Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[bagels]

It is all uncanny - even down to Knox gabbling about blood being on Sollecito's hand....or was that from the delicious sea-bass he was filleting while she read Harry Potter?

I found exclusive video of Raff and Amanda in San Angelo park after dumping the phones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8Q_8DvipCA

 

[query grind]

I found exclusive video of Raff and Amanda in San Angelo park after dumping the phones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8Q_8DvipCA

Requests for Raffaeles's delicious sea-bass recipe never make it through moderation at AmandaKnox.com. Then again neither do offers to buy her a casserole dish for her upcoming nuptials with Thunderstrike.

Sweet may the be uses of adversity, but I fear improving one's sense of humor (or what it pleases me to call humor) may not be one of them.

 

[acbytesla]

Serial refers to the podcast series regarding Adnan Syed. Strictly speaking the fact that incoming calls aren't reliable for location was not part of Syed rather it forms part of the basis of a Brady claim post conviction review of Syed on the grounds that the cover sheet containing this information was withheld from the defence and the prosecution expert witness.

I have no doubt your expertise as a salesman is legendary through-out the Greater Seattle area. To the extent this provides you with a deeper engineering knowledge I have no idea.

Friends of Amanda are notorious for providing "expert" opinions in areas which they are unqualified: Plangiale and Chris Halkides (the DNA guy) are some examples.


As I understand 22:13 was a text.
Perhaps we might have more confidence in your expertise if you had independently introduced this into your discussion rather than having brought to your attention by an acknowledged non-expert?




The Sollecito defence disagrees with you [Summary of Sollecito's defence in the Marasca report]

And the Italian Cassation Court endorsed the defence in this instance



I am not competent to discuss telecommunications, but if I am looking for an expert I will take the Sollecito's defence expert if it has been specifically endorsed as reliable by the Court over that of an anonymous person on the internet.

I I think you misunderstand a great deal of this as well as Raffaele's appeal.

I am not an engineer. I'm not very good at math to be honest. That said, I worked every day with telecom engineers, so I needed to have a solid understanding of how the components of the network generally and often specifically function so I could serve them. That said, I did not have the expertise to do their jobs.

But let me get back to the 10:13 call. Both Lana's and the cottage both are in range and have line of sight to the Wind tower so it's theoretically possible the phone could be in either place.
Is that what you're trying to say? If it is, then you are right.

However, this is not very probable. Possible, yes. given that the Wind cell repeater doesn't come close to making the top 3 best server for the cottage.

BTW, I figured this out before I read Pellero's or the other experts testimony on the subject. I worked back from Hellman's motivation because it was there I first read that the phone was probably in the park and not the cottage. I wanted to know why. It was the cell stuff that got me hooked on the case. I mapped out with Google Earth all the cell stations and measured distances from point to point. And the great thing is that Google Earth gives a great topographical perspective. You can see that there's a ridge line that would block cell reception at Lana's from the Aquila cell.

And no offense, I don't really care who you believe. I know what I know and the kids are free. So the rest don't matter.

 

[query grind]

I I think you misunderstand a great deal of this as well as Raffaele's appeal.
.

I haven't read Raffaele's appeal, I have only read the Marasca report's summary of his appeal and the part where they stated that they had determined the expert analysis of the Sollecito defence was superior to the prosecution's experts.

I am quite open to the fact that I have misunderstood it. From your perspective as a phone salesman, how should I interpret this line of the Marasca report?

4) at 10:13, an SMS was received by the cellular phone, in the place where it was abandoned, in via Sperandio.

 

[Bill Williams]

What a lot of co-incidences need to be overlooked to believe in the Lone Wolf scenario.

- a postal police (of all people) turning up to search a garden in response to a toilet bomb threat at the precise time or just after Guede tosses the phones in the garden
- a cat with a bleeding ear leaping all around the downstairs apartment and leaving large bloodstains on the bed sheets.
- a bunch of cars and a tow-truck employing stealth CCTV evading technology appearing right outside the house at the exact same time a woman's scream is heard an hour after Kercher's death
- Guede describing one of the intruders being blond, wearing a white woollen cap and jacket with the Norwegian flag on it - with precisely the same clothing being worn by a similar man at 5-6 am in Piazza Grimana

It is all uncanny - even down to Knox gabbling about blood being on Sollecito's hand....or was that from the delicious sea-bass he was filleting while she read Harry Potter?

Yeap, it all points to one thing: a crazed black sexual predator attempting a burglary and being surprised in the act. Thank god Friends of Amanda are here to explain it all to us.

You believe anything Guede says? One thing is consistent, you play the race card at frequent opportunity.

 

[Bill Williams]

I am not competent to discuss telecommunications, but if I am looking for an expert I will take the Sollecito's defence expert if it has been specifically endorsed as reliable by the Court over that of an anonymous person on the internet.

So, lessee----- an anonymous person on the internet ventures an opinion about another anonymous person on the internet, even if one of those latter folk are not anonymous and their bona fides are known. Gothcha.

 

[acbytesla]

What a lot of co-incidences need to be overlooked to believe in the Lone Wolf scenario.

- a postal police (of all people) turning up to search a garden in response to a toilet bomb threat at the precise time or just after Guede tosses the phones in the garden
- a cat with a bleeding ear leaping all around the downstairs apartment and leaving large bloodstains on the bed sheets.
- a bunch of cars and a tow-truck employing stealth CCTV evading technology appearing right outside the house at the exact same time a woman's scream is heard an hour after Kercher's death
- Guede describing one of the intruders being blond, wearing a white woollen cap and jacket with the Norwegian flag on it - with precisely the same clothing being worn by a similar man at 5-6 am in Piazza Grimana

It is all uncanny - even down to Knox gabbling about blood being on Sollecito's hand....or was that from the delicious sea-bass he was filleting while she read Harry Potter?

Yeap, it all points to one thing: a crazed black sexual predator attempting a burglary and being surprised in the act. Thank god Friends of Amanda are here to explain it all to us.

I don't care what color Guede is. That is irrelevant. I also don't think we should believe anything he says. And you can't very well say you believe some of what he says and disbelieve others although I'm sure some of what he says is true. But how do you know which? Filter it through your own bias?

You can ignore that Rudy only met Amanda 2 weeks before the murder and Rudy was in Milan for 3 of those days, but I can't.

You can ignore there is not a single call, email or text between them, but I can't.

You can ignore that Rudy was arrested for breaking into the nursery and had burglary tools, but I can't.

You can ignore that Rudy was possessing stolen goods from a second story heist that took place 2 weeks earlier, but I can't

You can ignore there is no credible motive for either Amanda or Raffaele, but I can't.

I could go on and on and on..but I won't..

 

[query grind]

You believe anything Guede says? One thing is consistent, you play the race card at frequent opportunity.

I don't believe anything Guede says nor do I, as opposed to Friends of Amanda, automatically assume everything Guede says is a lie. I apply the same reserve to Knox and Sollecito.

When Guede gives a description of a blond man with a white woollen cap and a napapijri jacket and seemingly independent witnesses in the early morning on Piazza Grimana describe a blond man with a white woollen cap and napaijri jacket with blood on his hand making a scene, then I don't automatically assume the two descriptions are unrelated.

To automatically assume Guede must be lying despite the uncanny resemblance in descriptions does strongly suggest to me that some people are probably motivated by racism when they assess evidence.

 

[query grind]

I could go on and on and on..but I won't..

Thank God for that, because you are well aware I don't believe Knox is guilty of any malice towards Meredith Kercher and nothing irritates me more than people who deliberately engage in strawmen tactics

 

[acbytesla]

I haven't read Raffaele's appeal, I have only read the Marasca report's summary of his appeal and the part where they stated that they had determined the expert analysis of the Sollecito defence was superior to the prosecution's experts.

I am quite open to the fact that I have misunderstood it. From your perspective as a phone salesman, how should I interpret this line of the Marasca report?

4) at 10:13, an SMS was received by the cellular phone, in the place where it was abandoned, in via Sperandio

.
I'm sorry, Isn't that a little self explanatory?

 

[acbytesla]

Thank God for that, because you are well aware I don't believe Knox is guilty of any malice towards Meredith Kercher and nothing irritates me more than people who deliberately engage in strawmen tactics

I don't get it Query, you seem reasonable. If there was real evidence that Amanda killed Meredith, I'd be pleased to see her do her time and then some. I don't actually know her and I don't have sympathy for killers. But where's the beef? I looked very hard at this and I just don't see any credible evidence.

 

[query grind]

.
I'm sorry, Isn't that a little self explanatory?

I believed it was - until you told me I didn't understand it.
So is it correct?

 

[Bill Williams]

I don't believe anything Guede says nor do I, as opposed to Friends of Amanda, automatically assume everything Guede says is a lie. I apply the same reserve to Knox and Sollecito.

When Guede gives a description of a blond man with a white woollen cap and a napapijri jacket and seemingly independent witnesses in the early morning on Piazza Grimana describe a blond man with a white woollen cap and napaijri jacket with blood on his hand making a scene, then I don't automatically assume the two descriptions are unrelated.

To automatically assume Guede must be lying despite the uncanny resemblance in descriptions does strongly suggest to me that some people are probably motivated by racism when they assess evidence.

For one thing you're wrong. On many levels. Even if there was some basis for this "yncanny resemblance," to take it and then say that those whi disagree are motivated by race, is itself racist so to assume so quickly.

It gives reason to suspect your whole scenario is also based on such canards.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't believe anything Guede says nor do I, as opposed to Friends of Amanda, automatically assume everything Guede says is a lie. I apply the same reserve to Knox and Sollecito.

When Guede gives a description of a blond man with a white woollen cap and a napapijri jacket and seemingly independent witnesses in the early morning on Piazza Grimana describe a blond man with a white woollen cap and napaijri jacket with blood on his hand making a scene, then I don't automatically assume the two descriptions are unrelated.

To automatically assume Guede must be lying despite the uncanny resemblance in descriptions does strongly suggest to me that some people are probably motivated by racism when they assess evidence.

I guess I don't follow. Neither Raffaele or Amanda are blonds.

 

[query grind]

For one thing you're wrong. On many levels. Even if there was some basis for this "yncanny resemblance," to take it and then say that those whi disagree are motivated by race, is itself racist so to assume so quickly.

Not consciously racist necessarily, but because the crazed black sexual predator is such a perfect fit to their world view that they unable to accept any evidence that points away from it.

A bit like assuming that a ticket to art exhibition could only appeared in Guede's trouser pockets because he had stolen it from the men downstairs.

Obviously I am not suggesting that Friends of Amanda think black people shouldn't be allowed to go to art exhibitions, but that they believe they are most likely only to be present in roles such as janitors and security guards

 

[acbytesla]

I believed it was - until you told me I didn't understand it.
So is it correct?

So how is that different from my explanation?

 

[acbytesla]

Not consciously racist necessarily, but because the crazed black sexual predator is such a perfect fit to their world view that they unable to accept any evidence that points away from it.

A bit like assuming that a ticket to art exhibition could only appeared in Guede's trouser pockets because he had stolen it from the men downstairs.

Obviously I am not suggesting that Friends of Amanda think black people shouldn't be allowed to go to art exhibitions, but that they believe they are most likely only to be present in roles such as janitors and security guards

Why not direct that comment to the person that made it instead of painting everyone who backs Amanda with a wide brush?

That one person makes a single comment about Rudy and not everyone of African descent does not really mean that person's comment was bigoted and it especially doesn't mean thar other people who believe Rudy killed Meredith are bigoted either.

 

[Bill Williams]

Not consciously racist necessarily, but because the crazed black sexual predator is such a perfect fit to their world view that they unable to accept any evidence that points away from it.

A bit like assuming that a ticket to art exhibition could only appeared in Guede's trouser pockets because he had stolen it from the men downstairs.

Obviously I am not suggesting that Friends of Amanda think black people shouldn't be allowed to go to art exhibitions, but that they believe they are most likely only to be present in roles such as janitors and security guards

What a load of hooey. You've not demonstrated anything of the sort. Point is - there's only evidence that one person did this crime. To suggest that failure to see other possibilities is because of racism and racism alone is racist.

Your "reasoning" above is simply a restatement of your unproven premise.

 

[sept79]

.
.
I would really like to know why the cops and prosecution continued to prosecute and persecute Amanda and Raffaele after the shoe prints were matched to Rudy and the case against the young pair disappeared? What makes people double down on stupid? Then there's the media, the bizarre Italian legal system not to mention the crazies that are logic impaired.

And why did the Italian judges refuse to reveal the ruse?

 

[Bill Williams]

Not consciously racist necessarily, but because the crazed black sexual predator is such a perfect fit to their world view that they unable to accept any evidence that points away from it.

A bit like assuming that a ticket to art exhibition could only appeared in Guede's trouser pockets because he had stolen it from the men downstairs.

Obviously I am not suggesting that Friends of Amanda think black people shouldn't be allowed to go to art exhibitions, but that they believe they are most likely only to be present in roles such as janitors and security guards

Why not instead just accuse everyone who does not agree with you of having early-onset dementia? All because you believe there are people out there who are "unable to accept" your point of view.

IMO the larger you make this deficiency of your critics, the more you;re trying to hide the tenuousness of what you're claiming. Get us all arguing about racism rather than the narrow-tenuous claim you are making which has nothing to do with it, all because you believe Rudy was suddenly telling the truth about a second person in the cottage wearing a hat!

The racist card was one Massei played when his own case was falling apart. Poor, poor Rudy. The guy who admitted on RAI3 to writing on the wall in Meredith's blood.