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

[TruthCalls]

IDK but clearly Lobato had a weak defense team if they didn't put her on the stand to dispute the confession which she could back up with 8 witnesses. The confession was already part of the evidence so not much to lose (and certainly not much to lose anyway since they lost in every trial so far).

I think with the bug evidence she'll have a good chance getting an acquittal at her next trial now that she has competent lawyers.

I always hesitate to compare any case to the Knox case because I think the Knox case is uniquely egregious in a way we shouldn't marginalize. Unlike Lobato, Knox never confessed to committing any act of violence ever. The police told her she had trauma induced amnesia and forced her to sign a statement that she was in her kitchen while the murder was happening. The police learned who the killer was two weeks after that when they discovered the rapekit contained the DNA of a burglar who was at the scene covered in blood, spotted alone on CCTV at the scene before the murder, confessed to a friend he went to the murder alone and left alone, had knife marks on his hand he voluntarily connected to the murder, had a history of two story rock bashing break-ins just like the break-in at the cottage, and had no connection to Knox, but they ignored all of that in pursuit of a case against a girl they beat a statement out of. And then the highest court in the country, under judge Chieffi, made it a permanent national decision on behalf of the entire country.

I've followed the Knox/Sollecito case since 2011 and can think of few cases of such obvious injustice, but personally I think Kirstin's case is even worse. Kirstin had an airtight alibi. Numerous people could testify that the assault she fought off was a month before Bailey's murder so despite the coincidence it could not have been related. Kirstin wasn't physically capable of committing the type of violence done onto Bailey. And there was significant forensic evidence not consistent with Kirstin and this doesn't even take into consideration the DNA evidence that never made it into trial. The police were aware of all of this but, like Mignini, locked onto Kirstin and proceeded to railroad her into a conviction.

All I can say is I'm praying for a full acquittal and then for Kirstin to sue the crap out of everyone involved in this gross miscarriage of justice!

 

[Stacyhs]

Derailing, much.

Nope.
Not getting it, much?

Since you're here, have you found that legal evidence declaring that a written statement given to the police stating being hit or verbally testifying to it in a court of law are not "recognised complaints channels"? Or that Knox has not exhausted the domestic remedies? Thought not.

How about any evidence that Raff was "in a part of the questura which made it impossible for him to hear Amanda's screams"?

I've given up on the myriad citations previously requested that you've failed to produce.

 

[Bill Williams]

I've given up on the myriad citations previously requested that you've failed to produce.

I'm keeping a list.

The one claim that Vixen has made that is disprovable - in the sense that even the Italian courts admit that there is no proof - is the claim that Knox had rubbed blood from her hands, and that that victim-blood-Knox-DNA mixture found in the bathroom must have been a result of actions taken at the murder.

The Italian Supreme Court had written in 2015, that even if that claim had been true, that still does not overcome the larger exculpatory fact that there was no evidence of her ever being in the murder room.

But remember, Vixen is claiming that the factoid had been accepted by the Italian courts as proven fact.

Enter the Massei court, and his 2010 motivations report, the place the the 2015 Supreme Court addresses the factoid.

The Massei court explicitly says that that factoid had not been proven. (Read that again.) The Massei motivations report explicitly says it is simply a circumstantial surmise which fits into all the other circumstantial surmises that led Massei to convict Sollecito and Knox in 2009.

What that court did not address was that it is not strange at all that Knox's DNA would be in her own bathroom. Rudy, the killer, admitted to going into that bathroom coincident with the murder - although he claimed he hadn't murdered the victim. Rudy admitted to being there and going into that bathroom.

But all this explains why Vixen continually makes the claim of that factoid - without ever providing a citation as to its factuality. There's a reason why: even the convicting court admitted that there was no factuality to it.

 

[Bill Williams]

We are also waiting for the proof that a Section 530.2 acquittal in the Italian code is an inferior acquittal to 530.1.

The only people in the known universe who claim such are the guilters gathered around the TJMK and remaining PMF websites. Also, perhaps Giuliano Mignini himself claims such in his brief aimed at hold Maori accountable for defamatory comments. (Mignini wrote that brief sometime between April and September 2015, but the defamation hearing has yet to begin, AFAIK.)

There has been much demonstration here on JREF/ISF that both types of acquittals are full and definitive. Even neutral folks initially skeptical that the two were equivalent, eventually conceded that what follows each in the Italian system is identical.

What follows is that the acquittals are definitive. Both of them. Nutters claim that the 530.2 acquittal leaves room for Sollecito and Knox eventually being declared guilty, or at the very least culpable. (That was almost 2 1/2 years ago, and the nutters are still the only ones claiming this.)

 

[Stacyhs]

The handful of main contributors over on TJMK are still desperately trying to convince others of RS and AK's guilt with article after article repeating the same things ad nauseam. What they fail to recognize, or cannot recognize, is that they are only preaching to the choir in their own little echo chamber. People made up their minds years ago. Yet on they go. I suspect that it really boils down to the need to keep convincing each other of how right they are. It seems to be a diehard PGP trait that they cannot ever admit being wrong about anything.

 

[TruthCalls]

The handful of main contributors over on TJMK are still desperately trying to convince others of RS and AK's guilt with article after article repeating the same things ad nauseam. What they fail to recognize, or cannot recognize, is that they are only preaching to the choir in their own little echo chamber. People made up their minds years ago. Yet on they go. I suspect that it really boils down to the need to keep convincing each other of how right they are. It seems to be a diehard PGP trait that they cannot ever admit being wrong about anything.

People still argue over the moon landings even though we have rovers traversing Mars, probes finding moons of Jupiter and Saturn capable of sustaining life and amazingly detailed photos of Pluto. Admitting "hey, I might have been wrong" just isn't in their DNA.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm keeping a list.

The one claim that Vixen has made that is disprovable - in the sense that even the Italian courts admit that there is no proof - is the claim that Knox had rubbed blood from her hands, and that that victim-blood-Knox-DNA mixture found in the bathroom must have been a result of actions taken at the murder.

The Italian Supreme Court had written in 2015, that even if that claim had been true, that still does not overcome the larger exculpatory fact that there was no evidence of her ever being in the murder room.

But remember, Vixen is claiming that the factoid had been accepted by the Italian courts as proven fact.

Enter the Massei court, and his 2010 motivations report, the place the the 2015 Supreme Court addresses the factoid.

The Massei court explicitly says that that factoid had not been proven. (Read that again.) The Massei motivations report explicitly says it is simply a circumstantial surmise which fits into all the other circumstantial surmises that led Massei to convict Sollecito and Knox in 2009.

What that court did not address was that it is not strange at all that Knox's DNA would be in her own bathroom. Rudy, the killer, admitted to going into that bathroom coincident with the murder - although he claimed he hadn't murdered the victim. Rudy admitted to being there and going into that bathroom.

But all this explains why Vixen continually makes the claim of that factoid - without ever providing a citation as to its factuality. There's a reason why: even the convicting court admitted that there was no factuality to it.

One claim? She's been disproved on several claims.

 

[Numbers]

Any news yet on the appeal to the CSC by Rudy Guede of the appeal court refusal of his request for a revision trial?

 

[Bill Williams]

One claim? She's been disproved on several claims.

In the one claim I was mentioning, it was within the court's documents themselves - the very courts which Vixen would claim as supporting her position - which fail to undergird her position.

She says - echo'ing ad nauseam the nutters in the echo chamber you mentioned upthread - that it is a proven fact that Knox had rubbed the victim's blood from her hands.

Yet even the most cursory read-through of the courts completely undermines Vixen's - and the nutters' - claims.

• The 2015 Supreme Court wrote that even if that claim had been true, there still is no evidence of either Knox or Sollecito in the murder room, therefore even if the claim had been true that would have put the pair at best in another part of the cottage and at a time other than the murder time.
• IIRC that same Supreme Court had written that there was an 'elegant proof' that Knox had rubbed blood from her hands. The Supreme Court made no mention as to what that 'proof' had been.
• Yet when one checks the 2010 motivations report from the first convicting court, the Perugian Massei court, one finds that Massei himself admits that there had been no evidence presented to confirm this "factoid", indeed even the much maligned Scientific Police Stefanoni had said that there'd be no way to tell.
• That same 2010 court then said that, even without evidence including Stefanoni's admission that there could be no evidence, that rubbing of blood off of her hands is 'factual', only in the sense that the allegation seems to fit the other allegations being flown.

That's it. Even so, Vixen keeps repeating the factoid, that it is a proven fact that Knox had rubbed the victim's blood from her hands. I simply do not know how to deal with Vixen's unwarranted repetition of this factoid, without (once again) simply repeating WHAT THE ACTUAL RECORD SHOWS, SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND.

 

[Stacyhs]

In the one claim I was mentioning, it was within the court's documents themselves - the very courts which Vixen would claim as supporting her position - which fail to undergird her position.

She says - echo'ing ad nauseam the nutters in the echo chamber you mentioned upthread - that it is a proven fact that Knox had rubbed the victim's blood from her hands.

Yet even the most cursory read-through of the courts completely undermines Vixen's - and the nutters' - claims.

• The 2015 Supreme Court wrote that even if that claim had been true, there still is no evidence of either Knox or Sollecito in the murder room, therefore even if the claim had been true that would have put the pair at best in another part of the cottage and at a time other than the murder time.
• IIRC that same Supreme Court had written that there was an 'elegant proof' that Knox had rubbed blood from her hands. The Supreme Court made no mention as to what that 'proof' had been.
• Yet when one checks the 2010 motivations report from the first convicting court, the Perugian Massei court, one finds that Massei himself admits that there had been no evidence presented to confirm this "factoid", indeed even the much maligned Scientific Police Stefanoni had said that there'd be no way to tell.
• That same 2010 court then said that, even without evidence including Stefanoni's admission that there could be no evidence, that rubbing of blood off of her hands is 'factual', only in the sense that the allegation seems to fit the other allegations being flown.

That's it. Even so, Vixen keeps repeating the factoid, that it is a proven fact that Knox had rubbed the victim's blood from her hands. I simply do not know how to deal with Vixen's unwarranted repetition of this factoid, without (once again) simply repeating WHAT THE ACTUAL RECORD SHOWS, SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND.

All the above is true. But since when have facts influenced certain PGP's views?

 

[Numbers]

Among the constant repetitions of the guilters include arguments that police everywhere, including in Perugia and Italy, never violate the law and never have reasons to fabricate evidence against innocent persons. Therefore, the guilters claim that the Italian police would have no reason to coerce Knox to make false statements, and thus would have not have done so.

Here's an excerpt from an article summarizing a case from the US state of Illinois that invalidates the premises of the guilters about the unwavering universal honesty of the police.

"In his 10-page ruling, [U.S. Federal District Judge Ronald A.] Guzman said the plaintiffs [three men from Illinois who claimed their Constitutional rights were violated by unlawful arrests by local police for a crime that had not occurred] “set out facts sufficient to allege” that the massive manhunt “for [Fox Lake, Illinois Police Lieutenant Charles Joseph] Gliniewicz’s nonexistent killers” resulted in part from the village’s “failure to supervise or discipline” the lieutenant before his death.

Guzman noted that the men who filed the complaint provided “specific accounts of incidents in which the village failed to investigate or discipline [police] officers for misconduct, even upon complaints from fellow employees.”

The plaintiffs’ claims suggest “the unaddressed misconduct” reached the highest levels of the department and was so pervasive that it made officers believe misconduct would go unpunished “or even be rewarded,” Guzman wrote. ...

[The three plaintiffs claimed to have been unlawfully arrested on suspicion of murdering Gliniewicz.] In truth, Gliniewicz, 52, whose 30-year career was marked by drunken indiscretions, claims of sexual misconduct, threatening behavior and suspensions, shot himself that September morning in a remote, marshy area of Fox Lake.
A financial review of his management of a youth police training program was bearing down on him. The review later showed that Gliniewicz had taken thousands of dollars from the Explorers youth group and used the money for personal travel, loans, cash and adult websites."

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/ct-met-fox-lake-police-suicide-lawsuit-20171222-story.html

 

[Stacyhs]

Among the constant repetitions of the guilters include arguments that police everywhere, including in Perugia and Italy, never violate the law and never have reasons to fabricate evidence against innocent persons. Therefore, the guilters claim that the Italian police would have no reason to coerce Knox to make false statements, and thus would have not have done so.

Here's an excerpt from an article summarizing a case from the US state of Illinois that invalidates the premises of the guilters about the unwavering universal honesty of the police.

"In his 10-page ruling, [U.S. Federal District Judge Ronald A.] Guzman said the plaintiffs [three men from Illinois who claimed their Constitutional rights were violated by unlawful arrests by local police for a crime that had not occurred] “set out facts sufficient to allege” that the massive manhunt “for [Fox Lake, Illinois Police Lieutenant Charles Joseph] Gliniewicz’s nonexistent killers” resulted in part from the village’s “failure to supervise or discipline” the lieutenant before his death.

Guzman noted that the men who filed the complaint provided “specific accounts of incidents in which the village failed to investigate or discipline [police] officers for misconduct, even upon complaints from fellow employees.”

The plaintiffs’ claims suggest “the unaddressed misconduct” reached the highest levels of the department and was so pervasive that it made officers believe misconduct would go unpunished “or even be rewarded,” Guzman wrote. ...

[The three plaintiffs claimed to have been unlawfully arrested on suspicion of murdering Gliniewicz.] In truth, Gliniewicz, 52, whose 30-year career was marked by drunken indiscretions, claims of sexual misconduct, threatening behavior and suspensions, shot himself that September morning in a remote, marshy area of Fox Lake.
A financial review of his management of a youth police training program was bearing down on him. The review later showed that Gliniewicz had taken thousands of dollars from the Explorers youth group and used the money for personal travel, loans, cash and adult websites."

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/ct-met-fox-lake-police-suicide-lawsuit-20171222-story.html

Well, yes...but that would never happen in Italy. Italian police would never, ever lie to protect their own careers by claiming they didn't do anything illegal.

 

[Mike1711]

Here comes the racism. So Stacyhs discovered the author of a random article - of which there are many - comes form...gasp...Sri Lanka.

Get over it.

The points she makes in her article are very good.

Sri Lanka defines a race? What race is Sri Lankan?

 

[Bill Williams]

Sri Lanka defines a race? What race is Sri Lankan?

The majority of the population is from the Sinhalese ethnicity, with a large minority of Tamils. Moors, Burghers, Malays, Chinese, and the aboriginal Vedda are also present on the island.

Vixen does what the remaining nutters do - throw mud and hope some sticks. It is truly lost on them that in a few days it will be almost three years since the definitive acquittals, and two months since the nutter in chief promised that Sollecito and Gumbel would apologize to Giuliano Mignini for the lawsuit against them that Mignini lost. (Both the civil lawsuit - which was withdrawn - as well as the criminal defamation charges which were thrown out.)

Don't worry, though. Soon the Mafia coordinated, Masonic funded, American media campaign will be exposed. How else can you explain that everyone is getting on with their lives?

 

[Stacyhs]

Here comes the racism. So Stacyhs discovered the author of a random article - of which there are many - comes form...gasp...Sri Lanka.

Get over it.

The points she makes in her article are very good.

Sri Lanka defines a race? What race is Sri Lankan?

Vixen wasn't even correct in what she wrote. I never said what she claims I did. In her hurry to make disparaging remarks, she completely misread what I actually did write.

 

[Vixen]

Sri Lanka defines a race? What race is Sri Lankan?

According to Stacyhs, its the home of fake degrees.

 

[Vixen]

We are also waiting for the proof that a Section 530.2 acquittal in the Italian code is an inferior acquittal to 530.1.

The only people in the known universe who claim such are the guilters gathered around the TJMK and remaining PMF websites. Also, perhaps Giuliano Mignini himself claims such in his brief aimed at hold Maori accountable for defamatory comments. (Mignini wrote that brief sometime between April and September 2015, but the defamation hearing has yet to begin, AFAIK.)

There has been much demonstration here on JREF/ISF that both types of acquittals are full and definitive. Even neutral folks initially skeptical that the two were equivalent, eventually conceded that what follows each in the Italian system is identical.

What follows is that the acquittals are definitive. Both of them. Nutters claim that the 530.2 acquittal leaves room for Sollecito and Knox eventually being declared guilty, or at the very least culpable. (That was almost 2 1/2 years ago, and the nutters are still the only ones claiming this.)

We are not talking about 'inferior' or 'superior'. In law, every word of a statute has a precise meaning, no more, no less.


530 para 2 states Not guilty due to insufficient evidence.

Unlike 530.1 it nowhere states 'did not commit the act'.

OK?

 

[Bill Williams]

According to Stacyhs, its the home of fake degrees.

You just made that up. Nowhere does Stacyhs say that. You seem to forget the little arrow beside the name being quoted, we can check back and look.

Please stop inventing things.

 

[Bill Williams]

We are not talking about 'inferior' or 'superior'. In law, every word of a statute has a precise meaning, no more, no less.


530 para 2 states Not guilty due to insufficient evidence.

Unlike 530.1 it nowhere states 'did not commit the act'.

OK?

From the 2015 Italian Supreme Court ruling:

Pursuant to Article 620 letter A) Italian Code of Criminal Procedure; annuls the ruling under appeal with respect to the crime under charge B) of the rubric because the crime is extinct due to statute of limitations;

pursuant to Articles 620 letter L) and 530, section 2 Italian Code of Criminal Procedure; excluding the aggravating circumstance under Italian under Article 61 n. 2 Penal Code, in relation to the crime of calumny, annuls the ruling under appeal without referral with respect to the crimes under charges A), D) and E) of the rubric because the appellants did not commit the act.​

 

[Stacyhs]

Yes, I pointed this out in my post above. The Open International University for Complementary Medicines, which the author lists as the source of her "degree", is unaccredited and a "diploma mill" run out of Sri Lanka.

According to Stacyhs, its the home of fake degrees.

Do you never tire of lying? I clearly said this particular "university" is unaccredited and a "diploma mill". And this is not according to me, but to these sources:

"Open International University for Complementary Medicines, The Sri Lanka; Pakistan. No accreditation from a CB recognized accreditor.Linked to Medicina Alternativa. Reportedly illegally operating in Pakistan and ordered to shut down by the Higher Education Commission. Not to be confused with The Open University of Sri Lanka. "
http://facts.ibcindia.co.in/index.p...institutions-whose-degrees-are-illegal-to-use

Degree Info:
http://www.degreeinfo.com/search.php?do=process

And Scribd's list of Fake Universities:
https://www.scribd.com/document/132171519/List-of-Fake-University

Why do you insist on lying about things that you've already been proved to be lying about?