Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

[Machiavelli]

Question 2: what is the evidence that Sollecito posted this image?

Question 3: what is the evidence that Sollecito created this image?

That Sollecito posted this image is reported by the journalist hersepf on the Dagospia page, but it can also be inferred by his answers about it: he is the one who answers a poster telling him what's the prize for the one who wins at the game. He answers the prize for the winner is scale model [of some murder cottage] from TV show "Porta a Porta". He answers basically all the questions about the cover. He has an obvious a "leader's" style, elusive, somehow condescending.

 

[Machiavelli]

He found the already-photoshopped image on the internet, or he found the original image of the box lid on the internet then photoshopped it himself? If the latter, what's the evidence?

(All assuming, of course, that Sollecito was actually the one who posted the image, which was addressed - and not yet answered - in Question 2......)

I assume he found the English cover on the internet - a non photoshopped version. It is anyway reasonable to infer that whoever photoshopped the cover was an Italian, since all characters portrayed on it are Italians, and I don't think portraying people like Rosa & Olindo Bazzi would make much sense outside an Italian context.

 

[LondonJohn]

Interestingly, if you are in Italy and you do an image search for "cluedo", you get this batch of images:

https://www.google.it/search?q=clue...r97RAhVKCMAKHbm4B5AQ_AUICCgB&biw=1366&bih=698

Several of them are high-resolution, very usable images of the Italian version of the Cluedo box.

I wonder why an Italian national, living in Italy, wanting to produce a spoof photoshopped Cluedo box cover to use on a FB group populated exclusively by Italians, might choose a UK version of the box over the many excellent images of the Italian version of the box....?

It's almost as if the photoshopped image originated from someone in the UK. Kind of like that photoshopped image of Knox and Santa Claus.....? Interesting, huh?

 

[bagels]

You may know, I am an Italian. A 17-year old person is not a child -in Italian, "child" means person below 14 - and she was certainly not a child over the subsequent years when her family waged a campaign claiming a politically motivated conspiracy, and when her father left politics following the case.
People are members of some family, and she took her father's place in politics. She did not put any distance between herself and her family actions, and the accused murderer happens to be her brother.
It's not a matter of judging her, it's a point of knowing where she comes from. How could I ignore the analogy and methods between her family case and political campaign calling a politically motivated conspiracy theory about police, and the case she stuck her case into with its political campaign callign a conspiracy theory? Why should I trust her or consder "respectable" in this regard?

On the other hand, let's say that another element to consider is that her observation was not a rational critique but rather a rabid delusional rant, a nonsensical accusation of political motives against decent persons.
The reason why she waged her vicious accusation might have something to do with the fact that she is a democratic senator from Seattle, that is from the same city and same political environment of the FoAs, the crowd that includes Ann Bremner & Judge Heavey and the Seattle Prep lobby group, the same people who gather with "brothers" at Vashon Island and a local family that includes Gogerty Marriott and his campaign, to which even Douglas Preston came to give its contribution and managed to drag the ICJ into.
Cantwell jumps into the case not because she has any rational critique to make - on things she has no clue about - but because the FoA managed to put up a political force of influencers around the case and Cantwell was just pushed by the political sentiment they created in her local environment.
Cantwell could not "refuse", after all. Since, you know, the case of her brother was still there...

Geez it sounds like the Cantwell conspiracy runs really deep. Fortunately I know someone who supported Knox who is in an even higher and more respected position and is totally incorruptible....

 

[Machiavelli]

There is no doubt this guy is a perv. He was disciplined and sacked IIRC So what stopped Amanda lodging a complaint at the time.

I tend to suspect she made up the story to get public sympathy.

All prisoners get HIV tested. She was not being singled out for special treatment as she claims. In her Prison Diary written at the time she makes no complaint about the doctor at all.

She "used" the perv to make up a story. We know that her "list of sexual partners" she wrote was just part of her "prison Diary", it was leaked to press simply because her whole of her prison diary was leaked.

By the way, the Italian press almost didn't pay attention to her list of sexual partners: they reported instead other snippets of her Prison Diary, it appeared they assumed the Italian public was more interested in other parts of her diary. I had never heared about the "sex partners" list before I learned about it from the English posters reporting about English speaking press.

 

[LondonJohn]

That Sollecito posted this image is reported by the journalist hersepf on the Dagospia page, but it can also be inferred by his answers about it: he is the one who answers a poster telling him what's the prize for the one who wins at the game. He answers the prize for the winner is scale model [of some murder cottage] from TV show "Porta a Porta". He answers basically all the questions about the cover. He has an obvious a "leader's" style, elusive, somehow condescending.

Yeah, excuse me if I don't take "reported by the journalist" as proof that Sollecito was really the one who posted it.

And your logic is *interesting* if you think that Sollecito making comments on an image implies that he was the one who originally posted it (far less that he was the one who created it). The clear style of that group was that a bunch of people were "humorously" trying to bait Sollecito about the murder, and Sollecito was batting back their baits with his own (ill-judged and unpleasant) attempts at "humour". So it's entirely unsurprising that Sollecito would have been answering questions about the Cluedo game implied by that provocative image, even if he hadn't been the one who created the image or even posted it.

 

[Bill Williams]

I didn't write an opinion post about Nadeau and Pisa.

I talked abaout trial documents.

The ISC has ruled definitely that the corpus of trial documents reveal an in competent investigation, and do not prove anything.

However if there's an agenda of simply picking and choosing various documents to prove a confirmation bias, go for it!

 

[Machiavelli]

Geez it sounds like the Cantwell conspiracy runs really deep. Fortunately I know someone who supported Knox who is in an even higher and more respected position and is totally incorruptible....

(...)

lol... not corruptible, right. Also Berlusconi claimed he was not corruptible.
He was only quite to corrupt.

Trump jumped in later, in 2011. And there is more that could be said about his participation, and about the timing of his declarations...

 

[Machiavelli]

The ISC has ruled definitely that the corpus of trial documents reveal an in competent investigation, and do not prove anything.

Absolutely not. The SC never assessed the corpus of the trial documents, and never had them.
It can also be proven btw that B/M make statements about the documents that are factually false.

(for example they state that the computer drives were destroyed and not recovered and this is false, they openly contradict res iudicata and definitive points of law, and so on).

 

[Bill Williams]

Nowhere, the trial papers say they are found "innocent".
The B/M verdict - which did not make any finding in the merits of evidence, as I said - just says ecatly what I reported.

The trial papers say the case against them was the result of an incompetent investigation, as well as judges substituting their hunches for the evidence.

Innocent they went into the process, innocent they came out.

But I'm not going to argue with you. My interest at this point is the rhetorical devices used to continue to argue a guilt scenario after they've been exonerated.

One is the continual reference to, "I follow the court documents." As I said, the ISC has ruled on what those documents show - nothing.

Yet the rhetoric continues which is fascinating.

 

[LondonJohn]

Remind us all, Mach, which joker (almost literally, perhaps soon....) is running the failing state of Italy this month? Remind us too about how virtually every branch of Italian government is in disarray, constitutional crisis and panic, and how the economy and banking system are in near-meltdown.

Funnily enough, this IS all directly germane to the Knox/Sollecito case. Had not the Italian government been a shambles for so long, the necessary legal reforms would have been legislated, codified and enacted a long time before 2007. And the judiciary would have been root-and-branch shaken up and modernised. If the Italian state had been even a fraction of the car crash that it's been over most of the past 25 years or so, there's a genuinely good chance that the judicial process against Knox and Sollecito would have been as short and as decisive (in its acquittals) as it should have been.

 

[Bill Williams]

Absolutely not. The SC never assessed the corpus of the trial documents, and never had them.
It can also be proven btw that B/M make statements about the documents that are factually false.

(for example they state that the computer drives were destroyed and not recovered and this is false, they openly contradict res iudicata and definitive points of law, and so on).

This is fascinating rhetoroc, wiyhout which the guilter scenario would not work. Thaks for giving it a go.

 

[LondonJohn]

Absolutely not. The SC never assessed the corpus of the trial documents, and never had them.
It can also be proven btw that B/M make statements about the documents that are factually false.

(for example they state that the computer drives were destroyed and not recovered and this is false, they openly contradict res iudicata and definitive points of law, and so on).

Your example is nothing to do with res judicata (which only applies to settled judgements). But onwards and upwards......

ETA: The Marasca SC panel never had the trial documents?!!!

 

[Machiavelli]

Yeah, excuse me if I don't take "reported by the journalist" as proof that Sollecito was really the one who posted it.

I don't think I can excuse you, also because Sollecito posted a response to the journalist, and he did not deny any of the journalist's statement - in fact he even confirmed some through his comment.
So, no, I cannot assume that the journalist could have provided false info about this, this would be not reasonable, also given that Italian law would punish a journalist who provides false information of this kind if Sollecito complains.

And your logic is *interesting* if you think that Sollecito making comments on an image implies that he was the one who originally posted it (far less that he was the one who created it).

No it's the way he answers and the fact that others ask him things about it, it all poitns to confirm the fact that he actually posted the picture.
I don't know obviously who photoshopped it - but I am not aware of evidence that anyone alse photoshopped and posted it on the internet before him, and anyway I don't think that it would make a difference who created it, since he obviously likes the picture and he posted it.

The clear style of that group was that a bunch of people were "humorously" trying to bait Sollecito about the murder, and Sollecito was batting back their baits with his own (ill-judged and unpleasant) attempts at "humour".

Actually, no. There is something more. Here we also have Sollecito himself suggesting that: 1) Knox is a murderess; 2) Knox is insane.
Those are original contents that he injects on his own mind.

Those content as conveyed in the group come directly from him, and him alone. His cluedo cover picture and his "Knox insane comment" (or his "likes" below racist comments or other pictures suggesting Knox's guilt) are not a way of responding to others, he is creating these contents directly on his own initiative.

So it's entirely unsurprising that Sollecito would have been answering questions about the Cluedo game implied by that provocative image, even if he hadn't been the one who created the image or even posted it.

He posted the cluedo cover.
He also liked racist jokes involving Knox and others, he liked others about Meredith, and he posted the "Knox insane" comment.

 

[toto]

That officer in question wasn't "disciplined and sacked", he just retired, according to this article.

And according to this one he seems to be quite p... that time is ticking away and the statute of limitations will kick in before he is able to clear his name...
Just for the record...

Thanks for this.

 

[Bill Williams]

Your example is nothing to do with res judicata (which only applies to settled judgements). But onwards and upwards......

ETA: The Marasca SC panel never had the trial documents?!!!

The ISC obviously had what the Nencini court had, and said Nencini should never have convicted on the basis of it all.

 

[Machiavelli]

Your example is nothing to do with res judicata (which only applies to settled judgements). But onwards and upwards......

ETA: The Marasca SC panel never had the trial documents?!!!

Exactly. They never had the trial documents.
They can't have them, by law, after all.

The SC can only have access to very limited trial documentation, only those documents attached in the submission, and only parts of them; access must be limited to only those pages or parts of the papers directly referred to by the submission.

 

[Machiavelli]

The ISC obviously had what the Nencini court had, and said Nencini should never have convicted on the basis of it all.

Absolutely not.

They did not have what Nencini had. And they couldn't.

 

[toto]

Yeah, excuse me if I don't take "reported by the journalist" as proof that Sollecito was really the one who posted it.

And your logic is *interesting* if you think that Sollecito making comments on an image implies that he was the one who originally posted it (far less that he was the one who created it). The clear style of that group was that a bunch of people were "humorously" trying to bait Sollecito about the murder, and Sollecito was batting back their baits with his own (ill-judged and unpleasant) attempts at "humour". So it's entirely unsurprising that Sollecito would have been answering questions about the Cluedo game implied by that provocative image, even if he hadn't been the one who created the image or even posted it.

I too am unhappy with "reported", "inferred" and "obvious"

 

[Machiavelli]

Remind us all, Mach, which joker (almost literally, perhaps soon....) is running the failing state of Italy this month? Remind us too about how virtually every branch of Italian government is in disarray, constitutional crisis and panic, and how the economy and banking system are in near-meltdown.

Funnily enough, this IS all directly germane to the Knox/Sollecito case. Had not the Italian government been a shambles for so long, the necessary legal reforms would have been legislated, codified and enacted a long time before 2007. And the judiciary would have been root-and-branch shaken up and modernised. If the Italian state had been even a fraction of the car crash that it's been over most of the past 25 years or so, there's a genuinely good chance that the judicial process against Knox and Sollecito would have been as short and as decisive (in its acquittals) as it should have been.

Personally, I still prefer the failing state of Italy rather than the failing state of the UK, if I have to chose.
If I were British I would think twice before spewing condescending judgements about things you don't know or about laughing of Italy. Just my opinion.

Italian prosecutor Henry Jorhn Woodcock (who happens to be also British citizen and familiar with the UK justice system) maintains that in terms of modernity - including rights of the accused - the Italian justice system is "light-years forward" compared to the British despite some suggest we shuld "parrot" it (so he says).