Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Chris_Halkides]

sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander

Hampikan is on the defense pay roll. Of course, he will report whatever his paymasters want him to report. Sadly, this compromises his scientific ethics.

Someone claiming to be an academic, immediately becomes an agent of anyone who sponsors him to write a report.

We have pro-smoking or pro-sugar "expert" witnesses writing reports in support of their pay masters, the tobacco industry or the sugar industry, for example.

IMV it is a form of intellectual prostitution.

In my profession it would be seen as a breach of professional ethics to be bought off.

Vixen,

Does your analysis apply to Dr. Novelli? Why or why not?

 

[Dan O.]

Deposition of Mohammad Egbaria: Knew Rudy since September through Alex, brother of his girlfriend. On 27th Oct he received a call from Rudy which wasn’t from his usual cellphone number. He states Rudy’s usual cellphone number was 329-1819627. Rudy was in Milan dancing. He didn’t see Rudy in the days surrounding the murder, including Halloween.

Rudy was caught inside the nursery on the morning of the 27th. Would this call be from the morning before he is caught or after the police release him (after confiscating the laptop and cell phone)?

 

[Katody Matrass]

1) TJMK
2) Peter Quennell
3) PQ's hundreds of lawyers
4) a UK tabloid

Exactly.

She should ask Quenell's hundred of Italian lawyers to look it up for her in the trial testimony, IMO.

 

[Bill Williams]

Nothing about the washing machine? I was hoping at least for some developments on the evil conspiracy to remove all mentions of this serious evidence from the trial transcripts and Massei...

You have been given citations. However, you prefer to be in denial. <shrug>

Not my problem. You have access to the same resources as me.

Vixen, you have expressed praise for Judge Massei. But three pages back in this thread I posted the sum-total of what Judge Massei said about the washing machine. Nothing Massei wrote confirms either you or your "sources", which is basically Peter Quennell.....

see: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10652370&postcount=1946

 

[Antony]

Just when I thought nothing could be more ludicrous than ten pages of debate over what "framing" means, along comes Vixen citing as sources -- Quennell and The Guardian. Somehow Moronic doesn't even begin to say it.

In fact, the news item which Vixen cites is from the Observer, the UK Sunday newspaper that shares the Guardian website. But be fair: all it's doing is reporting Filomena's back-stabbing of Amanda, which we know about and, as reported in the story, doesn't really add anything of substance.

It even points out that FR's testimony undermines the prosecution case, by suggesting that footprints in the murder room belonged to the policeman who entered the room at the time of the discovery. The Guardian/Observer is not the Daily Mail.

 

[LondonJohn]

Rudy was caught inside the nursery on the morning of the 27th. Would this call be from the morning before he is caught or after the police release him (after confiscating the laptop and cell phone)?

Good point. I'm suspecting that the police confiscated Guede's cellphone (the one with the number 329-1819627) and he then immediately got hold of a new cellphone and SIM via his *ahem* contacts.

I suspect that Guede then used this as part of his claim not to have had a cellphone at all at the time of the murder: he could claim that the Milan police had confiscated his handset on 27th October, and that he had not had a mobile at all since that day.

 

[Katody Matrass]

TIMES, GUARDIAN Filomena's testimony.

LOL, no. Wrong again.

 

[LondonJohn]

LOL, no. Wrong again.

As I said, there comes a point where it's no longer worthwhile trying to counter an intellectually-dishonest "argument".........

 

[Vixen]

1) TJMK
2) Peter Quennell
3) PQ's hundreds of lawyers
4) a UK tabloid

Not a tabloid. At least two broadsheets. "Top people read the TIMES" was once their slogan, alluding to the fact the hoi polloi can be fed a load of rubbish in the "gutter press", but us ruling classes expect accuracy and truth.

Peter Quennell has a brilliant mind and ********* detector. I haven't found him to be untruthful. Of course anybody can make an error.

 

[Vixen]

She just learned that Meredith is nowhere to be found, there are strange things in the house including open front door and blood. She even checked that Meredith really is unreachable by calling her. Nonetheless she didn't bother for another hour or so to show up at the cottage, she also never attempted to call the police, instead after another long while she asked her flat mate who didn't speak Italian to do this. How strange.

How disingenuous.

 

[Dan O.]

By the way, if Mach had won, could DanO have stayed sane?

You clearly don't know of what you speak.

 

[Katody Matrass]

As I said, there comes a point where it's no longer worthwhile trying to counter an intellectually-dishonest "argument".........

I learned my lesson and no longer treat anything she writes seriously. Alas. I was hoping a new forum user would bring more intellectual stimulation not just amusement of the train-wreck-watching kind.

 

[Vixen]

In fact, the news item which Vixen cites is from the Observer, the UK Sunday newspaper that shares the Guardian website. But be fair: all it's doing is reporting Filomena's back-stabbing of Amanda, which we know about and, as reported in the story, doesn't really add anything of substance.

It even points out that FR's testimony undermines the prosecution case, by suggesting that footprints in the murder room belonged to the policeman who entered the room at the time of the discovery. The Guardian/Observer is not the Daily Mail.

The OBSERVER IMV is the best Sunday newspaper.

So Filomena is "back-stabbing Amanda"?

Only a deranged mind would think Filomena was trying her best to recount the events to the best of her knowledge, under oath.

 

[Antony]

The only "evidence" presented is testimony of the glass on top of clothes. They took no pictures of this and the pictures we do have show evidence of the glass under the clothes. The other thing they mention is the lack of items stolen in Filomena's room. It's clear to me that Filomena left the room in a mess, I believe many items were already on the floor before the window was broken.

In the Observer article recently cited by Vixen, there is a reference to glass on top of clothes, but the only direct quote from FR is that the glass was on top of the computer, not the clothes.

ETA: where does the claim of "glass on top of the clothes" come from, originally?

 

[Bill Williams]

Vixen,

Does your analysis apply to Dr. Novelli? Why or why not?

The now defunct guilter-PR campaign adopted this strategy - of insinuating criminal activity of anyone/everyone who ever supported the case for innocence of AK and/or RS.

The wildest one was the fake-Wiki, Edward McCall's wiki entry about the DNA evidence surrounding the presumed Raffaele-DNA profile on the bra-hasp.

It dismisses with a wave of the hand the other male-profiles found in the same sample, and then goes on to say that a lawyer openly wondered if Conti and Vecchiotti were being paid by the Sollecitos to trash Stefanoni's work.

The proof is that a lawyer once openly opined. This lawyer? Maresca.

But regardless of who it was, the "proof" that Conti-Vecchiotti's work was bad? Because a lawyer once openly wondered something. Openly.

This takes the suspect-centric nature of guilter/prosecutor thinking to new heights. Why would guilters apply this reasoning to Dr. Novelli?

But back to the hand-wave and being suspect-centric. Both the 2013-ISC as well as Nencini were the epitome of suspect-centric, when they hand-waved away the other profiles on the bra-hasp by saying, "the point is that Raffaele's profile is there," implying it is completely immaterial how the others got there.

They are nothing if not consistent, and fading fast.

 

[Vixen]

In the Observer article recently cited by Vixen, there is a reference to glass on top of clothes, but the only direct quote from FR is that the glass was on top of the computer, not the clothes.

ETA: where does the claim of "glass on top of the clothes" come from, originally?

By the fact of the matter it was.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Peter Quennell has a brilliant mind and ********* detector. I haven't found him to be untruthful.

How naïve.
Ask him to find the trial transcript quotes for you. He'd be delighted to help along with his hundreds of lawyers

 

[Bill Williams]

The OBSERVER IMV is the best Sunday newspaper.

So Filomena is "back-stabbing Amanda"?

Only a deranged mind would think Filomena was trying her best to recount the events to the best of her knowledge, under oath.

You actually did not mean to say that. That is defamatory against Filomena. I suspect this will be the only thing you ever correct in your misapprehension of things.

 

[Vixen]

The now defunct guilter-PR campaign adopted this strategy - of insinuating criminal activity of anyone/everyone who ever supported the case for innocence of AK and/or RS.

The wildest one was the fake-Wiki, Edward McCall's wiki entry about the DNA evidence surrounding the presumed Raffaele-DNA profile on the bra-hasp.

It dismisses with a wave of the hand the other male-profiles found in the same sample, and then goes on to say that a lawyer openly wondered if Conti and Vecchiotti were being paid by the Sollecitos to trash Stefanoni's work.

The proof is that a lawyer once openly opined. This lawyer? Maresca.

But regardless of who it was, the "proof" that Conti-Vecchiotti's work was bad? Because a lawyer once openly wondered something. Openly.

This takes the suspect-centric nature of guilter/prosecutor thinking to new heights. Why would guilters apply this reasoning to Dr. Novelli?

But back to the hand-wave and being suspect-centric. Both the 2013-ISC as well as Nencini were the epitome of suspect-centric, when they hand-waved away the other profiles on the bra-hasp by saying, "the point is that Raffaele's profile is there," implying it is completely immaterial how the others got there.

They are nothing if not consistent, and fading fast.

Only a crazed mind would think the police and forensic team were doing their job to the best of their ability.

 

[LondonJohn]

Not a tabloid. At least two broadsheets. "Top people read the TIMES" was once their slogan, alluding to the fact the hoi polloi can be fed a load of rubbish in the "gutter press", but us ruling classes expect accuracy and truth.

But the Sunday Times is a tabloid rag though, correct? Oh and in the spirit of "accuracy and truth", this should be "we", not "us"

Peter Quennell has a brilliant mind and ********* detector. I haven't found him to be untruthful. Of course anybody can make an error.

Now that is hilarious! Well done!