The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 24

[Vixen]

Maybe. But maybe Vixen is demonstrating "guilt fraud", a campaign of attempted deceptions that seeks to show an innocent person is guilty of a crime by means of allegations that are falsehoods or fabrications. It's not criminal fraud, of course, because it doesn't satisfy the legal definition (elements) of criminal fraud; there is no legal injury, such as financial loss. And, of course, essentially no one - at least among current posters on ISF - finds Vixen's statements credible and thus there is no reliance upon them. An important contribution to this is that Vixen's falsehoods and fabrications are almost always transparent and absurd. However, some may consider "guilt fraud" to be immoral or unethical, while others may find it simply an entertaining diversion.

Here's the legal definition of fraud generally used in the US:

"Fraud

A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.

Fraud {in the legal sense} is commonly understood as dishonesty calculated for advantage. A person who is dishonest may be called a fraud. In the U.S. legal system, fraud is a specific offense with certain features. ....

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact, (2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result."

Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud

Er, Fraud, as is commonly understood by the man in the street, you know? As in con merchant.

 

[Vixen]

The broken glass was not visible due to the partially closed outside shutter:



[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_7166958e5dd6851a31.jpg[/qimg]

Oh riiiight. Now it's shut, yet a boulder was able to hurl through it.

 

[Vixen]

It is not common knowledge that blood dries in 30 seconds as you claimed.

Your citation states 30 to 60 minutes depending on conditions.

Furthermore, you claimed...
Therefore, you cannot know when MK ceased actively bleeding.

I said, 30".

 

[abaddon]

I said, 30".

You did. That means 30 seconds. Repeating your error will not magically make it right.

 

[Wilson85]

It is not common knowledge that blood dries in 30 seconds as you claimed.

I said, 30".

LOL, you still don't get it.
30″ (double prime) = 30 seconds
30′ (single prime) = 30 minutes

Wiki
The SI symbols for minute or minutes are min for time measurement, and the prime symbol after a number, e.g. 5′, for angle measurement. The prime is also sometimes used informally to denote minutes of time.

The prime symbol (′) is commonly used to represent feet (ft), arcminutes (am), and minutes (min). However, for convenience, a (') (single quote mark) is commonly used.

The double prime (″) represents inches (in), arcseconds (as), and seconds (s). However, for convenience, a (") (double quotation mark) is commonly used.

 

[Bill Williams]

I doubt very much Mignini apologised to Nathaniel Rich, hack, he was probably expressing some polite meaningless platitude to get shot of him.

Once again you attack anyone who reports something other than your confirmation bias.

I too doubt Mignini apologized. That's because that IS NOT what Nathaniel Rich reported. Rich reported that Mignini expressed regret. Why is it that you need to engage in strawman inventions?

But it'sclear how your mind works. You conspiratorialize the Netflix folks, you conspiratorialize all the scientific folks, you conspiratorialize the acquitting judges.

Whatever floats your boat.

ETA - "probably"? All you have is a "probably"? Wow, I'm convinced. So - a Rolling Stone reporter is a hack, and you've offered into evidence only a "probably"?

 

[LondonJohn]

The broken glass was not visible due to the partially closed outside shutter:



[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_7166958e5dd6851a31.jpg[/qimg]

Actually, the outer shutters were pulled shut when Knox arrived at the cottage. It was the police who opened the outer shutters to the position in which they're shown in that photograph from some hours later.

And it's laughably easy to understand that Guede, having broken in by opening the (at that point barely ajar, per Romanelli's own testimony) outer shutters, breaking Romanelli's window, and climbing in, would close the outer shutters tight behind him once he was in the room - that would have served the incredibly useful (to Guede) dual purpose of 1) preventing anyone outside the cottage from seeing him through the window, and 2) preventing anyone from outside the cottage from seeing that the window pane was broken (which in itself would obviously be a cause for alarm, investigation or curiosity).

 

[LondonJohn]

LOL, you still don't get it.
30″ (double prime) = 30 seconds
30′ (single prime) = 30 minutes

Wiki
The SI symbols for minute or minutes are min for time measurement, and the prime symbol after a number, e.g. 5′, for angle measurement. The prime is also sometimes used informally to denote minutes of time.

The prime symbol (′) is commonly used to represent feet (ft), arcminutes (am), and minutes (min). However, for convenience, a (') (single quote mark) is commonly used.

The double prime (″) represents inches (in), arcseconds (as), and seconds (s). However, for convenience, a (") (double quotation mark) is commonly used.

It's funny, isn't it, how this one small issue so beautifully encapsulates and embodies the stark differences within our little community in a) commitment to accuracy and clarity in argument, b) scientific understanding and literacy, and c) commitment to revising arguments and opinions in the light of improved knowledge or correction.............

 

[whoanellie]

I said, 30".

You're human and you made a booboo. You'd actually come across as a lot more intelligent and credible if you just admitted it. By itself, it's not a big deal ..... but there is a great deal of context.

 

[Bill Williams]

You're human and you made a booboo. You'd actually come across as a lot more intelligent and credible if you just admitted it. By itself, it's not a big deal ..... but there is a great deal of context.

Vixen actually did admit to making up a quote/observation, attributed falsely to Postal cop Battistelli - about Knox's demeanour at the cottage. She back-tracked from that one, with no apology.

She's now working on the issue of who it was who was responsible for the delay in taking the victim's body temperature - a major test in determining time of death. Vixen blamed Knox and Sollecito for that one, too, as if it was their responsibility to investigate the crime.

She'd been shown that Mignini himself 'fessed up to that one - he said he'd regretted delaying the critical temperature-taking for a further 24 hours, past the grisy discovery.

Rather than simply take Mignini on his own say-so, she attacked the reporter who reported on it, and further compounded her inanity by saying that Mignini actually had an intent to mislead Nathaniel Rich....

(Mignini) was probably expressing some polite meaningless platitude to get shot (sic) of him​

Once again, an invention from Vixen. But more to the point, what does that sentence even mean?

See what happens when you lie? More lies are needed to cover for the original.

 

[Numbers]

It's funny, isn't it, how this one small issue so beautifully encapsulates and embodies the stark differences within our little community in a) commitment to accuracy and clarity in argument, b) scientific understanding and literacy, and c) commitment to revising arguments and opinions in the light of improved knowledge or correction.............

Maintaining false statements in the face of clear and convincing contrary evidence, claiming true statements by independent experts that are contrary to one's misstatements or fabrications to be signs of a conspiracy, and negligently not seeking accurate information before making misstatements are all part of the pattern of "guilt fraud" (which is not a criminal fraud, in that it does not seek to cause legal injury).

 

[Matthew Best]

You're human ...

Evidence?

Could be a bot.

 

[Bill Williams]

Umm..no. ALL the courts, accepted that Raff had called 112 BEFORE the postal police arrived. Why do you keep ignoring this fact?

I missed this one.

Why does Vixen's correspondence keep "ignoring this fact"? Because not one court accept that Raffaele had called 112 BEFORE the postal police arrived, with the possible exception of Nencini's court which called no witnesses with regard.

The Massei motivations report, even in convicting the kids, put the postal's arrival at "just before 1 pm" and after the 112 call.

If you read through Nencini's long discussion on this point, Nencini basically says that he has no reason to distrust the Postals on this point.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's funny, isn't it, how this one small issue so beautifully encapsulates and embodies the stark differences within our little community in a) commitment to accuracy and clarity in argument, b) scientific understanding and literacy, and c) commitment to revising arguments and opinions in the light of improved knowledge or correction.............

Maintaining false statements in the face of clear and convincing contrary evidence, claiming true statements by independent experts that are contrary to one's misstatements or fabrications to be signs of a conspiracy, and negligently not seeking accurate information before making misstatements are all part of the pattern of "guilt fraud" (which is not a criminal fraud, in that it does not seek to cause legal injury).

It's long past time someone kept track of all these terms, like "innocence fraud". PGP are nothing if not inventive.

However, by far the favourite should be:

It's the American based Innocence Industry Complex which is conflating 'Exonerated' with a finding of "Not Guilty". One of the definitions of a factual finding would be someone else found guilty of the crime, a confession, or a cast iron alibi.​

Yet another compleat and utter invention.

We on this side of the fence should just give up in the face of this.

 

[Welshman]

Attacking Amanda and Raffaele for disrespecting the Kerchers is yet another example of industrial scale vile hypocrisy from PGP. As can be seen from the links below, John Kercher’s book Meredith was riddled with falsehoods and discredited evidence. To write a book accusing someone of committing a murder on the basis of a book full of falsehoods and discredited evidence is a disgusting thing to do and the PGP felt it was perfectly acceptable to do this. Vixen attacks Amanda and Raffaele for being disrespectful to the Kerchers but has no issue with the Kerchers being disrespectful to Amanda and Raffaele. If a person writes a book accusing someone of a crime on the basis of falsehoods, the subject of this accusation has a right to take legal action against the author. Those who attack Amanda and Raffaele for disrespecting to the Kerchers should bear in mind that Amanda and Raffaele did not take legal action against John Kercher over the lies in his book when they had the right to do so.

I have pointed out in the past that PGP have shown disgusting hypocrisy in attacking Amanda and Raffaele for lying when there are numerous occasions when they have lied themselves and supported the lies of others. The support they gave John Kercher is yet another example of this. On Amazon PGP gave glowing 5 star reviews to a book riddled with falsehoods and praise was heaped on John Kercher. PGP felt it was perfectly acceptable for people such as John Kercher to spread lies about Amanda and Raffaele.

http://www.groundreport.com/amanda-...arable-damage-caused-by-wrongful-convictions/

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1870&sid=2f907fb62848a64357ee1fa2e4fe2462

 

[Numbers]

Since according to the general theory of relativity gravity distorts space time of course 'heavy years' are longer than 'light years', don't try to be smart when physicists are around!

Planigale, we dealing here with the new new physics.

A light year ["] is the time light travels in one year.
A heavy year ['] is the time heavy travels in one year.

I know this because I have had a good education and don't need Google or any expert conspiracy folks to tell me otherwise.

 

[Bill Williams]

Planigale, we dealing here with the new new physics.

A light year ["] is the time light travels in one year.
A heavy year ['] is the time heavy travels in one year.

I know this because I have had a good education and don't need Google or any expert conspiracy folks to tell me otherwise.

"Heavy" is simply one component of mass. And mass (which is involved with gravity) is known to bend light. Einstein theorized this and it was proven by Sir Arthur Eddington in 1919 during an eclipse.

So, Vixen is not too far off by postulating a "heavy year", as the distance "heavy" travels in a year. (As an aside, some of us would travel farther in a year for obvious reasons.)

Compare this to Vixen's compleat and utter inventions - pulling factoids out of rear orifices. You haven't even considered Vixen's discovery of the "American based Innocence Industry Complex".

As such this version of the Innocence Industry Complex is based on Imperial units, while Italy bases it's the Innocence Industry Complex on the metric system.

No wonder they had to acquit the pair - the units of measure did not match. It wasn't a conspiracy at all!

 

[TruthCalls]

Candace Dempsey, the hack from Seattle, who thought she'd write a book from the Friends of Amanda POV? That one?


How thoughtful of her to chip in and offer Amanda a few 'explanations' she could use to explain various suspicious things.

Her claim is clearly rubbish.

And there you have it. The person who consistently quotes from TJMK, TMoMK, Follain and Nadeau calls Dempsey a hack.

So what of what Dempsey said is rubbish and where is your evidence of it? I mean, I get that you have no purpose for evidence and with you everything is what Vixen believes, but if you're going to call something rubbish you should at least be able to provide some evidence of that.

And since you never responded (as far as I can tell).. what is the relevance of your claim that blood drys in 30 minutes? What does that tell you about this crime?

 

[TruthCalls]

It is common knowledge.

Common knowledge is that you had this wrong. Several people have provided links to prove it.

What I really find fascinating is how you've responded to this. I think anyone else would simply have responded "You're right, I meant minutes and used the wrong symbol." and left it at that. Yet, for some unfathomable reason you simply can't admit you're wrong about anything, even something as simple and easily proven as this. I think it goes a long way towards explaining why you continue to argue things about this case as you do.

 

[Numbers]

"Heavy" is simply one component of mass. And mass (which is involved with gravity) is known to bend light. Einstein theorized this and it was proven by Sir Arthur Eddington in 1919 during an eclipse.

So, Vixen is not too far off by postulating a "heavy year", as the distance "heavy" travels in a year. (As an aside, some of us would travel farther in a year for obvious reasons.)

Compare this to Vixen's compleat and utter inventions - pulling factoids out of rear orifices. You haven't even considered Vixen's discovery of the "American based Innocence Industry Complex".

As such this version of the Innocence Industry Complex is based on Imperial units, while Italy bases it's the Innocence Industry Complex on the metric system.

No wonder they had to acquit the pair - the units of measure did not match. It wasn't a conspiracy at all!

Bill, both "light year" and "heavy year" must be measures of time, not distance, because they each are "years". Anyone with a good education would know that, it is common knowledge. And Einstein and Newton, and even quantum mechanics, have been supplanted by the new new physics, which is now common knowledge and may be used to calculate that a rock of about 4 kg can't be thrown through a window about 3 m away by a relatively strong adult male of height approximately less than 2 m (all units to be replaced by a series of primes to further the discussion).