Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[LondonJohn]

Imagine you spill some soup in the kitchen. Er, you clean up the spot the soup stained.

So why did "Captain Amanda" and idiot-savant Sollecito abjectly fail - despite conducting a very intricate clean-up over several hours - to notice, let alone dispose of, a print of Sollecito's on the bath mat which Sollecito himself would have to have remembered depositing?

Yeah that makes perfect sense! Here's the truth: if Sollecito and Knox had participated in that murder, and had they conducted this intricate hours-long clean-up afterwards, and had Sollecito been the one who'd left that blood/water partial foot print on the bath mat, they (Knox/Sollecito) would have a) noticed the evidence on the bath mat (they would have known to check the bathroom carefully, since - by definition - Sollecito at least would have been in the bathroom at some point shortly after the murder), b) either scrubbed the bathmat clean, poured a load of bleach on it, put it in the washing machine, or simply taken the whole mat out of the cottage and destroyed it elsewhere.

So here's another truth: the print on the bath mat was almost certainly made by Guede when he stepped from the shower (or possibly bidet) onto the mat after rinsing blood off his trousers. Some of the rinsed-off blood pooled with water on the floorpan of the shower, Guede then placed his bare right foot into this pool, and he then stepped onto the mat, thereby leaving the dilute partial print.

Case closed. Easy when you have the intelligence and objectivity to look at things properly

 

[LondonJohn]

Nick is a brilliant, original and perceptive writer. It's just as well Karen Pruett kicked up a stink about her Ground Report timeline, because - as with so many of the documents on the PIPs' sites - it leaves out half the story!

This genuinely made me snort

The man is a low-grade hack. To even use his name in the same sentence as "brilliant, original and perceptive" raises very serious questions about the person according the accolades

(And if Vixen is to be believed, this "brilliant, original and perceptive" man decided to publish in his book a timeline which "leaves out half the story"! That certainly does take immense brilliance, originality and perception on vdLeek's part......

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!)

 

[Vixen]

Van der Leek is nothing more (or less) that that ignoble form of non-fiction (especially crime) "writer" who looks for sensationalist cases in the news, then quickly and very un-artfully pulls a book together to exploit the public's prurient interest in the case. There appears to be a ready audience of "true crime" book enthusiasts who lap up this kind of crap, so in some ways it's a canny endeavour on the part of people such as vdLeek.

But where proper writers will have true insight into the subjects of their work - usually by dint of either a close professional connection with the subjects and/or their alleged actions, or by dint of being expert investigative reporters who will spend months of hard graft doing background research and contacting every possible protagonist and associated party - hacks such as vdLeek simply start with a web trawl, and (in a case such as this) latching on to willing and compliant internet communities, who very often fall over themselves to promote their own agenda to someone who's WRITING A BOOK!!!

What those hacks can end up with is a quick-and-dirty book which, in this era of self-publishing, vanity publishing and low-end commercial publishing, can look reasonable professional and respectable at face value sitting on a book shop shelf. That's the key. That and leading the prospective reader in with some juicy claims or details on the front and rear covers. Before you know it..... BOOM! Another true-crime junkie is drawn (like a moth to a flame - or a moth to Ronaldo's forehead....) to the glossy cover, sensationalist claims and overall gruesomeness and salaciousness of the subject matter. That'll be $9.95 please!

In this specific case, we also had the particularly unusual and unedifying spectacle of dreadful, poorly-informed books being published by people who should have known far better (hello Follain and Nadeau!) but who were almost certainly blinded by the lure of making a quick buck to supplement their day-job wages. And the even more dreadful "Darkness Descending", which was a bizarre mashup of reportage, crime novel (complete with totally invented dialogue and attribution of emotional ranges) and platform for biassed idiots such as Garofano. But I suspect none of them was a bad as vdLeek's effort.

As I said before, I suppose in a strange way one ought to admire the commercial instincts of his methods - just as, for example, one might strangely admire the commercial instincts of someone selling hot dogs at a public execution. The real shame should lie with the people who buy this kind of rubbish, and especially with those who fed him with biassed, vindictive and often flat-out mendacious "information" for his book. Whoever they might be.

Completely untrue. Nick and Lisa have an internet publishing empire (in fact ebooks sell more than paper these days). It is where their talents lie. If they earn a living then there must be a market for it. Lisa is based in California and is fascinated by solving crimes as 'the thirteenth juror'. Nick is a prolific writer and has written on myriad number of subjects, original, incisive and very well-written. He really does have a great BS detector. Lisa has an excellent insight into criminal psychology. Do read her series on Jody Arias.

Nick can't help being South African. What has nationality got to do with anything? He sat through much of the Pistorius trial in person; you can even see him in the background in courtroom scenes. He goes out and about. He has better things to do with his time than copy others, when he has plenty of his own ideas.

 

[LondonJohn]

Completely untrue. Nick and Lisa have an internet publishing empire (in fact ebooks sell more than paper these days). It is where their talents lie. If they earn a living then there must be a market for it. Lisa is based in California and is fascinated by solving crimes as 'the thirteen juror'. Nick is a prolific writer and has written on myriad number of subjects, original, incisive and very well-written. He really does have a great BS detector. Lisa has an excellent insight into criminal psychology. Do read her series on Jody Arias.

Nick can't help being South African. What has nationality got to do with anything?

1) I absolutely guarantee 100% that vdLeek does not have a "great BS detector"

2) My post made no mention whatsoever of vdLeek's nationality - let alone claiming it had anything "to do with anything". You really ought to read people's posts a lot more clearly before you fire off "responses" such as those.....

(Same sloppiness and inattention to detail as ever, I suppose.....)

 

[Vixen]

So why did "Captain Amanda" and idiot-savant Sollecito abjectly fail - despite conducting a very intricate clean-up over several hours - to notice, let alone dispose of, a print of Sollecito's on the bath mat which Sollecito himself would have to have remembered depositing?

Yeah that makes perfect sense! Here's the truth: if Sollecito and Knox had participated in that murder, and had they conducted this intricate hours-long clean-up afterwards, and had Sollecito been the one who'd left that blood/water partial foot print on the bath mat, they (Knox/Sollecito) would have a) noticed the evidence on the bath mat (they would have known to check the bathroom carefully, since - by definition - Sollecito at least would have been in the bathroom at some point shortly after the murder), b) either scrubbed the bathmat clean, poured a load of bleach on it, put it in the washing machine, or simply taken the whole mat out of the cottage and destroyed it elsewhere.

So here's another truth: the print on the bath mat was almost certainly made by Guede when he stepped from the shower (or possibly bidet) onto the mat after rinsing blood off his trousers. Some of the rinsed-off blood pooled with water on the floorpan of the shower, Guede then placed his bare right foot into this pool, and he then stepped onto the mat, thereby leaving the dilute partial print.

Case closed. Easy when you have the intelligence and objectivity to look at things properly

Would, could, should. If my granny wore trousers she could be my grandfather.

Amanda told police she had never used the washing machine (in over six weeks) yet some of her things were found bundled in with Mez' and Filomena's that morning, presumably to avoid it looking like a Mez-clothes only clean up.

 

[Bill Williams]

This genuinely made me snort

The man is a low-grade hack. To even use his name in the same sentence as "brilliant, original and perceptive" raises very serious questions about the person according the accolades

(And if Vixen is to be believed, this "brilliant, original and perceptive" man decided to publish in his book a timeline which "leaves out half the story"! That certainly does take immense brilliance, originality and perception on vdLeek's part......

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!)

The full story has not been told about how NvdL harassed the wrong person, harassment increased because - him being the brilliant writer/criminologists with a wonderful BS detector that they claim - he simply didn't believe that this anonymous person was not the supporter from Seattle. It took him a long while to graciously admit he'd got the wrong person. Which he did.

Hoots! NvdL has a BS detector!! That is the biggest laugh.

I also do not mean to imply that anyone actually knows the full story of that part of NvdL's lame attempt to bully someone out of their copyright claim. The person wrongly harassed simply wanted to be left alone, and not caught up in this drama.

But also it is exactly as you say, LondonJohn. The cut and paste genius, NvdL with this vast publishing empire, did not exclude the timeline because, "it left out half the story." He excluded it because his e-book publisher threatened to pull the book!

It seems the e-book publisher had a bigger BS detector than NvdL!

 

[LondonJohn]

Would, could, should. If my granny wore trousers she could be my grandfather.

Amanda told police she had never used the washing machine (in over six weeks)

Got any evidence to support this claim?

Naah. Thought not.

Fail.

yet some of her things were found bundled in with Mez' and Filomena's that morning, presumably to avoid it looking like a Mez-clothes only clean up.

Got any evidence to support this claim?

Naah. Thought not.

Fail.



Care to make anything else up entirely while we're here? Or is this enough total invention and made-up nonsense for one night?

 

[Bill Williams]

So why did "Captain Amanda" and idiot-savant Sollecito abjectly fail - despite conducting a very intricate clean-up over several hours - to notice, let alone dispose of, a print of Sollecito's on the bath mat which Sollecito himself would have to have remembered depositing?

Yeah that makes perfect sense! Here's the truth: if Sollecito and Knox had participated in that murder, and had they conducted this intricate hours-long clean-up afterwards, and had Sollecito been the one who'd left that blood/water partial foot print on the bath mat, they (Knox/Sollecito) would have a) noticed the evidence on the bath mat (they would have known to check the bathroom carefully, since - by definition - Sollecito at least would have been in the bathroom at some point shortly after the murder), b) either scrubbed the bathmat clean, poured a load of bleach on it, put it in the washing machine, or simply taken the whole mat out of the cottage and destroyed it elsewhere.

So here's another truth: the print on the bath mat was almost certainly made by Guede when he stepped from the shower (or possibly bidet) onto the mat after rinsing blood off his trousers. Some of the rinsed-off blood pooled with water on the floorpan of the shower, Guede then placed his bare right foot into this pool, and he then stepped onto the mat, thereby leaving the dilute partial print.

Case closed. Easy when you have the intelligence and objectivity to look at things properly

Would, could, should. If my granny wore trousers she could be my grandfather.

Amanda told police she had never used the washing machine (in over six weeks) yet some of her things were found bundled in with Mez' and Filomena's that morning, presumably to avoid it looking like a Mez-clothes only clean up.

Vixen leads the league in not addressing anything in posts put to her - like with what LJ posted.

Vixen puts in the work upthread to demonstrate that the stories AK and RS told about the leak at his place means....... what, exactly? That they fomented a conspiracy against Raffaele's landlord to avoid having his damage deposit revoked?

Thanks should be given to Vixen, though for actually putting together something a little more meaty than the usual ad hominem she offers.

Shame should go to Vixen for lying about not sexualizing things in her posts - twice she made mention that one fondled the other when trying to fix the leaky pipe.

It's the kind of thing one would miss if someone else were using their account.

 

[Vixen]

The full story has not been told about how NvdL harassed the wrong person, harassment increased because - him being the brilliant writer/criminologists with a wonderful BS detector that they claim - he simply didn't believe that this anonymous person was not the supporter from Seattle. It took him a long while to graciously admit he'd got the wrong person. Which he did.

Hoots! NvdL has a BS detector!! That is the biggest laugh.

I also do not mean to imply that anyone actually knows the full story of that part of NvdL's lame attempt to bully someone out of their copyright claim. The person wrongly harassed simply wanted to be left alone, and not caught up in this drama.

But also it is exactly as you say, LondonJohn. The cut and paste genius, NvdL with this vast publishing empire, did not exclude the timeline because, "it left out half the story." He excluded it because his e-book publisher threatened to pull the book!

It seems the e-book publisher had a bigger BS detector than NvdL!

Once again, a brilliant spin, on a two-bit coin, you could be Ronaldo of the forum world. Nick thought the time-line (heck, it was just a chronological list) was in the public domain. Pruett contacted Amazon to have his book pulled, claiming she had copyright on a time-line. Dozens of Amanda's paid shills queued up to give him negative reviews and one-star ratings. It was a wanton act of sheer malice by the PIP.

Nick behaved like a gentleman throughout and immediately told Pruett he'd remove her time-line, not because he agreed it breached any copyright (unoriginal lists and news are rarely copyright), but because he just wanted his book published. In the end he had to give it a new title all together, and republished it that way.

ETA Nick linked Pruett's timeline to her original Ground Report webpage (his style is internet interaction), so hardly shows any intent to bully or deprive someone of their copyright.

 

[Vixen]

Got any evidence to support this claim?

Naah. Thought not.

Fail.






Got any evidence to support this claim?

Naah. Thought not.

Fail.



Care to make anything else up entirely while we're here? Or is this enough total invention and made-up nonsense for one night?

It's in Barbie Nadeau's book, from official documents.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's in Barbie Nadeau's book, from official documents.

LOL!

The hits just keep on coming! Truly, you need to see Winterbottom's film based on that book. In the hands of screenplay writer Paul Viragh, Nadeau was completely trashed!

But this is a good one. Quoting from Nadeau, without providing the cite itself. My bet is that it does not exist, or else you would have printed the cite.

 

[Bill Williams]

Once again, a brilliant spin, on a two-bit coin, you could be Ronaldo of the forum world. Nick thought the time-line (heck, it was just a chronological list) was in the public domain. Pruett contacted Amazon to have his book pulled, claiming she had copyright on a time-line. Dozens of Amanda's paid shills queued up to give him negative reviews and one-star ratings. It was a wanton act of sheer malice by the PIP.

Nick behaved like a gentleman throughout and immediately told Pruett he'd remove her time-line, not because he agreed it breached any copyright (unoriginal lists and news are rarely copyright), but because he just wanted his book published. In the end he had to give it a new title all together, and republished it that way.

Unfortunately for what you've just posted, people saved "gentleman" Nick's offerings.

And please drop it with the "paid shills" factoid. That is very tiresome. Esp. coming from someone with a vested interest in his e-book.

Perhaps "gentleman" Nick never passed on to you how he'd harassed someone completely uninvolved in this, thinking she/he was that Seattleite!

 

[Bill Williams]

Vixen - I refer you to Continuation 16 of this thread, around page 12, where the copyright infringement issue was discussed at length.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10682957#post10682957

Van der Leek's account was suspended, and he had to remove the timeline - not at the original author's insistence, but a the insistence of the e-publisher. So far your view of that wee dust-up has not been exactly "accurate".

Quelle surprise.

 

[Welshman]

Vixen still refuses to answer why she constantly has to resort to lying in her posts if there was a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[Annella]

Nick is a brilliant, original and perceptive writer. It's just as well Karen Pruett kicked up a stink about her Ground Report timeline, because - as with so many of the documents on the PIPs' sites - it leaves out half the story!

Ummmmm... Vixen, did you know that Van der Leek 'published' 30 books in the space of 18 months? Granted, they were all online Ebooks, but still! Can you tell us how much study/investigation of each case he wrote/fantasized about he could possibly have achieved in that time frame? In your opinion of course.
Thanks in advance.

 

[analemma]

Is this a new Article by Peter Gill?

Analysis and implications of the miscarriages of justice of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497316300333

Highlights
The miscarriages of justice of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are described.
A knife recovered from a cutlery drawer was purported to be the murder weapon.
A bra-clasp found in the murder room was alleged to have DNA from a defendant.
Transfer of DNA found on the evidential material was either contamination or ‘innocent’.
The final judgement exonerated the defendants and the reasons are explored.

Maybe this has been discussed before, but it is from the July 2016 issue of
Forensic Science International: Genetics , and the pages are referenced.

 

[analemma]

This is interesting
Amanda Knox and the Ultimate Trial By Media
in the Penn Undergraduate Journel is an article by Alice Giannini is a fourth-year law student at the University of Bologna in Bologna, Italy.
http://www.pulj.org/the-roundtable/amanda-knox-and-the-ultimate-trial-by-media

As stated by the Italian Court of Cassation, there were glaring errors, investigative amnesia, and guilty omissions throughout the different trials. As the media attention and the pressure to find a culprit grew bigger and bigger, the investigation couldn’t cope with this burden and eventually it failed. All that remains is doubt and no way to find any real truth.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Imagine you spill some soup in the kitchen. Er, you clean up the spot the soup stained.

Ah, yes. A shining example of guilter logic. Reasoning by completely incorrect analogy. DNA is like soup! You spill it and clean up the stain! Easy peasy!

Except DNA is microscopic (unless you extract a huge amount from a large mass of tissue) and cannot be seen. So you don't know where the "soup stain" is located. So you have no way of knowing where to clean it up.

I am starting to realize why you can never get anything right. Did you ever consider that maybe, DNA isn't like soup, so the world renowned forensic genetics experts like Peter Gill and Bruce Budowle who have commented on this case may be correct about the evidence? Remember, you think "DNA spills" are like "soup". These people are the founding father of modern forensic DNA technology. Just something to think about lol.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Imagine you spill some soup in the kitchen. Er, you clean up the spot the soup stained.

Also, even more basic (you don't even have to know anything at all about molecular genetics to know this is dumb):

Pretend they had magic witch goggles and could identify their DNA vs. Rudy's, and they only cleaned up their DNA and left Rudy's.

Why, then, did they leave all of this "evidence" of themselves in the hallway and bathroom? Remember, all of the experts and all of the PIP are saying this wasn't evidence of them -- it was all evidence of Rudy since all of these footprints match Rudy.

You are saying Amanda gained magic witchcraft powers so she could clean her own and Raf's DNA but leave Rudy's. Yet she "forgot" to clean all of this evidence in the bathroom and hallway?

Could you reference the episode of the Twilight Zone where you learned how to make a logical argument? I'd like for us to get on the same page, one day.

 

[Stacyhs]

"Take the beam from thine own eye."

I'm not the one making the sleazy "fondling" comments; you are.
I see you still have not (cannot) provide any evidence of this ever happening. Why not just admit it like a mature adult?