Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stacyhs said:
The only two things that need addressing in your rant are the two hilighted sections.

1) You have no evidence whatsoever that Curt Knox "ploughed his life savings into PR with Gogerty-Marriott," nor that he paid "$2 million as you previously stated.

2) You have no evidence whatsoever that any PIP is a "paid shill".

When you do, come back and we'll talk. Until then, they're just more arsefacts.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
Did Rudy immediately rape and kill Maria del Prato? He was plugged into his personalised stolen laptop, which he claims he bought on the black market - no burglar hangs onto property they have stolen themself, so this has a ring of truth - when she arrived and he explained he had stayed there overnight to crash, after a party. It is a fact that one of the staff there had given him access to the nursery and she was sacked because of it.
Gold watches are ten a penny. The lady who had a gold watch stolen was some five years before the murder (2002, when Rudy would have been fifteen and living with his rich foster family). If Rudy was a 'neighbour' then so was Raff, yet I note you don't point the finger at him, so I expect you have a baggage of racist stereotypes.
Taramontano did not bother reporting the so-called Rudy intruder to the police, so no surprise the court gave little credence to it. So the intruder had a knife. You'd be shocked if you knew just how many people carry around a knife.
Your linking the fact Rudy had a knife and a gold watch = therefore this is conclusive evidence he was the sole burglar/rapist/ killer is tenuous, to say the least.
Click to expand...

1) "Did Rudy immediately rape and kill Maria del Prato?"
Maria del Prato did not arrive alone. She was accompanied by two grown workmen and her six year old son (Massei Motivation Report). Unlike Meredith, Maria was not alone and vulnerable.

2) "no burglar hangs onto property they have stolen themself, so this has a ring of truth"
Really? You've presented yet another unsupported by evidence factoid. And I bet you believe Guede bougth those two laptops from some guy at the train station, too. Guede also had a knife he'd stolen from the nursery school in his backpack. Do you think he was going to sell a common kitchen knife or keep it himself? What would be his motive for stealing something as common as a kitchen knife?

3) "It is a fact that one of the staff there had given him access to the nursery and she was sacked because of it."

You cite no evidence that any staff member let Guede into the nursery school or was sacked for it. I've followed this case closely and this is the first time I've seen any mention of this, so forgive me if I don't just accept your statement as a "fact". Cite your source. If no such source is forthcoming, I can only assume it was another "arsefact".

4) "If Rudy was a 'neighbour' then so was Raff, yet I note you don't point the finger at him, so I expect you have a baggage of racist stereotypes"

Guede lived next door to Maria Mandu-Diaz. Raffaele lived around the corner. Guede was found with a ladies gold watch while Raffaele was not.Your allegations of racist baggage is stooping to a new low for you.

5) "The lady who had a gold watch stolen was some five years before the murder"

Mandu-Diaz's watch was not stolen "years" ago. It was stolen the night her apartment burned down, on Oct. 23, just a little over a week before the murder. (Burleigh, pg. 128)

6) "Taramontano did not bother reporting the so-called Rudy intruder to the police, so no surprise the court gave little credence to it."

Tramontano's account was backed up by another witness, his girlfriend who was with him at the time. Guede not only "had a knife", he threatened Tramontano with it. He also tried to report it 3 times. It is interesting to note that you write off Guede having a knife (and using it to threaten someone) as irrelevant as I'd be shocked if I "knew just how many people carry around a knife". Yet much has been made of the fact by PGP that Sollecito carried around a pocket-knife as proof of his "obsession" with knives. No one ever accused Sollecito of threatening anyone with a knife...or anything else. Please don't say he killed Meredith with a knife as he has been definitively acquitted and it was Amanda they accused of actually stabbing Meredith anyway, not Raffaele. Also, don't resort to the "Raffaele attacked a girl with a pair of scissors in school" myth as no evidence of that happening exists, either.

7) "Your linking the fact Rudy had a knife and a gold watch = therefore this is conclusive evidence he was the sole burglar/rapist/ killer is tenuous"

Oh dear, you're doing it yet again. I never said that. I presented these as evidence that he was a burglar in response to your statement that he was "not much of a burglar". (post 2250)
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
1) "Did Rudy immediately rape and kill Maria del Prato?"
Maria del Prato did not arrive alone. She was accompanied by two grown workmen and her six year old son (Massei Motivation Report). Unlike Meredith, Maria was not alone and vulnerable.

2) "no burglar hangs onto property they have stolen themself, so this has a ring of truth"
Really? You've presented yet another unsupported by evidence factoid. And I bet you believe Guede bougth those two laptops from some guy at the train station, too. Guede also had a knife he'd stolen from the nursery school in his backpack. Do you think he was going to sell a common kitchen knife or keep it himself? What would be his motive for stealing something as common as a kitchen knife?

3) "It is a fact that one of the staff there had given him access to the nursery and she was sacked because of it."

You cite no evidence that any staff member let Guede into the nursery school or was sacked for it. I've followed this case closely and this is the first time I've seen any mention of this, so forgive me if I don't just accept your statement as a "fact". Cite your source. If no such source is forthcoming, I can only assume it was another "arsefact".

4) "If Rudy was a 'neighbour' then so was Raff, yet I note you don't point the finger at him, so I expect you have a baggage of racist stereotypes"

Guede lived next door to Maria Mandu-Diaz. Raffaele lived around the corner. Guede was found with a ladies gold watch while Raffaele was not.Your allegations of racist baggage is stooping to a new low for you.

5) "The lady who had a gold watch stolen was some five years before the murder"

Mandu-Diaz's watch was not stolen "years" ago. It was stolen the night her apartment burned down, on Oct. 23, just a little over a week before the murder. (Burleigh, pg. 128)

6) "Taramontano did not bother reporting the so-called Rudy intruder to the police, so no surprise the court gave little credence to it."

Tramontano's account was backed up by another witness, his girlfriend who was with him at the time. Guede not only "had a knife", he threatened Tramontano with it. He also tried to report it 3 times. It is interesting to note that you write off Guede having a knife (and using it to threaten someone) as irrelevant as I'd be shocked if I "knew just how many people carry around a knife". Yet much has been made of the fact by PGP that Sollecito carried around a pocket-knife as proof of his "obsession" with knives. No one ever accused Sollecito of threatening anyone with a knife...or anything else. Please don't say he killed Meredith with a knife as he has been definitively acquitted and it was Amanda they accused of actually stabbing Meredith anyway, not Raffaele. Also, don't resort to the "Raffaele attacked a girl with a pair of scissors in school" myth as no evidence of that happening exists, either.

7) "Your linking the fact Rudy had a knife and a gold watch = therefore this is conclusive evidence he was the sole burglar/rapist/ killer is tenuous"

Oh dear, you're doing it yet again. I never said that. I presented these as evidence that he was a burglar in response to your statement that he was "not much of a burglar". (post 2250)
Click to expand...

It's in the Pratillo transcripts. Nina Burleigh the PR/Advocate for Amanda also mentions it. Rudy himself says he paid some guy €50 for the info. (Unlikely as backpacker hostels are only about €12 per night in most cities.

Please get up to speed, instead of relying on Marriott PR manual page 9 crib sheet of innoscenti factoids.

Lots of people have gold watches. Rudy failed to steal Filomena's gold jewellery, so your theory falls a little flat. He also ignored at least three laptops at the cottage, so it's niether here nor there the lawyers' laptops were stolen. You have already been told the lawyers themselves believed it to be an inside job, a thief looking for legal data, the burglar alarm disabled, and with more than one person to cart off the goods.

Conjecture is a complete waste of time.

It doesn't make Rudy's accomplices any more or less innocent of the heinous crimes of 2 Nov 2007.
 
Vixen if Amanda is guilty the reason she got away with it is because of two remarkable facts:

1. She somehow got a random criminal she didn't know with a history of break-ins, burglary, and carrying a knife while committing crime, to come to her murder scene and leave his bloody prints and DNA all over the place, including inside the victim he sexually assaulted.

2. She miraculously was subjected to an inept prosecutor(s) who actively took steps to avoid getting this alleged accomplice to testify or produce evidence against her, protecting her from what should have been the entire basis of the prosecution's case.

Your 5000 posts in this thread should be complaining about Mignini failing to leverage Rudy's incontrovertible position into securing this supposed masterminds conviction.

Instead they are about things like blood negative DNA negative amorphous blobs on the floor that are vaguely compatible with half the feet on earth, and ludicrous blood free giant kitchen knifes that took mystical journeys across town to create knife wounds and imprints that could only have been made by significantly smaller knives.

This documentary seems to be a big concern for the PGP while the complete ineptness of the prosecution goes unnoticed lol
 
Vixen said:
Whoever stole Mez' rent money, did victimise Mez alone, as Amanda's rent money remained intact, together with her laptop, Filomena's laptop, gold jewellery and camera.

Not much of a burglar was Rudy, eh?
Click to expand...

Vixen still does not explain the contradiction of Amanda being so short of money she had to steal 300 euros from Meredith whilst coming from a family with millions of dollars. Vixen lies that Curt Knox paid 2 million dollars to the PR firm. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was so strong, why does Vixen have to resort to telling lies like this? Vixen constantly accuses Amanda of lying and then lies about Amanda's family. This hypocrisy is unbelievable.
 
bagels said:
Vixen if Amanda is guilty the reason she got away with it is because of two remarkable facts:

1. She somehow got a random criminal she didn't know with a history of break-ins, burglary, and carrying a knife while committing crime, to come to her murder scene and leave his bloody prints and DNA all over the place, including inside the victim he sexually assaulted.

2. She miraculously was subjected to an inept prosecutor(s) who actively took steps to avoid getting this alleged accomplice to testify or produce evidence against her, protecting her from what should have been the entire basis of the prosecution's case.

Your 5000 posts in this thread should be complaining about Mignini failing to leverage Rudy's incontrovertible position into securing this supposed masterminds conviction.

Instead they are about things like blood negative DNA negative amorphous blobs on the floor that are vaguely compatible with half the feet on earth, and ludicrous blood free giant kitchen knifes that took mystical journeys across town to create knife wounds and imprints that could only have been made by significantly smaller knives.

This documentary seems to be a big concern for the PGP while the complete ineptness of the prosecution goes unnoticed lol
Click to expand...

It's not quite true, is it bagels? Rudy had no criminal record as of the the time of the murder, unlike Amanda and Raff. There is zero evidence he was a 'drug dealer' or a burglar. He was later charged with being in possession of stolen property. At the nursery he was trespassing, a civil offence not a criminal one, ordinarily.

Rudy, like Raff and Amanda, exhibits numerous sociopathic tendencies, which means, yes, he has a propensity to casually lie, is reckless and irresponsible, is for sure light-fingered when given the opportunity and shows an immature need for instant gratitfication, with little appreciation of the consequences.

It is also untrue that 'Rudy was a random criminal who did not know Amanda'. As you know very well they met socially several times and according to Rudy, said, 'Hello' in the street. He also claimed Amanda gave him the glad eye when they were all together smoking dope with the boys downstairs.

It is also rubbish that Mignini provided Rudy with any legal advice whatsoever.

Amanda and Raff also left incriminating evidence all over the crime scene.

The idea Raff's near full DNA profile on the bra clasp was transferred from a cigarette butt would be laughed out of any non-corrupt court.

We do know that if Robert Morse, who has been fanatically active in promoting innocence fraud for Amanda, is involved in the documentary - and we note he has been ordered to delete dozens of his extreme tweets in support of her - then we can be certain the documentary is far from 'unbiased'.
 
Last edited:
Welshman said:
Vixen still does not explain the contradiction of Amanda being so short of money she had to steal 300 euros from Meredith whilst coming from a family with millions of dollars. Vixen lies that Curt Knox paid 2 million dollars to the PR firm. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was so strong, why does Vixen have to resort to telling lies like this? Vixen constantly accuses Amanda of lying and then lies about Amanda's family. This hypocrisy is unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Sociopaths have a need for instant gratification. If Amanda desperately needed to score drugs with Rudy or Kokomani or had a drugs debt (she was withdrawing her maximum of €300 per diem - that's not ordinary living expenses (cf Mez, who withdrew circa €20 pd) - then it is quite possible she did steal Mez' rent, which was missing, and Amanda was found to be about €200 better off, which she could not account for, and was initially charged with theft.

As for your other claim, which one of us is lying, when there is plenty of confirmation in the press that Curt Knox paid handsomely for PR. For example, the following:

http://www.prdaily.com/mediarelatio...d_Hiring_a_PR_pro_was_one_of_the_sm_9845.aspx


More on the sometimes abusive PR campaign here:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...galati_seems_one_of_curt_knoxs_pr_operatives/
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Sociopaths have a need for instant gratification. If Amanda desperately needed to score drugs with Rudy or Kokomani or had a drugs debt (she was withdrawing her maximum of €300 per diem - that's not ordinary living expenses (cf Mez, who withdrew circa €20 pd) - then it is quite possible she did steal Mez' rent, which was missing, and Amanda was found to be about €200 better off, which she could not account for, and was initially charged with theft.

As for your other claim, which one of us is lying, when there is plenty of confirmation in the press that Curt Knox paid handsomely for PR. For example, the following:

http://www.prdaily.com/mediarelatio...d_Hiring_a_PR_pro_was_one_of_the_sm_9845.aspx


More on the sometimes abusive PR campaign here:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...galati_seems_one_of_curt_knoxs_pr_operatives/
Click to expand...


Show me evidence that Knox was drawing out €300 per day while she was in Perugia. And show me evidence that Mez KERCHER was withdrawing around €20 per day while she was in Perugia.

And show me evidence - in that article you linked, or anywhere else you like - that the Knox family spent $2 million (or any sum even remotely approaching that amount) on PR.

Until and unless you can do so, I think the rest of us are safe in assuming that your claims are false, nonsensical and hysterically biassed. I'm waiting :D
 
Vixen said:
Sociopaths have a need for instant gratification. If Amanda desperately needed to score drugs with Rudy or Kokomani or had a drugs debt (she was withdrawing her maximum of €300 per diem - that's not ordinary living expenses (cf Mez Ms. Kercher, who withdrew circa €20 pd) - then it is quite possible she did steal Mez Ms. Kercher' rent, which was missing, and Amanda was found to be about €200 better off, which she could not account for, and was initially charged with theft.

As for your other claim, which one of us is lying, when there is plenty of confirmation in the press that Curt Knox paid handsomely for PR. For example, the following:

http://www.prdaily.com/mediarelatio...d_Hiring_a_PR_pro_was_one_of_the_sm_9845.aspx

More on the sometimes abusive PR campaign here:

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index...galati_seems_one_of_curt_knoxs_pr_operatives/
Click to expand...

Wow. You really do want all your malarky to be true!

Wouldn't it be better to admit you made a fool of yourself by claiming that Judge Chieffi told the Nencini court to "act osmotically"?

While calling other people sociopaths, you yourself are diverting from your own awkward mistakes.

Like - no one said it was you who put on a photoshopping contest. But we do note that after denying participating in a photoshopping campaign you defended he practice.

Giving that you are adept at making psychological assessments of others, what category would you put that into?
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Show me evidence that Knox was drawing out €300 per day while she was in Perugia. And show me evidence that Mez KERCHER was withdrawing around €20 per day while she was in Perugia.

And show me evidence - in that article you linked, or anywhere else you like - that the Knox family spent $2 million (or any sum even remotely approaching that amount) on PR.

Until and unless you can do so, I think the rest of us are safe in assuming that your claims are false, nonsensical and hysterically biassed. I'm waiting :D
Click to expand...

There is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, there is proof on the balance of probabilities, and then there is Vixen's proof.....

...... pulled straight out of thin air. This is the style of proof usual among siblings.)
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Wow. You really do want all your malarky to be true!

Wouldn't it be better to admit you made a fool of yourself by claiming that Judge Chieffi told the Nencini court to "act osmotically"?

While calling other people sociopaths, you yourself are diverting from your own awkward mistakes.

Like - no one said it was you who put on a photoshopping contest. But we do note that after denying participating in a photoshopping campaign you defended he practice.

Giving that you are adept at making psychological assessments of others, what category would you put that into?
Click to expand...


Vixen doesn't even appear to understand that one can hire a company without there being any financial exchange (or perhaps a small token financial arrangement) involved. In Vixen's mind, "Curt Knox hired Gogerty Marriott" appears to be synonymous with "Curt Knox paid Gogerty Marriott $2 million" :D:thumbsup::eek:
 
Vixen said:
It's not quite true, is it bagels? Rudy had no criminal record as of the the time of the murder, unlike Amanda and Raff.
Click to expand...


What criminal records did Knox and/or Sollecito have prior to the time of the murder?
 
LondonJohn said:
Show me evidence that Knox was drawing out €300 per day while she was in Perugia. And show me evidence that Mez KERCHER was withdrawing around €20 per day while she was in Perugia.

And show me evidence - in that article you linked, or anywhere else you like - that the Knox family spent $2 million (or any sum even remotely approaching that amount) on PR.

Until and unless you can do so, I think the rest of us are safe in assuming that your claims are false, nonsensical and hysterically biassed. I'm waiting :D
Click to expand...

Please refer to the documented bank statements. All publically available.

As for the Knoxen, the Business report further adds:


More from the Business Journal version of The Story:

Then, there’s the need for money. Curt Knox and Amanda’s mother, Edda Mellas — they are not married to each other — have each said they’ve drained their retirement funds, taken out second mortgages and accrued credit card debt to pay for Amanda’s defense. So, in this new phase, lucrative media deals will be a consideration.

At Marriott’s downtown Seattle office, he fields inquiries from book agents, screenwriters, news shows and movie studios. All want the Amanda Knox saga for their own. Some are offering big bucks. Marriott and the Knox family will be considering the offers, Marriott said — likely in a couple of weeks.

“There will be financial opportunities,” Marriott said. “I’ll be there to walk them through the opportunities.”
Click to expand...

You can be sure Marriott has lined his pockets lucratively, as has Della Vedova, Vecchiotti and Hellmann.
 
Bill Williams said:
Wow. You really do want all your malarky to be true!

Wouldn't it be better to admit you made a fool of yourself by claiming that Judge Chieffi told the Nencini court to "act osmotically"?

While calling other people sociopaths, you yourself are diverting from your own awkward mistakes.

Like - no one said it was you who put on a photoshopping contest. But we do note that after denying participating in a photoshopping campaign you defended he practice.

Giving that you are adept at making psychological assessments of others, what category would you put that into?
Click to expand...

I asked Stacyhs to provide a link to the photoshopping campaign she claimed I was currently running, and she carried out a personal attack on me instead.

For your reference, the photoshopping competition is to do with the dishonest netflix documentary debuting soon and showing at TTFF, (i.e., ipso facto dishonest, as one of the producers is a Friend of Amanda PR merchant, Robert Morse) - and nothing to do with silly beards.

Do lodge your vote here:

https://truecrimespodcasts.com/2016/08/31/vote-for-your-fav-amanda-knox-mockumentary-photoshop/
 
LondonJohn said:
Vixen doesn't even appear to understand that one can hire a company without there being any financial exchange (or perhaps a small token financial arrangement) involved. In Vixen's mind, "Curt Knox hired Gogerty Marriott" appears to be synonymous with "Curt Knox paid Gogerty Marriott $2 million" :D:thumbsup::eek:
Click to expand...

Feting tv, press and broadcasting costs money, as does 'product placement' (= 'Amanda is the victim [forget Mez]). Youtube is flooded with PR Amanda smearing of Mignini, police, courts, and even the Kercher family.

The fool Curt Knox believes this is better than a fair trial.
 
Vixen said:
Please refer to the documented bank statements. All publically available.

As for the Knoxen, the Business report further adds:




You can be sure Marriott has lined his pockets lucratively, as has Della Vedova, Vecchiotti and Hellmann.
Click to expand...

Why can anyone be sure of that? Is this part of "acting osmotically"?
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Taking a page from Raffaele maybe?
Click to expand...

You mean Raff as Civil Rights Campaigner:

"For now definitely exclude a candidate in politics because I do not feel able to deal with the political scene not having adequate experience: But I support the social struggles of the radicals, especially those on justice and the need to humanize the Italian prisons." So says Raffaele Sollecito acquitted with full formula of the charge of murdering Meredith Kercher, along with Amanda Knox. The young man is waiting to step in as a member to the second day of the fortieth special congress of the Radical Party, the first after the departure of Marco Pannella. The meeting, entitled "From Ventotene to Rebibbia", is organized right in the Roman prison.
alternative sentences
Its appearance is elegant and understated, but it seems to be clear: brown hair to tail, black jacket with lapel pin Porsche and tie with white polka dots on a black background. To improve the lives of prisoners, in fact, "I immediately abolish the preventive detention - which explains Sollecito in jail he spent 4 years and 6 months in pretrial isolation -. And in cases of danger to concrete escape or re-offending, I promuoverei alternative sentences. As it is made in Italy, the penitentiary is useless: leave a person in a room 2 meters by 3 meters from morning to night is human aberration and only serves to put the dust under the carpet. " Inmates at the bottom "are just people who did wrong and in most cases are disadvantaged living on the margins of society - he said -. What better organ of a community could follow them and help them embark on a path of rehabilitation and reintegration into society? Those who make mistakes as we want to throw a garbage bag in a landfill or want to try to find a solution that poses offer something concrete to have an alternative to the crime? ". Obviously Sollecito draws a clear line between "criminals, who do not repent and that they should be in prison, and who can and must be recovered and should not be in jail." Besides, who is awaiting trial "should have nothing to do with the prison environment." And the fighting in the Radical Party? "I will not enter into these affairs: I am here to defend the civil rights - adds -. My, both as a citizen and then be held, they have been trampled during my sad story court for 8 years: On those grounds, with my experience, I would like to make a contribution to prevent others do not have to relive my ordeal in the future " .http://www.corriere.it/cronache/16_...34-11e6-82b3-437d6c137c18.shtml?refresh_ce-cp …
Click to expand...


'Obviously'? What's obvious about it, and in which category does Raff place himself.

As we say in my neck of the woods, 'Hei, sit'.'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom