The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29

[LondonJohn]

WTBH was written by Linda Kulman. If she was merely a ghostwriter she would not have been credited as the author /joint author.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you don't even know what "ghostwriter" means, and (in this instance) what it does NOT mean.

Not surprised though. Again.

 

[LondonJohn]

Stop trolling. You know it's true.

What?

You're being asked to provide evidence to support your claims. If you think this is a definition of "trolling" then you're either grossly ignorant or grossly biassed. Or both.

 

[LondonJohn]

One of your lot was offering dirty pictures of Knox to the tabloids, which they considered too disgusting even for their rags, so how do you know it wasn't the same person who filched the diary?

1) Who are "your lot", please?

2) What actual reliable evidence do you have of anyone "offering dirty pictures of Knox to the tabloids"? Put up or shut up.

3) Who would have had access to Knox's prison diary in 2008?

Thanks in advance!

 

[LondonJohn]

That was on points of law. Chieffi heavily criticised Hellmann for failing to justify in legal terms why he had appointed them at all, amongst a myriad of other legal issues.

Yeah.... you STILL don't (or perhaps you still refuse to) understand that the Marasca SC pannel anulled Nencini and Massei - in fact, anulled and tossed out everything to do with the murder charges - on grounds of law.

The British Library is BOUND to have some good books about the scope and remit of Supreme Courts in general and the Italian Supreme Court in particular. I recommend the coffee in that place next to the first reading room.

 

[LondonJohn]

I am not sure of the definitions of co-author (which I agree Linda Kulman is not credited as) or ghost writer ,but perhaps AK's comments explain all:

"I wouldn't have been able to write this memoir without Linda Kulman. Somehow, with her Post it Notes and questions, with her generosity, dedication, and empathy, she turned my ramblings into writing, and taught me so much in the meantime

Edited to add that of course you have just given definition of ghostwriter: I suppose LK could be seen to be that; not clear whether AK gave long extended interviews and they were shaped into a narrative by LK although it seems that way myself.

But you forget the part in that Knox quote above where she explicitly writes: "I wouldn't have been able to write this memoir without......."

I strongly suspect (from the available evidence, obviously) that Kulman acted as an editor and sounding board for Knox, but that (aside from from minor text and structure alterations - which is something that regular publishing editors frequently do anyhow) the text on the page was Knox's.

 

[Stacyhs]

Good luck with that. I'm guessing AIUI means that somebody made it up and since it supports a certain view of the case, it must be true.

1) Who are "your lot", please?

2) What actual reliable evidence do you have of anyone "offering dirty pictures of Knox to the tabloids"? Put up or shut up.

3) Who would have had access to Knox's prison diary in 2008?
Thanks in advance!

Not even 2008. The diary was confiscated in Nov. 2007 by the police (WTBH). Just why Vixen thinks it was her defense who 'filched' it, I have no idea. No, I take that back. I do.

 

[Stacyhs]

But you forget the part in that Knox quote above where she explicitly writes: "I wouldn't have been able to write this memoir without......."

I strongly suspect (from the available evidence, obviously) that Kulman acted as an editor and sounding board for Knox, but that (aside from from minor text and structure alterations - which is something that regular publishing editors frequently do anyhow) the text on the page was Knox's.

You'd think that Vixen, as an editor* herself, would understand how all that works.But, noooooooo...

* Nick van der Leek....bwaaahaaahaaaahaaaahaaaahaaaaa!!!!!!

 

[toto]

I would say that is similar to a really engaged beta reader and editor. I get the feeling that certain posters doubt her ability to write but after reading her articles I have no doubt that she has that ability. Meaning she probably did learn a good bit.

Yes, I meant to suggest an editing role, but forgot. I agree AK can certainly write pretty well as I have read a number of her articles. She is also very articulate when speaking.

 

[toto]

But you forget the part in that Knox quote above where she explicitly writes: "I wouldn't have been able to write this memoir without......."

I strongly suspect (from the available evidence, obviously) that Kulman acted as an editor and sounding board for Knox, but that (aside from from minor text and structure alterations - which is something that regular publishing editors frequently do anyhow) the text on the page was Knox's.

Yes. You are right. I am watching Black Mirror at the same time so am not really concentrating.

 

[Stacyhs]

I did a bit more research and was able to locate the location of the light switch downstairs that had the droplets of blood: the hallway near the living room.

Bonassi Deposition:

A. In the hall, on the plate of the light switch, I do not remember having noticed stains of blood.

Riccardo Lucciano Depostion

A. I have never noticed spots of blood on the switch in the living hall.

In the police downstairs video (at 8:07 both are visible), there are two light switches in the living room/hall area. One by the front door with a chair next to it and the other between the green bureau and another door. Both would provide a higher position from which blood could spatter from a cat shaking its head. The one by the green bureau would be at almost the same height as a cat.

Something I just noticed: the window in the downstairs bathroom is OPEN. It's dark but look carefully at the chrome latch handle to the right of the white shutter. The window is open at a 45 degree angle making it appear like it's the casement around the window at first. The video goes by it very quickly, but when I froze the screen and enlarged it. it was definitely an open window. Since the window has a bars, the was no safety reason not to leave it open. So that is how the cat got in and out. Also notice there is blood spatter on the bathroom wall (about 8:53 in the video).

 

[LondonJohn]

I did a bit more research and was able to locate the location of the light switch downstairs that had the droplets of blood: the hallway near the living room.

Bonassi Deposition:



Riccardo Lucciano Depostion


In the police downstairs video (at 8:07 both are visible), there are two light switches in the living room/hall area. One by the front door with a chair next to it and the other between the green bureau and another door. Both would provide a higher position from which blood could spatter from a cat shaking its head. The one by the green bureau would be at almost the same height as a cat.

Something I just noticed: the window in the downstairs bathroom is OPEN. It's dark but look carefully at the chrome latch handle to the right of the white shutter. The window is open at a 45 degree angle making it appear like it's the casement around the window at first. The video goes by it very quickly, but when I froze the screen and enlarged it. it was definitely an open window. Since the window has a bars, the was no safety reason not to leave it open. So that is how the cat got in and out. Also notice there is blood spatter on the bathroom wall (about 8:53 in the video).
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_716695d7988cf41ec8.jpg[/qimg]

Stacy: is that still you've shown here DEFINTELY from the bathroom in the lower cottage (i.e. the one in which the chair had been placed)?


ETA: I've now found the actual video to which you were referring, and yes I can see that it's the bathroom.

However I'm interested in the whitewashed wall and door that can be seen (in semi-lighting) out of that window. This would imply that there was actually a building opposite that part of the larger house structure, and it would further imply that the car port effectively formed the roof of such a building. I'll try to find daytime exterior photographs which show what lies opposite that part of the large house structure and underneath the car port.

Also, the chair in question is not within the bathroom when that crime-scene video is being filmed (it's clearly visible outside the door to the bathroom). So was the chair truly within the bathroom when the police initially entered the lower cottage? If so, it would appear to be extremely lax of the police to have moved the chair before they recorded the condition of the lower cottage on video (but of course, nothing would really surprise me about the sloppiness of Stefanoni and her "crack" team of (largely unqualified) scene of crime team.....)

 

[Stacyhs]

Stacy: is that still you've shown here DEFINTELY from the bathroom in the lower cottage (i.e. the one in which the chair had been placed)?

That's what it says on the video. My pic is a snip of the actual video I had paused. I'll double check to be 100% sure.

ETA: Yes...it's 100% the downstairs apartment. It's near the end of the video.
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-evidence-downstairs-apartment/

ETA: changed the link to the correct video.

 

[Welshman]

The ECHR made no comment or decision whatsoever about the HIV test.

I know this is a long shot, but here goes: Do you have any evidence that "HIV test was routinely given to all prisoners as part of the prison healthcare service and support"? Nigel Scott, in his linked article, cites the official policy regarding HIV testing which said an HIV test could only be administered with the consent of the prisoner. Knox never gave consent.

Besides the irregularities pointed out in Nigel Scott's article, there are other factors which indicate Amanda was lied to she had HIV. Numerous abuses were comitted by the police/prosecution. Amanda and Raffaele were denied access to lawyers, their interrogations were not taped, false information was fed to the media, evidence was supressed and destroyed and the prosecution committed perjury. Lying to Amanda she had HIV is exactly the sort of dirty trick you would expect from corrupt police/prosecutors. Why there is no evidence a genuine HIV test was carried out and details such as when and where was Amanda's blood tested don't exist and no documentation has emerged showing a test was carried out.

I find it utterly repulsive that Amanda is the victim of the most disgusting lie possible but is attacked by Vixen and other PGP for lying. If the prosecution had a mountain of evidence and a slam dunk case against Amanda and Raffaele, why would they need to resort to dirty tricks like lying to Amanda she had HIV?

 

[Stacyhs]

Another interesting thing I noted was that the chair in the bathroom was not in the same place in the video as in the still photo. It had been moved to the side of the sink. This is visible at 8:21. The clothing on the floor had also been moved. The still photos do not have a time stamp so I don't know when they were taken. What was the original position of the chair? Was it moved by the police to the center of the room or did was it there when they arrived? TMoMK says labels ALL the pictures as taken on Nov. 2, but no pictures at all taken on Nov. 3. I don't know if this is accurate or not.

This is a police photo of the downstairs bathroom window. Notice it is open.


ETA: notice the blood drop is on the outside of the casement rather than the inside. It makes more sense that this would be left there by an injured cat passing through the open window rather than being left by a person.

 

[Vixen]

The Chieffi court was so mad they couldn't finalize a Knox conviction. Haha, suckazzzzz

What? It acted correctly in deferring it back to the lower court that erred. However, as the lower court concerned (Hellmann) had been so egregious and defective in a fatally devastating way, it was remitted to a completely new court (Nencini) in a completely different region, away from the corrupt influences of the offending court.

 

[Vixen]

Ah, er, no that's not it. The Chieffi panel had said no such thing.

Yes it did. Read the Chieffi report and stop displaying flagrant ignorance.

 

[Vixen]

First Highlight:
I agree, if you stand on a chair (as located in the video) you likely couldn't see anything but the wall as it lowers the line of sight outside. Which is why I said earlier that one would stand close to the window and look up from the lower part of the window.

Second Highlight: TruthCalls never said that. He did say

#2442

This larger window just next to the bathroom window:
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_716695d795016a0ead.png[/qimg]

Third Highlight:

Amanda said she saw the feces as she was putting the hairdryer back (WTBH pg. 66). Police video (Nov 2, 2007) show that hair dryer at the extreme end of the counter closest to the toilet. Below is an aerial view of that bathroom. The hair dryer (not visible in this photo) is lying just on the other side of the short wall to the right. That is approx. 6 feet from the toilet, not the ridiculous ' up to 20 ft' you speculate. There is no reason she could not look down into that toilet bowl and see the feces.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_716695d795a1d082ee.jpg[/qimg]

That is not a window that is a sealed unused door.

 

[Vixen]

For anyone who actually want to read an English translation of what the Chieffi Court actually said....

https://chieffireport.wordpress.com/11-procedural-rulings-ordering-new-expert-review-of-genetic-evidence-and-denying-new-review-of-the-new-sample-trace/

It is bewildering why you, gentle reader, would want to read actual text, rather than taking anyone's word here for it. Vixen and me included.

You will read in the first, long paragraph, that even though the Supreme Court (Chieffi panel) wanted to quibble with the reasoning given, the need given by the Hellmann/Zannetti second-level court could not be questioned. At. All ....

​

Imagine that. The Chieffi panel actually said....

THE

EXACT

OPPOSITE

OF

WHAT

VIXEN

CLAIMED.

The exact opposite. Is Vixen, then, simply uninformed, or is she lying?

Grow up and stop using childish language. Read the Chieffi report again. It clearly states that whilst the lower court (Hellmann) was within its jurisdictional remit to appoint independent expert witnesses, it erred in that it did not provide an explanation substantiating its decision.

 

[Vixen]

What?

You're being asked to provide evidence to support your claims. If you think this is a definition of "trolling" then you're either grossly ignorant or grossly biassed. Or both.

Sorry, are you denying Amanda Knox ever claimed she was forced to list her sex partners and this meme was picked up by her supporters?

 

[Vixen]

1) Who are "your lot", please?

2) What actual reliable evidence do you have of anyone "offering dirty pictures of Knox to the tabloids"? Put up or shut up.

3) Who would have had access to Knox's prison diary in 2008?

Thanks in advance!

This has been discussed on the forum before so please do a search on the name Frank Sfarzo.