I would add John Douglas - FBI
Continuation Part 16: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito
- Thread starter acbytesla
- Start date
- Status
I would add John Douglas - FBI
codyjuneau
Muse
.Wattson said:
And Peter Gill - forensic scientist
Cody
.
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
I think if she doesn't respond in the next few days, let's say six for argument's sake, we can consider that claim withdrawn.
Desert Fox
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 6,147
I think if she doesn't respond in the next few days, let's say six for argument's sake, we can consider that claim withdrawn.
I have dealt with people on other forums for around two decades, I have seen posters make claims and their claims are systematically demolished. They then repeat the exact same claims as if never addressed.
I think if she doesn't respond in the next few days, let's say six for argument's sake, we can consider that claim withdrawn.
I have no specific knowledge, but if someone does not reply for a few days in this thread/forum, it might be best to assume they are not able to, at least in the short term.
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
Sorry, I am deciding the rules for this thread at the moment.
Desert Fox
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 6,147
Good luck with that!
Agree. I am sure that topic is important to some, but the meaning of certain words is really OT, in my opinion. Especially when it creates endless discussion about said meaning.
Michael thanks for this and all your efforts.
As we all can see a writer that is PI gets far more latitude for error than a PG
one.
Here's the relevant Prato statement:
Then they told me... The police I remember that the laptop,
the computer he had had been stolen from a legal studio in Perugia and
so he had previous but they let him go, the police woman who had come
who had turned up at the nursery school told me this, that they let
him go because they didn’t know what to do with him, in the sense that
probably there was nowhere to keep him and so they let him go, Mr
Guede.
While there are some details I question in Prato's I can see no reason she would get this wrong. Having Perugia call is nuts as they wouldn't know he was in the station for trespass. I might have been that Milan checked with Perugia to see if Rudi was wanted. But from Nina's and Dempsey's POV having the PLE call fit with meme they favored.
It is humorous to watch NVL et al. get skewered by one and all but pointing out issues with any PI book brings a torrent of vitriol. It is further humorous to read that questioning alleged facts in a book is an insult and only fellow writers have that privilege.
Any work that is published for the public may be challenged by the public. That doesn't mean an author needs to respond but silence indicates the absence of an answer
Graham's piece was only published on IIP AFAIK. Sort of a self publishedbookarticle.
ETA - why would NB or CD be more reliable than Prato who was there? Why is it okay to contact writers to clarify "innocence" information but not to clarify other "innocence" statements?
Nina Burleigh gives her sources by chapter at the end of her book (“Notes on Sources and Methods”).
The “pounds of pasta” story is on page 126 regarding the October 8th break-in for which no suspect was ever identified. In “sources” (p. 312) Burleigh says “Maria Del Prado anecdotes from my interview in Milan, December 2009.”
Regarding Rudy’s release (Burleigh, p.129):
“The Milan police held Rudy for four hours, during which he refused to answer questions. The Milan prosecutor, after a call to Perugia police, released Rudy that afternoon. The Milan police didn’t want to let him go, according to the officers involved, but they had no choice. Detention is up to the prosecutor on duty, and on that October Saturday morning, the prosecutor had many more serious cases to sort through to keep this minor, nonviolent, potential burglar on their toster. Rudy was Perugia’s problem, not Milan’s. According to some accounts, the prosecutor actually called the Perugia police, who instructed him to send Rudy home. He confiscated the backpack with the laptop, cell phone, and watch, and directed the young man to the train station.”
Burleigh sources: “Items found in Guede backpack confirmed by Perugia carabiere Francisco Zampa to me, Spring 2010.”
"According to some accounts", means she is not sure it is true. Unconfirmed, not to be taken as gospel, might have happened.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,614
Deceit is an apt title, but not in the way the author intended.
I am reading Deceit. Here is an excerpt: "Possibly Amandda brings Guede home for sex in exchange for drugs, or perhaps the couple shoot up and begin to have sex while Guede hangs around." (2217)
There is no evidence of interaction between Guede and Knox on the night in question; she barely knew him at all, and they would have had a difficult time communicating due to language differences. There is no evidence that Knox or Sollecito shot up anything. In other words, this passage is pure invention. In the heavily contested category of worst book about the case, we may finally have a winner.
I am reading Deceit. Here is an excerpt: "Possibly Amandda brings Guede home for sex in exchange for drugs, or perhaps the couple shoot up and begin to have sex while Guede hangs around." (2217)
There is no evidence of interaction between Guede and Knox on the night in question; she barely knew him at all, and they would have had a difficult time communicating due to language differences. There is no evidence that Knox or Sollecito shot up anything. In other words, this passage is pure invention. In the heavily contested category of worst book about the case, we may finally have a winner.
What, you can shoot up canibis? So the author speculates that they shoot up hard drugs. That would make it more likely that they would leave trace in the murder room. They would be sloppy and careless. IMO
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,614
checklist item number one
The author has a checklist of twelve items to see whether someone was involved. Number one is prior deliquency/criminal pattern. "Knox was arrested 6 weeks prior, Sollecito disciplined by university for bestiality porn..." Knox was not arrested, and the bestiality porn is nonsense, as readers of this thread know. This book reminds me of a hand of euchre in which every card is trump; every page is filled with this possibly libelous drivel.
The author has a checklist of twelve items to see whether someone was involved. Number one is prior deliquency/criminal pattern. "Knox was arrested 6 weeks prior, Sollecito disciplined by university for bestiality porn..." Knox was not arrested, and the bestiality porn is nonsense, as readers of this thread know. This book reminds me of a hand of euchre in which every card is trump; every page is filled with this possibly libelous drivel.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,614
another (Lo)card
According to the author (while discussing while Amanda was not properly dressed for being outside) one possibility is that Amanda's winter coat was covered in Meredith's blood. Hello? Was any such coat discovered? Amanda's supposedly missing clothing was in her room, where she said it was. Finding the...errors...in this book is like shooting fish in a barrel, but only if the barrel has previously been emptied of water.
According to the author (while discussing while Amanda was not properly dressed for being outside) one possibility is that Amanda's winter coat was covered in Meredith's blood. Hello? Was any such coat discovered? Amanda's supposedly missing clothing was in her room, where she said it was. Finding the...errors...in this book is like shooting fish in a barrel, but only if the barrel has previously been emptied of water.
Last edited:
So evidence against this scenario is
1) No history before or after of Knox using drugs other than cannabis and alcohol.
2) No drugs found at Sollecito's or Knox's place of residence (Filomena removed her stash?), Kercher's boyfriend's stash found but no action taken.
3) Sollecito and Knox test negative for drug use.
4) Physical examination of Knox and Sollecito after detention provides no evidence of shooting up / injection sites.
5) No syringes / needles etc. found at Knox's or Sollecito's residence.
In particular neither Kercher (who seemed happy to gossip about Knox to her friends) nor the other residents nor other acquaintances in Perugia report any drug use by Knox other than alcohol and cannabis.
So it is not an evidence free framework in which to speculate, it is disingenuous not to document the considerable evidence against this hypothesis. The problem is that if you are just prepared to ignore what evidence there is you can come up with just about any theory. E.g. Kercher had previously expressed some sympathy with the palestinians, a Mossad assassination team targeted her and made her assassination look like a crime gone wrong. Only an agency like Mossad would have the technology to selectively clean up the crime scene. I have previously read that the way the knife was used meant it was wielded by some one with special forces training. What we will find is that Guede will be allowed to quietly emigrate to Israel after his release from jail. In some circles one can be fairly secure that anything bad and obscure can be laid at the door of Mossad.
(Now before anyone gets carried away the above is suggested because it is utterly ridiculous - so there is really no need to point out why this is a stupid idea, and if anyone from Mossad is reading this; I am sure you are all very socially aware and caring individuals with a difficult and stressful job who would never be involved in the 'accidental' murder of innocent people.)
Last edited:
RWVBWL
Master Poster
Greetings MichaelB,
Thanks again for the info, and the 1st of the Riccardo Luciani translations too.
Hopefully we, the interested, can read more of the witness depositions from the early days of November soon:
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/witness-depositions/
So Marco and Giacomo, Meredith's new boyfriend,
(whom she started dating on Oct. 13, after a night out at The Red Zone)
were sharing a room together.
Ricardo had been living downstairs for 2 years or so, Marco for a year.
It was Ricardo's bedroom,
not Giacomo's bedroom, which was seen in the Downstairs Crime Scene video on Nov. 3rd that had it's bedroom door broken into, and has crime scene markers and possible bloody red outines, or is that red crayon outlines(?) on his bedroom floor...
Did the cops break into his bedroom,
or Rudy Guede and/or someone else?
I'd like to read more,
hopefully ALL of the Stefano Bonassi depositions,
and ALL of the other downstairs boyz too.
Do you know if these will be available someday?
Also, what about Rudy Guede's Dec. 7, 2007 deposition
in front of PM Mignini, Judge Matteini and others, when he had his lawyer present?
This was the 1st time PM Mignini got his hands on "poor Rudy",
and the deposition was for 7 hours or so I've read.
Is this ever going to be released, and translated to English for public review?
Thanks again for the research work!
RW
PS - Sorry ya'll got banned,
no biggie, you'll all be back if you are seriously interested in this case we discuss. I just wish some of the old timers, like RandyN and Justinian could drop on by. By the way, how come Stilicho and Machiavelli have disappeared since The Acquittal?
Amanda
e
Raffaele
Sono Innocenti!
Last edited:
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
There was someone named Margaret Ganong. She is a homemaker and a landscaper, I think. She was a self-proclaimed expert though. Not sure if that counts. Also I seem to remember someone named Peter Quennell (sp?) who was some sort of expert on juvenile ballerinas. Again, he was a self-proclaimed expert so I guess neither really count in this context.
- Status