Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Stacyhs]

Half of England knew Jimmy Saville was a slimeball.
Was this the half that approved of his knighthood or the half that rose up in protest when the man they all "knew" was a slimeball pedophile was getting a knighthood?

There were newspaper reports going back to 1968 wherein he told one reporter police had warned him to never be alone with an eight year old girl again.
So a cop knew Savile had abused an 8 yr. old girl but just told him not to be alone with another 8 year old again and Savile ratted on himself to the reporter? Come now; use your head. It's more likely the cop was giving Savile a piece of good advice not to put himself into a situation where he could be accused of something. Just as male teachers are told never to be alone with a female student in their classroom with the door shut.

There was the paedohile ring scandal at a children's home in Jersey, and Jimmy Saville was named as one of the 'uncles' who often visited. I mentioned this on a mensa forum, way back, and everyone else said they'd always had their doubts about him, too. Suddenly everything went quiet: Jimmy Saville threatened to sue for libel, and that was the end of that. We are a class-ridden society in the UK and the rich and famous are well-protected, as is evidenced by the sheer number of sex abuse stories that only come out AFTER the person has died.

You're missing the point which is that "pervy criminals" don't all have a " well known and recognized sleazy look to their eyes" as you claimed. Savile got away with being a sleazy criminal for a long time.

Of course you cannot have people judged in a court of law by their appearance. That would be quite wrong and unethical. However, criminologists have always been fascinated by the criminal's appearance and behaviour.
You're half right. They are concerned with their behavior, not their appearance. What is widely accepted is that there is no way to tell a criminal by their eyes, hair color, nose size, chin or any other physical feature. Well, there is always phrenology, right?

The quote about sex offenders looking sleazy came directly from author J Paul de River, who was director of the Los Angeles Police Department Sex Offense Bureau in the 1940's. He has photos of the various convicts and observes: "Note the dreamy, neuropathic eyes often found among sexual criminals'.


So, it wasn't "detectiveS" as you claimed, but one detective from the 1940's?. LOL In the 1940's it was also widely believed that women were emotionally unsuited to hold positions of power/leadership and belonged in the home raising babies and putting dinner on the table for the "head of the household".

Some people are better at judging character than others; these people often make good detectives and judges.

That is true. But studies also show that police are no better at discerning lies than the general public although they believe they are. Once again, what has that got to do with your claim that pervy criminals have a well known and recognizable sleazy look to their eyes?

BTW, acbytesla: contrary to your belief, parents are only too aware of the proclivities of teenage boys.

As the mother of a daughter, I can vouch for that. But it doesn't mean parents can't be fooled by someone they think is "such a nice boy". Maybe parents of daughters need to take a course in recognizing those give-away "sleazy" eyes.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Oh please. I was in my office during the day and during the night, I was fast asleep in my bed. Airport authorities will confirm I never left the country. We have passport control here.

Wait wait wait. Meredith was still alive at 8:45pm Italian time. Meaning, assuming you are from the U.K., you definitely were not still at your office. You say you were home and fast asleep. But we have no eye witnesses to corroborate this. You are telling me that we are to take your word for it? This is a murder investigation Vixen, we have to take this seriously. Do you need an Italian interpreter?

Furthermore, regarding your so called "passport control", there has been "big money" involved in this case. I believe that fact has been brought up several times in this thread. Are you telling me Richard Branson money can't make airport authorities turn a blind eye or two?

Also, according to this website (http://www.worldtravelguide.net/italy/passport-visa) you only need a national ID card to enter Italy if you are from the UK. Perhaps Richard Branson or Donald Trump didn't actually need to pay off airport authorities and saved the money for Vixen's personal PR campaign to throw off the scent?

So let me get this straight. You're saying you didn't commit the murder, but you claim you were alone the entire night? No eye witnesses? Really? That is your full story?

Amanda has Raffaele as an alibi. Plus an electronic time stamp of them interacting with the computer in Raffaele's apartment at the exact time the murder occurred. Looks far more airtight than your "I was home asleep by myself" story.

Sounds like miss "I was alone all night officers, I swear" may be in a bit of trouble here.

A whole team of judges assembled in the murder room and they could see there was ample room for them. As Mez was restrained by the perps, not sure why you think size matters.

Because a struggle consisting of 4 people in a small room would leave evidence of 4 people. There was no magic or witchcraft here Vixen. Evidence of Rudy alone means Rudy did it alone.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

This is an imperfect analogy.

Well, my point isn't necessarily that some people have better "alibis" than others, nor that some people are/aren't more likely to have been able to commit the murder.

My point is that no matter what the alibi, you can construct ridiculously implausible narratives to get around whatever proof you have. Vixen claims she was in the U.K. at the time sleeping. Fine, whatever. Seems like a pretty weak story. Amanda has Raffaele as an alibi. Case closed right? Nope, now Raffaele must have been involved in this ancient Halloween Samhain murder rite. Oh wait there was evidence they used Raf's computer at the time of the murder? Oh err umm then all of the scientific evidence on gastric emptying must of course be wrong. Donald Trump got to those scientists too (before the murder... but still who cares about making sense? We've gotta get that American girl. This is 17th century Salem after all. Amanda was a slut and wasn't leading a traditional Puritan lifestyle, so she must be punished.)

 

[Stacyhs]

Wait wait wait. Meredith was still alive at 8:45pm Italian time. Meaning, assuming you are from the U.K., you definitely were not still at your office. You say you were home and fast asleep. But we have no eye witnesses to corroborate this. You are telling me that we are to take your word for it? This is a murder investigation Vixen, we have to take this seriously. Do you need an Italian interpreter?

Furthermore, regarding your so called "passport control", there has been "big money" involved in this case. I believe that fact has been brought up several times in this thread. Are you telling me Richard Branson money can't make airport authorities turn a blind eye or two?

Also, according to this website (http://www.worldtravelguide.net/italy/passport-visa) you only need a national ID card to enter Italy if you are from the UK. Perhaps Richard Branson or Donald Trump didn't actually need to pay off airport authorities and saved the money for Vixen's personal PR campaign to throw off the scent?

So let me get this straight. You're saying you didn't commit the murder, but you claim you were alone the entire night? No eye witnesses? Really? That is your full story?

Amanda has Raffaele as an alibi. Plus an electronic time stamp of them interacting with the computer in Raffaele's apartment at the exact time the murder occurred. Looks far more airtight than your "I was home asleep by myself" story.

Sounds like miss "I was alone all night officers, I swear" may be in a bit of trouble here.



Because a struggle consisting of 4 people in a small room would leave evidence of 4 people[/B]. There was no magic or witchcraft here Vixen. Evidence of Rudy alone means Rudy did it alone.

You forget that Amanda and Raff cleaned up all traces of themselves because they have supernatural abilities to see things normally invisible to the naked eye AND to distinguish one person's DNA and fingerprints from another's. I thought that was universally accepted.

 

[Vixen]

Wait wait wait. Meredith was still alive at 8:45pm Italian time. Meaning, assuming you are from the U.K., you definitely were not still at your office. You say you were home and fast asleep. But we have no eye witnesses to corroborate this. You are telling me that we are to take your word for it? This is a murder investigation Vixen, we have to take this seriously. Do you need an Italian interpreter?

Furthermore, regarding your so called "passport control", there has been "big money" involved in this case. I believe that fact has been brought up several times in this thread. Are you telling me Richard Branson money can't make airport authorities turn a blind eye or two?

Also, according to this website (http://www.worldtravelguide.net/italy/passport-visa) you only need a national ID card to enter Italy if you are from the UK. Perhaps Richard Branson or Donald Trump didn't actually need to pay off airport authorities and saved the money for Vixen's personal PR campaign to throw off the scent?

So let me get this straight. You're saying you didn't commit the murder, but you claim you were alone the entire night? No eye witnesses? Really? That is your full story?

Amanda has Raffaele as an alibi. Plus an electronic time stamp of them interacting with the computer in Raffaele's apartment at the exact time the murder occurred. Looks far more airtight than your "I was home asleep by myself" story.

Sounds like miss "I was alone all night officers, I swear" may be in a bit of trouble here.



Because a struggle consisting of 4 people in a small room would leave evidence of 4 people. There was no magic or witchcraft here Vixen. Evidence of Rudy alone means Rudy did it alone.

I know exactly what I was doing between 20:40 - 01:00 and beyond that day. Plenty of witnesses, and my family can vouch I returned home by at least 21:00-22:00. I am not going to reveal any personal details. At border control your passport is electronically verified. The UK doesn't have national ID cards, although I do have an EU (non-compulsory)card (+passport) because of my dual nationality and is the same size as a credit card.

In addition, there is zero scientific evidence and zero reason to suspect me.

 

[Vixen]

Well, my point isn't necessarily that some people have better "alibis" than others, nor that some people are/aren't more likely to have been able to commit the murder.

My point is that no matter what the alibi, you can construct ridiculously implausible narratives to get around whatever proof you have. Vixen claims she was in the U.K. at the time sleeping. Fine, whatever. Seems like a pretty weak story. Amanda has Raffaele as an alibi. Case closed right? Nope, now Raffaele must have been involved in this ancient Halloween Samhain murder rite. Oh wait there was evidence they used Raf's computer at the time of the murder? Oh err umm then all of the scientific evidence on gastric emptying must of course be wrong. Donald Trump got to those scientists too (before the murder... but still who cares about making sense? We've gotta get that American girl. This is 17th century Salem after all. Amanda was a slut and wasn't leading a traditional Puritan lifestyle, so she must be punished.)

Raff told police he was on his computer until 03:00 and Amanda came in 01:00. Police discovered he had lied to them as there was zero activity after 21:30, and that was an auto-ending of Amélie and an auto download of Nauruto (_sp). In addition, he claimed to have slept beyond 10:30 and after breakfast he went back to bed until nearly 12:30 next day. Yet he retrieved his phone messages and played some rock music between 05:00 and 06:30.

He turned off his phone between 20:55 and 05:30 and lied to police about it. How did he know this time would be significant? He told police he took a call from Papa Raff 23:00, another blatant lie. It was uncharacteristic of Raff not to spend a great part of the evening texting and using his phone.

Why lie? Plus his DNA was on Mez' bra, his knife was the scientifically proven murder weapon, his bare footprints appeared in luminol (standard test for recent blood) and his footprint appears on the bath mat (it is not Rudy's or Amanda's for definite).

Of the 40K students in Perugia, I don't recall any of them being persecuted by the Italian police for slutty student behaviour.

Time for a reality check.

You are in denial.

 

[Vixen]

You forget that Amanda and Raff cleaned up all traces of themselves because they have supernatural abilities to see things normally invisible to the naked eye AND to distinguish one person's DNA and fingerprints from another's. I thought that was universally accepted.

You do know Raff got through almost a bottle and a half of brand new ACE bleach, and there were a whole load of used rags and latex gloves in his bathroom bin. In addition, the flooding the kids reported in his flat was most likely caused by his unassembling the sink U-Bend to clear out the blockages/clean up incriminating debris from the murder clean up, rather than a sudden leaking pipe, that started 20:40 according to Papa Raff, as that was the last time they spoke, or after 23:00 according to Amanda when they had a late meal (what student cooks at 23:00? Gutting a fish? Really?). Washing up doesn't cause a pipe to leak. Amanda claims the 'pipe burst' as she was fondling him from behind. Burst pipes only happen in the road outside, or as a result of extremely cold weather causing the metal to contract, and frozen water making it expand. Italy is not known for Arctic conditions.

We saw Raff's half footprint on the bathmat, and Rudy's one-sided shoe prints in the hall. Obviously, someone cleaned around them.

It is staring you in the face.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

I know exactly what I was doing between 20:40 - 01:00 and beyond that day.

You know *exactly* what you were doing after 8:40 pm on the 6th of November..... 9 years ago? That seems pretty outlandish. And given your proven penchant for lying, this becomes even more suspicious.

Plenty of witnesses, and my family can vouch I returned home by at least 21:00-22:00.

Plenty of witnesses? You said you were home sleeping in your last post. Can you not keep your story straight?

I am not sure your family vouching for you will help you here Vixen. They are related to you and thus have a vested interest in lying to authorities. Besides, much like Raffaele (one of the people who you are trying to smear to throw off attention to yourself), how do we know your family members weren't involved? Remember, although it was a tiny bedroom Vixen, there was PLENTY of room for multiple people. Just like the judges said.

I am not going to reveal any personal details.

You don't need to. All of your documented lies is all of the information we need. You haven't requested a lawyer yet nor a translator. Are you sure you're aware of your rights?

At border control your passport is electronically verified. The UK doesn't have national ID cards, although I do have an EU (non-compulsory)card (+passport) because of my dual nationality and is the same size as a credit card.

The UK had a national ID card in 2008. It could be used for international travel to Italy. It was not canceled until 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/identity-cards-and-new-identity-and-passport-service-suppliers). The lies continue to mount. Hmm.

Why would an innocent person need to lie?

In addition, there is zero scientific evidence and zero reason to suspect me.

Wait, are you now saying a lack of scientific evidence is a valid reason to believe someone wasn't involved in the murder? Have you seen this paper Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is about how the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito case was analyzed incorrectly and misinterpreted. Peter Gill is a leading scientist in the field of forensic genetics. He has published numerous resources on how the scientific evidence used against Amanda and Raffaele was nonexistent. So there is zero scientific evidence against them.

Do you have any articles published by someone of the caliber of Peter Gill stating that was zero scientific evidence against you? If not, that is rather troubling. Perhaps you indeed are a more likely suspect than Amanda Knox? She had an alibi in Raffaele. They have an electronic time stamp on Raf's computer showing they were at Raf's apartment when the murder occurred. They have numerous published books and articles by leading forensic scientists showing how there was zero scientific evidence against them.

But you... you have none of this. You were asleep? At home? Alone? Right. Perhaps you can get some family members to vouch for this, but they have an incentive to lie. And they were perhaps involved as well (since at least 4 people could fit in that bedroom, as you said). Plus while Amanda and Raffaele have an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence showing they were NOT there (see the article I linked above), you don't have any of this.

The bra clasp had multiple unknown contributors. Has anyone tested Vixen's DNA to compare?

 

[Vixen]

Because a struggle consisting of 4 people in a small room would leave evidence of 4 people. There was no magic or witchcraft here Vixen. Evidence of Rudy alone means Rudy did it alone.

It is clear Mez' was restrained. Pathologists set out the injuries and bruises indicating her arms were forced behind her back. At least two different knifes were used. A hand was put over Mez' mouth and neck, her hair was pulled back, as she was forced onto all fours. You are claiming Rudy did all this with the minimum of movement or loosening of his hold and without any skirmish. A pile of postcards at the edge of Mez' desk and a glass of water, are virtually undisturbed in this extremely violent attack. It simply isn't reasonable to believe one person could do all this and then come back later to stage a burglary and undress and pose the body. Rudy went disco dancing.

 

[Vixen]

You know *exactly* what you were doing after 8:40 pm on the 6th of November..... 9 years ago? That seems pretty outlandish. And given your proven penchant for lying, this becomes even more suspicious.



Plenty of witnesses? You said you were home sleeping in your last post. Can you not keep your story straight?

I am not sure your family vouching for you will help you here Vixen. They are related to you and thus have a vested interest in lying to authorities. Besides, much like Raffaele (one of the people who you are trying to smear to throw off attention to yourself), how do we know your family members weren't involved? Remember, although it was a tiny bedroom Vixen, there was PLENTY of room for multiple people. Just like the judges said.



You don't need to. All of your documented lies is all of the information we need. You haven't requested a lawyer yet nor a translator. Are you sure you're aware of your rights?



The UK had a national ID card in 2008. It could be used for international travel to Italy. It was not canceled until 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/identity-cards-and-new-identity-and-passport-service-suppliers). The lies continue to mount. Hmm.

Why would an innocent person need to lie?



Wait, are you now saying a lack of scientific evidence is a valid reason to believe someone wasn't involved in the murder? Have you seen this paper Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is about how the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito case was analyzed incorrectly and misinterpreted. Peter Gill is a leading scientist in the field of forensic genetics. He has published numerous resources on how the scientific evidence used against Amanda and Raffaele was nonexistent. So there is zero scientific evidence against them.

Do you have any articles published by someone of the caliber of Peter Gill stating that was zero scientific evidence against you? If not, that is rather troubling. Perhaps you indeed are a more likely suspect than Amanda Knox? She had an alibi in Raffaele. They have an electronic time stamp on Raf's computer showing they were at Raf's apartment when the murder occurred. They have numerous published books and articles by leading forensic scientists showing how there was zero scientific evidence against them.

But you... you have none of this. You were asleep? At home? Alone? Right. Perhaps you can get some family members to vouch for this, but they have an incentive to lie. And they were perhaps involved as well (since at least 4 people could fit in that bedroom, as you said). Plus while Amanda and Raffaele have an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence showing they were NOT there (see the article I linked above), you don't have any of this.

The bra clasp had multiple unknown contributors. Has anyone tested Vixen's DNA to compare?

I know what I was doing 1st November 2007as I had a very busy schedule and kept to a tight calendar. I know for a fact in 2007 I was engaged on a Thursday evening every week. Your logic is poor and absurd.

 

[Vixen]

You know *exactly* what you were doing after 8:40 pm on the 6th of November..... 9 years ago? That seems pretty outlandish. And given your proven penchant for lying, this becomes even more suspicious.



Plenty of witnesses? You said you were home sleeping in your last post. Can you not keep your story straight?

I am not sure your family vouching for you will help you here Vixen. They are related to you and thus have a vested interest in lying to authorities. Besides, much like Raffaele (one of the people who you are trying to smear to throw off attention to yourself), how do we know your family members weren't involved? Remember, although it was a tiny bedroom Vixen, there was PLENTY of room for multiple people. Just like the judges said.



You don't need to. All of your documented lies is all of the information we need. You haven't requested a lawyer yet nor a translator. Are you sure you're aware of your rights?



The UK had a national ID card in 2008. It could be used for international travel to Italy. It was not canceled until 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/identity-cards-and-new-identity-and-passport-service-suppliers). The lies continue to mount. Hmm.

Why would an innocent person need to lie?



Wait, are you now saying a lack of scientific evidence is a valid reason to believe someone wasn't involved in the murder? Have you seen this paper Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is about how the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito case was analyzed incorrectly and misinterpreted. Peter Gill is a leading scientist in the field of forensic genetics. He has published numerous resources on how the scientific evidence used against Amanda and Raffaele was nonexistent. So there is zero scientific evidence against them.

Do you have any articles published by someone of the caliber of Peter Gill stating that was zero scientific evidence against you? If not, that is rather troubling. Perhaps you indeed are a more likely suspect than Amanda Knox? She had an alibi in Raffaele. They have an electronic time stamp on Raf's computer showing they were at Raf's apartment when the murder occurred. They have numerous published books and articles by leading forensic scientists showing how there was zero scientific evidence against them.

But you... you have none of this. You were asleep? At home? Alone? Right. Perhaps you can get some family members to vouch for this, but they have an incentive to lie. And they were perhaps involved as well (since at least 4 people could fit in that bedroom, as you said). Plus while Amanda and Raffaele have an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence showing they were NOT there (see the article I linked above), you don't have any of this.

The bra clasp had multiple unknown contributors. Has anyone tested Vixen's DNA to compare?

That's for you to ask and for me to tell.

 

[Annella]

You do know Raff got through almost a bottle and a half of brand new ACE bleach, and there were a whole load of used rags and latex gloves in his bathroom bin. In addition, the flooding the kids reported in his flat was most likely caused by his unassembling the sink U-Bend to clear out the blockages/clean up incriminating debris from the murder clean up, rather than a sudden leaking pipe, that started 20:40 according to Papa Raff, as that was the last time they spoke, or after 23:00 according to Amanda when they had a late meal (what student cooks at 23:00? Gutting a fish? Really?). Washing up doesn't cause a pipe to leak. Amanda claims the 'pipe burst' as she was fondling him from behind. Burst pipes only happen in the road outside, or as a result of extremely cold weather causing the metal to contract, and frozen water making it expand. Italy is not known for Arctic conditions.

We saw Raff's half footprint on the bathmat, and Rudy's one-sided shoe prints in the hall. Obviously, someone cleaned around them.

It is staring you in the face.

Since when did ISF become a forum for wannabe stand up comics?

 

[LondonJohn]

You know *exactly* what you were doing after 8:40 pm on the 6th of November..... 9 years ago? That seems pretty outlandish. And given your proven penchant for lying, this becomes even more suspicious.



Plenty of witnesses? You said you were home sleeping in your last post. Can you not keep your story straight?

I am not sure your family vouching for you will help you here Vixen. They are related to you and thus have a vested interest in lying to authorities. Besides, much like Raffaele (one of the people who you are trying to smear to throw off attention to yourself), how do we know your family members weren't involved? Remember, although it was a tiny bedroom Vixen, there was PLENTY of room for multiple people. Just like the judges said.



You don't need to. All of your documented lies is all of the information we need. You haven't requested a lawyer yet nor a translator. Are you sure you're aware of your rights?



The UK had a national ID card in 2008. It could be used for international travel to Italy. It was not canceled until 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/identity-cards-and-new-identity-and-passport-service-suppliers). The lies continue to mount. Hmm.

Why would an innocent person need to lie?



Wait, are you now saying a lack of scientific evidence is a valid reason to believe someone wasn't involved in the murder? Have you seen this paper Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is about how the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito case was analyzed incorrectly and misinterpreted. Peter Gill is a leading scientist in the field of forensic genetics. He has published numerous resources on how the scientific evidence used against Amanda and Raffaele was nonexistent. So there is zero scientific evidence against them.

Do you have any articles published by someone of the caliber of Peter Gill stating that was zero scientific evidence against you? If not, that is rather troubling. Perhaps you indeed are a more likely suspect than Amanda Knox? She had an alibi in Raffaele. They have an electronic time stamp on Raf's computer showing they were at Raf's apartment when the murder occurred. They have numerous published books and articles by leading forensic scientists showing how there was zero scientific evidence against them.

But you... you have none of this. You were asleep? At home? Alone? Right. Perhaps you can get some family members to vouch for this, but they have an incentive to lie. And they were perhaps involved as well (since at least 4 people could fit in that bedroom, as you said). Plus while Amanda and Raffaele have an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence showing they were NOT there (see the article I linked above), you don't have any of this.

The bra clasp had multiple unknown contributors. Has anyone tested Vixen's DNA to compare?

I truly don't think it's even worth trying to counter-argue a "true believer"-style "argument". In exactly the same way, a 9/11 Truther will continue to insist that the footage of the WTC Twin Towers collapse proves that the towers were brought down by Thermite, or a Moon-Landing-Hoaxer will continue to insist that the film footage shows ample proof that it was shot on a studio sound stage in the US. And no matter how patiently one explains matters such as structural load analysis or the effects of (lower) gravity and Newtonian conservation of momentum to such people, they steadfastly refuse to shift from their now zealously-cherished belief.

Every enlightened person who is sufficiently informed about the Kercher case and who is sufficiently intelligent to understand the science and jurisprudence relevant to the case can very easily and confidently conclude that ALL of the forensic DNA/blood "evidence" against Knox and Sollecito in this case was junk, performed by incompetent and dissembling operatives all the way through the process - from collection of evidence at the scene through transportation and storage and through to testing and interpretation. Literally ALL of it. Similarly, it's easy to confidently conclude that the bath mat partial print can in no way be either attributed to Sollecito or "un-attributed" to Guede, and that the "expert" prosecution testimony about this partial print was shockingly inept pseudoscience.

And so on and so on. At the end of the day, you and I (and pretty much every single pro-acquittal commentator) are simply correct in the conclusions we've reached - and fortunately our conclusions have - albeit belatedly and at some cost (both personal and financial) - been ratified by the Italian courts (save for the criminal slander conviction, which I have little doubt the ECHR will conclusively sort out). Believe me when I say that, just as with 9/11 and the Moon landings, there will always be a small cadre of people who, for one reason or another, need to cling to their provably incorrect beliefs. And believe me too when I say that virtually all such people will go to their graves in the zealous - but fundamentally mistaken and ignorant - belief that they are right, regardless of how many times their dogma is demolished by proper scientific analysis and proper critical thinking. So my considered advice is to stop even trying - it's a racing certainty that your arguments will fall on deaf, ignorant, misguided ears.

 

[Vixen]

To sum up

We have established in the last few days:

1. Kokomani did indeed claim to have been offered €100K to 'lose the testimony' and this he made to the prosecutor as early as January 2008.

2. We know for a fact Aviello (a mafia convict) made a claim Bongiorno offered to pay his sex change fees (circa €100K) if he falsified testimony to save Raff.

3. Bongiorno claimed she would sue for libel, but never did.

4. It is a PR soundbite 'there is no evidence the kids were at the scene'. There is cold objective scientific evidence, such as luminol and the identification of DNA left at the scene. There are five DNA samples of Amanda's mixed with Mez's, in two of them, Amanda's DNA is greater than Mez's, indicating she was bleeding herself, given the volume.

5. Hellman's report was repudiated as legally incorrect, invalid and grossly unprofessional, yet the PIP cling onto Hellmann as the main proof the kids are innocent.

6. The trial courts, Massei and Nencini, found overwhelmingly the kids were guilty as charged, despite making all kinds of concessions, such as blocking Amanda's self-incriminating voluntarily written documents (i.e, her memo to the police, which she called, 'a gift' and her 3:00 am email to all in her address book - despite a police embargo on her revealing confidential crime details) and knocking off up to six years for their youth.

7. The fact finding merits courts ruled out any reasonable possibility of contamination.

8. The defense forensic consultants Conti & Vecchiotti were seen wining and dining with the defense team of Maori during the hearing. Both have been heavily criticised by the Supreme court and have been found wanting by disciplinary committees. Their laboratories were shut down, with unclaimed cadavers littering the corridors and poor standards.

9. It is highly unlikely Raff had a sudden burst pipe in his kitchen as of the night of the murder. (Amanda, ducky, that was no burst pipe.)

 

[Bill Williams]

We have established in the last few days I have made wild assertions about the following things and have provided no proof at all that any of these things were true:

1. Kokomani did indeed claim to have been offered €100K to 'lose the testimony' and this he made to the prosecutor as early as January 2008.

2. We know for a fact Aviello (a mafia convict) made a claim Bongiorno offered to pay his sex change fees (circa €100K) if he falsified testimony to save Raff.

3. Bongiorno claimed she would sue for libel, but never did.

4. It is a PR soundbite 'there is no evidence the kids were at the scene'. There is cold objective scientific evidence, such as luminol and the identification of DNA left at the scene. There are five DNA samples of Amanda's mixed with Mez's, in two of them, Amanda's DNA is greater than Mez's, indicating she was bleeding herself, given the volume.

5. Hellman's report was repudiated as legally incorrect, invalid and grossly unprofessional, yet the PIP cling onto Hellmann as the main proof the kids are innocent.

6. The trial courts, Massei and Nencini, found overwhelmingly the kids were guilty as charged, despite making all kinds of concessions, such as blocking Amanda's self-incriminating voluntarily written documents (i.e, her memo to the police, which she called, 'a gift' and her 3:00 am email to all in her address book - despite a police embargo on her revealing confidential crime details) and knocking off up to six years for their youth.

7. The fact finding merits courts ruled out any reasonable possibility of contamination.

8. The defense forensic consultants Conti & Vecchiotti were seen wining and dining with the defense team of Maori during the hearing. Both have been heavily criticised by the Supreme court and have been found wanting by disciplinary committees. Their laboratories were shut down, with unclaimed cadavers littering the corridors and poor standards.

9. It is highly unlikely Raff had a sudden burst pipe in his kitchen as of the night of the murder. (Amanda, ducky, that was no burst pipe.)

There. I fixed that for you. As an aside, there is no "we" to those wild assertions. Those wild assertions are all Vixen.

It's hilarious that you'd say that Kokomani said damning things about the pair, then you add that he was bribed not to! One of the daming things Koko said about Knox was that he'd seen her before she'd even arrived in Italy!

Marasca/Bruno summarize Raffaele's poition on Koko (and others) this way, a position that Marasca/Bruno arguably agree with given that they acquitted Raffaele of this crime.

d) Limits of reliability of testimonial statements (such as those of Dramis,
Monacchia, Quintavalle and Curatolo) made at a distance of time from the events
following the urging of journalists. The legal issue is that of verifying the reliability of
testimony in proceedings with a strong interest in the media, with a particular
reference to the witnesses Gioffredi and Kokomani and to the deposition of Luciano
Aviello, previously convicted of several offences, who did not hesitate to make
libellous statements regarding public prosecutors and Raffaele Sollecito's counsel
and father.
The intervention of the highest jurisdictional assembly was necessary so that evaluative criteria for oral evidence would be established in trials of the strongest interest to the media, to preserve the credibility of the legal process, sheltering it from varieties of mythomania and from judicial protagonism.​

So we have also established that the ISC ruled that it is dangerous for lower courts to arrive at verdicts based on evidence tainted by, "varieties of mythomania and from judicial protagonism."

I just thought you'd want to know as someone committed to the truth.

 

[LondonJohn]

Love how Vixen continues to ignorantly refer to Conti/Vecchiotti as "defence expert consultants". As she ought to very well know, they were independent court-appointed experts. And they eviscerated the incompetent (and worse) work done by Stefanoni on the case, as well as the way in which prosecutors colluded with Stefanoni to obfuscate, misdirect and dissemble.

Whether they had a coffee with Maori or not is entirely neither here nor there - especially as the alleged incident happened well after their work had been completed and their report had been submitted to the court. Is Vixen equally ignorant of salient related facts such as the regular drink and dinner shindigs that prosecutors, judges and media commentators were having together throughout the trial process? Or perhaps if one is terminally biassed and incapable of critical though, only certain fraternisations "count"........

As I said: total waste of time. And space.

 

[Bill Williams]

Love how Vixen continues to ignorantly refer to Conti/Vecchiotti as "defence expert consultants". As she ought to very well know, they were independent court-appointed experts. And they eviscerated the incompetent (and worse) work done by Stefanoni on the case, as well as the way in which prosecutors colluded with Stefanoni to obfuscate, misdirect and dissemble.

Whether they had a coffee with Maori or not is entirely neither here nor there - especially as the alleged incident happened well after their work had been completed and their report had been submitted to the court. Is Vixen equally ignorant of salient related facts such as the regular drink and dinner shindigs that prosecutors, judges and media commentators were having together throughout the trial process? Or perhaps if one is terminally biassed and incapable of critical though, only certain fraternisations "count"........

As I said: total waste of time. And space.

By Vixen's standards, the lone photo of Mignini and John Follain on the street together should invalidate everything Follain ever wrote.

Fortunately his writings can be invalidated on their own merits.

 

[bagels]

5. Hellman's report was repudiated as legally incorrect, invalid and grossly unprofessional, yet the PIP cling onto Hellmann as the main proof the kids are innocent.

6. The trial courts, Massei and Nencini, found overwhelmingly the kids were guilty as charged,

lol

 

[Bill Williams]

Love how Vixen continues to ignorantly refer to Conti/Vecchiotti as "defence expert consultants". As she ought to very well know, they were independent court-appointed experts. And they eviscerated the incompetent (and worse) work done by Stefanoni on the case, as well as the way in which prosecutors colluded with Stefanoni to obfuscate, misdirect and dissemble.

Whether they had a coffee with Maori or not is entirely neither here nor there - especially as the alleged incident happened well after their work had been completed and their report had been submitted to the court. Is Vixen equally ignorant of salient related facts such as the regular drink and dinner shindigs that prosecutors, judges and media commentators were having together throughout the trial process? Or perhaps if one is terminally biassed and incapable of critical though, only certain fraternisations "count"........

As I said: total waste of time. And space.

However it is illustrative, as others have pointed out, that PGP and Vixen have to either lie or misrepresent the truth to make their case.

It's the same for their criticism that Vecchiotti's institution was sanctioned for improper storage of cadavers. That criticism, as it relates to Vecchiotti, is a monumental, "So!?"

Vecchiotti's work had nothing to do with the storage of cadavers.

Mignini, on the other hand, was directly sanctioned by his peers for abusing Sollecito's rights at interrogation. Nencini writes that Raffaele's DNA was found on the knife - a mistake in a legal document which threatened to put Sollecito away for 25 years; which Vixen calls, "a typo". (Vixen erased one of her posts upthread which had said that she has personally seen many typos in legal documents.)

The upshot is - who are you going to believe?

 

[Welshman]

However it is illustrative, as others have pointed out, that PGP and Vixen have to either lie or misrepresent the truth to make their case.

It's the same for their criticism that Vecchiotti's institution was sanctioned for improper storage of cadavers. That criticism, as it relates to Vecchiotti, is a monumental, "So!?"

Vecchiotti's work had nothing to do with the storage of cadavers.

Mignini, on the other hand, was directly sanctioned by his peers for abusing Sollecito's rights at interrogation. Nencini writes that Raffaele's DNA was found on the knife - a mistake in a legal document which threatened to put Sollecito away for 25 years; which Vixen calls, "a typo". (Vixen erased one of her posts upthread which had said that she has personally seen many typos in legal documents.)

The upshot is - who are you going to believe?

Almost a decade has passed since Meredith's murder. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele is such a slam dunk, why does Vixen habitually has to resort to lying in her posts?