• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 26

Status
Not open for further replies.
Numbers said:
3.3 If Knox is acquitted of calunnia in a revision trial, she will be able to request compensation for wrongful detention for the time she spent in prison that was attributed to the sentence for calunnia.
Click to expand...

Which will be denied, because the Italians will rule that, even thought she was innocent of calunnia, pointing out the turd to the cops and rambling on about when Meredith locked her door during a shower constituted a reasonable basis for them to beat a statement out of her while telling her she had trauma induced amnesia. So she'll have to appeal that to the ECHR. Hopefully we'll all still be posting here in 2040.
 
bagels said:
Which will be denied, because the Italians will rule that, even thought she was innocent of calunnia, pointing out the turd to the cops and rambling on about when Meredith locked her door during a shower constituted a reasonable basis for them to beat a statement out of her while telling her she had trauma induced amnesia. So she'll have to appeal that to the ECHR. Hopefully we'll all still be posting here in 2040.
Click to expand...

Someone in this thread once put it this way:

"There's a reason why 'vendetta' is an Italian word."
 
Stacyhs said:
He was banned from ISF: "Nick van der Leek has been banned for making legal threats against the forum and its owner."
Click to expand...

So let's get this straight.... he cuts-and-pastes libelous stuff that has long since been debunked....

But when criticized for so doing he threatens to sue? He can dish it out but can't take it? Tell me it ain't so.
 
Bill Williams said:
So let's get this straight.... he cuts-and-pastes libelous stuff that has long since been debunked....

But when criticized for so doing he threatens to sue? He can dish it out but can't take it? Tell me it ain't so.
Click to expand...

Just when you think things couldn't get any nuttier...

Stacy, how the heck did you find this out? So does that mean that was the real NvdL who registered with his real name? Why did he do that only to then threaten the site? ..I mean, he could have contacted the webmaster w/o first registering.

And here I thought we'd be hearing directly from 'da man' .. I am so disappointed.
 
TruthCalls said:
Just when you think things couldn't get any nuttier...

Stacy, how the heck did you find this out? So does that mean that was the real NvdL who registered with his real name? Why did he do that only to then threaten the site? ..I mean, he could have contacted the webmaster w/o first registering.

And here I thought we'd be hearing directly from 'da man' .. I am so disappointed.
Click to expand...

It's in the ISF public notices.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=53
 
Last edited:
TruthCalls said:
Just when you think things couldn't get any nuttier...

Stacy, how the heck did you find this out? So does that mean that was the real NvdL who registered with his real name? Why did he do that only to then threaten the site? ..I mean, he could have contacted the webmaster w/o first registering.

And here I thought we'd be hearing directly from 'da man' .. I am so disappointed.
Click to expand...

I've just discovered the ISF thread which chronicles/explains the various suspensions and bannings over the years. The NvdL banning is listed there as briefly as Stscyhs found.

This contact couldn't have been mediated by a lawyer, or so it seems - because it would have first been a request to reverse/make amends for the imagined wrongdoing. That would be a step well before summons fly.

In the first alleged plagarism NvdL led with name calling. It was when Amazon wouldn't budge that he got conciliatory and complied. The conciliatory part was reposted by Vixen above.
 
TruthCalls said:
Thanks Stacy.. I didn't even know that thread was there.

I'm still not sure I understand why this person bothered to create an account and then threaten the board via email w/o ever posting. S/he could have used the "Contact Us" link w/o joining. It makes about as much sense as a Vixen post.
Click to expand...

I agree that it makes no sense. It's not like he had to join in order to read what was being written, either.
 
Stacyhs said:
I agree that it makes no sense. It's not like he had to join in order to read what was being written, either.
Click to expand...


Oh I suspect he joined because he was informed (by whom, I wonder....?) that the mere act of registering under his name would be sufficient to give him a mechanism to close down criticism of him and his "book" about this case.

The apparent fact that he was unwilling/unable to complete the registration process, and then ended up issuing a legal threat against the board, serves as pretty decent evidence of the man's instability and all-round idiocy. No surprise really, given that he's such a vociferous pro-guilt commentator........
 
LondonJohn said:
Oh I suspect he joined because he was informed (by whom, I wonder....?) that the mere act of registering under his name would be sufficient to give him a mechanism to close down criticism of him and his "book" about this case.The apparent fact that he was unwilling/unable to complete the registration process, and then ended up issuing a legal threat against the board, serves as pretty decent evidence of the man's instability and all-round idiocy. No surprise really, given that he's such a vociferous pro-guilt commentator........
Click to expand...

Ummm...YA THINK?
 
Last edited:
FTR, I'm not a idiot, and have tried to drag my sorry ass through all of its peregrinations. It's not happening. Many of you are basing your beliefs on BS. Amanda Knox is likely innocent. At this point, prove she isn't, which you have not. Find another plllar to die on.
 
Matthew Best said:
How many, and who are you referring to?

There's pretty much only one person on this thread who thinks Knox is guilty.
Click to expand...

That's because there's only one person on this thread who thinks TMB negative means blood is present, that a person's DNA cannot be picked up from their own bathroom sink and mixed with blood also in the sink, that a young and athletic man cannot climb into a second story window with the help of a grate directly below it, that it's possible to selectively clean invisible DNA and fingerprints from a crime scene, that police would never coerce a suspect in an interrogation, and that not recording the most important interrogation of a murder suspect is perfectly reasonable and understandable despite having recorded said suspect for the previous 3 days.
 
Stacyhs said:
That's because there's only one person on this thread who thinks TMB negative means blood is present, that a person's DNA cannot be picked up from their own bathroom sink and mixed with blood also in the sink, that a young and athletic man cannot climb into a second story window with the help of a grate directly below it, that it's possible to selectively clean invisible DNA and fingerprints from a crime scene, that police would never coerce a suspect in an interrogation, and that not recording the most important interrogation of a murder suspect is perfectly reasonable and understandable despite having recorded said suspect for the previous 3 days.
Click to expand...

The arguments the PGP resort to indicate how weak the case against Amanda and Raffaele and how little evidence there is against them. If luminol results are TMB negative, this indicates the footprints were not in blood. Amanda lived in the cottage and it was perfectly normal for her own DNA to be in a bathroom she used. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone's DNA in their own bathroom is incriminating. There is so little evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, PGP have to resort to scientifically illiterate arguments that TMB negative footprints can be made in blood and the ludicrous notion someone's DNA in their bathroom is incriminating.
 
Welshman said:
The arguments the PGP resort to indicate how weak the case against Amanda and Raffaele and how little evidence there is against them. If luminol results are TMB negative, this indicates the footprints were not in blood. Amanda lived in the cottage and it was perfectly normal for her own DNA to be in a bathroom she used. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone's DNA in their own bathroom is incriminating. There is so little evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, PGP have to resort to scientifically illiterate arguments that TMB negative footprints can be made in blood and the ludicrous notion someone's DNA in their bathroom is incriminating.
Click to expand...

This should read: The arguments the PGP resort to indicate that there was no case against Amanda and Raffaele and no credible evidence against them.
 
Welshman said:
The arguments the PGP resort to indicate how weak the case against Amanda and Raffaele and how little evidence there is against them.
Click to expand...
Numbers said:
This should read: The arguments the PGP resort to indicate that there was no case against Amanda and Raffaele and no credible evidence against them.
Click to expand...

There's evidence and then there's stuff admissible in court.

As for the latter, the evidence admissible in Italian courts is sometimes, but apparently not always, generated by lower court rulings rather than what might be parochially called "hard" evidence.

So, there was, apparently, a case against the pair if one stuck to "judicial truths", and if one allowed the judge to be the "expert of the experts" whose intuition was allowed to overrule actual forensic experts.

That's how Massei in 2009 and Nencini in 2014 had convicted. It was the judicial process of a former age in Italy which manufactured convictions. It was the gradual conversion to the adversarial legal system which acquitted the pair.

It all depends on whether or not you believe a prosecutor is not an interested party to the proceedings, is completely objective and who just brings to court the unvarnished "facts".

Get a nutcase like Mignini who'd just been embarrassed by the Narducci trials, who'd at the time found himself charged with abuse of office, who was desperate for a judicial win.....

..... and you get this mess which is a day short of a decade old. At the end of the day what remains is a horrible murder and a family in England who's never been told the truth by their own lawyer.
 
Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox are known to a relatively small group of people who continue to follow Meredith Kerchers murder nothing much will change for them there are those who believe they were involved and those who will defend them, I believe most people either never cared or moved on many years ago. Rest in peace Meredith Kercher.
 
CoulsdonUK said:
Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox are known to a relatively small group of people who continue to follow Meredith Kerchers murder nothing much will change for them there are those who believe they were involved and those who will defend them, I believe most people either never cared or moved on many years ago. Rest in peace Meredith Kercher.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if they were secretly involved or not nor do I really care. What matters is the case that was brought to court, which was by every objective measurement crap. If someone says the case was good, they don't have a personal opinion, they have an incorrect piece of information.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom