Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

They were probably trying to save their country the money and embarrassment of another trial featuring the world's weakest and silliest case. If the appeals court found them guilty again because Amanda's DNA showed up on her toothbrush, it would just be appealed again with a litany of reasonable claims supported by expert testimony. If the appeals court found them innocent again the wrong gaggle of morons on the ISC might have wanted yet another trial because Quintavalle suddenly remembered what color socks Amanda was wearing 10 years later etc. They were putting the case out to pasture as every reasonable person agrees should have been done with Hellmann.

Even with the second appeals trial, they should have just said "We did not find any DNA on the knife, case closed."

 

[Bill Williams]

I speak four languages, but unfortunately, Italian is not one of them. A few errors of wishful thinking translation has been pointed out in your rushed version wistfully inserting such words as "allegedly" when the real translation is quite different.

I'd love to take your word for it, "Bill", but time has told me you are a master of legerdemain so I pass for now.

"Have" "it" "your" "way". "For" "heaven's" "sake", "even" "the" "PMF" "partial" "translation" "has" "it" "as", "presumed presence".

"Wishful thinking translation"! "Hoots"!

 

[Bill Williams]

Vixen - the Italian (for all to see) is "l'ipotizzata presenza". The presumed presence, the alleged presence, the supposed presence.

Even if the evidence which Marasca/Bruno discusses following 9.2/9.3 is presumed to be true - none of it proves their guilt.

You can listen to the haters if you want. You and cast aspersions at me if you want. You can accuse Marasca/Bruno of being fired if you want. You can post photos of a barred window and claim it shows that the window is not barred if you want.

What you cannot escape - except by ignoring it (which you've done successfully so far) - is the meaning of "synopsis" or "l'ipotizzata presenza" in the text.

It's clear why you ignore it - because you can only say what you claim by ignoring it.

Run it through an Italian/English dictionary. "Hypothesized presence" is mentioned. You simply refuse to deal with this, substituting all sorts of non sequitor reasons.

 

[Grinder]

Hello? Hellmann was rescinded, rejected, revoked. Like the dead parrot, it is no more. Hellmann's report is as dead as a dodo. Zippo.

Hello? Nencini was rescinded, rejected, revoked. Like the dead parrot, it is no more. Nencini's report is as dead as a dodo. Zippo. Nencini being nullified is the absolute end, no recourse. Sorry Charlie.

 

[Grinder]

bagels, Italy has no embarrassment in letting their trials last up to ten years.

So no, saving money and saving face would not have crossed their minds for a minute. With ten times the number of Supreme Court judges than other countries, don't you see, they are on a gravy train.

As a leader in ECHR violations Italy stands alone among western European countries and the number one violation is length of trial.

 

[Grinder]

This shows the illogicality of supposedly Italy's finest legal brains: the DNA traces of Rudy on the sweater "in particular" are absolutely fine, whereas the bra clasp collected at the same time must have been contaminated as it was not collected until then.

Agreed, it seems impossible Amanda's fingerprints were not found on her own lamp.

As no trace of Rudy was found in the burglary room in particular then it's impossible he was the so-called burglar.

No wonder Bruno and Marasca have been banned from ever being a judge in the Supreme Court again.

Yes I'm sure they were banned and Marriott bought them Aston Martins. Very few fingerprints of anybody were found anywhere in the place. I think only Rudi's palm print was found of his. The lamp prints, if there were any most likely were of the last person to touch them, either Rudi or the cops. The lamp was in the next room and had that room been Laura's I'm sure you would be burning her at the stake.

Rudi's DNA, besides not being contaminated with several unidentified partial DNA's, is different because it is not stand alone evidence. Rudi's evidence was found on many items and from the first go round as well as the last. If all the findings of the 18th were thrown out against Rudi it wouldn't change the certainty he was there during the murder.

Not so. It is commonplace for the defense to plead all alternatives to hedge their bets. For example their client might plead not guilty to murder but put in a plea to the alternative that if it is found their client was the killer, then it wasn't homicide, m'Lud, but manslaughter or self-defence. Or, if not pleaded, at least brought up in the closing submissions.

The defense did not lodge an appeal arguing what Marrasca found. IOW Bruno & Marasca advocated for the defense by putting the appeal on their behalf: a big NO! NO!

Really? Could you give examples where the defense was that the person wasn't at the scene but if they were it wouldn't have been premeditated?

Certainly if a person was at the scene and in fact shot the gun the defense will argue it was self defense or an accident and can also add that if the court doesn't accept their assertions that clearly it wasn't premeditated.

In effect, the defense did argue that since there was no evidence of the kids in the murder room, evidence of them in the house wasn't evidence they killed Meredith.

 

[Bill Williams]

Yes I'm sure they were banned and Marriott bought them Aston Martins bus passes.

There, I fixed that for you.

In fairness to Vixen, even Hellmann (the first acquitting judge - in 2011) wrote about being virtually shunned for daring to adjudicate his trial according to the evidence.

 

[Mike1711]

That's correct. The Oscar appeal is exactly based on defective reasoning by the original judge. They argue that as she had arrived at a "fact" erroneously, then discussion of that "fact" was relevant to the appeal, in terms of explaining why her verdict, and therefore, sentencing, was a legal error.

What Brruno & Marasca have done is overturn a legal fact, without bothering to argue Nencini's reasoning was wrong. They ought to have sent the "fact" in dispute back to the lower, fact-finding, court. They also erred in pleading something that the defense had never pled, ie., that, in he alternative, if it is found as a fact the defendants were "there" that in itself does not prove involvement in the crime, m'Lud.

This was Bruno & Marasca's core reasoning for anulling the conviction, which is clearly defective and perverse, as well as being outside of their jurisdiction.

Oh boy! Wrong....again.

I watched the entire Oscar appeal. Did you?

The Judges went to great length to point out that points of fact were not under discussion. It's a simple legal interpretation of the Roman Dutch law of "Dolus Eventualis" that is at issue. This is a legal issue and not a factual one.

You are entitled to your opinion of what you believe the B/M should have done, however wrong you are.

Rest assured...they know the law better than both you and I.

....end of...

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh boy! Wrong....again.

I watched the entire Oscar appeal. Did you?

The Judges went to great length to point out that points of fact were not under discussion. It's a simple legal interpretation of the Roman Dutch law of "Dolus Eventualis" that is at issue. This is a legal issue and not a factual one.

You are entitled to your opinion of what you believe the B/M should have done, however wrong you are. Rest assured...they know the law better than both you and I.
....end of...

Vixen is getting her view of these cases from a South African cut-and-paste true crime writer.

She's also being led by the English-language hate-sites. Of note is that there's not a single citation to any Italian-language sources (of repute) which sustain notions of Marasca/Bruno being disciplined for their March 2015 acquittals. All of that sort of talk is an English-language hater-fantasy.

 

[Ken Dine]

There appears to have been some kind of sexual assault involved in the crime. I would argue that is generally not consistent with a second person involved. I would also argue that Guede's bathroom activity is not consistent with a second person involved.

With a second person involved, unless they were screwed up in the head as well, the job would have been to grab whatever was worth something and basically get out of there.

We just had a case here in America where three Black thugs broke into a home, but only one of the three raped the pastor's wife before shooting her in the head:

A teen faces 13 charges in connection with the rape and killing of Amanda Blackburn, pregnant wife of an Indianapolis pastor, Davey Blackburn.

http://www.franchiseherald.com/articles/44999/20151123/amanda-blackburn-indianapolis-killer.htm

Edit: In addition, there is no way that another could have been in that environment without leaving evidence such as bloody finger prints or shoe prints.

A 2nd perp may have only been interested in burglary, and once he discovered the house was occupied, he may have quickly left before Meredith was raped and killed by Guede, just as the other two Black thugs had left with Amanda Blackburn's debit-card, leaving the 3rd thug behind to rape and murder her (the two Black thugs were later video-taped trying to use her debit card at an ATM).

Not saying there was a 2nd perp, only that if there was, then there are many scenarios where the 2nd dude never entered the bloody murder room.

As for the other silly issue now being discussed here for the umpteenth time (about entry thru the broken window), the only evidence is that someone had thrown the rock thru that window, probably to see if anyone was home. Guede was seen on the CCTV approaching the cottage twice around 25 minutes apart, so he obviously had chucked the rock well before attempting to enter the cottage.

After breaking the window, Guede may have picked the front door lock, or climbed up onto the balcony and found the balcony door unlatched. He may have followed Meredith thru the front door as she entered, etc.

The only certainty is that Guede had chucked the rock breaking the window, and that only Meredith and Guede had left traces behind in her bedroom.

You can't stop 'Guilters' from making all their groundless speculations, but there never was any credible evidence that Amanda & Raffaele had left his apartment that night, so they obviously didn't assist Guede in murdering Meredith.

CASE CLOSED!

 

[Desert Fox]

Never saying that it is absolutely impossible but one must present some evidence that somebody else was involved in a burglary of the home.

From what I have read, these crimes are usually although not always solitary.

 

[Mike1711]

Vixen is getting her view of these cases from a South African cut-and-paste true crime writer.

She's also being led by the English-language hate-sites. Of note is that there's not a single citation to any Italian-language sources (of repute) which sustain notions of Marasca/Bruno being disciplined for their March 2015 acquittals. All of that sort of talk is an English-language hater-fantasy.

A certain true crime writer who claims to be friends with somebody because he claims to have been her Facebook friend?

"True" as in a popular TV advert years ago by a certain hi fi manufacturer who claimed.."Everything you hear is true" which is vastly different to everything you hear is true to the source.

 

[Bill Williams]

Ok - there actually is continuing coverage of "the case" in Italy. No wonder Vixen does not link to it.

Is it press coverage about the unprofessional motivations report from Marasca/Bruno? Has there been an investigative-reporting on Marasca & Bruno's firing from Cassation?

You'd think there'd be something in the press of something of that magnitude!!!!

But there is actually coverage - of Raffaele's new, Italian language book. If Giuliano Mignini is suing Sollecito and Gumbel for the English language book, Raffaele is shaking in his boots so much he's now published a 2nd volume - in Italian!

And it is getting the **only** press that remains in Italy. So much for the judicial-scandal myth advanced by the English-language haters.

http://www.unionesarda.it/articolo/cronaca/2015/11/22/amanda_gli_errori_e_il_carcere_inferno_la_verit_di_sollecito_sul-68-446800.html

The truth about the murder of Meredith

Q: In front of his acquittal, the English press speak of "heinous miscarriage of justice".

"It reflects perfectly the feeling that was the backdrop to all these years of tragedy that invested me and my family: the terrible years when they stepped on my person and my rights, while seeking to play down the atrocities they committed along the way, for make sure that no one, not even the newspapers, could give the slightest prominence. The judges of the Supreme Court have had the great and commendable courage to admit and highlight obscenities performed by investigators. The judgment in my case is perhaps the only one in Italy where they speak openly of guilt, referring to the responsibilities of investigating magistrates and judges, forensic investigators and in kind. "​

Sollecito says that the guilt belongs to the investigating magistrates and judges, as well as forensic investigators.

A perfect summary.

 

[Grinder]

Ok - there actually is continuing coverage of "the case" in Italy. No wonder Vixen does not link to it.

Is it press coverage about the unprofessional motivations report from Marasca/Bruno? Has there been an investigative-reporting on Marasca & Bruno's firing from Cassation?

You'd think there'd be something in the press of something of that magnitude!!!!

But there is actually coverage - of Raffaele's new, Italian language book. If Giuliano Mignini is suing Sollecito and Gumbel for the English language book, Raffaele is shaking in his boots so much he's now published a 2nd volume - in Italian!

And it is getting the **only** press that remains in Italy. So much for the judicial-scandal myth advanced by the English-language haters.

http://www.unionesarda.it/articolo/cronaca/2015/11/22/amanda_gli_errori_e_il_carcere_inferno_la_verit_di_sollecito_sul-68-446800.html

The truth about the murder of Meredith

​

Sollecito says that the guilt belongs to the investigating magistrates and judges, as well as forensic investigators.

A perfect summary.

Bill have you been over at .net again?

 

[RWVBWL]

Greetings ya'all!
I'm kinda outta the loop, been arguin' some alleged kayak murder.

So ah, what are you folks arguin' about now?
Did Rudy Guede fart or something before or after he shot his wad?

Or did Vixen convince you all that Amanda is guilty?
Of what? Not watchin' Rudy when he e-jact-ed?

Just wonderin', before I get a warnin' again!!!
Haha, luv ya all, carry on, you'se all are makin' great headway in this tragic murder case!
RW

 

[Zephyrgeist]

Damn

I'm all alone

that means I don't have an Alibi

get a JOB. You have too much time on your hands. (credit: Tommy Shaw - Chicago, USA band Styx)

 

[Grinder]

Damn

I'm all alone

that means I don't have an Alibi

get a JOB. You have too much time on your hands. (credit: Tommy Shaw - Chicago, USA band Styx)

It's worse than that Zephyrgeist - a heroin dealer saw you outside the murder house and woman heard a scream. You're toast.

 

[bagels]

It's worse than that Zephyrgeist - a heroin dealer saw you outside the murder house and woman heard a scream. You're toast.

It's even worse than that. The heroin dealer was asked and saw nothing and knew nothing. Then many months later will miraculously remember key testimony just in time to be vital to the prosecution's desperate case.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's even worse than that. The heroin dealer was asked and saw nothing and knew nothing. Then many months later will miraculously remember key testimony just in time to be vital to the prosecution's desperate case.

But where Zephyrgeist really gets screwed - is despite the shoppe keeper in a neighbouring store saying he hadn't seen Zephyrgeist in his store the morning of the grisly discovery; a year later he describes to an cub reporter Zephyrgeist's eyes and doesn't rule out a similarly of clothes Zephyrgeist might have been wearing.

 

[Grinder]

But where you really get screwed - is despite the shoppe keeper in a neighbouring store saying he hadn't seen you in his store the morning of the grisly discovery; a year later he describes to an cub reporter your eyes and doesn't rule out a similarly of clothes you might have been wearing.

Not accurate. Quintavalle when interviewed by Volturno stated "I do not recall seeing either of them, but if I had seen the girl she would have been wearing the clothes found on her bed the morning of the body's discovery or whatever clothes would be best for the case"