Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Kauffer]

Down boy, down! Patience is a virtue.

We've been waiting months. Where are they or, alternatively, where is your retraction?

 

[LondonJohn]

Vixen, I have to say I'm disappointed. According to you, "everyone knows" that Knox sent a stalker-esque barrage of texts to Kercher on the evening of Halloween. And as such, I'd imagine that it would be astonishingly easy for you to find and post the evidence to support such an assertion. Yet I've been out for a couple of hours while you've been posting here, and there's still nothing about all these "desperate" texts from Knox.

You're surely not going to pretend you never made such a claim and hope it just all goes away are you? I'd be especially disappointed if you were going to adopt that as your position, as it would be indicative of sly dishonesty. So I'm sure you won't do that, will you? You'll either be back with the evidence, or you'll state that in fact no such evidence exists. I look forward to an answer!

 

[LondonJohn]

We've been waiting months. Where are they or, alternatively, where is your retraction?

Great minds.....

 

[davefoc]

Down boy, down! Patience is a virtue.

How's the redone mixed blood analysis coming after you realized your initial assumptions were wrong? Your promises of a response there predate by many months promises of producing non-existent Halloween text messages.

 

[Kauffer]

Great minds.....

 

[acbytesla]

When I try to construct a case for guilt I always start by assuming Knox and Sollecito are sociopathic thrill killers. The problem is this doesn't solve any of the logistical and temporal problems with the case. And even if it were possible to construct a working theory, it wouldn't be enough to overcome reasonable doubt, and strong reasonable doubt in this case. For example there's a pretty good working theory that John Ramsey killed his daughter that mostly fits the known facts, but the double LCN DNA from an unknown male in the victim's underwear, and the wife corroborating the broken window story, and the lack of proof there was previous sexual abuse, all raise reasonable doubt. (I apologize in advance for bringing up another 3rd rail case)

But of course there is not a shred of evidence that either Amanda or Raffaele are sociopaths. Judge Heavey's daughter went to school with Amanda and she said that Amanda was about the nicest person she had ever met. Meredith Paxton traveled to Italy to support her friend. People have said Amanda was boisterous, a tomboy, not typical but no one that knew or knows Amanda have said that she is crazy, a sociopath or psychopath. And Raffaele has carried himself with a tremendous amount of class. No one has said those things about him either.

It seems as if only prosecutors and nuts on the Internet who actually don't know either say those things.

Makes you wonder who the real psychopaths and sociopaths are?

 

[bagels]

But of course there is not a shred of evidence that either Amanda or Raffaele are sociopaths. Judge Heavey's daughter went to school with Amanda and she said that Amanda was about the nicest person she had ever met. Meredith Paxton traveled to Italy to support her friend. People have said Amanda was boisterous, a tomboy, not typical but no one that knew or knows Amanda have said that. And Raffaele has carried himself with a tremendous amount of class. No one has said those things about him either.

It seems as if only prosecutors and nuts on the Internet who actually don't know either say those things.

Makes you wonder who the real psychopaths and sociopaths are?

Oh I definitely agree. Some of the PGP I've encountered have given me more anti-social vibes than anything Amanda has ever done. But I'm always willing to consider every possible angle before I dismiss something. It just doesn't work in this case.

 

[Mike1711]

OK. You imply therefore you are a somebody. Go on, edify us.

Non-sequitur.
If you seriously extrapolate any implied or inferred ability on my part from my post, I can see why you're confused over the reality of the innocence of AK and RS.
Whether I am "somebody" or "nobody" won't change Van Der Leek's status.

 

[acbytesla]

Oh I definitely agree. Some of the PGP I've encountered have given me more anti-social vibes than anything Amanda has ever done. But I'm always willing to consider every possible angle before I dismiss something. It just doesn't work in this case.

Hey, I don't know Amanda from Adam. I have no real allegiance to her. Especially if she killed her roommate. I just ask that a case beyond a reasonable doubt is presented.

Vixen's response is to suggest that Amanda was wild and sociopathic because she smoked grass and threw a loud party.

She says I should believe Koko despite the fact that he was proven to be a liar on the stand.
That I accept her false claims that Amanda's shoe print was left at the scene. I'm also to believe that Amanda felt homicidally slighted by Meredith ditching Amanda on Halloween. Her proof? Desperate texts that Amanda sent on Halloween that we are all waiting for. I am to believe that Amanda was selling her body for drugs even though there is no proof of that.

Somehow a Manga comic book and a Facebook comment is her proof that Raffaele is a sociopath.

I repeat Vixen. Prove that Amanda was helping to kill Meredith. And no more speculation.

 

[Grinder]

Bill I'll confess I at most glance at your Mach attacks but you seem to have a meme that the Italians don't care about the case or worry that perhaps the kids got off. This is Google but it would seem some concern exists. Btw, how do you track the fact that Italian newspapers aren't discussing the case in any unfavorable manner?


Fabio Bonasera

A man who fired on the crowd, killing a student, guilty only of manslaughter and free to speculate on each other economically. Another, guilty of having killed another student, this time within the confines of a private, sentenced for murder but always in competition. Although there are other culprits. The evils of the Italian justice are all here. With convoluted sentences , which have very little to the right, and that generate distrust, suspicion. Even the car delegitimation of so-called powers of the State .

The events are known. On 9 May 1997, the researcher John Scattone , flanked by an accomplice, Salvatore Ferraro , shoot from a window of the university town of La Sapienza in Rome , beating to death the 22-year old Marta Russo . In 1999, although convicted at first instance, a 7 and 4 years of jail, Scattone and Ferraro are free and also to undergo interviews with pay. Which is absolutely prohibited, in terms of ethics, in the journalistic profession. Famous in the Doorstep , which allowed the two to earn 130 million pounds each.

On appeal, the sentences go up to 8 and 6 years old, but the Supreme Court , in December 2001, disintegrates the sentence, speaking of contradictory verdict, calling illogical many trials, labeling inadequacy of the procedures for investigating and coming to proclaim the nullity of ballistics. In the new trial on appeal, however, Scattone is sentenced to 5 years and 4 months, Ferrero 4 years and 2 months imprisonment.

To say that you never knew with what weapon he shot Scattone. Probably, a gun. Above all, you do not understand how someone who shoots at a yard populated by people until now alive can be convicted of involuntary manslaughter. If there is enough evidence, a man is acquitted. If there are any, it should be punished for what they really did. Because the problem is not whether, today, to Scattone be given the opportunity to teach in the schools, but why so much indulgence towards him, if he really killed a poor girl of 22 years, ruining the lives of families and taking away all hope .

Another case to be presented as an example not to be followed is that of ' murder of Meredith Kercher , 21 year old student in London, in an apartment in Perugia , Nov. 1, 2007, during a feast. After a series of judgments between them in contrast, in June 2014, two of the defendants, Amanda Knox , a US national, and Raffaele Sollecito , are acquitted. To be noted that, in January, the Court of Assizes had sentenced them to 28 years and 6 months each, and 25 years old, the other. But even here, the Supreme Court , was to be redone. Motivations, published on September 7, the Supreme Court puts radically into question the work of investigation of the Prosecutor of Perugia. He speaks of "inter wavering" and "amnesia investigation", of "guilty omissions".

An awkward situation to say the least, with the institutions involved in each other disgraced and humiliated the victim's family once more. Especially when you consider that, for a change, this legal case, Knox drew a popularity until that November 1st, 2007 unexpected. Arriving, among other things, to publish a book.

The only definitely convicted, on summary judgment, is a son of no one, the Ivorian Rudy Guede . Convicted of murder in the competition. But we do not know with whom. On this, no one has anything to complain.

 

[Mike1711]

Whilst there is some overlap, "disgust" and "horror" is not a real synonym. Disgust is associated with nausea, "horror" as a mix of awe, dread and fear. This evidenced in that disgust as a facial expression is different from horror. Disgust is a frown, pulled lips and wrinkled up nose, as though sbout to retch. Horror is wide-eyed and wide-mouthed, with hands over ears.

(No dictionary needed.)

Quite right. Vixen has spoken. I'll let the Oxford Concise Dictionary publishers know about their error.
You seek credibility by being incredible.

 

[Mike1711]

You might not be able to contemplate such behaviour, but obviously Amanda, Rudy and Raff thought it a spiffing way to spend a boring evening, sociopaths being easily bored and constantly restless. As Raff said on public domain facebook, he wanted "extreme experiences". This included taking acid and cocaine.

Police identified the cep lodged in Mez' gullet as coming from Raff's punnet in his apartment.

You haven't really explained Kokomani's motive for lying.

I read they found something that was "mushroom like" which means they found something that resembled but wasn't a mushroom. It makes no sense to call a mushroom anything but "a mushroom".
Can you point me to the documentation showing it was a mushroom and not mushroom like?

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill I'll confess I at most glance at your Mach attacks but you seem to have a meme that the Italians don't care about the case or worry that perhaps the kids got off. This is Google but it would seem some concern exists. Btw, how do you track the fact that Italian newspapers aren't discussing the case in any unfavorable manner?


Fabio Bonasera

A man who fired on the crowd, killing a student, guilty only of manslaughter and free to speculate on each other economically. Another, guilty of having killed another student, this time within the confines of a private, sentenced for murder but always in competition. Although there are other culprits. The evils of the Italian justice are all here. With convoluted sentences , which have very little to the right, and that generate distrust, suspicion. Even the car delegitimation of so-called powers of the State .

The events are known. On 9 May 1997, the researcher John Scattone , flanked by an accomplice, Salvatore Ferraro , shoot from a window of the university town of La Sapienza in Rome , beating to death the 22-year old Marta Russo . In 1999, although convicted at first instance, a 7 and 4 years of jail, Scattone and Ferraro are free and also to undergo interviews with pay. Which is absolutely prohibited, in terms of ethics, in the journalistic profession. Famous in the Doorstep , which allowed the two to earn 130 million pounds each.

On appeal, the sentences go up to 8 and 6 years old, but the Supreme Court , in December 2001, disintegrates the sentence, speaking of contradictory verdict, calling illogical many trials, labeling inadequacy of the procedures for investigating and coming to proclaim the nullity of ballistics. In the new trial on appeal, however, Scattone is sentenced to 5 years and 4 months, Ferrero 4 years and 2 months imprisonment.

To say that you never knew with what weapon he shot Scattone. Probably, a gun. Above all, you do not understand how someone who shoots at a yard populated by people until now alive can be convicted of involuntary manslaughter. If there is enough evidence, a man is acquitted. If there are any, it should be punished for what they really did. Because the problem is not whether, today, to Scattone be given the opportunity to teach in the schools, but why so much indulgence towards him, if he really killed a poor girl of 22 years, ruining the lives of families and taking away all hope .

Another case to be presented as an example not to be followed is that of ' murder of Meredith Kercher , 21 year old student in London, in an apartment in Perugia , Nov. 1, 2007, during a feast. After a series of judgments between them in contrast, in June 2014, two of the defendants, Amanda Knox , a US national, and Raffaele Sollecito , are acquitted. To be noted that, in January, the Court of Assizes had sentenced them to 28 years and 6 months each, and 25 years old, the other. But even here, the Supreme Court , was to be redone. Motivations, published on September 7, the Supreme Court puts radically into question the work of investigation of the Prosecutor of Perugia. He speaks of "inter wavering" and "amnesia investigation", of "guilty omissions".

An awkward situation to say the least, with the institutions involved in each other disgraced and humiliated the victim's family once more. Especially when you consider that, for a change, this legal case, Knox drew a popularity until that November 1st, 2007 unexpected. Arriving, among other things, to publish a book.

The only definitely convicted, on summary judgment, is a son of no one, the Ivorian Rudy Guede . Convicted of murder in the competition. But we do not know with whom. On this, no one has anything to complain.

I'd not seen this. Thanks for forwarding it. It looks like a Google-translate.

You'd do well to more than glance at what I am asking of Machiavelli. I'm not sure I ever said I've actively tracked Italian reporting - but you seem to be in "gotcha mode" so maybe you can point to a post where I've said that.

I've asked Machivelli to point to any Italian news "chatter", or Italian language internet "chatter" which buttresses his point of view that Marasca/Bruno engaged in a massive miscarriage of justice. Or even wrote a fatally contradictory report!

Where's the Italian language PMF, or TJMK? Or even the ISF for that matter? Machiavelli, in fact, did oblige by pointing to one journalist who (immediately following March 27) did, in fact, say that something might be amiss, and that the fault might be with Section 5 of the ISC.

Mainly, Machiavelli said he doesn't read the news or follow the popular press - which left it all the more strange that (at the same time as he was telling me that) he was actively tweeting Porta a Porta to consider that...... all might not be right with the Section 5 ISC decision of March 27. Machiavelli was being the PR Machine he'd always accused the FOA of being!!!!!!! Hoots!

If I said that Italians-writ-large don't worry about the case, I'd not be in a position to comment because I am not Italian living in Italy. The ex-pat Italians living here have no trouble believing that the judiciary is crookeder than a dog's hind leg, and that was to cast doubt on people like Massei and Nencini, although even you and me would have to admit that Hellmann/Marasca/Bruno have their Italian moments, too!!

I have pretty much these days given up tracking the Italian pieces. From Google searches on the various search terms (esp. on Google.IT) the story pops up..... and newspieces are a-plenty. Me, I kind of gave up when I could not find one that remotely was in the ball-park of what offends Machiavelli so much.

Who knows maybe "some" concerns DO exist. Me with my meagre skills, I was unable to find evidence in the press there. So I reached out to those who I thought would have an agenda to chronicle concerns, and record the outrage coming from Italy.

Crickets.

Ok, not crickets, but Machiavelli found one, then implied that the subject bored him and that he would rather debate English speakers on the meaning of "forte sospetto", in the context of the report.

 

[Mike1711]

Mez was murdered by the wardrobe and a sheet used to move her body away.

Not unnaturally, police were most interested in how Amanda knew Mez was killed by the wardrobe. She was nowhere near the door when Luca broke it down.

No-one mentioned the wardrobe on the way to the questura.

Let's face it, Amanda on a chemical and/ or adrenaline high could not resist bragging her special knowledge.

She didn't say "by the wardrobe". She said "IN the wardrobe".
She didn't say Meredith's body....she said "A body".
So AK knew a lot about the murder? But what she "knew" was wrong.
So AK by your reasoning Vixen, proved her ignorance of the murder scene, and therefore her innocence.
Vixen, you do have an open mind after all.

 

[Grinder]

I'd not seen this. Thanks for forwarding it. It looks like a Google-translate.

You'd do well to more than glance at what I am asking of Machiavelli. I'm not sure I ever said I've actively tracked Italian reporting - but you seem to be in "gotcha mode" so maybe you can point to a post where I've said that.

I've asked Machivelli to point to any Italian news "chatter", or Italian language internet "chatter" which buttresses his point of view that Marasca/Bruno engaged in a massive miscarriage of justice. Or even wrote a fatally contradictory report!

Where's the Italian language PMF, or TJMK? Or even the ISF for that matter? Machiavelli, in fact, did oblige by pointing to one journalist who (immediately following March 27) did, in fact, say that something might be amiss, and that the fault might be with Section 5 of the ISC.

Mainly, Machiavelli said he doesn't read the news or follow the popular press - which left it all the more strange that (at the same time as he was telling me that) he was actively tweeting Porta a Porta to consider that...... all might not be right with the Section 5 ISC decision of March 27. Machiavelli was being the PR Machine he'd always accused the FOA of being!!!!!!! Hoots!

If I said that Italians-writ-large don't worry about the case, I'd not be in a position to comment because I am not Italian living in Italy. The ex-pat Italians living here have no trouble believing that the judiciary is crookeder than a dog's hind leg, and that was to cast doubt on people like Massei and Nencini, although even you and me would have to admit that Hellmann/Marasca/Bruno have their Italian moments, too!!

I have pretty much these days given up tracking the Italian pieces. From Google searches on the various search terms (esp. on Google.IT) the story pops up..... and newspieces are a-plenty. Me, I kind of gave up when I could not find one that remotely was in the ball-park of what offends Machiavelli so much.

Who knows maybe "some" concerns DO exist. Me with my meagre skills, I was unable to find evidence in the press there. So I reached out to those who I thought would have an agenda to chronicle concerns, and record the outrage coming from Italy.

Crickets.

Ok, not crickets, but Machiavelli found one, then implied that the subject bored him and that he would rather debate English speakers on the meaning of "forte sospetto", in the context of the report.

It is a Google as I stated in the post with the article.

Here is one of many assertions you have made to Mach:

...... and while you are in full guilter reconstructionist mode, the rest of Italy is talking about their innocence and the screw ups of people like Mignini

You have repeatedly challenged Mach to come up with news stories worried about the verdict and claimed that (paraphrase) the Italians support the verdict with very few outlying opinions.

 

[Bill Williams]

...... and while you are in full guilter reconstructionist mode, the rest of Italy is talking about their innocence and the screw ups of people like Mignini

You have repeatedly challenged Mach to come up with news stories worried about the verdict and claimed that (paraphrase) the Italians support the verdict with very few outlying opinions.

Wow, you are in gotcha mode today. If you cannot parse the non-literal meaning of my claim there's nothing much I can say to convince you.

 

[carbonjam72]

I'd not seen this. Thanks for forwarding it. It looks like a Google-translate.

You'd do well to more than glance at what I am asking of Machiavelli. I'm not sure I ever said I've actively tracked Italian reporting - but you seem to be in "gotcha mode" so maybe you can point to a post where I've said that.

I've asked Machivelli to point to any Italian news "chatter", or Italian language internet "chatter" which buttresses his point of view that Marasca/Bruno engaged in a massive miscarriage of justice. Or even wrote a fatally contradictory report!

Where's the Italian language PMF, or TJMK? Or even the ISF for that matter? Machiavelli, in fact, did oblige by pointing to one journalist who (immediately following March 27) did, in fact, say that something might be amiss, and that the fault might be with Section 5 of the ISC.

Mainly, Machiavelli said he doesn't read the news or follow the popular press - which left it all the more strange that (at the same time as he was telling me that) he was actively tweeting Porta a Porta to consider that...... all might not be right with the Section 5 ISC decision of March 27. Machiavelli was being the PR Machine he'd always accused the FOA of being!!!!!!! Hoots!

If I said that Italians-writ-large don't worry about the case, I'd not be in a position to comment because I am not Italian living in Italy. The ex-pat Italians living here have no trouble believing that the judiciary is crookeder than a dog's hind leg, and that was to cast doubt on people like Massei and Nencini, although even you and me would have to admit that Hellmann/Marasca/Bruno have their Italian moments, too!!

I have pretty much these days given up tracking the Italian pieces. From Google searches on the various search terms (esp. on Google.IT) the story pops up..... and newspieces are a-plenty. Me, I kind of gave up when I could not find one that remotely was in the ball-park of what offends Machiavelli so much.

Who knows maybe "some" concerns DO exist. Me with my meagre skills, I was unable to find evidence in the press there. So I reached out to those who I thought would have an agenda to chronicle concerns, and record the outrage coming from Italy.

Crickets.

Ok, not crickets, but Machiavelli found one, then implied that the subject bored him and that he would rather debate English speakers on the meaning of "forte sospetto", in the context of the report.

IIRC, this is a case of 2 philosophy students who supposedly used their training to "commit the perfect crime". In other words, there was again ZERO evidence against these defendants, hence they used their super natural powers (which they learned in the philosophy curriculum) to commit a murder while leaving no evidence, just to show that they could. Brings to mind the murder of Leopold & Loeb, and their seeing themselves as Nietche supermen, or some nonsense like that, and committing the perfect crime just to prove they could.

But once one pair of one in a billion psychos has been shown to exist, Italian prosecutors seem to think its some kind of franchise, whether the original crime occurred or not.

Lord knows where Mach has run off to. He may be assisting the Palestinians with some sort of anti-zionist dietrological master plan to confound the masons.

 

[Bill Williams]

Lord knows where Mach has run off to. He may be assisting the Palestinians with some sort of anti-zionist dietrological master plan to confound the masons.

Imagine my embarrassment when Machiavelli returns with every front page of every Rome/Milan/Naples/Florence/Bologna paper with the story of Marasca/Bruno's treachery on the front page, above the fold.

In Italian!!

I'll owe Grinder an apology. I've already offered to buy coffee, so I can't make it up to him by offering that to assuage his wrath!

 

[Vixen]

Non-sequitur.
If you seriously extrapolate any implied or inferred ability on my part from my post, I can see why you're confused over the reality of the innocence of AK and RS.
Whether I am "somebody" or "nobody" won't change Van Der Leek's status.

So we should take Mike1711's word for it, "Nick Van Der Leek is a nobody".

I see.

 

[Vixen]

Quite right. Vixen has spoken. I'll let the Oxford Concise Dictionary publishers know about their error.
You seek credibility by being incredible.

Do you really need a dictionary to tell you the difference between horror and disgust?

Machiavelli was right all along, so his grasp of English appears superior to yours.