Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stacyhs said:
Yes, it is. But I was "in a rush". Hoots!

They got it from the interpretations that had evolved over the centuries that the Magna Carta had anything to do with the rights of the people. It didn't. It was strictly concerned with the rights of the barons and "free people" which was made up of a very small portion of Englishmen. Serfs/villeins made up, by far, the largest group of people in 1215. They were not "free men" and were not protected by the Magna Carta.

I agree with LJ. I'm not going to get into this with you as I know it will be futile.
Click to expand...

ROFL Oh no, not you as well. LOL.
 
Vixen said:
Oh dear.

He took me at my word.
Click to expand...


Er no. It's called education, knowledge and understanding. But, as I said, a little internet research would probably have prevented you from getting it wrong in the first place :)
 
Antony said:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/sep/15/amanda-knox-review-documentary-netflix-meredith-kercher

Article posted 12:17 UK time and comments closed by around 5pm. But it's still amazing the number of people who post confident belief in the proven falsehoods surrounding the story.
Click to expand...

People will always think her guilty, no helping that. If she had been smart enough to go to her aunt in Germany none of us would know her name today. But then again, it just as easily could have been her home alone in the cottage that night to be raped and murdered by the guy who broke in, with Meredith out with her boyfriend. Maybe we'd be on Continuation Part 22: Meredith Kercher/Giacomo Silenzi.
 
Antony said:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/sep/15/amanda-knox-review-documentary-netflix-meredith-kercher

Article posted 12:17 UK time and comments closed by around 5pm. But it's still amazing the number of people who post confident belief in the proven falsehoods surrounding the story.
Click to expand...

Was this the one where someone posted that the "proof of guilt" was when the Postal Police arrived, they found Knox carrying bleach in her possession?

It's those sorts of things which are annoying, and the kind of thing (not this claim, but others) that are associated with Darkness Descending, Nick van der Leek, and to a lesser extent John Follain.
 
Antony said:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/sep/15/amanda-knox-review-documentary-netflix-meredith-kercher

Article posted 12:17 UK time and comments closed by around 5pm. But it's still amazing the number of people who post confident belief in the proven falsehoods surrounding the story.
Click to expand...

True. Sadly, far too many people get their information from tabloids, but I've been told that nobody believes what they read in them. I think we can all remember comments from people about Knox "showering in a bathroom covered in blood", "canoodling" with Sollecito", etc.
 
Stacyhs said:
True. Sadly, far too many people get their information from tabloids, but I've been told that nobody believes what they read in them. I think we can all remember comments from people about Knox "showering in a bathroom covered in blood", "canoodling" with Sollecito", etc.
Click to expand...

I saw a couple days ago, in a comment section regarding the upcoming Netflix docu, someone referring to Knox's out of control party where she was arrested for throwing rocks. This was stated as a fact and the source of this misinformation was immediately obvious as the Daily Fail's "The Wild and Raunchy Past of Foxy Knoxy". But nobody believes anything they read in the tabloids. Right?
 
Stacyhs said:
I saw a couple days ago, in a comment section regarding the upcoming Netflix docu, someone referring to Knox's out of control party where she was arrested for throwing rocks. This was stated as a fact and the source of this misinformation was immediately obvious as the Daily Fail's "The Wild and Raunchy Past of Foxy Knoxy". But nobody believes anything they read in the tabloids. Right?
Click to expand...

From down under

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11712067

Au.com seems to be a communal resource.
It beats the pants off what we have relied on in NZ.
Critical mass really matters, and these Australian Neanderthals are far more aggressive and savvy than the NZ bimbos.
 
Last edited:
Annella said:
Nina Burleigh got it very right in this piece from 2011.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/04/amanda-knox-meredith-kercher-media
Click to expand...


Would this be the same Nina Burleigh who:

Former Time reporter Nina Burleigh wished Clinton took her to his hotel room so she could be "ravished" by him and she could go down on him. Powerful men turn her on, but not Rush Limbaugh. He's a "hater."
Click to expand...

http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/cyberalert-07071998-reporter-offers-clinton-blewinsky#1

:eye-poppi
 
Vixen said:
Would this be the same Nina Burleigh who:



http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/cyberalert-07071998-reporter-offers-clinton-blewinsky#1

:eye-poppi
Click to expand...


If we're talking about credibility of journalism on the Kercher case based on other articles by the same person, you might like to take a gander at some of the epic prior work penned by I'd-love-to-believe-I'm-a-real-investigative-journalist God Ergon and creepy obsessive ballerina botherer Quennell (both of whom you invariably use as trusted sources on this case).

Just sayin'...... :D:thumbsup:
 
LondonJohn said:
If we're talking about credibility of journalism on the Kercher case based on other articles by the same person, you might like to take a gander at some of the epic prior work penned by I'd-love-to-believe-I'm-a-real-investigative-journalist God Ergon and creepy obsessive ballerina botherer Quennell (both of whom you invariably use as trusted sources on this case).

Just sayin'...... :D:thumbsup:
Click to expand...


Big deal, so Ergon had an interest in spirituality and Quennell enjoys ballet. So he tried to help a twenty-something Russian ballerina new to the US settle into a strange culture and develop her career. He won't be the first 'There's No Fool Like an Old Fool' to overdo his enthusiasm in taking her under his wing. So she felt uncomfortable by their business relationship and ended it.
 
LondonJohn said:
If we're talking about credibility of journalism on the Kercher case based on other articles by the same person, you might like to take a gander at some of the epic prior work penned by I'd-love-to-believe-I'm-a-real-investigative-journalist God Ergon and creepy obsessive ballerina botherer Quennell (both of whom you invariably use as trusted sources on this case).

Just sayin'......
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
Big deal, so Ergon had an interest in spirituality and Quennell enjoys ballet. So he tried to help a twenty-something Russian ballerina new to the US settle into a strange culture and develop her career. He won't be the first 'There's No Fool Like an Old Fool' to overdo his enthusiasm in taking her under his wing. So she felt uncomfortable by their business relationship and ended it.
Click to expand...

...... all of which does not address LondonJohn's point which began: "If we're talking about credibility of journalism on the Kercher case based on other articles by the same person....."

On the more minor matter, I tend to agree with Vixen - that somewhat extraneous issues don't really have a direct effect on the "quality" of their "journalism". But with those issues in play, Vixen has no idea..... or is willfully ignorant.

Two of Quennell's repeated claims simply have not be borne out - we may as well eliminate them one by one. The first is his claim that his website is backed by and contributed to by 100s of lawyers. He's never once backed up that claim.

The second is his predictions of legal peril befalling all and sundry on the innocentisti side - including Hellmann and Zanetti, Bruno and Marasca, as well as all the Ground Report authors who over the years have leveled broadsides at the tabloid hacks like Nick Pisa as well as the Italian PLE which created this wrongful mess.

If both Winterbottom's film in 2014 and this present TIFF documentary are any indication, those broadsides are now fairly standard - my view is that an impartial observer coming to this new could only come to the conclusions that Ground Report wrote abut for years.

I suppose we all have a level of creepiness lurking in the shadows; the point being is that those two individuals hardly have any credibility in journalistic circles. Reputable journalists or reviewers take a look at their history with this case and see it for what it is. They have no impact on anything outside of their cabal of "interesting characters". (To put it mildly!)

Nick Pisa is a hack-journalist salivating over a juicy headline and clicks on a webpage; all was known about him to all the journalists in 2011, even before Pisa put his name to a false-conviction report in Oct 2011 for The Daily Mail - such incident which even made it to the Leveson Inquiry in Britain. Yes, indeed, those are the journalists you want setting out "facts" for cases like these.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
...... all of which does not address LondonJohn's point which began: "If we're talking about credibility of journalism on the Kercher case based on other articles by the same person....."

On the more minor matter, I tend to agree with Vixen - that somewhat extraneous issues don't really have a direct effect on the "quality" of their "journalism". But with those issues in play, Vixen has no idea..... or is willfully ignorant.

Two of Quennell's repeated claims simply have not be borne out - we may as well eliminate them one by one. The first is his claim that his website is backed by and contributed to by 100s of lawyers. He's never once backed up that claim.

The second is his predictions of legal peril befalling all and sundry on the innocentisti side - including Hellmann and Zanetti, Bruno and Marasca, as well as all the Ground Report authors who over the years have leveled broadsides at the tabloid hacks like Nick Pisa as well as the Italian PLE which created this wrongful mess.

If both Winterbottom's film in 2014 and this present TIFF documentary are any indication, those broadsides are now fairly standard - my view is that an impartial observer coming to this new could only come to the conclusions that Ground Report wrote abut for years.

I suppose we all have a level of creepiness lurking in the shadows; the point being is that those two individuals hardly have any credibility in journalistic circles. Reputable journalists or reviewers take a look at their history with this case and see it for what it is. They have no impact on anything outside of their cabal of "interesting characters". (To put it mildly!)

Nick Pisa is a hack-journalist salivating over a juicy headline and clicks on a webpage; all was known about him to all the journalists in 2011, even before Pisa put his name to a false-conviction report in Oct 2011 for The Daily Mail - such incident which even made it to the Leveson Inquiry in Britain. Yes, indeed, those are the journalists you want setting out "facts" for cases like these.
Click to expand...


The netflix movie claim that Amanda was only convicted 'because of Nick Pisa' is hilarious. According to Journalisted.com, he has written: 1818 articles since May 2007 with an average of 513 words. That's what he does, he churns out articles for the DAILY MAIL which is rarely seen as a serious paper, more for its entertainment value.


It's what they do. McGinn and Blackhurst must be crazy if they thought he did anything else.

Nina Burleigh doesn't even bother to hide her advocacy. She comes across as an angry feminist who believes in abortion on demand and the right to lay any US president who gives into her whims and who will be rewarded with the promise of a BJ by her; never mind if he's married; this is a foul-mouthed advocate of prostitution in effect, hardly the liberated woman.

Burleigh has the ability to write well, yet she squanders it on lost causes and trying to emotionally blackmail the reader into accepting her POV.

Quennell is bang on the money when it comes to the Kercher case. He has right on his side, always a good starting point.

The case is not about winning hegemony, it's to do with bringing about justice.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
The netflix movie claim that Amanda was only convicted 'because of Nick Pisa' is hilarious. According to Journalisted.com, he has written: 1818 articles since May 2007 with an average of 513 words. That's what he does, he churns out articles for the DAILY MAIL which is rarely seen as a serious paper, more for its entertainment value.


It's what they do. McGinn and Blackhurst must be crazy if they thought he did anything else.

Nina Burleigh doesn't even bother to hide her advocacy. She comes across as an angry feminist who believes in abortion on demand and the right to lay any US president who gives into her whims and who will be rewarded with the promise of a BJ by her; never mind if he's married; this is a foul-mouthed advocate of prostitution in effect, hardly the liberated woman.

Burleigh has the ability to write well, yet she squanders it on lost causes and trying to emotionally blackmail the reader into accepting her POV.

Quennell is bang on the money when it comes to the Kercher case. He has right on his side, always a good starting point.

The case is not about winning hegemony, it's to do with bringing about justice.
Click to expand...

Then you've obviously not seen the documentary. I've seen the Winterbottom film, and it's view of the role tabloid journalists played early on is simply a matter of record. Pisa is savaged in that one too.

Quennell is a known quantity - the only people who would regard him as "bang on the money" are people who've bought into the pre-Massei trial factoids which were leaked by the prosecution.

It says everything I need to hear that after the pasting Mignini gets in this documentary, the only place which will give him the time of day is TJMK. Otherwise he's a laughingstock to his own peers - which has gotta hurt!
 
Vixen said:
The netflix movie claim that Amanda was only convicted 'because of Nick Pisa' is hilarious.
Click to expand...

Actually as we learned from this very thread she was convicted...all because of a cartwheel, and the conviction would probably be overturned on the automatic appeal because a real court would see through the so-called evidence. And that's exactly what happened, 5 years ago now, but we're still posting :D
 
Bill Williams said:
Then you've obviously not seen the documentary. I've seen the Winterbottom film, and it's view of the role tabloid journalists played early on is simply a matter of record. Pisa is savaged in that one too.

Quennell is a known quantity - the only people who would regard him as "bang on the money" are people who've bought into the pre-Massei trial factoids which were leaked by the prosecution.

It says everything I need to hear that after the pasting Mignini gets in this documentary, the only place which will give him the time of day is TJMK. Otherwise he's a laughingstock to his own peers - which has gotta hurt!
Click to expand...

I saw the Winterbottom film and 'Nick Pisa' facsimile appeared as the caricature British journalist. I don't know whether you guys in North America are aware but this is a well-known archetype in the UK: the hard drinking hack who spends half his time in the pub and turns in any old cliché-ridden junk, hence the need for sub-editors.

As an example, there is Jeffrey Bernard, of the SPECTATOR of whom Keith Waterhouse* wrote a West End play, 'Jeffrey Bernard is Unwell'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Bernard

The PRIVATE EYE euphemism 'tired and emotional' comes from this hack tradition (='drunk'). Nick Pisa is simply the stock hack UK journalist. To expect him to be anything different would be like expecting Trump to raise his level to United Nations spokesperson. B'ain't never going to happen!
 
Last edited:
bagels said:
Actually as we learned from this very thread she was convicted...all because of a cartwheel, and the conviction would probably be overturned on the automatic appeal because a real court would see through the so-called evidence. And that's exactly what happened, 5 years ago now, but we're still posting :D
Click to expand...

Seriously? You believe a person convicted of aggravated murder (murder with torture and sexual assault), and the conviction upheld on appeal, has been charged and convicted for no reason at all?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom