Continuation Part 17: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

Did Amanda Knox's and Raffaele's Sollecito's lawyer interview
and take a deposition of Hekuran Kokomani?

If not,
how does anyone even know if the dude who appeared in Court was Hekuran Kokomani?

That dude pictured above could be anybody!?!

As could the dude who testified as Stefano Bonassi...
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=480&pictureid=9531[/qimg]

You might remember Stefano,
he was the dude who,
before leavin' on Holiday,
had made his bed.

But the DownStairsz Boyz cat tossed his comforter upwards,
inside, IIRC, his locked bedroom,
and
left some interestingly, straight blood lines on it:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=480&pictureid=9189[/qimg]
and
an also interesting bloody imprint
that kinda looks like the knife handle imprint found upstairs on Meredith Kercher's bed:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=480&pictureid=9918[/qimg]

What's Stefano,
as pictured up above,
hiding from?

Question:
Was Giacomo wearin' a hoody + sunglasses in Court?
This is the dude who was datin' Miss Kercher for a coupla weeks before here horrible rape and murder.
Was he hiding too, wearin' a hoody and sunglasses , when he testified in Court?

Heck,
I testified my own Civil Trial in a case were I was suspected of a horrible rape,
yet I never went incognito. And before that I did undercover work for SMPD, though The Grinder, would never find this info out online on The WWW, unless I told him so, for it is surly buried in some box in some basement, somewhere. Yet I've never been in Court wearin' a hoody + sunglasses.

Why does Koko,
or Bonassi,
do so?

What gives???
Do they do things that much differently in Italy?
I'll have to ask this of the next Italian surfer I meet here at The Beach...
RW

In England & Wales, they'd be ordered to remove the disguise.

 

[Numbers]

Amanda wrote the second memoriale all by herself of her own volition. It is simply deception for her to claim she was tortured into writing it.

She did not retract her disgusting allegations against Patrick, as she likes to claim. She reiterated it.

When will Amanda take responsibilty for her own behaviour?

The Memoriales are in English. Any person who can read English can determine what they say. Italian-speaking persons could understand their content with a fair translation.

Amanda did not have legal counsel when she wrote the Memoriales, contrary to ECHR case-law (Dayanan v. Turkey), and therefore the statements reflect her very forthcoming, honest, and non-legalistic style of communication.

There has no been no claim by Amanda that she was tortured, and certainly not that she wrote the second Memoriale under torture. The second Memoriale strongly indicates that her statements relating to Patrick on Nov. 6 were unreliable, because she regained her confidence in her memory and was certain as of Nov. 7 that she was with Raffaele the whole evening and night of Nov. 1, and had not seen Patrick on Nov. 1 in the cottage.

Images of Amanda's statements Nov. 6 - 7 (including both Memoriales) may be seen at http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/statements-phone-taps-prison-intercepts/

Your posts are reverting to falsehoods.

 

[Strozzi]

. . .

I awoke, made out with her + had then removed my friend's pajama's on a cold January night.. . .

RW, I don't mean to digress, but I have a question for you. Why were you wearing your girlfriend's pajamas?

 

[Bill Williams]

The Memoriales are in English. Any person who can read English can determine what they say. Italian-speaking persons could understand their content with a fair translation.

Amanda did not have legal counsel when she wrote the Memoriales, contrary to ECHR case-law (Dayanan v. Turkey), and therefore the statements reflect her very forthcoming, honest, and non-legalistic style of communication.
There has no been no claim by Amanda that she was tortured, and certainly not that she wrote the second Memoriale under torture. The second Memoriale strongly indicates that her statements relating to Patrick on Nov. 6 were unreliable, because she regained her confidence in her memory and was certain as of Nov. 7 that she was with Raffaele the whole evening and night of Nov. 1, and had not seen Patrick on Nov. 1 in the cottage.

Images of Amanda's statements Nov. 6 - 7 (including both Memoriales) may be seen at http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/statements-phone-taps-prison-intercepts/

Your posts are reverting to falsehoods.

Amanda's "gift" memorale betrays something else.... how different her style is from the first two memorales written for her in legalistic Italian. There is no way Amanda could have reasonably either known the content or appreciated the implication of signing - which is precisely the reason people are supposed to have lawyers present. She was denied a lawyer.

The second memorale settles any disagreement reasonable people might have - it opens with, "I wish to spontaneously declare....". No one but a lawyer would write it that way, because the "spontaneity" of the statement is precisely what would be at issue in court. There's no way anyone without legal training, unprompted, wrote that spontaneously. Much less a foreigner, barely past her teens.

 

[Ken Dine]

Dogstown Boys looks like a cool film. It's tough your ex-girlfriend did that to you.

Having heard bloodcurdling screams in the night myself, I believe Nara when she says she heard it.

I was on a train t'other day and this kid had a scream that went right through me. Her parents made no effort to stop her.

Hmmm? This could be important, so please do remember the details of that bloodcurdling scream since the kid may have witnessed a murder and thus been justified for screaming bloody murder?

Next year you could read in the papers that they found a body near those same tracks, so you may be a material EAR-witness and help the police establish a TOD for that murder.

Of course, the kid may have just had a dirty diaper, but what the hell.

 

[PhantomWolf]

The mop? It is a cleaning implement, is it not? Amanda claimed she needed to carry it backward and forward between Raff's and the cottage as there had been a flood the night before at Raff's.

You mean the mop that was found inside of the house? The mop that was then poorly wrapped up in paper also found in the house? The mop that was then carried into the murder room by one of the expert forensic police? The mop that came back negative for blood and/or DNA? That mop?

That was Massei bending over backward.

No, it was Massei accepting the incontrovertible evidence based on the carpark video, the radio calls, and emergency call itself, that the emergency call was placed prior to the Postal Police's arrival.

The luminol showed the footprints of all three.

Try again. Luminol showed footprints, full stop. None of the Luminol footprints was able to be positively and exclusively matched to anyone. It was assumed they were Knox's based on size. Rudy's footprints were not found with Luminol but were visible. The one so call Raf footprint, is extremely debatable and most non-biased sources say it is not attributable to any one.

Mixed Amanda/Mez DNA in five different places.

Mixed DNA, not mixed Blood as you previously stated. Surprise, two people that shared an apartment had spots of mixed DNA, including a sink where the samples were taken by swabbing half the sink. It would have been more of a surprise if they hadn't found mixed DNA. There simply is zero evidence of when the DNA was deposited, and without that there is not way to claim that such deposits had any relevance to the murder.

I am sorry, but science doesn't lie

I agree, however, Scientists do, sadly quite often. Hiding raw data, failing to run controls, lying about doing tests that returned results that contradict the conclusions, making up procedures, running tests without training and certification in those methods.... That's not science, that's scientific fraud.

and nor did the defense prove the hoary old chestnut, "It was contaminated, M'Lud".

The onus is not on the defence to prove that contamination did happen, but rather that there is evidence that it could have. The onus is on the Government to make sure that contamination doesn't occur and can show procedures are in place to prevent it. It's clear from the video of the forenics police at work that they had no such procedures and happily provided evidence of contamination on video. Even the results they presented in court show contamination, or do you believe that Meredith got the DNA of at least 5 people on the hook of her bra because they all touched that hook at some point in time?

 

[acbytesla]

If Rudy said so, it must be true

Yet, you believe Rudy's story about Meredith disliking Amanda and the 300 Euros.

 

[zotz]

"She did not retract her disgusting allegations against Patrick, as she likes to claim. She reiterated it." -Vixen

"I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I didn’t lie when I said I thought the killer was Patrick. I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember that I can’t know who the murderer was because I didn’t return back to the house." -AK

She said that she did accuse Patrick because she was confused but now that she remembers clearly she realizes that she was wrong. I know the ISC said that it was a "self-accusation" but I have to believe that they got a bad translation of what she wrote because that description makes no sense. Vixen, either you are mentally unstable or you can't read the Queen's English.

Which one is it?

 

[Bill Williams]

"She did not retract her disgusting allegations against Patrick, as she likes to claim. She reiterated it." -Vixen

"I’m sorry I didn’t remember before and I’m sorry I said I could have been at the house when it happened. I said these things because I was confused and scared. I didn’t lie when I said I thought the killer was Patrick. I was very stressed at the time and I really did think he was the murderer. But now I remember that I can’t know who the murderer was because I didn’t return back to the house." -AK

She said that she did accuse Patrick because she was confused but now that she remembers clearly she realizes that she was wrong. I know the ISC said that it was a "self-accusation" but I have to believe that they got a bad translation of what she wrote because that description makes no sense. Vixen, either you are mentally unstable or you can't read the Queen's English.

Which one is it?

It's hard to fathom why someone would average 30 posts a day of falsehoods and demonstrable falsehoods.

 

[davefoc]

It's hard to fathom why someone would average 30 posts a day of falsehoods and demonstrable falsehoods.

It is hard to fathom that.

 

[Planigale]

The mop? It is a cleaning implement, is it not? Amanda claimed she needed to carry it backward and forward between Raff's and the cottage as there had been a flood the night before at Raff's.

The mop was inside the cottage. Neither mop, bucket nor any other cleaning material were in the possession of Knox / Sollecito when the postal police arrived. So the claim that they were in possession of cleaning materials when the police arrived is false. Either provide testimony from the postal police to this effect or withdraw this falsehood.

The luminol showed the footprints of all three.

This is untrue. There are shoe prints in blood attributable to Guede's trainers in the bedroom of MK. Note no Luminol used in the bedroom. There are shoe prints in the victim's blood attributable to Guede's shoes visible in the hall. There are right footprints visible in Luminol which tested negative for blood and DNA in the hall. These are not identifiable. What we can say is these are not what a footprint resulting from treading in blood would look like because we can compare with the visible print from Guede's shoes. We know that they can not result from cleaning wet blood because this would have spread blood around and left swirls.

I will accept that testimony was given with regards to 'compatibility' of Luminol positive footprints with Sollecito / Knox. But they were not 'identifiable'. Remember comparison prints were taken from only three people, they reported only in relation to this closed population. The police's own measurements exclude Sollecito as the cause of the footprint on the mat.

Mixed Amanda/Mez DNA in five different places.

So you accept your statement that there was mixed blood all over the crime scene was false.

I am sorry, but science doesn't lie and nor did the defense prove the hoary old chestnut, "It was contaminated, M'Lud".

Actually they did not have to. The prosecution did that. The bra clasp showed DNA of multiple individuals. Nencini had to conclude that the DNA of other individuals resulted from contamination but that Sollecito's DNA did not. The limited DNA results from Steffanoni show at least one episode of contamination with a negative control coming up positive. The negative controls from the knife have not been disclosed. No the science does not lie but those reporting the conclusions do.

 

[Antony]

Not "ruled innocent". The verdict said Not Guilty because of "insufficient evidence" and is anyway, illegal for them to cite 530 para 2.

Not just "insufficient" but completely bogus, contrived and/or meaningless. Nothing presented by the prosecution in this case had any probity whatsoever.

For example, you (and people who think like you) have never explained why a speck of the victim's DNA on something used by one of her close friends proves that it is the murder weapon, or even makes it likely that it is the murder weapon. It's not just a junk lab result, it's junk judicial reasoning.

 

[Antony]

The mop was inside the cottage. Neither mop, bucket nor any other cleaning material were in the possession of Knox / Sollecito when the postal police arrived.

Not only that, but the mop and bucket never showed any traces of blood or other signs of being used in the fictional cleaning operation.

The claims about "cleaning materials" are nothing but a ruse by the guilters to suggest to the uninformed that something had been going on. They never stand up to scrutiny.

So the claim that they were in possession of cleaning materials when the police arrived is false. Either provide testimony from the postal police to this effect or withdraw this falsehood.

...

 

[Kauffer]

I was addressing the forum.

I have said before I do not believe - zilch, zippo, diddly - anything Rudy says.

All three are champion liars.

Maybe the police were terse, they are not airline cabin staff, but I disbelieve Amanda's self-serving claim of being tortured and interrogated non-stop 53 hours by tag teams.

It's lying by omission for pro-Knoxers to constantly claim to the media she was "interrogated for 53 hours, with a different tag team every hour".
Look up the Steve Moore youtube video.

You do this with any regard for the truth?

The video link you posted at 2:00 mins, has Steve Moore saying the following, and I quote:

"They interrogate her for 53 hours in 5 days"

That's the only context in which 53 hours is mentioned.

Do you have any regard for your own personal integrity?

What? The average full-time working week is 35 hours. Mr Moore is claiming Amanda was interrogated a continuous ten hours a day over five days.

That from eight in the morning to eight at night, if we assume one-hour for lunch and four 15-minute comfort breaks.

Assuming another hour for an evening meal and an hour to wash and then sleep for eight hours, pro-Knoxers are seriously claiming Amanda "was interrogated for 53 hours with tag teams every hour".
A clear fraudulent claim, as Amanda arrived at the cop shop circa 22:30, chatted to the police from about 23:30 including giving a voluntary witness statement naming Patrick as a killer-cum-rapist, whom she was very scared of, which was typed up and signed by 00:45. Less than three hours.

So much for hourly tag teams over five consecutive days non-stop, except to eat, wash and sleep.

If the "innocent" campaign has to be predicated on a pack of lies, what an insult to the genuinely innocent and wrongly convicted!

The anatomy of vixen's falsehoods regarding claims made for a 53 hour non stop interrogation.

She cites evidence, which does not say what she claims it says and then doubles down on the lie, actually inventing quotations - making them up.

Nobody has ever claimed a 53 hour non stop interrogation let alone a 53 hour non stop interrogation with new tag teams every hour.

Shameful.

 

[Antony]

Yes, the first thing Dad Amanda did, was not hire an attorney, but a PR agency - possibly several of them systematically posting here - as reputation limitation and maximum commercial marketing, paying shills to gild the lily and secure television and book deals.

This is known as a Conspiracy Theory. The reality is that we all came to the controversy independently, each because of his/her own outrage at the injustice being perpetrated. You don't like the reality, so you make up a phantom organised campaign in support of the defendants.

What I see here isn't Amanda supporters "gilding the lily", but a torrent of lies from you, Vixen, trying to perpetuate the myths that have been built up by the bogus guilt campaign.

Of course, the Knox/Mellas family were forced to seek help from a media management organisation, because they were inundated with demands from the press at exactly the time when they needed to direct their efforts to getting legal help for Amanda.

 

[Grinder]

Yes, the first thing Dad Amanda did, was not hire an attorney, but a PR agency - possibly several of them systematically posting here - as reputation limitation and maximum commercial marketing, paying shills to gild the lily and secure television and book deals.

He was in Seattle and by that time Edda had hired attorney(s) in Italy.

 

[Dopre]

It is hard to fathom that.

What Vixen is doing isn't about arguing the truth as she sees it. Reading what she writes it is easy to see her comments are meant to incite and elicit reactions.

People need to stop feeding her. She is here trolling and she will not stop as long as people validate her. As difficult as it is, people need to ignore her. She will eventually go away if she sees she isn't getting a reaction.

I wish everyone would get back to discussing the case in a more constructive way. These pages have been filled with useless rebuttals to Vixen that are truly a waste of energy.

 

[acbytesla]

Look at it another way. You're a hardnosed cop dealing with scum every day who will spit at you, tell blatant lies, steal, cheat, kill.

There is a murder. A couple of guys are hanging around outside with cleaning material and yet have some how not got round to calling the police.

They have no alibi. They switched off their phone just before the murder (as did Jodi Arias); their footprints and blood mixed with the victim's are all over the murder scene.

Are you beginning to understand what makes a cop tick?

I've never seen anyone lie this much. Why? What makes someone tick who'll ignore the court documents and instead believe the tabloids and the press? Do Mensa members do this? Do they believe the Bible instead of Galileo, Copernicus, Darwin and Einstein?

Is this just the result of an overwhelming need for authority? Fairy tales instead of facts? Ministers and judges instead of scientists and mathematicians?

Do we really lose something in accepting the truth over the legend?

 

[Dopre]

I've never seen anyone lie this much. Why? What makes someone tick who'll ignore the court documents and instead believe the tabloids and the press? Do Mensa members do this? Do they believe the Bible instead of Galileo, Copernicus, Darwin and Einstein?

Is this just the result of an overwhelming need for authority? Fairy tales instead of facts? Ministers and judges instead of scientists and mathematicians?

Do we really lose something in accepting the truth over the legend?

These are the words of someone who has either lost touch with reason or is, as I suspect, here to cause a ruckus.

Having read past comments posted on PMF regarding this forum, it seems reasonable to believe there could be an incentive in it for Vixen. People who venture here and do this kind of thing are praised. They see value in kicking the proverbial hornets nest. It is a tactic they seem to believe has the effect of morally defeating the opposition.

 

[carbonjam72]

What Vixen is doing isn't about arguing the truth as she sees it. Reading what she writes it is easy to see her comments are meant to incite and elicit reactions.

People need to stop feeding her. She is here trolling and she will not stop as long as people validate her. As difficult as it is, people need to ignore her. She will eventually go away if she sees she isn't getting a reaction.

I wish everyone would get back to discussing the case in a more constructive way. These pages have been filled with useless rebuttals to Vixen that are truly a waste of energy.

+1