Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

Comodi's issue was the continuing reverberations of the Monster of Florence and the row over Mignini's theory there was a satanic masonic lodge behind it (and the masons do flirt with ancient Egyptian sorcery).

Mignini, Comodi and Massei just kept the Kercher murder as simple as possible to secure the conviction. It hardly matters what the row was about, if indeed it happened as Rudy said, and Nencini said it could have, as stabbing someone in the neck is totally a disproportionate act deserving of a murder conviction, and duly given.

Maybe Mignini, Comodi, and Massei should have confined themselves to the evidence. It is a laugh-out-loud for someone to suggest they did not present all the evidence, just enough to secure conviction.

You have no idea how stupid, and wrongful that apporach is. It is tantamount to admitting they withheld evidence, rather than offered full disclosure to the defence so that AK/RS could get a fair trial.

You have no idea what I am talking about, do you.

I note your idol worships depraved degenerates who burn Bibles on stage with swastika symbology and Black Mass, with Raff bragging in a recent blog that self-confessed satanist Manson, who once kept a dead foetus in a jar, splattered his blood around the audience after pricking himself with his microphone-cum-sword "in baptism". Nauseating.

My idol!? Is that all you have, ad hominem? A Marilyn Manson concert!? LOL! The streets of Italy and America must all be warzones after each one of his concerts.

You are full value to find this nauseating; Marilyn Manson I mean. However the subject of this thread is evidence which proves murder - and as for the Republic of Italy, the sane judges know that someone's concert-going habits have little bearing on a case.....

...... where even you admit it is all right for the prosecution to withhold evidence - picking and choosing through it so as to secure conviction.

Because it is the securing of the conviction which is all important, isn't it? Esp. for those who go to Marilyn Manson concerts!

Hoots!

 

[Bill Williams]

Can you quit with the "your idol" crap please. It's demeaning, inappropriate, insulting and a total misrepresentation of (to my best knowledge and understanding) the way in which pro-acquittal/pro-innocence commentators feel about Knox and/or Sollecito.

In addition, if I might say so, it rather harms your credibility in the debate at the same time. Stop accusing people of "idolising" Knox and/or Sollecito please. It's a lie and a misrepresentation.

I hope Vixen continues. It shows lurkers the standards on which she evaluates things.

Haters gotta hate.

 

[Bill Williams]

Vixen has already demonstrated to my total satisfaction that unfortunately she has absolutely no idea what she is writing about in respect of mobile phones, GPS, network operations and so on. Virtually every single element of what she has written over the past few days on these subjects is stunningly wrong and ignorant. I think it's important that people understand this, in the context of the importance of mobile phone evidence in the Knox/Sollecito case.

However, we have finally got it out of Vixen why she believes the mobile-phone evidence compelling.

She now openly disagrees with major aspects of the Massei Report, implying that Massei found them guilty but for the wrong reasons.

The phone evidence is ONLY relevant if one believes AK and RS left the apratment, with the knife, with malice aforethought. Massei is clear, they did not. Massei's "choice for evil" had not arisen that early.

So Vixen, like all guilters do, have to correct even the convicting judges to maintain their vilification of the pair - not just make a case for their guilt, but as we've seen make a case for their psychopathology and moral deprevation.

No Italian court, acquitting or convicting, found that.

Even in the attempt to prop up Nencini's report - as is the last ditch attempt by the few remaining guilters...... they have to ignore that Nencini believed that Raffaele's DNA was found on the knife, that the motive was an argument over rent-money, and that parts of the Conti-Vecchiotti report were to be believed but not others (fc. the extra male-material on 165B).

In short, to be consistent, Vixen now believes that Rudy Guede's "theory of the crime" is essentially correct, not Massei's for sure who saw Rudy as the sole perp, with whom AK and RS only joined with a last second, "choice for evil". That he'd had a date with Meredith, that Meredith had let him in, and that Rudy's DNA was inside the victim because of consensual sex.

No one believes those three things except Rudy. Why then believe the fourth thing about the rent money?

That's what you must accept if you go with the "rent money" motive; because Rudy and Rudy to the exclusion of all others was the one to offer that motive - which Nencini believed.

No wonder the March 2015 ISC put an end to this nonsense. The only outstanding issue is why Vixen continues? Continues reinventing the crime, even having to dismiss the courts which convicted the pair!!!

Hoots.

 

[bagels]

It escapes you Rudy was never convicted of anything other than handling stolen goods, yet you keep falsely insisting it is an established fact Rudy was Spiderman. Presumably you got that from Burleigh, as not even buffoons Bruno & Marasca put forward your jaundiced view.

ETA If Rudy has an MO of nicking laptops and gold jewellery, how come he left Filomena's and Amanda's laptops alone, together with Filomena's gold jewellery and €300- of Amanda's rent money?

You've got a backwards view of this case. That me thinking Rudy did it is some sort of extravagant extrapolation from a fantastic interpretation of the evidence. It is just the opposite.

The crime scene is as follows: a woman's stabbed and sexually assaulted body is found lying on the floor. It's surrounded by the bloody footprints of a male burglar. Inside her genitals is the DNA of the burglar. Next to where her body was dragged is this burglar's bloody handprint. There is an apparent break-in entirely consistent with a previous break-in this burglar was connected to by criminal evidence. This burglar was also caught trespassing in another property carrying a knife.

What happened is so obvious and so self evident that it's hardly worth asking. But instead of accepting this plainly self evident crime, you choose a fantastic theory, reconstructed from a fantastically contrived interpretation of the evidence, involving a highly implausible socially, logistically, and temporally constrained scenario. Why? Because prior to the police processing the abundant forensic evidence and discovering this knife carrying wall climbing burglar, they had used "intuition" to "solve" the crime, and had publicly declared case closed, done, finito, upon the arrests of two students and a bar owner, and they and you have been bending yourselves hopelessly out of shape trying to sustain the unsustainable ever since. The Italian courts rightly called it quits, and I think you would be wise to follow their lead.

 

[Desert Fox]

Vixen has already demonstrated to my total satisfaction that unfortunately she has absolutely no idea what she is writing about in respect of mobile phones, GPS, network operations and so on. Virtually every single element of what she has written over the past few days on these subjects is stunningly wrong and ignorant. I think it's important that people understand this, in the context of the importance of mobile phone evidence in the Knox/Sollecito case.

In honesty, I don't think Vixen care. . . .Only wants to write something to smear Amanda Knox.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen has already demonstrated to my total satisfaction that unfortunately she has absolutely no idea what she is writing about in respect of mobile phones, GPS, network operations and so on. Virtually every single element of what she has written over the past few days on these subjects is stunningly wrong and ignorant. I think it's important that people understand this, in the context of the importance of mobile phone evidence in the Knox/Sollecito case.

The police and the courts were satisfied the pair made their phones inactive for the duration of the murder and clean up. Q.E.D::

 

[Vixen]

I hope Vixen continues. It shows lurkers the standards on which she evaluates things.

Haters gotta hate.

Ad hominem proves you have exhausted your abilty to put forward a reasoned argument.

 

[Vixen]

Maybe Mignini, Comodi, and Massei should have confined themselves to the evidence. It is a laugh-out-loud for someone to suggest they did not present all the evidence, just enough to secure conviction.

You have no idea how stupid, and wrongful that apporach is. It is tantamount to admitting they withheld evidence, rather than offered full disclosure to the defence so that AK/RS could get a fair trial.

You have no idea what I am talking about, do you.


My idol!? Is that all you have, ad hominem? A Marilyn Manson concert!? LOL! The streets of Italy and America must all be warzones after each one of his concerts.

You are full value to find this nauseating; Marilyn Manson I mean. However the subject of this thread is evidence which proves murder - and as for the Republic of Italy, the sane judges know that someone's concert-going habits have little bearing on a case.....

...... where even you admit it is all right for the prosecution to withhold evidence - picking and choosing through it so as to secure conviction.

Because it is the securing of the conviction which is all important, isn't it? Esp. for those who go to Marilyn Manson concerts!

Hoots!

Withhold evidence? Motive is ascertained by the judge and therefore the police are under no obligation to hypothesise about motive or personality traits. It has nothing to do with evidence.

I wonder whether you are familar with court procedure?

You might think outraging public decency is OK, but that doesn't make it so.

It is abhorrent that Raff and Amanda are defiantly cocking a snook at us all for having got away with a heinous crime IMV.

 

[Vixen]

However, we have finally got it out of Vixen why she believes the mobile-phone evidence compelling.

She now openly disagrees with major aspects of the Massei Report, implying that Massei found them guilty but for the wrong reasons.

The phone evidence is ONLY relevant if one believes AK and RS left the apratment, with the knife, with malice aforethought. Massei is clear, they did not. Massei's "choice for evil" had not arisen that early.

So Vixen, like all guilters do, have to correct even the convicting judges to maintain their vilification of the pair - not just make a case for their guilt, but as we've seen make a case for their psychopathology and moral deprevation.

No Italian court, acquitting or convicting, found that.

Even in the attempt to prop up Nencini's report - as is the last ditch attempt by the few remaining guilters...... they have to ignore that Nencini believed that Raffaele's DNA was found on the knife, that the motive was an argument over rent-money, and that parts of the Conti-Vecchiotti report were to be believed but not others (fc. the extra male-material on 165B).

In short, to be consistent, Vixen now believes that Rudy Guede's "theory of the crime" is essentially correct, not Massei's for sure who saw Rudy as the sole perp, with whom AK and RS only joined with a last second, "choice for evil". That he'd had a date with Meredith, that Meredith had let him in, and that Rudy's DNA was inside the victim because of consensual sex.

No one believes those three things except Rudy. Why then believe the fourth thing about the rent money?

That's what you must accept if you go with the "rent money" motive; because Rudy and Rudy to the exclusion of all others was the one to offer that motive - which Nencini believed.

No wonder the March 2015 ISC put an end to this nonsense. The only outstanding issue is why Vixen continues? Continues reinventing the crime, even having to dismiss the courts which convicted the pair!!!

Hoots.

I do not agree Rudy's version of the crime is correct. However, his claim Mez called Amanda, "that bloody drugged up tart" rings true because that's how the English talk.

I've told you before, my view is the crime was the result of Raff, Amanda and Rudy putting their evil drug-fuelled fantasies into practice and in so doing behaved, recklessy, irresponsibly and monstrously. In that respect, I agree with Massei it was a "choice for evil".

Without mentioning a C16 priest, they had the choice for good. They could have helped Mez and immediately owned up to their crime, and faced the consequences, instead of making a mockery of us all, especially Mez' family and friends.

 

[Bill Williams]

Withhold evidence?

Yes, that is what you are advocating when you say that the prosecution is only required to present enough evidence to gain a conviction. The prosecution - esp. in countries which follow the Inquisatorial system - are supposed to assemble ALL the evidence, including evidence which tends to support acquittal.

You believe that is not necessary. It's what you said, not me.

Motive is ascertained by the judge and therefore the police are under no obligation to hypothesise about motive or personality traits. It has nothing to do with evidence.

Sigh. The point is that police, prosecution, and convicting judges **DID** hypothesize about motive. What's the matter with you?

It is abhorrent that Raff and Amanda are defiantly cocking a snook at us all for having got away with a heinous crime IMV.

You mean like dressing up as a soccer player at Halloween and going to a Marilyn Manson concert!? Hoots! You must think Western Civilization is in free-fall....

Actually, you may be closer to the truth than you know, but not because of two random students in Perugia in 2007!

 

[Grinder]

The police and the courts were satisfied the pair made their phones inactive for the duration of the murder and clean up. Q.E.D::

They made their phones inactive. I had a call early today and since then nothing. Did I make my phone inactive.

Why do you find it impossible to admit you were wrong that there is no evidence the phones were turned off except for Amanda telling the police she turned off her phone?

 

[RoseMontague]

They made their phones inactive. I had a call early today and since then nothing. Did I make my phone inactive.

Why do you find it impossible to admit you were wrong that there is no evidence the phones were turned off except for Amanda telling the police she turned off her phone?

Massei page 320

Given the point, in accordance with Chief Inspector Latella’s proposition with regard to the fact that the phone record printouts do not give information as to whether a mobile phone is switched on or turned off, the Consultant recounted the survey, carried out using his own technical equipment inside Sollecito’s apartment at Corso Garibaldi 30

 

[Desert Fox]

They made their phones inactive. I had a call early today and since then nothing. Did I make my phone inactive.

Why do you find it impossible to admit you were wrong that there is no evidence the phones were turned off except for Amanda telling the police she turned off her phone?

I have a 4G Galaxy S5. . . .This morning it claimed it had no signal and I had to reset it. Granted, I now live in a relatively bad signal area.

 

[Vixen]

Yes, that is what you are advocating when you say that the prosecution is only required to present enough evidence to gain a conviction. The prosecution - esp. in countries which follow the Inquisatorial system - are supposed to assemble ALL the evidence, including evidence which tends to support acquittal.

You believe that is not necessary. It's what you said, not me.


Sigh. The point is that police, prosecution, and convicting judges **DID** hypothesize about motive. What's the matter with you?


You mean like dressing up as a soccer player at Halloween and going to a Marilyn Manson concert!? Hoots! You must think Western Civilization is in free-fall....

Actually, you may be closer to the truth than you know, but not because of two random students in Perugia in 2007!

And having looked at all the evidence, the two fact-finding judges found the pair guilty. Not a verdict they came to lightly. Given Italian judges have to provide detailed reasoning, some of which, such as motive, can only be subjective, so of course the reports will be disputed, even if the verdict is agreed.

Massei and Nencini preferred a pedestrian "row escalation" motive, as is their prerogative. Bruno & Marasca said it was a fact Amanda was at the murder, by her own account. Make of it what you will.

Dressing up as a soccer player? What? Amanda celebrating Halloween with relish and Raff becoming the satanists' new guru tells you they have discretion missing.

Hoots mon.

 

[Vixen]

They made their phones inactive. I had a call early today and since then nothing. Did I make my phone inactive.

Why do you find it impossible to admit you were wrong that there is no evidence the phones were turned off except for Amanda telling the police she turned off her phone?

Why do you prefer to ignore forensic testimony that they did?

 

[Grinder]

Why do you prefer to ignore forensic testimony that they did?

What forensic testimony? There is no evidence the phones were turned off which is what you contended.

 

[Bill Williams]

Massei and Nencini preferred a pedestrian "row escalation" motive, as is their prerogative.

Wrong. Massei had no "row escalation" motive. Nencini (and you) prefer Rudy's account to everyone else - an account where Rudy said Meredith let him in voluntarily and that they'd had consensual sex. Deal with it.

Bruno & Marasca said it was a fact Amanda was at the murder, by her own account. Make of it what you will.

Wrong. Marasca/Bruno says, "During the analysis of the aforementioned elements of evidence, it is certainly useful to remember that, taking for granted that the murder occurred on via della Pergola, the alleged presence at the house of the defendants cannot, in itself, be considered as proof of guilt. " For heaven's sake, even the PMF translation has it as their "presumed" presence.

Dressing up as a soccer player? What? Amanda celebrating Halloween with relish and Raff becoming the satanists' new guru tells you they have discretion missing.

The Satanists' new Guru?? Where do you dream up his stuff? Why shouldn't Amanda celebrate Halloween with relish? Why shouldn't she dress as her favourite Seattle Sounder soccer player?

This is only interesting because guilters said she was soiling the memory of Meredith by dressing as a cat-burglar on the anniversary of the horrible killing. It was neither a cat burglar nor the anniversary. But that does not stop shamers like yourself from pushing it as if it means something about their character.

Hoots!!!

 

[Matthew Best]

Amanda Knox: I am resolved to clear the names of the wrongfully convicted

This coming Dec. 3, I will be speaking at Loyola University Chicago’s Sixth Annual Life After Innocence Luncheon. Like many other local and regional innocence groups, Loyola’s Life After Innocence program advocates for innocent people released from prison, helping them reenter society, clear their records and start their lives over. The luncheon will be my first public opportunity to direct the conversation away from my past, and towards our shared goal of ensuring that other innocents may be freed and, better yet, not accused in the first place. I very much look forward to turning that page.

 

[sept79]

Amanda Knox: I am resolved to clear the names of the wrongfully convicted

Amanda Knox:

This coming Dec. 3, I will be speaking at Loyola University Chicago’s Sixth Annual Life After Innocence Luncheon. Like many other local and regional innocence groups, Loyola’s Life After Innocence program advocates for innocent people released from prison, helping them reenter society, clear their records and start their lives over. The luncheon will be my first public opportunity to direct the conversation away from my past, and towards our shared goal of ensuring that other innocents may be freed and, better yet, not accused in the first place. I very much look forward to turning that page.



Way to go Amanda!

 

[Vixen]

Wrong. Massei had no "row escalation" motive. Nencini (and you) prefer Rudy's account to everyone else - an account where Rudy said Meredith let him in voluntarily and that they'd had consensual sex. Deal with it.


Wrong. Marasca/Bruno says, "During the analysis of the aforementioned elements of evidence, it is certainly useful to remember that, taking for granted that the murder occurred on via della Pergola, the alleged presence at the house of the defendants cannot, in itself, be considered as proof of guilt. " For heaven's sake, even the PMF translation has it as their "presumed" presence.


The Satanists' new Guru?? Where do you dream up his stuff? Why shouldn't Amanda celebrate Halloween with relish? Why shouldn't she dress as her favourite Seattle Sounder soccer player?

This is only interesting because guilters said she was soiling the memory of Meredith by dressing as a cat-burglar on the anniversary of the horrible killing. It was neither a cat burglar nor the anniversary. But that does not stop shamers like yourself from pushing it as if it means something about their character.

Hoots!!!

No, I do not agree with Rudy's version of events. No way would Mez shag some guy who turns up at the front door!

Are you living in the past? The cat burglar get up was a few years ago. I didn't know the Seattle goalie wore cat face paint. Are you sure a preoccupation with what happened 2007 and recreating it annually is healthy?

Raff is the new Manson golden boy, doncha know?