Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[LondonJohn]

As a writer, I will never divulge my sources.

That's so pompous it's ridiculous. But that's your prerogative of course. At least it will allow me and others to entirely disregard the credibility of your claim.

 

[LondonJohn]

AIUI the murderofmeredithkercher.com site received hundred's of thousands of hits in its first view months.

Uh....

1) You do realise, do you not, that the alleged statistic you provide above has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not journalists use that site as an information source on the case?

2) You do realise, do you not, that Quennell and a small group of nutters repeatedly hitting the site every single day might (ahem) lead to something of a *distortion* of the page hit statistics in any case?

 

[Vixen]

1) "Ruinous" is a straw man - that's a claim I never made.

2) For a prosecutor to receive an official censure from his disciplinary body is not good news to that prosecutor - even in such a messed-up country as Italy.

3) Do you yet actually understand how and why Mignini received his censure? And I'm talking here about the facts and the findings of the disciplinary panel - not about Mignini's own jaundiced, biassed and mendacious "defence".

Yes, I do. It is obviously a retaliatary complaint by Raff as a defense tactic against being charged. So there was a technical oversight of a rule, and Mignini got a rap on the knuckle for the clerical error.

 

[Bill Williams]

I see. It's OK for you to dramatically announce that Bruce Fischer of Injustice Anywhere is hopping mad that the PGP have accessed public domain court documents, yet it's a factoid when the PIP has behaved abominably. Offering nude pics of Amanda in custody for money and bombarding the victim's family with pictures of Vaseline jars.

ETA The murderofmeredithkercher.com has been collating the crime documents for years. It is the first source of information for many journalists seeking the facts of the case, rather than spin.

It must, then, have been the same source which gave you the pic to post here of a barred lower window, all to prove there were no bars on the window.

If you paid for your source, I'd seriously suggest getting your money back.

Are we now to make random allegations against you, then when you complain to the mods here, we fall back on: "Well, I have a source, but I never reveal my sources"?

 

[Vixen]

It must, then, have been the same source which gave you the pic to post here of a barred lower window, all to prove there were no bars on the window.

If you paid for your source, I'd seriously suggest getting your money back.

Are we now to make random allegations against you, then when you complain to the mods here, we fall back on: "Well, I have a source, but I never reveal my sources"?

The picture of the windows were from a police portfolio of crimescene photos in the public domain.

I never pay for a source. If some information is hard to find, I will go away and research it myself.

 

[Bill Williams]

Yes, I do. It is obviously a retaliatary complaint by Raff as a defense tactic against being charged. So there was a technical oversight of a rule, and Mignini got a rap on the knuckle for the clerical error.

"A technical oversight of a rule"!!?!???!???!?

Well, we know where you stand on the due process scale..... is being required to give testimony against oneself next? Are we to throw women onto a lake and if they sink, they're not a witch?

 

[Bill Williams]

The picture of the windows were from a police portfolio of crimescene photos in the public domain.

I never pay for a source. If some information is hard to find, I will go away and research it myself.

Ahhhhhhh so you DO reveal your sources!

But you claimed it showed there were no bars on the windows! So within 4 posts, you've reversed yourself on giving up sources, and you've acknowledged posting a pic which refutes a point you, yourself, were making.

There we have it.

 

[acbytesla]

AIUI the murderofmeredithkercher.com site received hundred's of thousands of hits in its first few months.

Of course that was based on deception and the site please interrest that they have in this case. That doesn't mean it is authoritative or relied on by professional journalists. But it wouldn't surprise me that some lazy ones unknowingly relied upon it at one time. But now that Amanda and Raffaele have been exonerated it's clear to any thinking journalist that they are being catfished.

 

[LondonJohn]

"A technical oversight of a rule"!!?!???!???!?

Well, we know where you stand on the due process scale..... is being required to give testimony against oneself next? Are we to throw women onto a lake and if they sink, they're not a witch?

Yeah - dontchaknow it was a "technical oversight of a rule" which left Sollecito sitting alone in a cell in solitary confinement for three full days after his arrest, without any chance of having any communication or consultation with a lawyer.

"Technical oversight" AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

BTW - it's also worth remembering here that the CSM disciplinary panel effectively found Mignini to be a liar in his evidence to them, when he claimed he couldn't remember whether or not he'd given the verbal order about the denial of counsel for Sollecito. The CSM effectively found that Mignini had indeed given the verbal order to police not to allow Sollecito access to a lawyer, and that he (Mignini) had lied in his defence evidence. Such a fine, upstanding, scrupulously honest public figure Mignini is

 

[acbytesla]

The picture of the windows were from a police portfolio of crimescene photos in the public domain.

I never pay for a source. If some information is hard to find, I will go away and research it myself.

It is so funny to read this nonsense. Nobody posts more error filled nonsense to this forum than you.

 

[LondonJohn]

The picture of the windows were from a police portfolio of crimescene photos in the public domain.

I never pay for a source. If some information is hard to find, I will go away and research it myself.

To think of just two examples from the extremely-recent past, it would have been useful (and conducive to honest debate) if some of this fabled research had been employed on the nature (and comparative length and related attention to detail) of Italian appeal trials compared with first-level trials, and the issue of the iron/steel bars covering the window below Romanelli's........

 

[Bill Williams]

Yeah - dontchaknow it was a "technical oversight of a rule" which left Sollecito sitting alone in a cell in solitary confinement for three full days after his arrest, without any chance of having any communication or consultation with a lawyer.

But LondonJohn, Raffaele was still free to go get himself a lawyer! The layabout.... all he did for those three days was sit there alone not doing anything about his legal future.

(I'm experimenting with how we can blame Raffaele for his plight. Vixen makes it look easy!)

 

[Mike1711]

I am afraid it was 4 KG.

The rock weighed just over 8 pounds which is about 3.5kg.
But that's neither here nor there. The point is when one considers that the distance high school kids toss a 12 pound weight "shot put" method is about 50 feet. ...and that's AVERAGE. Rudy was not restricted in throwing the stone by "shot put" rules.
A stone of even 9 pounds can easily be tossed a distance of 70 feet.

 

[Vixen]

"A technical oversight of a rule"!!?!???!???!?

Well, we know where you stand on the due process scale..... is being required to give testimony against oneself next? Are we to throw women onto a lake and if they sink, they're not a witch?

It was not a witch hunt. The fact is, a man and a woman were found at the scene of a crime when police arrived.

Stop being sexist.

 

[Vixen]

The rock weighed just over 8 pounds which is about 3.5kg.
But that's neither here nor there. The point is when one considers that the distance high school kids toss a 12 pound weight "shot put" method is about 50 feet. ...and that's AVERAGE. Rudy was not restricted in throwing the stone by "shot put" rules.
A stone of even 9 pounds can easily be tossed a distance of 70 feet.

It was 4KG.

 

[Vixen]

Ahhhhhhh so you DO reveal your sources!

But you claimed it showed there were no bars on the windows! So within 4 posts, you've reversed yourself on giving up sources, and you've acknowledged posting a pic which refutes a point you, yourself, were making.

There we have it.

It is a fact, the upper windows did not have bars. The professional expert rock climber in the pro-Amanda video - who probably practised until he got the knack - had bars to cling onto to keep his balance. To pull yourself up onto the ledge, you need leverage via your elbows and shoulders. This requires strong wrists, pectorals and biceps, together with a strong chest. The defence lawyer who tried, just hung by his fingertips.

 

[bagels]

It was not a witch hunt. The fact is, a man and a woman were found at the scene of a crime when police arrived.

Stop being sexist.

Surely you mean a man and a woman summoned the police to the crime scene they discovered

 

[bagels]

It is a fact, the upper windows did not have bars. The professional expert rock climber in the pro-Amanda video - who probably practised until he got the knack - had bars to cling onto to keep his balance. To pull yourself up onto the ledge, you need leverage via your elbows and shoulders. This requires strong wrists, pectotals and biceps, together with a strong chest. The defence lawyer who tried, just hung by his fingertips.

In the video he shows a lunge move to climb in without the bars, but his forward momentum is blocked by the bars themselves. The experiment would have been better without them, but they're there now.

The fact is the climb is doable.

The fact is Rudy Guede was found holding stolen property from a break-in walking distance from his house that involved a climb up a 4 meter metal grate and balcony rail.

The fact is this strongly suggests to anyone with a functioning brain either Rudy did in fact break in to that cottage, or Amanda was smart/lucky enough to stage a break-in in a strikingly similar style to her supposed accomplice she couldn't speak the same language as, which helped raise reasonable doubt.

The fact is denying the above is an act of delusion.

 

[Vixen]

Surely you mean a man and a woman summoned the police to the crime scene they discovered

Incorrect: Amanda did not call the police once (yet rang her mother, for the first time since she departed the US, THREE times, and lied to police about it). Raff only rang police once they had already arrived.

 

[Vixen]

In the video he shows a lunge move to climb in without the bars, but his forward momentum is blocked by the bars themselves. The experiment would have been better without them, but they're there now.

The fact is the climb is doable.

The fact is Rudy Guede was found holding stolen property from a break-in walking distance from his house that involved a climb up a 4 meter metal grate and balcony rail.

The fact is this strongly suggests to anyone with a functioning brain either Rudy did in fact break in to that cottage, or Amanda was smart/lucky enough to stage a break-in in a strikingly similar style to her supposed accomplice she couldn't speak the same language as, which helped raise reasonable doubt.

The fact is denying the above is an act of delusion.

The teams of forensic police and four separate judges do not support your What If...? scenario.

It was a transitory student accommodation with no reason to be of any great interest to professional thieves, other than electronic equipment, which, tellingly, was left untouched, as was Filomena's gold jewellery. If Rudy's MO was stealing laptops, then whoever simulated this one, did not copy Rudy well.

Bits of paper scattered about to give the appearance of ransacking were found ON TOP of the duvet covering Mez, one in Filomena's room, had Amanda's footprint on it, glass from the window was ON TOP of the strewn about clothes and most incriminating of all, a footprint encased in blood leading INTO Filomena's room, contained the MIXED DNA of Mez and Amanda (no DNA at all of Rudy in the burglary room). Amanda must have entered that room AFTER Mez' assault. In addition, a shard of glass from Filomena's window was found on Mez' floor. Therefore, Amanda was LYING when she claims she had no idea Filomena's room was in turmoil the next morning, claiming the door was shut, yet Raff said it was "wide open". WHY LIE ABOUT IT???

No doubt someone could climb up to the second floor window, should they be greatly motivated to, as was the professional pro -Knox climber. However, it doesn't logically follow, they did.