Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[bagels]

The judge in this case cannot make a ruling to that effect as it was not pleaded.

What was pleaded was that Amanda committed calunnia against the police when she accused them of brutality. She was found "not guilty" of this charge alone.

The calunnia conviction is being contested in the ECHR. If even local Italian judges saw clear rights violations during the interrogation in this recent ruling, it's probably not gonna be pretty when it gets to Strasbourg lol

 

[LondonJohn]

The judge in this case cannot make a ruling to that effect as it was not pleaded.

What was pleaded was that Amanda committed calunnia against the police when she accused them of brutality. She was found "not guilty" of this charge alone.

Uhhhh have you read the motivation report? Obviously the context is critical to the court's reasoning on the narrower issue of the police brutality. And the court makes it perfectly clear that it concluded that the police interrogators were actively coercing Knox in a calculated manner to force her to "confess" to something that they (the police and PM) had already decided was "the truth" (that Knox had left Sollecito's apartment that night and met up with the text message correspondent, and gone with him to the cottage where he had assaulted and murdered Kercher). Understanding this context correctly was key to understanding whether or not Knox's claims of physical assault were plausible.

 

[acbytesla]

Why do PGP think PIP would care what M&B confirmed? Massei confirmed Amanda carried a medieval broadsword across town stuffed into her purse and used it to slice Meredith's neck open in just a way that the wound resembled a stab from a small penknife, and then she rested the giant claymore on the bedsheet where it left an imprint of a small penknife, and then she packed it back into her purse and took it home and sliced bread with it. Do you think PIP believe that actually happened?

I'm still 100 percent convinced that BM never confirmed that Knox was there. They were just summarizing "judicial truths" that they could not set aside. The whole tenor of their motivation was to say that the investigation never proved a case. And to me the magic words were "even if" Even if these judicial truths were actually true, it doesn't prove their participation in Meredith's murder.

What's great about this latest motivation is the judge is saying "something stinks in Denmark".

 

[Vixen]

*sigh*

530.2 is not equivalent to "not proven". It covers everything from zero evidence of guilt right up to evidence just falling short of proof BARD. So, I repeat, it's equivalent to "not guilty", except for the fact that if one were found not guilty in E&W on account of either a) being able to PROVE your factual innocence, or b) the court determining that no crime even took place, that would be a 530.1 Italian acquittal.

But obviously you're going to carry on promoting the myth that 530.2 is equivalent to "not proven", because it's central to your need to believe that Knox and Sollecito really were involved in the murder, and that they "got away with it" on account of there just not being quite enough evidence to convict to the BARD standard. Which is fine I guess - there are plenty of people who steadfastly stick to the belief that Thermite brought down the Twin Towers in NYC and that the Moon Landings were filmed in a California TV studio

It is. Bath professor and expert in Italian law, Anna Cento Bull confirms it. Please refer to the extract I cited previously.

 

[Mr Fied]

Unfortunately for Amanda, the forensic evidence shows she did. For example, Mez blood in the bidet was diluted with water and mixed with Amanda (and it was not menstrual).

I'll get in my listening pose whilst you explain to me how that happened.

Unfortunately for you the forensic evidence shows nothing of the sort.

The forensic evidence shows that the swab they took contained Meredith's and Amanda's DNA. It can not show how the DNA got there, it can not show when the DNA got there.

Meredith's blood in the bidet mixed with water. What else would it be mixed with in the bidet?

Amanda's DNA found in her bidet in her bathroom. Shockhorror.

Did you see how they swabbed the sink and the bidet?

Now back to your original point, is there any PROOF Amanda WASHED Meredith's blood from her?

Could you provide a cite to the PROOF, not a made up judicial fact?

 

[LondonJohn]

It is. Bath professor and expert in Italian law, Anna Cento Bull confirms it. Please refer to the extract I cited previously.

What extract? How previously?

ETA: Anna Bull appears to be an expert in Italian history and Italian politics. Not Italian law. Another "innocent misremembering" of the truth....?

http://www.bath.ac.uk/polis/staff/anna-bull/

 

[Vixen]

Unfortunately for you the forensic evidence shows nothing of the sort.

The forensic evidence shows that the swab they took contained Meredith's and Amanda's DNA. It can not show how the DNA got there, it can not show when the DNA got there.

Meredith's blood in the bidet mixed with water. What else would it be mixed with in the bidet?

Amanda's DNA found in her bidet in her bathroom. Shockhorror.

Did you see how they swabbed the sink and the bidet?

Now back to your original point, is there any PROOF Amanda WASHED Meredith's blood from her?

Could you provide a cite to the PROOF, not a made up judicial fact?

But I thought you loved Bruno-Marasca? It is they who "made up the judicial fact" of Amanda washing off Mez' blood and covering up for Rudy.

 

[Mr Fied]

But I thought you loved Bruno-Marasca? It is they who "made up the judicial fact" of Amanda washing off Mez' blood and covering up for Rudy.

If we can get away from the childish remarks for a minute.

I have stated before that because the Italian courts finally came to the right decision, does not detract from the fact that their process is flawed.

These judicial facts are a farce.

There are provable, verified facts or there is conjecture.

There is no proof Knox washed blood from her.

She could not cover up for Guede because she wasn't involved.

 

[Planigale]

You are clearly not familiar with the evidence. Even Amanda herself mentions it in her prison diary.

No, it's not reasonable for you to assume "you made this up". Just because you do, with your phony DNA claims that the police DNA analyses are all wrong, Stefanoni incompetent, with your theory, qualifications and experience superior to theirs, which by strange coincidence, exonerates your darlings.

Thank you Vixen. I note that you resort to an ad hominem attack rather than addressing the argument. This is a sign that you have no evidence to support your assertion.

Proving a negative is difficult, but there appears to be no testimony saying there are female sized finger bruises on the victim's face. I did you the curtesy of looking up the literature to see if this was a valid observation, and it is not. There are ways of predicting gender from fingerprints but this requires detailed analysis of ridges, not visible on bruises.

So my case is that it was never said by the forensic pathologists - any of them and is not technically possible.

One of the things you should learn about a skeptic site is we try and address the argument. It is irrelevant that I am better qualified than Steffanoni, she undoubtedly has done more PCR work than I have. But it is wrong to imbue her with papal infallibility. Steffanoni is human and thus can err. It is entirely reasonable to review her work and if there are errors point them out.

 

[Planigale]

The judge in this case cannot make a ruling to that effect as it was not pleaded.
What was pleaded was that Amanda committed calunnia against the police when she accused them of brutality. She was found "not guilty" of this charge alone.

This is exactly the same as the issue about Guede wielding the knife. As the judge pointed out as this was never pleaded, they cannot make a ruling. So please remember it is not a judicial fact that Guede did not weild the knife. The judge was clear about this. It is the significantly different there is no ruling that Guede did wield the knife that caused the fatal injury. There is no definite ruling.

I previously posted the quote from the judge.

 

[Planigale]

Unfortunately for Amanda, the forensic evidence shows she did. For example, Mez blood in the bidet was diluted with water and mixed with Amanda (and it was not menstrual).

I'll get in my listening pose whilst you explain to me how that happened.

Did you look at the video I linked?

If you did, the blood stain around the drain in the bidet is there and visible and dry. So not diluted with water. Did you see how the swab of the drain was then wiped around other parts of the bidet including the rim? There is no way one can know where on the bidet Knox's DNA was (or Kercher's for that matter). One can certainly not conclude that the blood stain contained DNA of more than one individual. But do not believe me, look at the video of the evidence collection yourself. See how they wiped large areas of the bidet with the same swab. See how Steffanoni examined the plug with her gloved hands then touched the swab without changing gloves.

The presence of DNA in a bidet of a user of that bidet is not an indication of any suspicious activity.

How can you tell it is not menstrual blood? Or from haemorrhoids?

Can I reiterate, the fact that DNA of more than one individual was extracted from a swab does NOT mean that the original source was mingled DNA at a single point. It means that somewhere over the area that was swabbed DNA of two or more individuals was present. It does NOT mean the DNA was co-located.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I love those that claim that Amanda cleaned up all of the evidence of her and Raf being there, right down to most of the DNA and fingerprints, yet totally left all the evidence of Rudy being there intact, and then for some reason after making sure that the Cops had all the evidence pointing to Rudy as the killer, which she provided them by not cleaning it up, she then covered up that he was there. I'm sure this makes sense to someone.

 

[Vixen]

Thank you Vixen. I note that you resort to an ad hominem attack rather than addressing the argument. This is a sign that you have no evidence to support your assertion.

Proving a negative is difficult, but there appears to be no testimony saying there are female sized finger bruises on the victim's face. I did you the curtesy of looking up the literature to see if this was a valid observation, and it is not. There are ways of predicting gender from fingerprints but this requires detailed analysis of ridges, not visible on bruises.

So my case is that it was never said by the forensic pathologists - any of them and is not technically possible.

One of the things you should learn about a skeptic site is we try and address the argument. It is irrelevant that I am better qualified than Steffanoni, she undoubtedly has done more PCR work than I have. But it is wrong to imbue her with papal infallibility. Steffanoni is human and thus can err. It is entirely reasonable to review her work and if there are errors point them out.

Planigale, last time I went to the trouble of getting you sources, I was rewarded with a barrage of insults calling me a "liar", all because you couldn't be bothered to scroll down the page and when you eventually found it, you weren't even interested anyway.

So perhaps you can look it up for yourself this time.

 

[Strozzi]

Looks like Amanda has more judges on the mafia payroll.

Indeed, I hope the judges were paid off using Mafia money. As an American taxpayer, I think the US Government has already spent too much of my hard-earned money buying off the other Italian judges. Congress will have to earmark more funds in the Department of State's annual appropriation when the ECHR takes up the case. Justice does not come cheap.

 

[acbytesla]

Planigale, last time I went to the trouble of getting you sources, I was rewarded with a barrage of insults calling me a "liar", all because you couldn't be bothered to scroll down the page and when you eventually found it, you weren't even interested anyway.

So perhaps you can look it up for yourself this time.

You don't provide sources. At least not specific sources that back your claim. No, that's not correct. Sometimes you offer tabloid articles. You usually tell us to "get familiar with the evidence". Now I wouldn't call you a liar. Just someone who makes it up as you go.

 

[Vixen]

Did you look at the video I linked?

If you did, the blood stain around the drain in the bidet is there and visible and dry. So not diluted with water. Did you see how the swab of the drain was then wiped around other parts of the bidet including the rim? There is no way one can know where on the bidet Knox's DNA was (or Kercher's for that matter). One can certainly not conclude that the blood stain contained DNA of more than one individual. But do not believe me, look at the video of the evidence collection yourself. See how they wiped large areas of the bidet with the same swab. See how Steffanoni examined the plug with her gloved hands then touched the swab without changing gloves.

The presence of DNA in a bidet of a user of that bidet is not an indication of any suspicious activity.

How can you tell it is not menstrual blood? Or from haemorrhoids?

Can I reiterate, the fact that DNA of more than one individual was extracted from a swab does NOT mean that the original source was mingled DNA at a single point. It means that somewhere over the area that was swabbed DNA of two or more individuals was present. It does NOT mean the DNA was co-located.

We can tell it's not menstrual, because Stefanoni said it wasn't.

The Rome Scientific Police, the Forensic team, have a better handle on the facts than you.

They found plenty of DNA and luminol evidence that places the kids at the scene.

Each party was mandated to witness them doing all of their tests.

So you fancy yourself as a Barry Scheck-style defense attorney casting doubt from your armchair, hoping to get the near-certain killers off "on a technicality". In this perverse upside down world, it's the police on trial, the prosecutor the criminal and the killers the saints, because they were clever enough to delay discovery of the body - and hence finding key evidence - for as long as possible, and to contaminate the scene in so doing.

 

[Vixen]

You don't provide sources. At least not specific sources that back your claim. No, that's not correct. Sometimes you offer tabloid articles. You usually tell us to "get familiar with the evidence". Now I wouldn't call you a liar. Just someone who makes it up as you go.

It's common knowledge police found bottles of bleach and buckets of used latex gloves and rags. It is also well-known about the finger marks found on Mez' lower face.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited breach of rule 12

 

[analemma]

Sorry to bring you back down to earth, but Amanda's original calunnia conviction stands, in perpetuity. This judgment relates to the most recent calunnia trial only, brought by the cops against Amanda for accusing them of brutality. The excerpt is reasoning as to why the judge found her not guilty, in this case.

It's a side show, Bob, and means little in the grand scheme of things.

Incidentally, I have always said I did not approve of Anna Donnino acting like a detective when she was just there to interpret.

"in perpetuity" means until the ECHR orders the Italians to reverse the conviction and apologize to Amanda for what this latest ITALIAN COURT recognized were clear human rights violations. If the ITALIAN COURTS can recognize and condemn the Gestapo tactics of the Italian police in beating these statements out of Knox, you can bet that the NON-Italian ECHR will "bitch slap" the police into the ground.
"side show"??????????????
Starting with the acquittal, the rulings from Italian courts have been more just, realistic, and reasonable, showing a clear wish by the Italian Justice system to repair the damage done to the reputation of Italian courts by such biased and illogical idiots as Nencini, etc.
Incidentally, Vixen, I am noticing a higher percentage of misstatements and even outright lies in your more recent postings, which has changed the timbre of your arguments from what were sometimes interesting propositions to what has become shrill name calling.
I much prefer the "interesting propositions" to the shrill name calling, but after the recent beatification of Raffaele and the condemnation of the police Gestapo tactics, I can understand there would be some frustration.
I have a prediction;
It will get worse for the PGP
It will get a LOT WORSE

 

[Strozzi]

We can tell it's not menstrual, because Stefanoni said it wasn't.

The Rome Scientific Police, the Forensic team, have a better handle on the facts than you.

They found plenty of DNA and luminol evidence that places the kids at the scene.

Each party was mandated to witness them doing all of their tests.

So you fancy yourself as a Barry Scheck-style defense attorney casting doubt from your armchair, hoping to get the near-certain killers off "on a technicality". In this perverse upside down world, it's the police on trial, the prosecutor the criminal and the killers the saints, because they were clever enough to delay discovery of the body - and hence finding key evidence - for as long as possible, and to contaminate the scene in so doing.

STEFANONI SAID ? STEFANONI SAID ?
Sheesh . . . There is the problem!

Stefanoni is discredited. She is no more reliable than Guede.

 

[analemma]

I am the bearer of great news! ( sorry to interrupt your flow Vixen)

The motivation report re the police slander charge has been released and the article link and translation below, explains enough that we can see it must be painful reading for all concerned in Perugia.

https://goo.gl/8Hbgmc

Annella
Thanks SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much for providing this.
How did you find it????????????

It does not show up on any Google searches of "Amanda Knox"