotheques, such that he correlated [ha ancorato] his stay in Piazza Grimana up until about ten minutes after their departure, at a time indicated as between 11:30 pm – midnight.

According to the defense such circumstances (regardless of whether the two youths seen by the witness were actually the current defendants) would prove that the day in which the witness saw what he reported, was 31 October and not 1 November, considering that the masks were being worn to celebrate Halloween, which in fact falls on the night between 31 October and 1 November and not on the night between 1 November and 2 November, and considering also, that the buses for the discotheques had to be present the evening of 31 October and not the following evening. In fact, practically all the discotheques, open all night between 31 October and 1 November specifically because it was Halloween, remained understandably closed the following evening, the night between 1 November and 2 November, for the anticipated lack of customers the day immediately following a holiday.

https://hellmannreport.wordpress.com/contents/reasons-for-the-decision/curatolo/

 

[anglolawyer]

Moreover, once it is concluded that the reality surrounding [events] was 31 October and not 1 November, it would seem more logical to reconsider the sighting of the two youths in that context, therefore on 31 October, because it is contemporaneous with the sighting, rather than the next day which is the day preceding the arrival of the Scientific Police, but thus necessarily extrapolated from context. Hellmann on Curatolo.

Discuss.

I already did.