Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
Here we go again.

Police investigating mysterious death of an American woman in Italy

The case is being handled by Giacinto Profazio — the same detective who initially ran the investigation into the killing of British student Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy,
Click to expand...

Profazio, great! By tomorrow he will be hawking photographs he took at the crime scene to the British tabloids. :jaw-dropp
 
Vixen said:
Andrea Vogt is tweeting Curt Knox and Edda Mellas will face slander trial 18th January 2016 and the final arguments likely to be a few weeks later.
Click to expand...

In a previous post Vixen boasted how the Italian justice system bends over backwards for defendants. If the system is so defendant friendly, why are slander laws used against people who speak about police abuses?
 
Vixen said:
Profazio, great! By tomorrow he will have found the killer/s.
Click to expand...

You'll only think that. Much better chance his investigation will be sloppy and will resort to whomever is convenient. I'm sure all eyes are on the boyfriend as he discovered the body.

My bet is they'll be trying to sweat out a confession. Hopefully, they'll record this one.
 
Vixen said:
You sound bitter, "John". Liz Houle's recent audiovideo attracted over nine thousand hits within about five days.

As the above article has over 254 comments, clearly your maths is as dodgy as your lachrymose lamentations and pseudo handwringing.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make her any less ******* crazy.
 
Vixen said:
You sound bitter, "John". Liz Houle's recent audiovideo attracted over nine thousand hits within about five days.

As the above article has over 254 comments, clearly your maths is as dodgy as your lachrymose lamentations and pseudo handwringing.
Click to expand...


You do understand the difference between a) "hits" or "comments" and b) "unique individuals", don't you, "Vixen"? Maybe you don't. For help, read the comments section, and try to count up the total number of individuals behind those "over 254" comments. Then you might understand. Applied maths clearly isn't your strong point (together with pretty much most science and jurisprudence), but I'm happy to help where I can.

Still, maybe astrology helped Houle do the fine, objective research which led her to the "fact" that Guede wasn't convicted of murder, eh? She must have a pretty anhydrous mind, don't you think? I might drop in a meaningless and inappropriate (but impressive-sounding in a pseudo sort of way) res judicata at this point :D
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
When in Rome, do as the Romans do.
Click to expand...

Vixen is saying that people should not be able to speak out against police abuses. I wonder if Vixen was a victim of police misconduct, would she be happy at not being able to speak out.
 
Welshman said:
In a previous post Vixen boasted how the Italian justice system bends over backwards for defendants. If the system is so defendant friendly, why are slander laws used against people who speak about police abuses?
Click to expand...


The Italian system most assuredly does not "bend over backwards" for defendants. The state still has inordinately too much power over private citizens - predominantly a relic of the fascist era. And the criminal justice is so hideously broken that anyone who's ever earmarked by the police/PM for a crime is probably three-quarters of the way to being convicted there and then (the dreadful and improper - and supposedly outlawed by the Council of Europe - thinking being along the lines of "no smoke without fire" and "well, prove to us you DIDN'T do it and you should be OK").

And the slander and criminal-slander laws are a total disgrace. The press is muzzled, the public are muzzled, and power-crazed egomaniacs such as Mignini can use threats and intimidation to close down any semblance of accountability.
 
Vixen said:
Andrea Vogt is tweeting Curt Knox and Edda Mellas will face slander trial 18th January 2016 and the final arguments likely to be a few weeks later.
Click to expand...

thanks for this. she's alsotweeting that Knox's slander verdict is coming up,and that Vogt believes she'll be acquitted.
 
Bill Williams said:
thanks for this. she's alsotweeting that Knox's slander verdict is coming up,and that Vogt believes she'll be acquitted.
Click to expand...


So she is. I wonder what "little bird" is whispering in her ear about that one? Given Vogt's *ahem* proximity to Mignini and other prosecutors, I suspect that one of them knows the way the wind is blowing and is trying a little front-running damage limitation by informing Vogt of their concerns. I certainly don't think that even if Knox or anyone on her team felt confident of acquittal, they'd be communicating that to Vogt.

ETA: "Vixen" must have missed that tweet.........
 
Vixen said:
Numbers, I have better things to do on a Sunday than wade through pages of turgid waffle. It is the common consensus Bruno-Marasca copied and pasted Bongiorno. May as well call the judgment Bongiorno (Recorder).
Click to expand...

There are two logical fallacies here as described at https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com.

Burden of proof:

You claim that Bruno-Marasca is a copy-paste of Bongiorno's appeal documents. It is your claim to prove. You decline to do so.

Bandwagon:

You assert that it is common consensus that this is so. Leaving aside that you have the burden of proof to show that this is the actual common consensus, even if your copy-paste claim is believed by many, it does not follow that it is true.
 
The investigator in charge of the Florence Flying Squad is no stranger to high profile murder cases involving foreigners, having led the investigation into British exchange student Meredith Kercher’s murder in Perugia in 2007. As head of the Perugia Flying Squad at the time, Giacinto Profazio was present at Amanda Knox’s interrogation and had testified that the American from Seattle did cartwheels and the splits in the police station while waiting to be questioned about Miss Kercher's murder.
Miss Knox, who Italy’s Supreme Court last year acquitted of murder, maintained she was just doing yoga to relieve stress. Mr. Profazio was later transfered to Rome, then appointed in early 2015 to lead Florence Flying Squad, where he now is among the lead investigators probing Olsen’s murder.

I always thought the cop who saw her do "cartwheels" was a mystery cop from Rome.
 
The investigator in charge of the Florence Flying Squad is no stranger to high profile murder cases involving foreigners, having led the investigation into British exchange student Meredith Kercher’s murder in Perugia in 2007. As head of the Perugia Flying Squad at the time, Giacinto Profazio was present at Amanda Knox’s interrogation and had testified that the American from Seattle did cartwheels and the splits in the police station while waiting to be questioned about Miss Kercher's murder.
Miss Knox, who Italy’s Supreme Court last year acquitted of murder, maintained she was just doing yoga to relieve stress. Mr. Profazio was later transfered to Rome, then appointed in early 2015 to lead Florence Flying Squad, where he now is among the lead investigators probing Olsen’s murder.

I always thought the cop who saw her do "cartwheels" was a mystery cop from Rome.
 
andreajo said:
There are two logical fallacies here as described at https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com.

Burden of proof:

You claim that Bruno-Marasca is a copy-paste of Bongiorno's appeal documents. It is your claim to prove. You decline to do so.

Bandwagon:

You assert that it is common consensus that this is so. Leaving aside that you have the burden of proof to show that this is the actual common consensus, even if your copy-paste claim is believed by many, it does not follow that it is true.
Click to expand...

We are not in a court of law so there is no 'burden of proof' on me to prove anything. That Bruno-Marasca's MR reflects Bongiorno is my opinion. I am happy to give examples, but just not today, thanks.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Logical fallacy= false premise. We are not in a court of law so there is no 'burden of proof' on me to prove anything. That Bruno-Marasca's MR reflects Bongiorno is my opinion. I am happy to give examples, but not today, thanks.

My reference to common consensus was simply that this an opinion expressed by many. I am not claiming it as proof in support of my opinion.
Click to expand...

It is perfectly within your rights to have an opinion and express it.

What is objectionable among skeptics is to present statements as factual when they are merely opinion and without any foundation in fact. That is, they are false claims without any factual support.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom