The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
It matters very much to Welshman, who as you can see is having a hissy fit about it and demanding I be branded a 'hypocrite' for simply quoting a respectable and highly regarded GUARDIAN journalist.
Click to expand...

Yawn. Maybe he's just not litigious.
 
Vixen said:
Like Nigella Lawson...?
Click to expand...

If you think Amanda Knox and her wrongful conviction in the murder of Meredith Kercher isn't high profile then you're hopelessly confused. If you didn't understand I was talking about her notoriety as a result of the murder case then your hopelessly ignorant. Either way, this response is just another example of your diversionary tactics and inability to address the issues.
 
Vixen said:
She is NOT innocent of Calunnia. This is an extremely serious crime for Patrick and his family - whose wife and little boy had to see him being arrested in the early hours for rape and murder - and put into custody on Amanda's malicious word.

Thank goodness for Patrick his Austrian friend was able to give him an alibi or - thanks to Amanda and Mom Edda - the poor guy would be a GENUINE victim of 'wrongful imprisonment'.

It is the height of cheek for Amanda to claim this epithet for herself.
Click to expand...

Vixen, just stop this nonsense. You know damn well her calunia conviction has nothing to do with this. Amanda was convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher and subsequently acquitted on appeal. It is on the basis of this exoneration that she was invited to speak.

It's this type of nonsense that earns you the reputation of being dishonest and disingenuous.
 
TruthCalls said:
Vixen, just stop this nonsense. You know damn well her calunia conviction has nothing to do with this. Amanda was convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher and subsequently acquitted on appeal. It is on the basis of this exoneration that she was invited to speak.

It's this type of nonsense that earns you the reputation of being dishonest and disingenuous.
Click to expand...

Only with the truly dishonest and disingenuous.

Amanda was NOT exonerated. The verdict was merely vacated on the grounds of 'insufficient evidence'.

It was NOT a paragraph one 'Not Guilty', it was a qualified one.

It is generally accepted the pair were only released because of backroom manoeuvres.

You would think they would be SO GLAD to get out of jail, they'd be happy to lead a quiet life of anonymity and thankful reflection.

Instead, they insist on picking at the scab of their unfair acquittal by making outrageous and unreasonable demands for recompense, book tours and putting themselves on lists as after dinner speakers costing $5K.
 
acbytesla said:
Nobody gives a crap Vixen.

I don't blame Amanda for Patrick being arrested I blame the same arrogant inept morons that put Amanda and Raffaele through hell.
Click to expand...

Your sentimental, mawkish and maudlin affection for this pair of monsters is matched only by your cold callous disregard for their victims.
 
TruthCalls said:
If you think Amanda Knox and her wrongful conviction in the murder of Meredith Kercher isn't high profile then you're hopelessly confused. If you didn't understand I was talking about her notoriety as a result of the murder case then your hopelessly ignorant. Either way, this response is just another example of your diversionary tactics and inability to address the issues.
Click to expand...

Why make her notoriety even worse by masquerading as the victim?

As John Kercher remarked, why not just go away?
 
Vixen said:
Your sentimental, mawkish and maudlin affection for this pair of monsters is matched only by your cold callous disregard for their victims.
Click to expand...

Koo Koo. There is nothing sentimental mawkish or maudlin about this whole affair. It was a tragedy every step of the way.

And neither Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito are monsters. They have no victims. They were victims of a great injustice.
 
Last edited:
TruthCalls said:
More misdirection by you, Vixen. Whether the Luminol traces were made from Meredith's blood has NOTHING to do with " Body language. Demeanour. Witnesses in person. Physical exhibits. Highly detailed, intricate, complex presentations." It is entirely based on science.

Here are five key questions to ask;

1. Did Massei & Nencini consider the Luminol traces as evidence of Amanda tracking Meredith's blood?

2. Were three of these samples taken from Amanda's bedroom?

3. Did all three traces test negative for blood using TMB?

4. Did all three traces test negative for Meredith's DNA?

5. Did all three traces test positive for Amanda's DNA?

The answer to ALL of the above is a resounding YES. (if you disagree then please advise which ones).

So then here is the one question that you and every other PGP for the past 9+ years have avoided answering.

How can those traces be Made from Meredith's blood given the answer to #'s 3, 4 and 5 above are all YES?

Can you answer that? Yeah, didn't think so.

And here's something I KNOW about you. You will once again avoid the question because you CAN NOT answer the question. You KNOW those traces could not have been made from Meredith's blood but to admit that means you know Massei and Nencini's conclusion was wrong - something you will NEVER admit to. What a quandary for you!

If I had to guess, you will come back with one of the following;

1. You will remind everyone that this is what Massei and Nencini ruled while entirely ignoring the impossibility of their conclusion based on the science.

2. You'll ask "if not blood, what". This is not an answer. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, especially when the science confirms it is not Meredith's blood.
Click to expand...


1. Yes, it is believed Amanda tracked Mez' blood into Filomena's room (where the staged burglary took place).

Apart from Guede's bloody footprints, all of the blood evidence outside of Meredith's bedroom was dilute, indicating that it was spread during and after washing. Five traces of Knox DNA mixed with the victim's were found at the crime scene: three in the bathroom (along with a Knox-only bloodstain on the faucet Knox claimed not to recognize), a mixed sample in a Luminol trace in the hall, and in a Luminol trace in Romanelli's room.
Click to expand...
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Mixed_DNA

This is because Amanda's DNA occurs in the exact spot where Mez' spilt blood was found in a small area.

As for whether any of the others showed Amanda's DNA:

Finding 1 / L5 / Rep. 180
Located in the bedroom of Amanda Knox this was identified as the right foot most likely in a deposit of haematic substance. The 1st toe, 3rd toe, the metatarsus, and a portion of the plantar arch led the technicians to conclude that the footprint was compatible with Amanda Knox's right foot.[8] This trace was also found to have Amanda Knox's DNA.[9]
Click to expand...

There is also a luminol-highlighted footprint compatible with Raff:

Finding 2 / L7 / Rep. 181
(Pictured above) Located in the corridor in the direction facing the exit was the print of another right foot made imprinted by a deposit of blood.[10] Next to the right foot was a print (L6) made by a left foot but there were no useful details for identification purposes.[11] The right foot did provide useful information. Being placed on a Robbins grid the investigators were able to get measurements for the big toe, both width and length for the metatarsus, and a width measurement for the heel.[12] The bloody footprint was determined to be compatible with Raffaele Sollecito's right foot.[13]
Click to expand...

Then we have yet another footprint identified as Amanda's:

Finding 7 / L9 / Rep. 184
Located in the corridor directly in front of the door to Meredith Kercher's room and pointing towards the entrance as if entering the room.[14] Measurements for the big toe, metatarsus, and heel were found to be compatible with Amanda Knox's foot.[15]
Click to expand...

Luminol is used by Forensic Teams to highlight blood. It is not reasonable to claim the substance is not blood. And even in the vanishingly remote chance it wasn't Mez' blood but parsnip juice or horseradish sauce, you need to explain why Raff and Amanda dipped their feet in these substances to leave their incriminating evidence at the crime scene.

The discovery of Amanda Knox's DNA mixed with the victims DNA in a footprint with no useful characteristics that is presumed to have been made in blood is difficult to explain.[16]
Click to expand...

Finally, how did the court reasonably decide the burglary was staged after the murder?

Rep 176 (L1 in the inspection report) was a Luminol trace found to have the victim's DNA, located on the floor near the window..[18] Rep 177 (L2) was between the door and the window, containing a Knox/Victim mixed profile.[19] That the victim's blood had been tracked into Filomena's room proved to the satisfaction of the courts that the staging must therefore have taken place after the murder.
Click to expand...
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Luminol_Traces


You are demanding that criminal courts must have 100% scientific certainty. This has never been the case. The acid test has always been: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

In a serious crime such as this, the bar is very high, especially where young adults are involved.

Massei and Nencini were unable to get the kids below this high bar of reasonable doubt.

In other words, each satisfied itself the kids were guilty as charged and the evidence corroborated it.
 
Last edited:
It has been confirmed:

Amanda Knox is actually a pagan sex demon as we have always suspected, Miginini is an investigative genius the likes of which we have not seen since Sherlock Holmes, Trump paid off the Italian Supreme Court, the Freemasons got to Hellman, the Illuminati manipulated the entire population of Seattle to only say good things about Amanda, and Knox's dad held a fund raiser to raise the trillions of dollars required to pay off the entirety of the field of forensic science (except, uh.. Stefanoni). Oh and Gill explained the limitations and proper protocol for his own DNA analysis technique, explaining precisely how Stefanoni messed it up and why it led to false positives, for a nickel because he was bored with having the reputation of being the most important forensic geneticist of the last 3 decades.

In related news, Vixen is quite intelligent, very educated, and not at all super nuts.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Koo Koo. There is nothing sentimental mawkish or maudlin about this whole affair. It was a tragedy every step of the way.

And neither Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito are monsters. They have no victims. They were victims of a great injustice.
Click to expand...

Your averred affection and pride in the kids is mawkish, sentimental and of vulgar bad taste.
 
Vixen said:
Your averred affection and pride in the kids is mawkish, sentimental and of vulgar bad taste.
Click to expand...

Defending two young people who were proven innocent and wrongfully convicted of a murder is not mawkish. Literally nothing you write ever makes sense. It is just a bunch of words from a thesaurus strung together.
 
Vixen said:
Only with the truly dishonest and disingenuous.

Amanda was NOT exonerated. The verdict was merely vacated on the grounds of 'insufficient evidence'.
Click to expand...

Wrong. The Italian courts (mainly, the Boninsegna court) use the word "absolved", which is the same as exonerated.

You simply repeating your claim ad nauseam does not make it so.
 
Vixen said:
Your averred affection and pride in the kids is mawkish, sentimental and of vulgar bad taste.
Click to expand...

Only in your bizarre little world.

While I am proud of how they have acted, I can't say I have affection for either of them. And maybe proud is the wrong word. I admire how they have handled themselves under great pressure.
 
Vixen said:
Boninsegna had nothing to do with the murder trial. He is ipso facto using a vernacular and not a legal term.
Click to expand...

LOL!!!! You have gall, I'll give you that! You've been citing Raffaele's compensation hearing as stating it's factual Knox was at the cottage!

Hoots!
 
Vixen said:
Boninsegna had nothing to do with the murder trial. He is ipso facto using a vernacular and not a legal term.
Click to expand...

Who knows this better, you or Judge Boninsegna?

Boninsegna said:
CONSIDERED AS FACTS AND MATTERS OF LAW

The defendant was summoned to trial by the Judge of the Preliminary hearings
with the decree of 20-Mar-2015, for the facts cited in the charges.
The case is a follow-on of a more complex and serious one, regarding the
murder of Meredith Kercher, a young English student, which occurred in Perugia
between 01-Nov and 02-Nov-2007. Those proceedings concluded with the exoneration of the defendant of murder, that she was accused of together with her
boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito​
Click to expand...
"Considered as facts and matter of law."

You regard this as "the vernacular"? Hoots!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom