The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 26

[LondonJohn]

I just looked at what serial fantasist Quennell was claiming on his website. In a most beautiful piece of self-contradiction, he quotes himself saying

"Dr Mignini is said to be satisfied and drops criminal lawsuit* (his choice, no acquittal)"

and then adds

"That (the criminal slander trial) is the one the prosecution stated to the judge now did not need to go forward. That was their choice. Dr Mignini was not involved."





* Of course, the term "lawsuit" is pretty much ubiquitously used solely in the context of civil actions - i.e. where one individual (or group of individuals) is bringing a case against another individual (or group); therefore the very phrase "criminal lawsuit" is somewhat nonsensical.

 

[Welshman]

In complaining about Amanda and Raffaele writing falsehoods in their books and defaming Mignini we see yet another example of industrial scale hypocrisy by PGP. As can be seen in the piece below there are numerous instances when PGP have either praised books, films and documentaries containing falsehoods or not complained about these falsehoods. It is strange how PGP have no issue when PGP works contain falsehoods which proves my point PGP regard lying as perfectly fine when it works against Amanda and Raffaele. PGP had no issue when the authors of pieces containing falsehoods defamed Amanda and Raffaele.

“Books, documentaries and films about the case are often riddled with falsehoods. The following are examples :-

John Kercher's book Meredith. The falsehoods are detailed on http://groundreport.com/amanda-knox-...l-convictions/ http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/ http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.or...1e0c2cd6559958

The lifetime move the falsehoods are detailed in chapter 2 of finding justice in Perugia.

Barbara Nadeu's book Angel Face. As with John Kercher's book the falsehoods are detailed on http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda-knox-media-lies/ and the chapter Injustice in Perugia on the media.

A documentary on British Television is Amanda Knox guilty the rebuttal can be found by searching "is Amanda Knox guilty youtube rebuttal"


The haters have never complained about the falsehoods in the items listed above. In fact, John Kercher's book Meredith received glowing 5 star reviews on Amazon.”

PGP complain Amanda and Raffaele defamed Mignini but PGP conveniently forget how the prosecution defamed Amanda and Raffaele and used lies against them. As can be seen in the links below, the police/prosecution committed numerous abuses against Amanda and Raffaele. The prosecution used the media to fed false information to the media about bleach receipts, the Harry Potter books, the washing machine running and showering in a bloody bathroom. The prosecutor Comodi lied to Amanda in court asking why Amanda phoned her mother at 12.00 pm when phoned records show Amanda phoned her mother at 12.47 pm. Amanda was lied to she had HIV which is the most disgusting lie imaginable. The prosecution lied and committed perjury to advance their case. PGP complain about Amanda and Raffaele lying in their books and defaming the prosecution but PGP had no problem when the prosecution used lies and defamation against Amanda and Raffaele.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contamination-labwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-perjury-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com...old-about-amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11071314#post11071314


PGP conveniently forget the numerous occasions when people have lied and defamed Amanda and below are just a few examples. PGP had no issue with people lying and defaming Amanda.

* The media spread false information about Amanda and Raffaele as shown in the link below.

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

*There were several examples of witnesses such as Quintavelle, Curalto and Kokomi lying they had seen Amanda and Raffaele. The link below shows the English girls lying about Amanda in court as detailed in the link below

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/the-british-girls/

* Patrick Lumumba spread falsehoods about Amanda as detailed in the link below
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/patrick-lumumba/

PGP posters have also defamed and spread malicious falsehoods about Amanda and Raffaele. Below is a list of the some numerous falsehoods Vixen has said in her posts and many of these contain malicious lies against Amanda and Raffaele such as Amanda showing no grief over Meredith, Raffaele was off his head, Amanda was taking 300 euros a day from her bank account and recently Vixen devoted post after post to a blatant falsehood about Raffaele destroying his own computers. PGP posters have also spread malicious falsehoods about other people. In the list below there are false accusations C*V withheld a DVD from the court and Judge Hellman received a 500,000 euro bribe. PGP posters lie on an industrial scale in their posts, make malicious false accusations against people and have the cheek to bang on about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11938562#post11938562
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11942852#post11942852
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11598412#post11598412
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11427461#post11427461
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11951893#post11951893
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11982023#post11982023
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11669633#post11669633

 

[Numbers]

The ECHR has published its judgments in the following cases:

Azzolina and Others v. Italy (nos. 28923/09 and 67599/10)
Blair and Others v. Italy (nos. 1442/14, 21319/14, and 21911/14)
Cirino and Renne v. Italy (nos. 2539/13 and 4705/13).

The significance of these ECHR cases is:

1. The ECHR has found that because there is no law making torture a criminal offense in Italy, under Italian law in force at the time, the Italian courts "had had to turn to other provisions of the Criminal Code, which were subject to statutory limitation periods. As a result of this lacuna in the legal system, the domestic courts had been ill-equipped to ensure that treatment contrary to Article 3 perpetrated by State officials did not go unpunished".

2. In all of these sets of cases, the ECHR judged that Italy was thus in violation of Convention Article 3, prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, and in particular of inadequate investigation of such acts.

3. These cases were among the "noteworthy pending cases" summarized in the current Country Profile for Italy. Knox v. Italy is also listed as a noteworthy pending case, and thus it appears highly likely that the ECHR will publish a judgment on that case in 2018 if not sooner.

Press releases in English summarizing the judgments are available by links from:

http://echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home

The full text of the judgments of Azzolina and Others v. Italy and Blair and Others v. Italy are available only in French, while that of Cirino and Renne v. Italy is available only in English, all on the ECHR's HUDOC site:

https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22]}

 

[Numbers]

Why did Mignini withdraw his complaint for alleged defamation against Sollecito and Gumbel?

My firm belief is that he would have done so only under pressure. And my opinion is that during the pretrial investigation of the defamation charge, information was developed that showed that Mignini had indeed committed acts that would make him lose his case and embarrass him and possibly result in another censure by the Superior Council of the Judiciary. Mignini chose to end his lawsuit to prevent this information from becoming public.

 

[TruthCalls]

It was a typo?

Now THAT was freakin funny!

 

[Bill Williams]

Why did Mignini withdraw his complaint for alleged defamation against Sollecito and Gumbel?

My firm belief is that he would have done so only under pressure. And my opinion is that during the pretrial investigation of the defamation charge, information was developed that showed that Mignini had indeed committed acts that would make him lose his case and embarrass him and possibly result in another censure by the Superior Council of the Judiciary. Mignini chose to end his lawsuit to prevent this information from becoming public.

While we are speculating......

He may have received legal advice of his own, that to advance the case against Sollecito and Gumbel would simply have ended in him revealing more information about how the initial, 2007-2008 investigation into the Kercher murder got bungled.

Indeed, he'd been censured once. Had he been setting himself up to be censured again?

Then again, as LJ has said, there are two separate things here - Mignini's civil suit which he has withdrown (probably under legal advice), and the criminal case which was thrown out, "because the act did not exist".

IMO one of the stupidest moves Mignini ever made was allowing himself to be interviewed by CNN's Drew Griffin, in 2010. At that time RS and AK were in prison, and he felt the field was his to own.

That fell apart in 2011, when the Hellmann court was shown that the emperor had no clothes.

Today, in 2017, the mystery is that the main pro-Mignini outlet(s) is in English and lies for him.

 

[Bill Williams]

It was a typo?

Now THAT was freakin funny!

So to review:

First it was, "this is all a sideshow anyway."

Then it was: "the fact does not exist" in Italy does not actually mean, "the fact does not exist." Instead it means, "they committed the act and will soon apologize." (This goes with the other things in Italy which do not mean what they mean - things like, "hypothesize" and "even if".)

Then it was that if Mignini had withdrawn the lawsuit, the judge adjudicating the criminal trial would throw out the criminal charges against RS and AG, as long as RS and AG apologized next week. (Why "next week" is anyone's guess.)

Maybe it will end up as a typo as once promised.

 

[TruthCalls]

So to review:

First it was, "this is all a sideshow anyway."

Then it was: "the fact does not exist" in Italy does not actually mean, "the fact does not exist." Instead it means, "they committed the act and will soon apologize." (This goes with the other things in Italy which do not mean what they mean - things like, "hypothesize" and "even if".)

Then it was that if Mignini had withdrawn the lawsuit, the judge adjudicating the criminal trial would throw out the criminal charges against RS and AG, as long as RS and AG apologized next week. (Why "next week" is anyone's guess.)

Maybe it will end up as a typo as once promised.

Don't forget;

The thing about settlements, is that they usually contain 'gagging clauses', which means both parties agree not to discuss it further, nor even to state that a settlement exists.

So apparently there's a gag order that stifles even disclosing a settlement has been reached but, nonetheless, TJMK has confirmed this settlement was made.

Apparently you CAN make this stuff up. I'm just not sure whether to give creative credit to Quennell or Vixen.

 

[Bill Williams]

So apparently there's a gag order that stifles even disclosing a settlement has been reached but, nonetheless, TJMK has confirmed this settlement was made.

Apparently you CAN make this stuff up. I'm just not sure whether to give creative credit to Quennell or Vixen.

What with today's release of the remaining JFK Assassination files, someone is going to win a Pulitzer with what is going on in the world.

It will either be Peter Quennell finally blowing the lid off of the demonization of Giuliano Mignini by the international Masonic/US Media conspiracy.....

.... or some enterprising cub reporter who finally finds out that there'd been a grassy knoll shooter.

Which is your money on?

 

[Stacyhs]

Don't forget;



So apparently there's a gag order that stifles even disclosing a settlement has been reached but, nonetheless, TJMK has confirmed this settlement was made.

Apparently you CAN make this stuff up. I'm just not sure whether to give creative credit to Quennell or Vixen.

Not only that a settlement was reached, but they've disclosed the alleged terms of the settlement. According to Fast Pete on dotnut today:

Sollecito and Gumbel MUST publish a statement admitting that they lied in the book

.

How would they even know that unless someone with inside knowledge told them? And just who could know that outside Mignini, his lawyers, RS, Gumbel and their lawyer? RS,Gumbel and their lawyer sure as hell wouldn't talk to anyone associated with TJMK.

 

[whoanellie]

Now THAT was freakin funny!

Vixen makes it easy!

 

[Bill Williams]

Amanda Knox put herself at the scene, once verbally, within an hour or so after voluntarily arriving at the Questura, when hearing Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her, telling police his initial statement had been a 'sack of ****', and twice more in writing by her own hand.

Her footprints in Mez' Meredith's blood is highlighted by luminol. Her DNA is mixed in with Mez' Meredith's DNA in the bathroom and in Filomena's room, and in one of the luminol highlighted footprint.

Oh, don't tell us: the luminol is all wrong.

It is you which is all wrong. Luminol is a presumptive test.

Her footprints were not found in Meredith's blood anywhere in the cottage.

But the PR-campaign you are engaged in has had to default to these long-since debunked claims. Mignini has been laughed out of court in his defamation claims against Sollecito/Gumbel, and Nick van der Leek has been exposed as a plagiarist. So it is, you've simply reotted the PR campaign as if nothing had happened.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

Amanda Knox put herself at the scene, once verbally, within an hour or so after voluntarily arriving at the Questura, when hearing Raff had withdrawn his alibi for her, telling police his initial statement had been a 'sack of ****', and twice more in writing by her own hand.
Her footprints in Mez' Meredith's blood is highlighted by luminol. Her DNA is mixed in with Mez' Meredith's DNA in the bathroom and in Filomena's room, and in one of the luminol highlighted footprint.

Oh, don't tell us: the luminol is all wrong.

It is you which is all wrong. Luminol is a presumptive test.

Her footprints were not found in Meredith's blood anywhere in the cottage.

But the PR-campaign you are engaged in has had to default to these long-since debunked claims. Mignini has been laughed out of court in his defamation claims against Sollecito/Gumbel, and Nick van der Leek has been exposed as a plagiarist. So it is, you've simply reotted the PR campaign as if nothing had happened.

The luminol was not wrong at all. It reacted correctly to something. That something just wasn't blood.

It takes no stretch of the imagination to know that, if a PGP or one of their family or friends had been accused of murder and their luminol positive footprints had a TMB negative reaction, they'd be singing a far different tune. We'd not being hearing about how luminol is so much more sensitive or silliness about horseradish or fruit juice.

 

[acbytesla]

The ECHR has published its judgments in the following cases:

Azzolina and Others v. Italy (nos. 28923/09 and 67599/10)
Blair and Others v. Italy (nos. 1442/14, 21319/14, and 21911/14)
Cirino and Renne v. Italy (nos. 2539/13 and 4705/13).

The significance of these ECHR cases is:

1. The ECHR has found that because there is no law making torture a criminal offense in Italy, under Italian law in force at the time, the Italian courts "had had to turn to other provisions of the Criminal Code, which were subject to statutory limitation periods. As a result of this lacuna in the legal system, the domestic courts had been ill-equipped to ensure that treatment contrary to Article 3 perpetrated by State officials did not go unpunished".

2. In all of these sets of cases, the ECHR judged that Italy was thus in violation of Convention Article 3, prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, and in particular of inadequate investigation of such acts.

3. These cases were among the "noteworthy pending cases" summarized in the current Country Profile for Italy. Knox v. Italy is also listed as a noteworthy pending case, and thus it appears highly likely that the ECHR will publish a judgment on that case in 2018 if not sooner.

Press releases in English summarizing the judgments are available by links from:

http://echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home

The full text of the judgments of Azzolina and Others v. Italy and Blair and Others v. Italy are available only in French, while that of Cirino and Renne v. Italy is available only in English, all on the ECHR's HUDOC site:

https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22documentcollectionid2%22:[%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22]}

I'm curious about the court case numbers. Are the last 2 numbers related to a year? Like maybe the year they were filed or something else? And do you know the number of the Knox case?

 

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

The luminol was not wrong at all. It reacted correctly to something. That something just wasn't blood.

It takes no stretch of the imagination to know that, if a PGP or one of their family or friends had been accused of murder and their luminol positive footprints had a TMB negative reaction, they'd be singing a far different tune. We'd not being hearing about how luminol is so much more sensitive or silliness about horseradish or fruit juice.

The Luminol argument is so dishonest. It is incumbent upon someone judging a criminal case to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt on equivocal evidence. Not only was TMB results negative which should make any fair observer to discount it in its entirety. But the prints cannot be attributed to anyone. The probative value is non-existent.

But we're never going to convince Vixen. And she's unlikely to convince anyone. TEN YEARS in just a few days.

 

[Bill Williams]

The Luminol argument is so dishonest. It is incumbent upon someone judging a criminal case to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt on equivocal evidence. Not only was TMB results negative which should make any fair observer to discount it in its entirety. But the prints cannot be attributed to anyone. The probative value is non-existent.

But we're never going to convince Vixen. And she's unlikely to convince anyone. TEN YEARS in just a few days.

Let's not let Vixen change the subject too fast. Her campaign has been dealt two devastating blows in a row - NvdL's plagiarism and Mignini's embarassment over the defamation case collapsing in a heap.

But..... is this not a pic of the lumimol "print" Vixen refers to?



ETA - the thing which almost certainly settles that that is not a footprint made in blood is that it vaguely looks like a footprint. Think about it. If it had been a **visible** footprint in blood then you wouldn't need luminol to see it (presumptively of course).

The fact that you had to have used luminol is because - obviously - the print had been cleaned up! Luminol would have shown the signs of a clean - swirling motions of the invisible traces of residue blood, made by the action of trying to clean it. There are none.

Is the claim, then, that the blood had evaporated, so that the "print" was left undisturbed?

This is before considering - the other test said it wasn't blood. Indeed, it actually looks like a spill of some sort which was not cleaned-up but evaporated.

That is even before discussing - why are the protective booties and the ruler reacting to the Luminol? Aren't they supposed to be sterile, and not contaminating the scene?

 

[Stacyhs]

Let's not let Vixen change the subject too fast. Her campaign has been dealt two devastating blows in a row - NvdL's plagiarism and Mignini's embarassment over the defamation case collapsing in a heap.

But..... is this not a pic of the lumimol "print" Vixen refers to?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_53971539b74fa8742d.jpg[/qimg]

ETA - the thing which almost certainly settles that that is not a footprint made in blood is that it vaguely looks like a footprint. Think about it. If it had been a **visible** footprint in blood then you wouldn't need luminol to see it (presumptively of course).


The fact that you had to have used luminol is because - obviously - the print had been cleaned up! Luminol would have shown the signs of a clean - swirling motions of the invisible traces of residue blood, made by the action of trying to clean it. There are none.

Is the claim, then, that the blood had evaporated, so that the "print" was left undisturbed?

This is before considering - the other test said it wasn't blood. Indeed, it actually looks like a spill of some sort which was not cleaned-up but evaporated.

That is even before discussing - why are the protective booties and the ruler reacting to the Luminol? Aren't they supposed to be sterile, and not contaminating the scene?

Not to mention that these were never compared to Meredith's, Laura's or Filomena's feet at all. But of course, they would never have walked around barefoot in the cottage. Only Amanda would have so it must be hers. And before Vixen pops in with "but none of those girls would have walked in blood", let's remind her that they were not in blood. And here we go again...

 

[acbytesla]

Not to mention that these were never compared to Meredith's, Laura's or Filomena's feet at all. But of course, they would never have walked around barefoot in the cottage. Only Amanda would have so it must be hers. And before Vixen pops in with "but none of those girls would have walked in blood", let's remind her that they were not in blood. And here we go again...

Who says the prints belonged to anyone who lived at the cottage? Not that I actually believe that Rudy had an accomplice. But if he did, maybe they belong to that unknown person. The point is they aren't attributed to anyone. They are smudges not fingerprints with loops and whirls that can be matched to an individual.

All we actually know is various smudges appear to be the footprints of an unknown individual. We don't know what substance that the person was walking through. We can only spot these smudges because they react to Luminol a presumptive test for blood. We also know that these smudges were also subjected to TMB another presumptive test for blood and they tested negative.

These smudges tell us nothing.

 

[Stacyhs]

The Kristin Lobato case is a great example of how prosecutors become so entrenched in their beliefs, tunnel vision, and the inability to admit they got it wrong that they can't see the forest for the trees. Which is the connection to the Kercher case and the PGP who suffer from the same affliction and who still insist that there is "a mountain of evidence" against Knox and Sollecito.

When 3 expert entomologists testified that the absence of blowfly activity on the body of the victim indicated he had died near or after sunset and not in the early morning hours, thus excluding Lobato as the killer, the prosecutor claimed that blowfly activity in Las Vegas is "different" than anywhere else in the world. This reminds me of Mignini moving the TOD of Kercher to match the "ear witnesses" scream rather than the far more logical 9:00-9:30 TOD indicated by her still being fully clothed in day clothes when she was attacked, the interrupted call to her mother, and the aborted call to her bank.

https://theintercept.com/2017/10/25/kirstin-lobato-murder-trial-las-vegas/?comments=1#comments

 

[TruthCalls]

Who says the prints belonged to anyone who lived at the cottage? Not that I actually believe that Rudy had an accomplice. But if he did, maybe they belong to that unknown person. The point is they aren't attributed to anyone. They are smudges not fingerprints with loops and whirls that can be matched to an individual.

All we actually know is various smudges appear to be the footprints of an unknown individual. We don't know what substance that the person was walking through. We can only spot these smudges because they react to Luminol a presumptive test for blood. We also know that these smudges were also subjected to TMB another presumptive test for blood and they tested negative.

These smudges tell us nothing.

The most damning evidence that proves the Luminol traces were not Meredith's blood is, with the exception of three traces, they also did not contain Meredith's DNA. Three prints in Amanda's room.. all TMB negative and all have Amanda's DNA but not Meredith's. Still waiting for Vixen, or any PGP, to explain how those prints were made from Meredith's blood.