Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

[NotEvenWrong]

How do we know? HE HAS ADMITTED IT.

Fair enough.

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove rule 12 breach

I haven't seen the context but if Raf did indeed joke about the murder that is just stupid after he has spent the last 9 years trying to fight this. Dark humor or not.

 

[Numbers]

But the thing is, you're always wrong about everything. For example, Knox is sitting at home in Seattle as a famous exonoree, with the ECtHR about to bring down the hammer on Italy.

And, to date, Guede's request for a revision trial has been ruled inadmissible by the Florence Court of Appeal, so that he remains the only person finally and definitively convicted of the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher.

Furthermore, Knox was finally and definitively acquitted of calunnia against the police and Mignini with the motivation report summary of verdict:

Pursuant to article 530 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure,
acquits Knox Amanda Marie for the charge under letter a), because the facts do not exist, and for the charge under letter b), because the facts do not exist and because the act does not constitute an offense, as regards the accusations addressed to Dr. Giuliano Mignini.

Source for calunnia verdict summary: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/
link to Boninsegna Report PDF

 

[Bill Williams]

o Amanda's presence at the cottage when Meredith is murdered is based entirely on a signed statement that Amanda claims was coerced. Amanda retracts the statement hours later. The statement is provably false since we know that Lumumba was not there. This is the ONLY evidence cited by M/B. An illegally obtained, false statement that was subsequently retracted is hardly PROOF of her presence.

It's worse than this.

Machiavelli readily concedes that the ISC does not deal directly with evidence. M/B themselves say - on a read of the **whole** of Sections 8 and 9 - that the ISC is assessing the evidence as it was set before the Nencini court, with the only issue being: should Nencini have convicted with that corpus of evidence in front of it.

The ISC has definitively said, "no", and absolved (Judge Boninsegna's word, offered by him as a judicial fact) the pair.

Section 9 begins with M/B writing about Knox's alleged presence at the cottage; a timeframe, BTW which includes the late morning of Nov 2 when no one disputes that they were both there.

The word "alleged" is in the text, for what M/B want to set up in Section 9.4 following. Anything written after that assumes what has already been written.

Anything else is a desperate set of rhetorical diversions, meant to divert from the fact that the prosecution eventually lost this case - for reasons also spelled out in the plain-text reading of *ALL* of the report, not just the cutting-and-pasting of what one wishes was the sum total of the document.

Read the sum total of the document.

However, I could be wrong - there very well could be a mounting volcanic explosion within the Italian judiciary as claimed is coming as a result of what Judge Hellmann wrought in 2011.

But other than some posts here on ISF, and one fringe YouTuber...... where is it? After two years of being absolved of the crime, this claimed monumental judicial fraud has two proponents - there's one YouTuber and some posts on an obscure website on the outer corner of the internet. In English!

 

[js202]

Retweet

But the thing is, you're always wrong about everything. For example, Knox is sitting at home in Seattle as a famous exonoree, with the ECtHR about to bring down the hammer on Italy.

..

 

[Vixen]

How forensics can locate a phone call or text.

Can forensic police track a ping from a mobile phone? Do signals bounce off an antenna?

Cell Tower Triangulation

Cell tower triangulation is similar to GPS tracking in many ways. Multiple towers are used to track the phone’s location by measuring the time delay that a signal takes to return back to the towers from the phone. This delay is then calculated into distance and gives a fairly accurate location of the phone. Detecting which antenna of the tower the signal bounced off of can further refine the location. This gives a more specific location when used congruently with multiple towers calculated by multiple dishes on each tower. Cell phone companies do this for a variety of reasons including enhancing the ability of the E911 system. This system was put in place for 911 operators to get a location of where a call from a cell phone is made from so that if communication is lost, the operator would know where to dispatch help. Cell tower triangulation is also used to provide the phone with the best service by noting which tower it is closest to and using them to provide service. Cell tower triangulation provides the ability to track the historic location of the cell phone’s presence. It will then identify where the cell phone was when receiving/making calls, texting, emailing, etc.

<snip>

Historical call details, are not just incoming/outgoing phone calls, they consist of the originating cell site and the terminating cell site, which in essence is where the call began and where it as ended. These cell sites are the actual cellular tower location, which typically consist of three antennas. Depending on the azimuth of each antenna, it will depend on the layout in degrees of each antenna, as various companies have different layouts and even various layouts depending on the topographic area of the location of the cell tower. These details, along with the certain details of the cell tower triangulation investigation, can be of the utmost importance in explaining the events in question. For example, these details can show a route of travel to and from a location. The frequency of when the “target phone” is in a certain area, the time of day, where the last call made on a certain day and the first call the immediate morning could be a logical conclusion of where a person slept that night. Lastly, in the events of homicides, or missing persons and any suspect(s) in these investigations, the phone may be powered down for a certain time period. These “voids” of irregular activity, should cast doubt in why the phone suddenly was powered off.

http://www.iiiweb.net/forensic-services/cell-phone-tower-triangulation/

 

[TruthCalls]

It's worse than this.

Machiavelli readily concedes that the ISC does not deal directly with evidence. M/B themselves say - on a read of the **whole** of Sections 8 and 9 - that the ISC is assessing the evidence as it was set before the Nencini court, with the only issue being: should Nencini have convicted with that corpus of evidence in front of it.

The ISC has definitively said, "no", and absolved (Judge Boninsegna's word, offered by him as a judicial fact) the pair.

Section 9 begins with M/B writing about Knox's alleged presence at the cottage; a timeframe, BTW which includes the late morning of Nov 2 when no one disputes that they were both there.

The word "alleged" is in the text, for what M/B want to set up in Section 9.4 following. Anything written after that assumes what has already been written.

Anything else is a desperate set of rhetorical diversions, meant to divert from the fact that the prosecution eventually lost this case - for reasons also spelled out in the plain-text reading of *ALL* of the report, not just the cutting-and-pasting of what one wishes was the sum total of the document.

Read the sum total of the document.

However, I could be wrong - there very well could be a mounting volcanic explosion within the Italian judiciary as claimed is coming as a result of what Judge Hellmann wrought in 2011.

But other than some posts here on ISF, and one fringe YouTuber...... where is it? After two years of being absolved of the crime, this claimed monumental judicial fraud has two proponents - there's one YouTuber and some posts on an obscure website on the outer corner of the internet. In English!

Bill, I agree but the point I am making is... regardless of how you interpret the context of the MR report, if you're interested in the truth of the case you have to actually apply critical thought to the facts and not just blindly accept what is written. If the courts (ANY of them) had laid out conclusive evidence that Amanda was present at the cottage at the time of the murder then this would be extremely incriminating and would possibly have altered my view of the case. But given the only basis by which this claim could ever be made was the interrogation of 5/6 Nov, there is no way anyone with an ounce of integrity would run around claiming this is a proven fact. Likewise with the other "proven facts". It's proof to me that people like Mach and Vixen want to believe Amanda and Raffaele are guilty and are willing to ignore the obvious if that's what it takes.

 

[bagels]

You prefer abbaddon's knee-jerk insults, rather than considered well-read sourced information from me. That's your prerogative.

The tower that sent Patrick's text was tested and shown to service Raffaele's apartment, and was very likely servicing it in several subsequent calls. Amanda being at Raff's during the text is consistent with all other known data points including two eyewitness sightings before and after the text and the computer activity. The only reason to believe she was out when she received the text is...well there is no real reason, simply faith in a particular belief, which isn't relevant to a criminal trial.

 

[Vixen]

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I understand the subject can be complicated especially when explaining one culture to another culture.

When you say freedom of the press is ranking low in Italy is this a self imposed ranking by journalists (they become complacent, lazy, report superficial stories which are easier to compose and involve less work, etc.) or do they fear government interference in their reporting and possibly litigation or jail?

How do the public view the press (Italian)? Do they look to it to investigate and expose corruption from whoever or wherever it may occur? Or do the public view the press with distrust?

I do believe in this judicial truth that the Italian justice strives towards. It is just the process takes so long that the truth sometimes is a casualty (i.e. the Meredith trial, 8 years is a long time to reach a final conclusion and that conclusion is anything but clear as to innocence or guilt with the different verdicts).

And as to the Italian press reporting on corruption in the judiciary - can and do they? Are there repercussions for them doing so or do they lack the ambition for wanting to report? Because if a journalist knows there is more to the truth beyond a superficial level why wouldn't they want to investigate and report that even if it doesn't change the outcome?

Do you mind if I lean in and point out that one reason the case took so long in this instance is because Raff's attorney, Bongiorno, took a substantial amount of maternity leave during the trial.

So, the trial progressed at about two days per week whilst she went off for her medical care, and then another several months whilst she took leave to have the baby.

In the UK a trial revolves around the court. In this trial it revolved around the defence attorney, and still the defence complains.

 

[Vixen]

The Italian judicial system is intended by law - the Italian Constitution - to be fundamentally an adversarial system, but it retains some features of the previous inquisitional system, for example, the fast-track trial.

Here is the clause of the Italian Constitution calling for adversarial trials:

Art. 111
Jurisdiction is implemented through due process regulated by law.
All court trials are conducted with adversary proceedings and the parties are entitled to equal conditions before an impartial judge in third party position. ....
Source: https://www.senato.it/3801
Link to Constitution of the Italian Republic PDF

The fact Italian courts are tribunal style - i.e., by a panel of judges - should tell you it is still within the inquisitorial model.

Added to this, there are no restrictions on what the press are allowed to write about the trial and the 'jury' (judges) is not sequestered during the trial.

 

[Vixen]

Nope, sorry, that misdirection isn't going to fly here. I rely on my own research. I have been reading court documents for over six years. In response to this comment of yours I went back and reviewed all relevant court documentation, conceding that it was possible I somehow missed this. But all this did was confirm this never was mentioned.

If it is so well documented then I'm sure you can provide a link to such documentation, or tell me who testified to this, during what proceeding and on what date.

And, given your penchant to move goalposts around, let's be clear here - by AUTODOWNLOAD you mean the cartoon was downloaded by some means of automation, presumably by the computer itself, and NOT by Raffaele. Correct?

Correct. That is the view of the forensic IT guys AFAIAA.

 

[Vixen]

Obvious misdirection on your part. Stick to the facts. The recollection Raffaele gave to the police could not possibly have occurred the night of the murder. That is the ONLY thing that matters. The statement, however it was obtained, and for whatever purpose, does not in any way impugn their alibi since it's proven impossible to represent events from the evening of the murder. Since the recollection DOES match perfectly events from the evening of Halloween it is reasonable to conclude this is what Raffaele is talking about. That it's proven Raffaele was confused on dates, asked for a calendar and was denied further supports this. But at the end of the day it's irrelevant since the events are provably not from the night of the murder.

If Raff was just mistaken in his recollection, how come he manages to insert his leaking pipes into the narrative, which did happen and which he himself describes as 'highly suspicious'.

Is it a coincidence he told a DAILY MIRROR journalist he and Amanda were at a party on that night, and 'it was my girlfriend who found the body'.

Again another lie,as the dinner party was the night after the murder. Or was it the day before...?

 

[Numbers]

The fact Italian courts are tribunal style - i.e., by a panel of judges - should tell you it is still within the inquisitorial model. Added to this, there are no restrictions on what the press are allowed to write about the trial and the 'jury' (judges) is not sequestered during the trial.

So you are in agreement with those who state that the Italian courts operate in violation of Italian law, including Italy's most basic law, the Constitution of the Italian Republic?

Perhaps, though, you should also do a little research and find out how legal scholars define "adversarial" and "inquisitional" legal systems, and "hybrids" of such systems.

Here's a head start:

The adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries where two advocates represent their parties' positions before an impartial person or group of people, usually a jury or judge, who attempt to determine the truth of the case.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adversarial_system

 

[Vixen]

While by no means defending the behaviour, Raffaele has admitted it. It seems there is in some cultures among some in that culture who engage in rather dark humour, to the point of it being offensive. For heaven's sake, the USA just elected a man president because there's a counter-reaction to "politically correct language" so who knows, maybe the FB page doesn't offend all.

Here many years ago there was a case where a secretly taped jailhouse conversion had a man seemingly confessing to his wife's murder. At trial, the defence called a cultural anthropologist - the conversation had been in an Eastern European language, and in some regions of the country some of the men engage in that sort of offensive talk; meaning it as dark humour. The anthropologist didn't defend the practise, but described it well.....

I find the practice offensive, rather than culturally relative. I find the words spoken by those who participate in it, equally offensive. There's no two ways around it.

It's his life, and he is innocent, and obviously innocent of the horrible events of Nov 1/2, 2007. As unfair as the consequences of that are - attacks by the likes of Machiavelli, Briars, and Vixen - that is the new reality of one's life. He certainly does not need a lecture from me about all of this.....

....... however......

Like Raff, you are trying to downplay the matter. There is a site for 'Black Humour'. This was NOT a 'black humour' site.

 

[TruthCalls]

Correct. That is the view of the forensic IT guys AFAIAA.

Nope. All they did was confirm the cartoon was downloaded at 21:26 and that the cartoon is 20 minutes long. No mention of "autodownload" anywhere. It was a clear attempt by you to suggest Raffaele really wasn't there at 21:26 downloading the cartoon but it's not working.

Why AFAIAA? You are the one that said it's documented in court records. Why not go check it yourself. You can then come back and admit it was a false statement. I can accept you heard it somewhere - especially given it seems all you read are pro-guilt sites/books - and upon researching it you realized you got snookered.

 

[TruthCalls]

If Raff was just mistaken in his recollection, how come he manages to insert his leaking pipes into the narrative, which did happen and which he himself describes as 'highly suspicious'.

Is it a coincidence he told a DAILY MIRROR journalist he and Amanda were at a party on that night, and 'it was my girlfriend who found the body'.

Again another lie,as the dinner party was the night after the murder. Or was it the day before...?

Problem is, he does not mention his leaking pipes in his statement to the police. What he told Kate Mansey has NO BEARING on what he told the police.

You seem to consistently try to muddy the water with misdirection, a tactic that would not be used by someone sure of their argument. What's up with that?

Now focus... we are talking about Raffaele's statement to the police during the interrogation of 5/6 Nov and whether it impugns their alibi. Mentioning anything outside of this is more misdirection and is disingenuous.

 

[Vixen]

Re: the highlighted part.

Either there will be no link provided (probably because the claim was false to begin with), or:

The provided link will deal with another topic all together (probably because the claim was false to begin with), or:

There'll be a retraction claiming that they'd made a typo (probably because the claim was false to begin with).

Please refer to the police testimony of Claudio Trifici:

We used this graphic effect simply because this will be one of the points with which we can determine with certainty what is the timetable that we believe did not result in human interaction. Finally, we have the file with last accessed. The files are 124, because clearly already a computer to remain turned on involves access to a large number of files. Discorro quickly. As I said before this is the full scan. So among these 124 files we considered critical to the investigation we were doing that described in the report in paragraph 8, that virtually it certifies that there is human interaction icon VLC program. That is, the VLC program is called upon to operate. The lure of this application takes place at 18:27 and 15 of November 1, 2007. This will also be one of the basic points on which we will pull our conclusions. We then the last access to the video files, the Fabulous World of Amelì. The keis records as the last access to this file to 21:10 and 32 of November 1, 2007. As a final access keis gives a peremptory definition, he says that basically is the last moment on which an operation is performed on that file. The operation could be dragging or stop of any thing. However, it is exactly the time when the file is finally abandoned. What then are the 21/10 and 32/2 of 1 November 2007.

Basically, the police found that Amélie was crashed at 21:10 and this was the last human interraction. He reasoned this, because an error message came up, which needed human interaction to see (he gives the example, as an analogy, of his needing to turn the key in his car to discover the car is not working).

He explains Amélie is a VLC download, wheareas the Naruto is a P2P (person to person filesharing) program, which does not need the presence of the recipient.

(Think Windows Update or McAffee downloads. )

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Claudio_Trifici's_Testimony

 

[Bill Williams]

Like Raff, you are trying to downplay the matter. There is a site for 'Black Humour'. This was NOT a 'black humour' site.

I am? Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Vixen]

Problem is, he does not mention his leaking pipes in his statement to the police. What he told Kate Mansey has NO BEARING on what he told the police.

You seem to consistently try to muddy the water with misdirection, a tactic that would not be used by someone sure of their argument. What's up with that?

Now focus... we are talking about Raffaele's statement to the police during the interrogation of 5/6 Nov and whether it impugns their alibi. Mentioning anything outside of this is more misdirection and is disingenuous.

Erratum He mentions this in his Prison Diary:

The questions asked by the agents of the Squadra Mobile made me remember that that day the water pipe under the sink had detached itself and this fact makes me very suspicious since it is not possible for it to detach itself. In any case, the fact is that it flooded half the house. (Raffaele Sollecito Prison Diary 7 Nov 2007)

 

[TruthCalls]

Erratum He mentions this in his Prison Diary:

OK, so once again, the recollection he gave the police during the interrogation were completely consistent with the events of the night of Halloween, not from the night of the murder. Ergo, he did NOT impugn their alibi.

 

[Vixen]

OK, so once again, the recollection he gave the police during the interrogation were completely consistent with the events of the night of Halloween, not from the night of the murder. Ergo, he did NOT impugn their alibi.

What? He is asked what he did on the murder night, and he relates to police a completely different night?


So why did he not produce a statement to rectify his error?