Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 27

[Stacyhs]

You are referring us to his pack of lies to explain his other pack of lies?

Lies seem to be a favorite recourse of the PGP. Like claiming Raff said he couldn't vouch for Amanda's whereabouts between 8:45 PM and 1:00 AM on the night of the murder.

 

[Bill Williams]

You are referring us to his pack of lies to explain his other pack of lies?

Why the question mark at the end of that sentence?

But the answer is that he did not write "a pack of lies". You must have missed it - the defamation case that Mignini himself brought against Sollectico and Gumbel has just been tbrown out of criminal court, and Mignini dropped his parallel civil suit.

That does not happen when the book is "a pack of lies". So try again........

 

[Stacyhs]

Why the question mark at the end of that sentence?

But the answer is that he did not write "a pack of lies". You must have missed it - the defamation case that Mignini himself brought against Sollectico and Gumbel has just been tbrown out of criminal court, and Mignini dropped his parallel civil suit.

That does not happen when the book is "a pack of lies". So try again........

The PGP hang on to whatever they think they have left since the acquittal. Such is their desperation. It's like watching a toddler having a melt down because Mommy wouldn't get them the toy in the checkout line. It's annoying as hell but you have to kind of feel sorry for the kid at the same time; he really, really wanted that plastic car and he seems so disappointed.

 

[Bill Williams]

Highlighted part: Ummm...no. Neither RS nor Bongiorno said he could not vouch for Knox between 8:45 and 1:00 AM What Bongioro said was:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...strategy-to-potentially-incriminate-Knox.html

(Psssst...and that's how you cite something.)

By the way, Vixen, if you're going to copy and paste an entire blog from the internet, please at least cite it. Here, I've done it for you:

https://krissyg1.com/2017/02/07/what-marasca-bruno-supreme-court-said-about-raffaele-sollecito/

This blog simply reposts stuff from TJMK and the lone remaining PMF.

 

[Stacyhs]

This blog simply reposts stuff from TJMK and the lone remaining PMF.

NO! Tell me it ain't so!

 

[TruthCalls]

Lies seem to be a favorite recourse of the PGP. Like claiming Raff said he couldn't vouch for Amanda's whereabouts between 8:45 PM and 1:00 AM on the night of the murder.

Raffaele wouldn't even need to vouch for her for this period of time since Popovic saw her at Raffaele's at 20:45. And, of course, as has been pointed out to Vixen a million times before, the account Raffaele gave simply could not have been from the night of the murder since Popovic saw Amanda at his place twice whereas Raffaele's account had her NEVER at his place. But never let it be said that facts could stand in the way of Vixen's dogged determination to stick to a failed conclusion.

It's like her claiming Amanda and Raffaele are at the cottage at the time of the murder. Geezus, if she's said it once she's said it a thousand times. Yet when you ask her for just one shred of evidence that would prove this the best she can do is claim the courts ruled it so, as if that makes it so.

 

[Vixen]

Lies seem to be a favorite recourse of the PGP. Like claiming Raff said he couldn't vouch for Amanda's whereabouts between 8:45 PM and 1:00 AM on the night of the murder.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

At 21:00 I went home alone because Amanda told me that she was going to go to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends.
QA At this point we said goodbye and I headed home while she headed towards the center.
QA I went home alone, sat at the computer and rolled myself a spliff. Surely I had dinner but I don’t remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called at my home number 075.9660789. During that time I remember Amanda had not come back yet.
QA I browsed at my computer for another two hours after my father’s phone call and only stopped when Amanda came back presumably around 1:00.

from: SUBJECT: Witness statement of person informed of the facts given by SOLLECITO Raffaele, already identified.

On November 5th 2007 at 22:40 in the offices of the Flying Squad of the Perugia Police Headquarters. Before the undersigned of the Criminal Investigation Dept. Deputy Commissioner MONICA NAPOLEONI. http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...7_Statement_to_the_Police#English_translation

Have you no embarrassment?

 

[Vixen]

Raffaele wouldn't even need to vouch for her for this period of time since Popovic saw her at Raffaele's at 20:45. And, of course, as has been pointed out to Vixen a million times before, the account Raffaele gave simply could not have been from the night of the murder since Popovic saw Amanda at his place twice whereas Raffaele's account had her NEVER at his place. But never let it be said that facts could stand in the way of Vixen's dogged determination to stick to a failed conclusion.

It's like her claiming Amanda and Raffaele are at the cottage at the time of the murder. Geezus, if she's said it once she's said it a thousand times. Yet when you ask her for just one shred of evidence that would prove this the best she can do is claim the courts ruled it so, as if that makes it so.

Popovic is no help to Raff:

However all of the versions offered by Sollecito are untrue not only because they are
contradictory, but also because many of them have been substantially disproved. For
example, the witness Popovic disproves that Sollecito returned to his home alone at
around 20:00/:30, although this is what he claimed in his last account which he never
withdrew. This witness testified that she visited Sollecito's house twice on the evening of 1
November 2007, at about 18:00 and at about 20:40, and that on both occasions saw Knox
there, from which it seems certain that both of the young people were at Sollecito's house
together at least up until the time of the later visit.

Florence Appeal Court throwing out Raff's compo claim on grounds of his wilfully fraudulent and deceitful conduct.

 

[bagels]

Popovic is no help to Raff:

Florence Appeal Court throwing out Raff's compo claim on grounds of his wilfully fraudulent and deceitful conduct.

The Florence appeal court is making transparently false claims seeing as the last statement Raffaele made to the court was that he was home all evening and Amanda was with him for every specific event he remembered (dinner, getting text from her boss, broken pipe) and he doesn't specifically remember being alone.

Even from a PGP perspective I'm not sure how you can make a valid case denying Raff compensation while relying on only the existing evidence not overturned by M&B. Apparently the only way to do it is to just make false claims and cite false evidence (like the 112 call timing).

 

[Stacyhs]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?




from: SUBJECT: Witness statement of person informed of the facts given by SOLLECITO Raffaele, already identified.

On November 5th 2007 at 22:40 in the offices of the Flying Squad of the Perugia Police Headquarters. Before the undersigned of the Criminal Investigation Dept. Deputy Commissioner MONICA NAPOLEONI. http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...7_Statement_to_the_Police#English_translation

Have you no embarrassment?

Someone's being obtuse here, but it isn't me. What part of this is a description of HALLOWEEN night are you not understanding?

At 21:00 I went home alone because Amanda told me that she was going to go to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends.
QA At this point we said goodbye and I headed home while she headed towards the center.
QA I went home alone, sat at the computer and rolled myself a spliff. Surely I had dinner but I don’t remember what I ate. Around 23:00 my father called at my home number 075.9660789. During that time I remember Amanda had not come back yet.
QA I browsed at my computer for another two hours after my father’s phone call and only stopped when Amanda came back presumably around 1:00.

Since Popovic saw Amanda at Raff's place circa 20:45 how on earth did Raff go home alone at 21:00? How did Amanda head to the center and Le Chic at 21:00 from somewhere NOT Raff's apartment but was seen at 20:45 by Popovic at the apartment? A time machine?

The police did not know on Nov 5/6 that Popovic could place them at Raff's apartment at 8:45 which makes his statement that night impossible.

Amanda went to Le Chic on Halloween night as testified to by witnesses. She went home about 1:00 as also testified to by witnesses.

He is clearly getting the two nights mixed up which is exactly what he has always claimed.

Have you no ability to figure that out?

 

[Stacyhs]

Popovic is no help to Raff:

It's sad that you and the appeal court rely on a statement from Raff taken illegally without a lawyer present and that was not recorded as required by law in order to prevent exactly what happened. A statement that is clearly a mishmash of two nights as confirmed by witnesses. A statement the police drew up and RS signed at 3:30 AM after 5 hours of interrogation.
But, of course, people's memories are never confused even during a stressful police interrogation according to you despite memory experts saying otherwise. Darn shills!

 

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
Please provide a reference for this.

As has previously been pointed out to you this is not true. That you repeat this falsehood just shows how committed you are to propagating lies; that you do so despite the error having been previously pointed out to you.

As the court says, "her contact with the victim’s blood would have occurred after the crime and in another part of the house."

If therefore the fact that Knox was in the house 7 Via della Pergola at the time when young Meredith Kercher was killed constitutes a fact of absolute and indisputable certainty; it is evident that the statements made by Sollecito that she was with him all evening on 1 November 2007 are false, and that one cannot believe his statements that he couldn't remember what he and Knox were doing from the evening of 1 November 2007 until the following morning.

Stop twisting the facts.

Can't be any clearer than that?


Please keep up to speed.

I really do not need to add anything but just repeat your post.

Stop twisting the facts.

Please keep up to speed.

Look up the meaning of 'If'. The sentence beginning with 'If' cannot be what you claimed,

Don't lie. The Supreme Court ruled that Knox was present at the crime scene during the murder.

Think, Vixen. Think!

 

[Lince]

Stop twisting the facts.

If therefore the fact that Knox
was in the house 7 Via della Pergola at the time when young Meredith Kercher was killed
constitutes a fact of absolute and indisputable certainty ...

Can't be any clearer than that?


Please keep up to speed.

You should use an even bigger font and also add the names of the judges that produced such a "perl". For me, this statement is a testament of their complete unprofessionalism and/or stupidity. With "absolute and indisputable certainty", indeed

 

[Bill Williams]

You should use an even bigger font and also add the names of the judges that produced such a "perl". For me, this statement is a testament of their complete unprofessionalism and/or stupidity. With "absolute and indisputable certainty", indeed

If anyone is having trouble tracking down Vixen's cites, they are from Raffaele's compensation process, a process which denied him compensation for 4 wrongful years in prison.

Of note in that process, they heard no evidence related to the main crime. The main crime's judicial process had concluded in 2015 with another Chambers of the Italian Supreme Court saying that even if RS and AK had been at the cottage, it would have had to have been at another time and in another part of the cottage.

Perhaps if we all put words like "even if" in as large caps and colours that Vixen does it will make the point better!

 

[Stacyhs]

If the Supreme Court had, as Vixen claims, confirmed that the pair were at the house at the time of the murder it would mean that they knew Guede had killed Meredith and had lied to the police about it. Would that not constitute obstruction of justice for which they could be charged? Yet they have not.

 

[Bill Williams]

If the Supreme Court had, as Vixen claims, confirmed that the pair were at the house at the time of the murder it would mean that they knew Guede had killed Meredith and had lied to the police about it. Would that not constitute obstruction of justice for which they could be charged? Yet they have not.

Think, Stacyhs, think.

The courts from Raffaele's failed compensation claim are all part of the conspiracy. Part of it, but not all in. They're convinced enough of the mainly English-language conspiracy as outlined by the usual PGP posters, but not so much as to actually take on (full force) the Masonic-funded, US Media conspiracy to subvert Italian justice.

Cowards, all of them. If it were as Vixen said, they're simply too cowardly to initiate extradition and arrest RS.

 

[Stacyhs]

Think, Stacyhs, think.

The courts from Raffaele's failed compensation claim are all part of the conspiracy. Part of it, but not all in. They're convinced enough of the mainly English-language conspiracy as outlined by the usual PGP posters, but not so much as to actually take on (full force) the Masonic-funded, US Media conspiracy to subvert Italian justice.

Cowards, all of them. If it were as Vixen said, they're simply too cowardly to initiate extradition and arrest RS.

Hmmm... I suspect the Mafia is more likely involved and protecting the Sollecito family. After all, a man named Rocco Sollecito was a member of the Montreal (CA) mafia! And every single person surnamed Sollecito must be related and connected to the Mafia. It's clearly obvious that they can't charge Raffaele and not Amanda. As you say, the Italians don't want to bring up the whole extradition thing when, as we all know, it's a fact that the Masons, the US State Dept, Clinton, and the US media would undoubtedly just protect her again.

 

[Vixen]

Oh, dear. Isn't "clearly" a synonym for "obviously"? Maybe it's not in British English.

By the way, still waiting for those citations, including the one that supports your claim that "many judges immediately start sniffing a lie when people in the witness box use words like, 'Obviously'. It's often a flag they are trying to persuade the court a thing is obvious when it is anything but."
and that "Police, barristers and judges are trained to be alert to lying."



LOL! No one claimed she did. But the author never gives a citation for any of her lengthy list. She doesn't bother to give any supporting evidence of her claims. Sounds strangely familiar.

Here you are: Skip to 8:30:

https://youtu.be/P_6vDLq64gE

 

[Bill Williams]

Here you are: Skip to 8:30:

https://youtu.be/P_6vDLq64gE

It's amazing what doesn't phase you. You call Raffaele's book a pack of lies, yet the one criminal and civil action against RS and AG where that is in question gets dropped.

Must be the conspiracy.

 

[Vixen]

This reminds me that Vixen still hasn't provided a single citationsfor her claim that "Under Italian law Dalla Vedova had a duty and obligation to report the police abuse" or a citation for her claim that "Police, barristers and judges are trained to be alert to lying." Of course, according to her, asking for citations is just my "facetious attempt to willfully waste (her) time". How convenient it must be to think one can state things as fact without having to support them with evidence.

Article 26.3 Source: NATIONAL BAR COUNCIL
MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
Code of Conduct for Italian Lawyers
(Approved by the National Bar Council
during the session of January 31st 2014)