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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
The cctv cameras only pick up people walking past or driving into or out of the San Antonio (_sp?) car park (via Pergola 7, strictly speaking, being in San Antonio, which is why the police had trouble finding it both times).
Your other points I have answered in great detail many times before.
Click to expand...

Yes you have. You've answered with word salads and an occasional link to nowhere.

You can start being serious by citing one, just one forensic-DNA expert who agrees with the original prosecution and Stefanoni.

Even with that, you simply pivot to calling world renowned forensic-DNA experts "defence shills". Aside from being absurd, it is a deflection from the question as asked.....

..... which you never answer. We've noted each time you've done that.
 
Vixen said:
'Brass neck'.

It is a compilation by one guy. He doesn't even have 'brassic' in there. Does that mean Londoners do not use that term?

In addition, language constantly changes, slang comes and goes. The cockney guys I knew who used 'Kimo sabe' to mean, 'Do you speak English?'

The whole aim of Cockney villain slang is to speak in a code that the police wouldn't understand, and they even invented a backslang for this purpose.

(No, I am not cockney and I never followed the Lone Ranger, thanks for asking.)
Click to expand...

And yet, if you google "brassic" you get several returns, including the Oxford Dictionary, explaining its Cockney meaning. Google "kimo sabe" and you get nothing Cockney related. You have not/cannot provide any evidence whatsoever that "kimo sabe" is used as you so erroneously use it. NEXT EXCUSE!
 
Stacyhs said:
And yet, if you google "brassic" you get several returns, including the Oxford Dictionary, explaining its Cockney meaning. Google "kimo sabe" and you get nothing Cockney related. You have not/cannot provide any evidence whatsoever that "kimo sabe" is used as you so erroneously use it. NEXT EXCUSE!
Click to expand...

Because Stacyhs hasn't heard of a thing, it doesn't exist!

O-kaaaay. <fx backs out of the room slowly>
 
Vixen said:
The cctv cameras only pick up people walking past or driving into or out of the San Antonio (_sp?) car park (via Pergola 7, strictly speaking, being in San Antonio, which is why the police had trouble finding it both times).

Your other points I have answered in great detail many times before.
Click to expand...

The camera shows the gated entrance to the driveway leading to the girls' cottage. This is where we see Battistelli standing caught by the garage camera. Anyone going to the cottage had to go through that gate, unless of course, you would like to claim that Knox and Sollecito hiked up from the rugged ravine behind the house. If you look at the map provided in the link, you will see that walking from Raff's apartment to the cottage gate would be caught by the camera just as Meredith was caught on the camera. The camera did not catch Knox or Sollecito either coming or going.
 
Bill Williams said:
Yes you have. You've answered with word salads and an occasional link to nowhere.

You can start being serious by citing one, just one forensic-DNA expert who agrees with the original prosecution and Stefanoni.

Even with that, you simply pivot to calling world renowned forensic-DNA experts "defence shills". Aside from being absurd, it is a deflection from the question as asked.....

..... which you never answer. We've noted each time you've done that.
Click to expand...

You have been told many times before that Stefanoni was/is a member of staff and as such has not put forth any academic papers since her last college dissertation.

So ipso facto researchers have nothing of her 'works' to bring out papers on.

Please stop your over-dependence on strawman propositions.
 
Vixen said:
Because Stacyhs hasn't heard of a thing, it doesn't exist!

O-kaaaay. <fx backs out of the room slowly>
Click to expand...

Two things.

1. You're playing personalities, after wrongly chiding others for it.

2. You're misusing "fx", in addition for not having a clue as to the origin of "kimo sabe".
 
Vixen said:
Because Stacyhs hasn't heard of a thing, it doesn't exist!

O-kaaaay. <fx backs out of the room slowly>
Click to expand...

No, because Stacyhs requires evidence rather than just the say so of someone who has made provably false claims many times. Would Vixen like a list of some of those things? We could start with the window that had "no grate" and go from there.
 
Stacyhs said:
The camera shows the gated entrance to the driveway leading to the girls' cottage. This is where we see Battistelli standing caught by the garage camera. Anyone going to the cottage had to go through that gate, unless of course, you would like to claim that Knox and Sollecito hiked up from the rugged ravine behind the house. If you look at the map provided in the link, you will see that walking from Raff's apartment to the cottage gate would be caught by the camera just as Meredith was caught on the camera. The camera did not catch Knox or Sollecito either coming or going.
Click to expand...

That section where the camera caught the carabinieri car is on a pavement-less stretch of the road. Cautious pedestrians would not generally walk directly past there, but on the other side of the road. The cctv is extremely grainy, and although you can see several pairs of legs go by, there is no way of identifying them.

There are at least two approaches to the cottage.

In addition, independent witnesses saw a dark car parked outside the cottage.
 
Vixen said:
You have been told many times before that Stefanoni was/is a member of staff and as such has not put forth any academic papers since her last college dissertation.

So ipso facto researchers have nothing of her 'works' to bring out papers on.

Please stop your over-dependence on strawman propositions.
Click to expand...



WHAT?

The matter at hand was whether you could find any forensic DNA experts* who agreed with the work done by Stefanoni (especially the conclusions she reached based on her methods) and the presentation of Stefanoni's work by the prosecution.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with how many research papers Stefanoni may or may not have authored/co-authored.

Now, who was it who was just mentioning straw-man propositions? "Ipso facto" hehehehehe


* And of course this excludes Stefanoni's own superiors in her own department, since (especially in Italy....) they can clearly not be treated as objective participants.
 
Vixen said:
That section where the camera caught the carabinieri car is on a pavement-less stretch of the road. Cautious pedestrians would not generally walk directly past there, but on the other side of the road. The cctv is extremely grainy, and although you can see several pairs of legs go by, there is no way of identifying them.

There are at least two approaches to the cottage.

In addition, independent witnesses saw a dark car parked outside the cottage.
Click to expand...


You do know, don't you, that it's a near-certainty that Guede committed this murder, acting alone, and that it's a similar near-certainty that Guede had left the vicinity of the cottage (having murdered Kercher and stopped to partially clean himself up) shortly after 10pm (as evidenced by the GPRS traffic to Kercher's UK handset at 10.17pm in the area of Parco Sant'Angelo)?

Other than that.......
 
Vixen said:
That section where the camera caught the carabinieri car is on a pavement-less stretch of the road. Cautious pedestrians would not generally walk directly past there, but on the other side of the road. The cctv is extremely grainy, and although you can see several pairs of legs go by, there is no way of identifying them.

There are at least two approaches to the cottage.

In addition, independent witnesses saw a dark car parked outside the cottage.
Click to expand...

False. It is not pavement-less as a quick look at this picture shows.
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/photo1.jpg

(I'll add this to yet another one of your blatantly false claims. And you wonder why I don't just take your word for things?)

Whether the footage is grainy or not, no one is shown walking by there at the relevant times.

Yes, there are two approaches; one from the direction one AK and RS would take from his apartment and one form the opposite direction on the other side of the cottage. But regardless from which direction a person comes, they can still only access the cottage by going through that gate which is covered by the garage camera.

A dark car parked outside the cottage...on the street. Use some logic here. RS would park his car in the parking space next to the cottage, not on the street.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Even with that, you simply pivot to calling world renowned forensic-DNA experts "defence shills". Aside from being absurd, it is a deflection from the question as asked.....

..... which you never answer. We've noted each time you've done that.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
You have been told many times before that Stefanoni was/is a member of staff and as such has not put forth any academic papers since her last college dissertation.

So ipso facto researchers have nothing of her 'works' to bring out papers on.

Please stop your over-dependence on strawman propositions.
Click to expand...

You've done it again, pivoted from the question as asked. You've also used a completely moronic example to pivot to. I do hope Roanoke people are reading here, to see what the "opposition" is up to.
 
Vixen said:
That section where the camera caught the carabinieri car is on a pavement-less stretch of the road. Cautious pedestrians would not generally walk directly past there, but on the other side of the road. The cctv is extremely grainy, and although you can see several pairs of legs go by, there is no way of identifying them.

There are at least two approaches to the cottage.

In addition, independent witnesses saw a dark car parked outside the cottage.
Click to expand...

Yet somehow that same camera caught Guede twice as well as Meredith coming home but amazingly managed to miss Amanda and Raffaele twice. And if Amanda had invited Guede along, how come the camera catches Guede twice but Amanda isn't with him either time?

Going from Raffaele's apartment to the cottage leaves them only one approach, the same one Meredith took and which resulted in her being caught on camera. And lets not forget that wasn't the only CCTV camera that captures the streets from Raffaele's to the cottage and none of them caught a glimpse of either of them.

This is but one issue with this case but it couldn't be more obvious. If you can't concede you're wrong on this then there is no wonder why you can't understand why Luminol positive traces that are TMB and DNA negative are not made from Meredith's blood.
 
Bill Williams said:
You've done it again, pivoted from the question as asked. You've also used a completely moronic example to pivot to. I do hope Roanoke people are reading here, to see what the "opposition" is up to.
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, Amanda is speaking there at this very moment. So much for Quennell and his email/phone campaign. HOOTS!!
 
LondonJohn said:
You do know, don't you, that it's a near-certainty that Guede committed this murder, acting alone, and that it's a similar near-certainty that Guede had left the vicinity of the cottage (having murdered Kercher and stopped to partially clean himself up) shortly after 10pm (as evidenced by the GPRS traffic to Kercher's UK handset at 10.17pm in the area of Parco Sant'Angelo)?

Other than that.......
Click to expand...

How come not one single court (apart from the expunged Hellmann one) concluded 'Rudy did it alone'.

Even Marasca-Bruno emphatically ruled it out, saying the murder was of such a sadistic nature, it was more fitting a serial killer than a random burglar.

Let's not have your usual rationalisation nonsense about 'all the courts were misled by Mignini'.
 
Bill Williams said:
To the Roanoke folk on their mobile devices....

Hi!

And get off your mobile devices!
Click to expand...

Can one of you ask Amanda Knox when she will do an honest day's work instead of grifting off 'Innocence Projects'?

Same goes for Raff: has he really nothing better to do than design 'apps' to help people locate sunbeds and reserve them.

Get off your backsides and do some proper work!
 
Vixen said:
Can one of you ask Amanda Knox when she will do an honest day's work instead of grifting off 'Innocence Projects'?

Same goes for Raff: has he really nothing better to do than design 'apps' to help people locate sunbeds and reserve them.

Get off your backsides and do some proper work!
Click to expand...

Hmmm...Amanda has written a best selling book, is in high demand to speak and writes for a real newspaper. This might bring out the Green Eyed Monster in some. Just sayin'.
 
Vixen said:
How come not one single court (apart from the expunged Hellmann one) concluded 'Rudy did it alone'.

Even Marasca-Bruno emphatically ruled it out, saying the murder was of such a sadistic nature, it was more fitting a serial killer than a random burglar.

Let's not have your usual rationalisation nonsense about 'all the courts were misled by Mignini'.
Click to expand...

LOL. LJ and no one here has ever said such a thing. Try again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom