The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 24

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no requirement. However, if you travel or ring abroad frequently
I do.

you would do the same.
I don't.

Mez rang her parents frequently.
Good for her. However, that doesn't mean anything. When I am abroad, I call home frequently. The number isn't even stored in my phone at all.

ETA: Nor are my siblings home and mobile numbers, nor my office, nor my colleagues.
 
Last edited:
It has always been my opinion that it was premeditated.

Note the pages ripped out of Amanda's diary, the phones switched off before 9:00; grabbing a kitchen knife on way out (cf Rachel Wade), the sheer brutality.

As the pair were charged with aggravated murder, which automatically means life, there was no requirement for the police or prosecutor, to construct a case for premeditation (as they might have had to in the USA).

Kokomani said he saw the three of them smashed out of their heads crouched behind the bins awaiting their 'friend'. He was pinged in the area, I think there is a grain of truth in his claim.

The Amélie film crashed at 9:10 - there is no requirement for one to be sitting in front of it watching it.

Phone switched back on 6:00 - Raff and midday Amanda, whereupon her first call was to Mez.

Look up Costas / Protti, De Nardo, Erin Caffey- the murder archives are littered with teenage girls armed with sharp weapons who set off specifically to kill.

Personally, I am sceptical that a row would lead to the type of torture Mez was subjected to. It was someone obtaining sadistic and vindictive pleasure out of it. Taking both of Mez' phones and locking the door, is the height of wickedness.

I think it's kind of nuts that you or anyone thinks that Amanda planned to kill Meredith. It should come as no surprise that even the Italian judges who convicted Amanda believe that it was premeditated.

I was going to go over the countless reasons your opinion is insane. And maybe point out that not even the judges that convicted Amanda believe this. There are a million possible reasons for these little points you make. None of which point to premeditated murder. For example, I often turn off my phone at night often and turn it on again in the morning. Maybe I don't want to be disturbed, maybe I don't want to have a dead battery the next day.

This is the difference between us. I don't have a higher consciousness. I don't assume I know things I possibly couldn't know. Your points are hardly even likely.

That there are a very tiny number of female killers proves little to nothing. What we do know is that absolutely no evidence was presented that Amanda has ever exhibited signs of being unbalanced or psychotic. No known history of violence. There also were no witnesses that Amanda and Meredith had ever even raised their voice to each other. In fact, the evidence points to them getting along and spending time with each other, ie: texts with kisses, attending the chocolate festival, concert and sunning together. Now I'm not saying they were BFFs, they had known each other about a month. But other then Meredith complaining there is nothing to lead a rational mind to conclude that Amanda disliked Meredith.

As I said, Vixen goes from A to Z without the letters in between. But that's not really true. Vixen starts with her conclusion. Oh well, just another day on ISF.
 
Chieffi was 'riddled with falsehoods' was it? Citation of the report in which he was castigated, please.

These two posts below show the numerous falsehoods contained in the Chieffi report. These posts show it was the Chieffi report which was flawed and illogical and not Hellman. Vixen and other PGP slavishly defend a judge who wrote a motivation report riddled with lies and brand Amanda a liar. Just one of numerous examples where PGP attack Amanda for lying while supporting people who have lied. Amanda's acquittal under Hellman was annulled and Amanda was sent for another trial on the basis of a motivation report full of lies. PGP such as Vixen viciously attack Amanda for lying when lies have been used against Amanda and feel it is perfectly acceptable to use lies against Amanda. Yet another example of the staggering hypocrisy of the PGP.

If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk and there was so much evidence against them, why did Chieffi have to resort to using falsehoods in his report?

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3142&p=153035

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/critical-commentary-knox-sollecito-trial/
 
It has always been my opinion that it was premeditated.

Note the pages ripped out of Amanda's diary TC: No evidence of this, the phones switched off before 9:00 TC: Yes, so she wouldn't get called into work; grabbing a kitchen knife on way out TC: No evidence of this (cf Rachel Wade), the sheer brutality. TC: And the relevance of this is???

As the pair were charged with aggravated murder, which automatically means life, there was no requirement for the police or prosecutor, to construct a case for premeditation (as they might have had to in the USA). TC: Of course, the old "we don't need no stinkin motive" excuse, which is really code for "we tried to come up with one, but each one was worse than the previous one so we finally decided 'just because' worked well enough"

Kokomani said he saw the three of them smashed out of their heads crouched behind the bins awaiting their 'friend'. He was pinged in the area, I think there is a grain of truth in his claim. TC: You give him a grain, no one else gave him a thing. Since Popovic has them at Raffaele's, NOT smashed out of their heads, at the time they would have needed to be there waiting for their 'friend' - the one they had no idea if/when she was coming home - to come home, it would seem there was good reason not to give him any credibility. You are desperate...

The Amélie film crashed at 9:10 - there is no requirement for one to be sitting in front of it watching it. TC: The film ended at 21:10, it didn't crash. They claimed they were watching it and it was running. That is called evidence, that is called an alibi. I see you're still keeping that head of yours in the sand.

Phone switched back on 6:00 - Raff and midday Amanda, whereupon her first call was to Mez. TC: Her first call wasn't to Meredith (and BTW, unless you were personal friends with Meredith, calling her Mez is both classless and insulting) but this is irrelevant anyway.

Look up Costas / Protti, De Nardo, Erin Caffey- the murder archives are littered with teenage girls armed with sharp weapons who set off specifically to kill. TC: Yes, but the key is to find one where the teenage girl armed with sharp weapons had no motive and leaves no evidence of herself but is aided by someone else whom they didn't know who did leave copious amounts of evidence behind. And, of course, it would be good to find one where someone else, who has only known the girl for a week, agrees to participate despite also having no motive or history. You're probably being deliberately vague but, if Amanda and Raffaele had been involved, this case would be extremely unique - probably a one-of-a-kind. Why don't you go check in with Quennell and see if he's had any luck finding a case that even remotely parallels this one.

Personally, I am sceptical that a row would lead to the type of torture Mez was subjected to. It was someone obtaining sadistic and vindictive pleasure out of it. Taking both of Mez' phones and locking the door, is the height of wickedness. TC: There was nothing unique to how Meredith died compared to the millions of women who have been sexually assaulted and murdered as a result of a bungled burglary. You'll have to help me to understand why taking the phones and locking the door is "the height of wickedness"

Comments in red above
 
In the U.S., on my cell phone carrier, you do not have to dial the country code when calling your home country when on an international plan.

Of course, Meredith's may have been different. But you don't know that and are making up fantasies in your head again. Because that's how your "higher consciousness" works lolol.

The problem is the telecommunications stuff changes constantly especially the phone features and the plans. I've owned at least 10 different cell phones over the years. Do we really remember exactly how we interacted with our phones in 2007 today in 2017? Or how someone else did with different plan in a different country? One of the funny things in WTBH was when Amanda was speeding away from the prison after her release, she was given an iPhone to make calls and she didn't know how to use it.

I consider myself to be a bit of an expert when it comes to data and telecommunications and it's impossible for me to know all the details of when, how etc. There is just too many different iterations. The principles are pretty much the same how the cell towers and how handshaking works but everything else is a fast moving target.
 
In the U.S., on my cell phone carrier, you do not have to dial the country code when calling your home country when on an international plan.

Of course, Meredith's may have been different. But you don't know that and are making up fantasies in your head again. Because that's how your "higher consciousness" works lolol.

Thank you NEW, you have just contradicted LoJo's theory, Rudy was fiddling about with it but didn't realise you need to ring the country code.
 
That you are flat out wrong yet again. You have no way of knowing if MK had her parents number even stored in her phone let alone whether the country code was included.

That won't stop her from presuming that she does.
 
Thank you NEW, you have just contradicted LoJo's theory, Rudy was fiddling about with it but didn't realise you need to ring the country code.

You really should understand what it means to contradict someone. Unless NEW has proven that on Meredith's UK phone, back in 2007, dialing the CC was not required, all NEW did was explain how his/her phone works today. i.e., s/he didn't contradict a thing.
 
I really wonder how this works. Rudy may not be an Italian citizen, but I was under the impression that he had lived most of his life in Italy and was adopted by Italian citizens. Countries sometimes refuse repatriation. I've read that this is a problem for the US. Here we must release someone back into the US within 180 days of a final deportation order if they won't be accepted.

AIUI Most countries have a mechanism by which they can strip 'naturalised citizens' of their status and deport them, usually because of imprsionment, or in the case of the US, former Nazi's.

ECHR would consider it a breach of family law if Rudy is deported, as he has been in Italy since age five, and was educated and culturalised there. He would be a stranger in Cote D'Ivoire.

Having said that, when we look at his crime and note he has shown zero remorse, hard to shed any tears for him.

He'll be cashing in as soon as he steps out. Just like Raff and Amanda.

Imagine that: commit a heinous crime, and you need never have to do any honest day's work: you do book tours and Innocence talks at US$5K a time.
 
You really should understand what it means to contradict someone. Unless NEW has proven that on Meredith's UK phone, back in 2007, dialing the CC was not required, all NEW did was explain how his/her phone works today. i.e., s/he didn't contradict a thing.

Believe me, you do not. I was abroad in 2007 and my phone automatically connected me to English numbers without my having to do anything.
 
acbytesla, you raise interesting questions. In the US, certainly undocumented ("illegal") immigrants are subject to deportation after serving a sentence after a criminal conviction ("irregular" first-time entry itself being actionable as a civil, not criminal, matter) and the federal government pursues this without prompting. It's interesting that in Italy, an acquitted co-accused can raise the issue of deporting the convicted accused who is not an Italian citizen through a notice to the police.

Rudy could still be a naturalised citizen, but yet still be subject to having it revoked.
 
AIUI Most countries have a mechanism by which they can strip 'naturalised citizens' of their status and deport them, usually because of imprsionment, or in the case of the US, former Nazi's.

ECHR would consider it a breach of family law if Rudy is deported, as he has been in Italy since age five, and was educated and culturalised there. He would be a stranger in Cote D'Ivoire.

Having said that, when we look at his crime and note he has shown zero remorse, hard to shed any tears for him.

He'll be cashing in as soon as he steps out. Just like Raff and Amanda.

Imagine that: commit a heinous crime, and you need never have to do any honest day's work: you do book tours and Innocence talks at US$5K a time.

I can't imagine for one second that Rudy will be cashing in. Are YOU going to buy his book? Are YOU interested in hearing him discuss this crime? Rudy is going to have a very hard time.

I'm also not sure the ECHR would consider it unlawful to deportation Rudy. What evidence do you have of that? Do you have a citation or are you talking out your ass?
 
Believe me, you do not. I was abroad in 2007 and my phone automatically connected me to English numbers without my having to do anything.

No, I don't think I have any reason at all to believe you. Your track record of non-stop falsehoods and fabrications precedes you.
 
I think it's kind of nuts that you or anyone thinks that Amanda planned to kill Meredith. It should come as no surprise that even the Italian judges who convicted Amanda believe that it was premeditated.

I was going to go over the countless reasons your opinion is insane. And maybe point out that not even the judges that convicted Amanda believe this. There are a million possible reasons for these little points you make. None of which point to premeditated murder. For example, I often turn off my phone at night often and turn it on again in the morning. Maybe I don't want to be disturbed, maybe I don't want to have a dead battery the next day.

This is the difference between us. I don't have a higher consciousness. I don't assume I know things I possibly couldn't know. Your points are hardly even likely.

That there are a very tiny number of female killers proves little to nothing. What we do know is that absolutely no evidence was presented that Amanda has ever exhibited signs of being unbalanced or psychotic. No known history of violence. There also were no witnesses that Amanda and Meredith had ever even raised their voice to each other. In fact, the evidence points to them getting along and spending time with each other, ie: texts with kisses, attending the chocolate festival, concert and sunning together. Now I'm not saying they were BFFs, they had known each other about a month. But other then Meredith complaining there is nothing to lead a rational mind to conclude that Amanda disliked Meredith.

As I said, Vixen goes from A to Z without the letters in between. But that's not really true. Vixen starts with her conclusion. Oh well, just another day on ISF.

Please don't quote me out of context. This was in the context of religion and your claim to be superior, as an atheist.

The evidence shows, Mez snubbed Amanda over Halloween, she got off with handsome ski-aficionado Giacomo (and noted to a friend that Amanda irritated her by saying, 'You can have him', as though she had first choice), and immediately before the murder, Patrick told her not to come in.

Remembering how Mez had shaken a mean mojito and Patrick had demoted Amanda to handing out flyers, and how Mez had gone out yet again that afternoon with friends with barely a backward glance or inviting Amanada, we can see how Amanda's envy and resentment got the better of her.

No motive? I don't think so.
 
I can't imagine for one second that Rudy will be cashing in. Are YOU going to buy his book? Are YOU interested in hearing him discuss this crime? Rudy is going to have a very hard time.

I'm also not sure the ECHR would consider it unlawful to deportation Rudy. What evidence do you have of that? Do you have a citation or are you talking out your ass?

They do not have the jursidiction to rule it 'unlawful'. However, they can rule it a breach of Human Rights ( = Right to Family Life) and award compensation against the member state.

The UK had this problem with various criminals, including the notorious Hamza (now serving time in the USA).

So, Rudy cannot overturn the law, but can get compensation if it is ruled there is a breach of Human Rights.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom