The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 26

[Stacyhs]

I see. It's yet another one of your doxxing exercises.

So Nina Burleigh contacted this person's employers and blackmailed her.

You do realise this person appears to be working for a charity and you are recklessly solciting Amanda Knox fans to harass her at work by posting her linkedin details, for no discernible reason.

No morals, no manners, no decency.

You really do have a reading comprehension problem or you just can't refrain from making false accusations in an attempt to divert attention. This tactic is evident and tiresome. Nowhere does Burleigh write she "contacted this person's employers" or "blackmailed her". And how do you conclude she is working for a charity from "a UK social media company"? Where do you come up with this stuff?

This happened in 2009, eight years ago. No one gives a darn about contacting her much less harassing her. Really, stop with the false accusations in an attempt to divert from the fact that you cannot name a single psychologist who has said AK or RS is a psychopath.

And please, get off your high horse and stop with the accusation of no morals, manners or decency. You have no grounds to be slinging those accusations.

 

[bagels]

She banked on the police being so racist, they would jail Patrick for no reason, just like back home.

She already had a black guy to blame, bonus points for actually doing it. You have no real way to explain the interrogation.

 

[Stacyhs]

You still don't get it, do you? Amanda can hardly say 'Guede did it', without putting herself in it, so she carefully made sure they'd find his shoeprints, blood and excreta in the loo, and finger him without drawing attention to herself.

Napoleoni must have thought, 'Who are these two nuts, trying to get me to look at a turd in a toilet?'

Nonsense. So you think that she would have trusted Guede...a guy she'd met once or twice... not to turn on her instead of just cleaning up all the evidence? She would have had no reason to think Guede wouldn't turn on her and Sollecito in an instant in an effort to save himself.
Get real.

 

[TruthCalls]

What is this, TC, exams? Do I get three hours, and twenty minutes' reading time?

Not an exam. Just a few questions that lead to a couple of inevitable conclusions, assuming you can answer them honestly and correctly. Then again, you can also just ignore them as you usually do and stick with your baseless, preconceived conclusions. Your choice.

Considering you manage to respond to a dozen or so posts in just a few minutes, and given all of the questions are directly related to a case you've supposedly been following for nearly ten years now, I can't see why you should need three hours and twenty minutes reading time but if that's what it takes.

 

[Stacyhs]

Not an exam. Just a few questions that lead to a couple of inevitable conclusions, assuming you can answer them honestly and correctly. Then again, you can also just ignore them as you usually do and stick with your baseless, preconceived conclusions. Your choice.

Considering you manage to respond to a dozen or so posts in just a few minutes, and given all of the questions are directly related to a case you've supposedly been following for nearly ten years now, I can't see why you should need three hours and twenty minutes reading time but if that's what it takes.

You just made me spit out a perfectly good pinot grigio. I expect to be reimbursed.

 

[TruthCalls]

You still don't get it, do you? Amanda can hardly say 'Guede did it', without putting herself in it, so she carefully made sure they'd find his shoeprints, blood and excreta in the loo, and finger him without drawing attention to herself.

Napoleoni must have thought, 'Who are these two nuts, trying to get me to look at a turd in a toilet?'

Yeah, good strategy. So instead she says Lumumba did it and put herself in it anyway.

So if she carefully made sure they'd find his shoe prints, blood and excreta in the loo, why didn't she just continue to say she wasn't there and allow the forensic investigation to do their job? I'm pretty sure saying she was at the cottage drew attention to herself.

So in other words she's concerned Guede will finger her for the crime so she doesn't name him, but she's not at all concerned Guede will finger her for the crime once they nail him based on all of the evidence of his presence that she deliberately left behind?

Yeah, I guess you're right - I still don't get it.

 

[TruthCalls]

You just made me spit out a perfectly good pinot grigio. I expect to be reimbursed.

Sorry about that, but... given all the priceless 'logic' on display from Vixen lately I'm thinking you need something stronger than pinot grigio. Regardless, the next glass is on me!

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Oh wow. This is really still a thing?

 

[Stacyhs]

Oh wow. This is really still a thing?

Pinot grigio will always be a thing.

 

[bagels]

Not an exam. Just a few questions that lead to a couple of inevitable conclusions, assuming you can answer them honestly and correctly. Then again, you can also just ignore them as you usually do and stick with your baseless, preconceived conclusions. Your choice.

Considering you manage to respond to a dozen or so posts in just a few minutes, and given all of the questions are directly related to a case you've supposedly been following for nearly ten years now, I can't see why you should need three hours and twenty minutes reading time but if that's what it takes.

No need for Vixen to bother engaging any reasoning or critical thinking skills when she can write 5 paragraphs about a satanic manga death ritual.

 

[Planigale]

Paucity of logic for a supposed IT boff.

Knox wasn't to know Guede's DNA was on the security database.

Guede's DNA was not on any database.

Why do you just make stuff up?

 

[Welshman]

Above your head is it?

Amanda had lived in the cottage for several weeks and had been using the bathroom which meant it was perfectly normal for her DNA to be in the bathroom. DNA has no time stamp which makes it impossible to establish when DNA was deposited. When Guede killed Meredith he carried Meredith's blood in the bathroom which got mixed with Amanda's DNA which had been deposited previously. The argument Amanda's DNA in her own bathroom incriminating has no validity. Vixen can't understand this simple concept and has the cheek to say things are above my head.

 

[abaddon]

I see. It's yet another one of your doxxing exercises.

So Nina Burleigh contacted this person's employers and blackmailed her.

You do realise this person appears to be working for a charity and you are recklessly solciting Amanda Knox fans to harass her at work by posting her linkedin details, for no discernible reason.

No morals, no manners, no decency.

There is no "doxxing" in that. It is all public domain information.

Nina Burleigh did not contact the employer only the employee.

Linked-in details are public domain by default, unless one explicitly chooses for them not to be, which utterly defeats the purpose of linked-in anyway.

 

[Bill Williams]

There is no "doxxing" in that. It is all public domain information.

Nina Burleigh did not contact the employer only the employee.

Linked-in details are public domain by default, unless one explicitly chooses for them not to be, which utterly defeats the purpose of linked-in anyway.

Apparently, lying is part of the pro-guilt-PR strategy. The problem is, the last time I claimed such, I got called out for using the phrase "part of".

Amanda had lived in the cottage for several weeks and had been using the bathroom which meant it was perfectly normal for her DNA to be in the bathroom. DNA has no time stamp which makes it impossible to establish when DNA was deposited. When Guede killed Meredith he carried Meredith's blood in the bathroom which got mixed with Amanda's DNA which had been deposited previously. The argument Amanda's DNA in her own bathroom incriminating has no validity. Vixen can't understand this simple concept and has the cheek to say things are above my head.​

Guede's DNA was not on any database.

Why do you just make stuff up?​

No need for Vixen to bother engaging any reasoning or critical thinking skills when she can write 5 paragraphs about a satanic manga death ritual.​

You just made me spit out a perfectly good pinot grigio. I expect to be reimbursed.

Sorry about that, but... given all the priceless 'logic' on display from Vixen lately I'm thinking you need something stronger than pinot grigio. Regardless, the next glass is on me!​

Yeah, good strategy. So instead she says Lumumba did it and put herself in it anyway.

So if she carefully made sure they'd find his shoe prints, blood and excreta in the loo, why didn't she just continue to say she wasn't there and allow the forensic investigation to do their job? I'm pretty sure saying she was at the cottage drew attention to herself.

So in other words she's concerned Guede will finger her for the crime so she doesn't name him, but she's not at all concerned Guede will finger her for the crime once they nail him based on all of the evidence of his presence that she deliberately left behind?

Yeah, I guess you're right - I still don't get it.​

Nonsense. So you think that she would have trusted Guede...a guy she'd met once or twice... not to turn on her instead of just cleaning up all the evidence? She would have had no reason to think Guede wouldn't turn on her and Sollecito in an instant in an effort to save himself.
Get real.​

You really do have a reading comprehension problem or you just can't refrain from making false accusations in an attempt to divert attention. This tactic is evident and tiresome. Nowhere does Burleigh write she "contacted this person's employers" or "blackmailed her". And how do you conclude she is working for a charity from "a UK social media company"? Where do you come up with this stuff?

This happened in 2009, eight years ago. No one gives a darn about contacting her much less harassing her. Really, stop with the false accusations in an attempt to divert from the fact that you cannot name a single psychologist who has said AK or RS is a psychopath.

And please, get off your high horse and stop with the accusation of no morals, manners or decency. You have no grounds to be slinging those accusations.​

And all this is before considering that the pro-guilt-PR campaign still cannot name one forensic-DNA expert who agrees with Stefanoni.

Or that the pro-guilt-PR campaign is now fractured into two by conceding that NvdL is a plagiarist.

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh wow. This is really still a thing?

Agreed that it shouldn't be.

 

[Bill Williams]

Miss Represented's fraud and TJMK's duping was thoroughly discussed with links to Quennell's and other popular TJMK contributors' claim that she was a psychologist (with a doctorate, no less) here:
Deleted
And by the way, can you produce any named mental health professional who has diagnosed either RS or AK as being psychopaths? I thought not.

I see. It's yet another one of your doxxing exercises.
So Nina Burleigh contacted this person's employers and blackmailed her.

You do realise this person appears to be working for a charity and you are recklessly solciting Amanda Knox fans to harass her at work by posting her linkedin details, for no discernible reason.

No morals, no manners, no decency.

Wait a minute, wasn't it YOU, Vixen, who wanted Stacyhs to prove that Miss Represented WASN'T a psychologist?

This is how off the rails the guilter-PR campaign is. Now we're not even allowed to look into the background of the only person in the history of everything to claim expertise in diagnosing someone else's psychopathology.

Why on earth would someone who disputes "Miss Represented"'s bona fides be criticized for posting her Linked-In details?

The guilter-PR campaign is so far off the rails that finding out that this person does charity work - work completely distant from formal psychological expertise - is now considered "doxxing". Others could be forgiven for thinking that this proves that there is no expert who's ever said RS and/or AK ever suffered from psychopathology, but the guilter-PR campaign has a different agenda.

The guilter-PR agenda is to promote books by Nick van der Leek, even when other parts of guilter-land accuse NvdL of plagiarism for his latest effort, just like those in innocence-land accused him of plagiarism the last time. And the last time NvdL actually had his Amazon account suspended...... by Amazon!

The guilter-PR effort is all about moving goalposts. It dares others to prove that Miss Represented (not her real name!) is not a professional psychologist competent to make such determinations - THEN it accuses people of doxxing her when they look into her qualifications.

Welcome to the almost-decade-long guilter-PR agenda. The real difference lately is that now is not 2008-2009, when the prosecution (Mignini and Comodi) had unchallenged and unvetted access to tabloid media.

How do we know this? Nick Pisa, the main tabloid presence in Perugia at that time, told us so. He said that if he'd taken time to actually vette something the prosecution had told him - particularly the more slutty stuff - he'd be scooped by some other tabloid hack - and thus, not be paid.

This is how the guilter-PR agenda rolls.

 

[Stacyhs]

There is no "doxxing" in that. It is all public domain information.

Nina Burleigh did not contact the employer only the employee.

Linked-in details are public domain by default, unless one explicitly chooses for them not to be, which utterly defeats the purpose of linked-in anyway.

My favorite touch was the "blackmailing" part. Exactly how Vixen concludes that Burleigh blackmailed Ewing by not revealing her name is perplexing.

Turning a "UK social media company" into a "charity", turning emailing Ewing at work into "contacting her employers" and "blackmail", and quoting from a TIME article which revealed Miss Represented's real name is turned into "doxxing" in an attempt to "solicit Amanda Knox fans to harass her at work" . This convoluted and irrational thinking is a prime example of how negative TMB tests can still be blood, how finding a person's DNA in their own bathroom is inculpatory evidence, how a footprint never identified with DNA or even compared to anyone else's footprint becomes Amanda's and how world renowned forensic experts become "paid shills" who don't know what their talking about.

 

[Stacyhs]

At the time (2009) that Miss Represented was proclaiming herself a psychologist, PQ was claiming she had a "doctorate in criminal psychology" and declaring that AK was a psychopath, she had not even graduated from university yet (2010).

 

[bagels]

At the time (2009) that Miss Represented was proclaiming herself a psychologist, PQ was claiming she had a "doctorate in criminal psychology" and declaring that AK was a psychopath, she had not even graduated from university yet (2010).

It takes a lot of skill to diagnose someone you think is a butcher that slaughtered a defenseless girl in her own home for no reason as a psychopath. Very subtle work.

 

[Bill Williams]

At the time (2009) that Miss Represented was proclaiming herself a psychologist, PQ was claiming she had a "doctorate in criminal psychology" and declaring that AK was a psychopath, she had not even graduated from university yet (2010).

This is very cynical of you, Stacyhs, to imply that Peter Quennell and Miss Represented (not her real name) might have been LYING.

So when PQ implies that NvdL is a plagiarist, who's the liar? PQ or NvdL?

Vixen won't tell us, so you're going to have to fill in.....