Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 32

[euroneighbour]

The irony is that even a joint with its sedative effect, alongside the truly unexciting film “Amelie,” represents an additional obstacle to leaving Raffaele’s apartment on a chilly November night!

 

[Numbers]

I'll make a small point about claims in the media (publications such as newspapers, online, TV, radio, books, etc.).
Italy has laws against defamation/libel that are especially strong against defamatory statements that are published.
If a statement that is published is negative or injurious to a person's reputation, and is untrue, the harmed person may sue, and the act of publishing the false injurious statement is a crime under Italian law.

So while we don't know if the claims in the Italian media of Guede being a drug user or a small-time drug dealer are true, it is noteworthy that - to our knowledge - he did not sue nor did a prosecutor charge anyone (reporter, editor, publisher) connected with the media statements with defamation (CP Articles 595 Diffamazione and 596-bis Diffamazione col mezzo della stampa*).

* Google translation: Defamation through the press

 

[Stacyhs]

<YAWN> Rationalization #101: 'Meredith Kercher's blood was really root vegetable juice; that is what the luminol footprints show'.

<YAWN> Denial #101. We don't know what the luminol reacted to, but we know what it DID NOT react to: blood.
I'm surprised you're not claiming the TMB tests were "bent" somehow.

In any case, not being on drugs or other substance abuse makes the murder even more cold-blooded and deliberately cruel, so it is not the win you believe it to be.

Nice try.

 

[Stacyhs]

All that proves is that the extremely expensive Knox PR - Gogerty-Marriott and self-professed Knox advocate, Nina Burleigh, were successful in their PR campaign to beatify Knox and demonise the black guy. So suddenly, Knox and Sollecito are the epitome of high society whilst 'Guede is the hobo drug dealer drifter who is probably a Muslim'.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Riiiiiiight.... That doesn't even deserve a response other than laughter.

 

[Stacyhs]

AFIACS you don't get onto hotel management courses and be a semi-professional basket ball player in a regular team if you are a convicted drug dealer, hobo, convicted burglar.

He took the hotel management course in high school so hardly difficult to get into.

Roger had left Rudy back in Bastia, in the care of his common-law wife. The teen was supposed to be attending Alberghiero high school in Assisi, a vocational high school for young people planning careers in the hotel or restaurant industry.

He stopped going to school, and he stopped going home at night. The school would call and say they couldn’t find him.

Burleigh, Nina. The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox (pp. 91-92).

Guede, like everything else in his life, quit.

His foster family, the Caporalis, owned the basketball team he played for. He only played for the team in 2004 and 2005 when he was living with the family before they kicked him out for habitual lying and failure to either stay in school or work.

In the UK the Hotel Catering university courses are highly sought after.

Irrelevant since Guede's course was part of a vocational high school.

 

[Numbers]

He took the hotel management course in high school so hardly difficult to get into.



Burleigh, Nina. The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox (pp. 91-92).

Guede, like everything else in his life, quit.

His foster family, the Caporalis, owned the basketball team he played for. He only played for the team in 2004 and 2005 when he was living with the family before they kicked him out for habitual lying and failure to either stay in school or work.

Irrelevant since Guede's course was part of a vocational high school.

Stacyhs, I agree with your post, and I agree that Guede's admission to coursework in a vocational school (that he did not complete, according to Italian media), differs from admission to a higher-level educational institution, and is not relevant in that sense, but I have to add: Relevant to what?

It appears to be true that persons with higher educational levels are less likely to commit crimes than those with lower educational levels, on a population (statistical) basis.* It's also likely to be true that the crimes committed by those who have achieved higher educational levels, when they do commit crimes, are likely to commit crimes that are different from those who have lower educational levels, perhaps because of differences in employment (and lack of employment) and other environmental differences. Embezzling at a corporation may require an educational background as well as a temperament that is different from that required for robbing stores.

My point is that Vixen's comparisons - including their falsities - of the backgrounds of Knox and Sollecito versus Guede are irrelevant diversions from the evidence, which is well known. The credible reliable evidence clearly shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Guede was responsible for the murder/rape of Kercher as well as the related crimes, such as the taking of her phones. The credible reliable evidence clearly shows no indication that Knox and/or Sollecito had any role in the murder/rape of Kercher or any of the related crimes.

Vixen's diversions are possibly an attempt to convince readers here, through an abundance of irrelevant information, false or misleading, that Knox and/or Sollecito were involved in the crimes against Kercher.


* https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/correlates-of-crime/education-and-crime/

 

[Stacyhs]

Stacyhs, I agree with your post, and I agree that Guede's admission to coursework in a vocational school (that he did not complete, according to Italian media), differs from admission to a higher-level educational institution, and is not relevant in that sense, but I have to add: Relevant to what?

It's not relevant to anything. It's like comparing getting into a high school band with getting accepted by Juilliard.

It appears to be true that persons with higher educational levels are less likely to commit crimes than those with lower educational levels, on a population (statistical) basis.* It's also likely to be true that the crimes committed by those who have achieved higher educational levels, when they do commit crimes, are likely to commit crimes that are different from those who have lower educational levels, perhaps because of differences in employment (and lack of employment) and other environmental differences. Embezzling at a corporation may require an educational background as well as a temperament that is different from that required for robbing stores.

My point is that Vixen's comparisons - including their falsities - of the backgrounds of Knox and Sollecito versus Guede are irrelevant diversions from the evidence, which is well known.

It's typical TJMK-style rubbish. Remember, nothing...absolutely nothing...positive can ever be said about RS and AK. Everything concerning them must be interpreted negatively.

The credible reliable evidence clearly shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Guede was responsible for the murder/rape of Kercher as well as the related crimes, such as the taking of her phones. The credible reliable evidence clearly shows no indication that Knox and/or Sollecito had any role in the murder/rape of Kercher or any of the related crimes.

Vixen's diversions are possibly an attempt to convince readers here, through an abundance of irrelevant information, false or misleading, that Knox and/or Sollecito were involved in the crimes against Kercher.


* https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/correlates-of-crime/education-and-crime/

I'd say a more accurate description would be "an attempt to gaslight readers here".

 

[Numbers]

It's not relevant to anything. It's like comparing getting into a high school band with getting accepted by Juilliard.

It's typical TJMK-style rubbish. Remember, nothing...absolutely nothing...positive can ever be said about RS and AK. Everything concerning them must be interpreted negatively.


I'd say a more accurate description would be "an attempt to gaslight readers here".

I looked up a definition of "gaslighting" as part of my program of continuing education It stated*:

Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse whereby a person or group manipulates one or more people into questioning their sanity and perception of reality.

Gaslighting is often a persistent form of manipulation that, over time, can cause the victims to lose their sense of perception, identity, and self-worth.

Emotional confusion appears to be the base of a gaslighter’s agenda, so this may work well on someone who already does not trust their own judgment. Thus, people who trust themselves more may be more immune to gaslighting.


Despite this, gaslighters may persist in their coercion to eventually wear down their victims over time. The tactics of the gaslighter may be used to shake the confidence of their victim, lower their self-esteem, and make the victim dependent on the gaslighter.

* https://www.simplypsychology.org/what-is-gaslighting.html

One thought: perhaps sometimes those subject to gaslighting come to suspect that the gaslighter has a different perception of reality; a perception possibly filtered through bias and ignorance.

​

 

[Stacyhs]

Gaslighting comes from "Gaslight" a classic 1944 movie with Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman.

Bergman's husband, Boyer, manipulates her into believing she's losing her mind for his own ulterior purpose

 

[Numbers]

Gaslighting comes from "Gaslight" a classic 1944 movie with Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman.

Bergman's husband, Boyer, manipulates her into believing she's losing her mind for his own ulterior purpose

Yes, and it was preceded by a 1940 UK film of the same name, and a 1938 stage play, Gas Light. It's repetition but with some variation.

See:

Gaslight (1940 film) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Gas Light - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[SpitfireIX]

<YAWN> Rationalization #101: 'Meredith Kercher's blood was really root vegetable juice; that is what the luminol footprints show'.

And, of course, you ignore, because they don't fit your guilter fantasy, the facts that a) common household cleaners, such as those one might use to clean a shower or a bathroom floor, can cause false positive Luminol tests, and b) the footprints tested negative for blood with the far more accurate TMB, and they also tested negative for Meredith's DNA. And BTW, Stefanoni lied about these last in her testimony, so please explain to us again how she was so honest, competent, and conscientious.

In any case, not being on drugs or other substance abuse makes the murder even more cold-blooded and deliberately cruel, so it is not the win you believe it to be.

As noted ad nauseam, Amanda and Raffaele have been legally exonerated of the murder and rape (your "technicality" lie notwithstanding), so the burden of proof is squarely on you to demonstrate that they are factually guilty. Assuming what you need to prove is not a promising start.

 

[Vixen]

He took the hotel management course in high school so hardly difficult to get into.



Burleigh, Nina. The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox (pp. 91-92).

Guede, like everything else in his life, quit.

His foster family, the Caporalis, owned the basketball team he played for. He only played for the team in 2004 and 2005 when he was living with the family before they kicked him out for habitual lying and failure to either stay in school or work.

Irrelevant since Guede's course was part of a vocational high school.

HOLD THE FRONT PAGE! Teenager lies in bed all day, skips school, tells lies, is difficult. Better let the criminologists know the future symptoms of a burglar-cum-drug dealer-cum-rapist-killer. You do cling on to totally irrational nonsense.

 

[AmyStrange]

"You do cling on to totally irrational nonsense"


Thank gawd, I was finally able to find a super-duper, heavy-duty irony meter, because this would've blown up my old one into tiny, itty-bitty pieces otherwise.


-

 

[Numbers]

The PGP don't seem to have any rational, reasonable explanation consistent with the PGP false narratives on the Knox - Sollecito case for why the ECHR found Italy in violation of Convention Article 3 (procedural limb), Article 6.1 with 6.3c, and Article 6.1 with 6.3e.

The recent ECHR judgment Bulent Bekdemir v. Turkiye 42881/18 17/06/2025 is an example of the consistency of ECHR judgments in following ECHR case law relevant to the ECHR case Knox v. Italy; the ECHR found a violation of Convention Article 6.1 with 6.3c in the Bulent Bekdemir v. Turkiye case. The Registry short summary of the case states:

Art 6 § 1 (criminal) and Art 6 § 3 (c) • Fair hearing • Statutory restriction of the applicant’s right of access to a lawyer in police custody • Domestic courts’ reliance on statements obtained in the absence of a lawyer to convict him of attempting to overthrow the constitutional order and to impose a sentence of life imprisonment • No compelling reasons justifying impugned restriction • Domestic courts’ failure to assess the impact the absence of a lawyer might have had on defence rights or the overall fairness of proceedings • Failure to exclude impugned statements as required by domestic law • Constitutional Court’s failure to apply principles in the Court’s case-law • Impugned statement carried significant probative value • Overall fairness of criminal proceedings irretrievably prejudiced

What is different from the Knox case in the Bulent Bekdemir case is that the statements made by the suspect/accused were not claimed to be a criminal offense but were allegedly accurate information leading to other evidence allegedly implicating Bekdemir in serious crimes against the state. However, because these statements were obtained in the questioning of Bekdemir without a lawyer - and contrary to Turkish law, although even if lawful would not have changed the outcome of the ECHR judgment - Turkiye had violated Bekdemir's rights to a fair trial by obtaining them and using them and their investigative products in a trial to obtain a conviction. [Bekdemir had retracted his statements and complained that he had been tortured in the questioning.] Here are the relevant conclusions of the judgment:

63. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the statement obtained from the applicant in the absence of a lawyer carried significant probative value, as it provided the authorities with the narrative of what had happened and, in so far as the offence of attempting to subvert the constitutional order is concerned, appears to have framed the process of evidence-gathering in the criminal proceedings against him.... As a result, neither the further identification of the applicant by some of the business owners during the trial, nor the absence of any sign of ill-treatment of the applicant during his time in police custody could suffice to ensure the overall fairness of the proceedings.

64. In view of the above, the Court concludes that the overall fairness of the criminal proceedings against the applicant was irretrievably prejudiced by the statutory restriction placed on his right of access to a lawyer and the subsequent use of his statements in the absence of a lawyer.

65. The foregoing considerations are sufficient to enable the Court to conclude that there has been a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention.
....
70. The Court further considers that the most appropriate form of redress would be the retrial of the applicant, in accordance with the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention, should he so request.

 

[Stacyhs]

HOLD THE FRONT PAGE! Teenager lies in bed all day, skips school, tells lies, is difficult. Better let the criminologists know the future symptoms of a burglar-cum-drug dealer-cum-rapist-killer.

Oh, come on, Vixen. This is an obvious redirection from, and minimizing of, Guede's behavior pattern because your claims that Guede couldn't get into "hotel management courses" or "be a semi-professional basket ball player in a regular team," if he were a "convicted drug dealer, hobo, convicted burglar" were shown to be rubbish.

He had a long-standing pattern of telling lies, quitting jobs, getting fired, etc. even after he was a teenager. For Christ's sake, he was two months from turning 21 and he was still continually lying and getting fired or quitting. He lied to and abused the trust of the family who gave him his own private apartment in their luxurious home, sent him to a prestigious school and hired a private tutor, who gave him a job, and a spot on their basketball team. He is the classic "dog who bit the hand that fed him".

Ilaria Caporali: “He was a good guy, but he lied. He didn’t know the difference between good and bad. He didn’t have values. He was a like a baby that can’t understand right and wrong.”

Paolo Caporali:
“We gave him an opportunity, even though we knew he was a liar and had been in trouble, but we wanted to give him a chance. We took him in as a son, but he was more interested in other things than studying and work.… In the end we asked him to leave our home because we just couldn’t cope any longer.”

You do cling on to totally irrational nonsense.

Says the woman who's accused the acquitting judges, defense lawyers, defense experts, and defense witnesses of being bent, incompetent, paid off, or committing perjury because they wanted to do the pair "a favor". Then there's the accusations of the pair 'getting off' with help from the mafia, Trump, the US government, and world-renowned forensic experts.

Says the woman who denies the results of standard forensic tests when they don't suit her: the negative TMB tests and negative for narcotics hair tests.

Says the woman who thinks Knox cleaned up her own invisible DNA and fingerprints while leaving those of Guede's.

Says the woman who still claims there was a woman's shoe prints on the pillowcase, who thinks the pair would not only keep "Sollecito's" bloody footprint on the mat, but point it out to the police, who thinks two people would fake a burglary then tell the police nothing was stolen, who claims RS called the carabinieri after the postales arrived despite five phone calls being made during the time they claim to have been there and just never noticed.

 

[Numbers]

The PGP don't seem to have any rational, reasonable explanation consistent with the PGP false narratives on the Knox - Sollecito case for why the ECHR found Italy in violation of Convention Article 3 (procedural limb), Article 6.1 with 6.3c, and Article 6.1 with 6.3e.

The recent ECHR judgment Bulent Bekdemir v. Turkiye 42881/18 17/06/2025 is an example of the consistency of ECHR judgments in following ECHR case law relevant to the ECHR case Knox v. Italy; the ECHR found a violation of Convention Article 6.1 with 6.3c in the Bulent Bekdemir v. Turkiye case. The Registry short summary of the case states:


What is different from the Knox case in the Bulent Bekdemir case is that the statements made by the suspect/accused were not claimed to be a criminal offense but were allegedly accurate information leading to other evidence allegedly implicating Bekdemir in serious crimes against the state. However, because these statements were obtained in the questioning of Bekdemir without a lawyer - and contrary to Turkish law, although even if lawful would not have changed the outcome of the ECHR judgment - Turkiye had violated Bekdemir's rights to a fair trial by obtaining them and using them and their investigative products in a trial to obtain a conviction. [Bekdemir had retracted his statements and complained that he had been tortured in the questioning.] Here are the relevant conclusions of the judgment:

Here's the ECHR's link to the text of the judgment Bulent Bekdemir v. Turkiye:

HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights

The HUDOC database provides access to the case-law of the Court (Grand Chamber, Chamber and Committee judgments and decisions, communicated cases, advisory opinions and legal summaries from the Case-Law Information Note), the European Commission of Human Rights (decisions and reports) and the...

hudoc.echr.coe.int

 

[Vixen]

Oh, come on, Vixen. This is an obvious redirection from, and minimizing of, Guede's behavior pattern because your claims that Guede couldn't get into "hotel management courses" or "be a semi-professional basket ball player in a regular team," if he were a "convicted drug dealer, hobo, convicted burglar" were shown to be rubbish.

He had a long-standing pattern of telling lies, quitting jobs, getting fired, etc. even after he was a teenager. For Christ's sake, he was two months from turning 21 and he was still continually lying and getting fired or quitting. He lied to and abused the trust of the family who gave him his own private apartment in their luxurious home, sent him to a prestigious school and hired a private tutor, who gave him a job, and a spot on their basketball team. He is the classic "dog who bit the hand that fed him".

Ilaria Caporali: “He was a good guy, but he lied. He didn’t know the difference between good and bad. He didn’t have values. He was a like a baby that can’t understand right and wrong.”

Paolo Caporali:
“We gave him an opportunity, even though we knew he was a liar and had been in trouble, but we wanted to give him a chance. We took him in as a son, but he was more interested in other things than studying and work.… In the end we asked him to leave our home because we just couldn’t cope any longer.”

<snip>

Behaviour patterns? Not like Knox who was known for sleeping around at college and declared she was going to Italy to sleep with as many men as possible, had sex on a train with a cocaine drug smuggler, going off with a strange guy she just met in front of her little sister, Deanna, who must have been terribly worried and anxious. Wrote gory detailed essays about 'chicks' being raped and murdered in which Kyle says to Edgar, "What you need to know about chicks is when they say 'no', they mean 'yes'". Her sex exploits put up on MySpace for her German relatives to read all about it after walking off a job her uncle Uwe so kindly went out of his way to get her at the Bundesreich, much to his embarrassment. Too lazy to get out of bed and go to work. Quitting after a week. Made sure to embarrass Mez by placing her dildo and condoms in the same bathroom they shared. Refused to flush the chain or clean her mess in the toilet after herself. Referred to her dead friend's dying blood as, 'Ew', when she was the cause of it, as scientifically determined by the forensic police. And Sollecito: bragging on FB about his LSD and cocaine escapades and how he wanted extreme experiences, burning a bible at a Marilyn Manson concert. Extensive knife collection. Cautioned about being in possession of drugs. Had a stash of manga horror-porn. Wrapped himself up in toilet paper and got a chum to take a picture so he could upload it onto FB showing himself menacingly waving a butchers cleaver with a beaker of mad scientist lotion, his face half covered. And Guede not sticking with his waiters job is the one who's the homeless drifter according to you and the PIP.

 

[Stacyhs]

Behaviour patterns? Not like Knox who was known for sleeping around at college

Sigh. Here we go again. So Knox had sex with four men in college. So what? We all know if Knox had been a guy this would be completely irrelevant. But thanks for reminding us of the double standard women are subjected to even by other women.

and declared she was going to Italy to sleep with as many men as possible,

She never said that. What she did say was that she wanted to have casual sex. Again, that's considered perfectly normal for men but women are called sluts for doing the same thing.

had sex on a train with a cocaine drug smuggler,

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. She never had sex on the damn train with him! She MET him on the train and they had foreplay and oral sex the next night in his hotel room.
And there is NO evidence whatsoever that she ever knew his drug connection but that will never stop you from pushing the lie she did.

This is the second time you've referred to "Federico" as a cocaine "smuggler". More hyperbole from you and everything I read about this (and it's basically the same things as there's very little info on it) is that he was a small-time DEALER not a SMUGGLER.

The initial police report was full of misinformation and speculation:

" The police in particular kept an eye on two boys, Federico and Luciano. Both would have had frequent telephone contacts with Amanda and Federico would also have sexual relations with her," and
"The report says that Federico was arrested along with two of his drug dealer friends, Luciano and Lorenzo, precisely for an investigation conducted starting from the wiretaps on Amanda Knox's cell phone. Federico, the document says, "would have occasionally supplied the well-known Amanda Knox with narcotics, in addition to presumably having had sexual relations with her"

Knox's phone records and wire-taps available in the court records showed NO contact between Federico and Knox.
Federico didn't even live in Perugia so just how did he supply her with drugs or have sex with her?

going off with a strange guy she just met in front of her little sister, Deanna, who must have been terribly worried and anxious.

Yet again, you assume to know what people were thinking and feeling. Now, it's Deanna.

Wrote gory detailed essays about 'chicks' being raped and murdered in which Kyle says to Edgar, "What you need to know about chicks is when they say 'no', they mean 'yes'".

Sigh. Why do you insist of repeating a long and repeatedly disproved lie?
Vixen hyperbole: "Wrote gory detailed essays". It was ONE class assignment and there were no "gory details" about the rape at all. And it was an ANTI-RAPE story; Kyle was the BAD GUY and Edgar was disgusted with him.

Her sex exploits put up on MySpace for her German relatives to read all about it after walking off a job her uncle Uwe so kindly went out of his way to get her at the Bundesreich, much to his embarrassment. Too lazy to get out of bed and go to work. Quitting after a week. Made sure to embarrass Mez by placing her dildo and condoms in the same bathroom they shared. Refused to flush the chain or clean her mess in the toilet after herself. Referred to her dead friend's dying blood as, 'Ew', when she was the cause of it, as scientifically determined by the forensic police. And Sollecito: bragging on FB about his LSD and cocaine escapades and how he wanted extreme experiences, burning a bible at a Marilyn Manson concert. Extensive knife collection. Cautioned about being in possession of drugs. Had a stash of manga horror-porn. Wrapped himself up in toilet paper and got a chum to take a picture so he could upload it onto FB showing himself menacingly waving a butchers cleaver with a beaker of mad scientist lotion, his face half covered.

There's such a gish-gallop of previously covered rubbish in the above that I'm not even going to waste my time with it.

And Guede not sticking with his waiters job is the one who's the homeless drifter according to you and the PIP.

Nice try at minimizing Guede's history of repeatedly lying, not attending school or tutor sessions, being FIRED from and quitting several jobs, being in possession of stolen goods, trespassing, and burglary.
NONE of which is true of Knox.

Guede had a history of moving around with no permanent home because he couldn't/wouldn't keep a job.

Stop trying to white-wash Guede's pattern of pathological lying, breaking the law, and general irresponsible and immature behavior.

 

[Vixen]

Sigh. Here we go again. So Knox had sex with four men in college. So what? We all know if Knox had been a guy this would be completely irrelevant. But thanks for reminding us of the double standard women are subjected to even by other women.

She never said that. What she did say was that she wanted to have casual sex. Again, that's considered perfectly normal for men but women are called sluts for doing the same thing.

Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. She never had sex on the damn train with him! She MET him on the train and they had foreplay and oral sex the next night in his hotel room.
And there is NO evidence whatsoever that she ever knew his drug connection but that will never stop you from pushing the lie she did.

This is the second time you've referred to "Federico" as a cocaine "smuggler". More hyperbole from you and everything I read about this (and it's basically the same things as there's very little info on it) is that he was a small-time DEALER not a SMUGGLER.

The initial police report was full of misinformation and speculation:

Knox's phone records and wire-taps available in the court records showed NO contact between Federico and Knox.
Federico didn't even live in Perugia so just how did he supply her with drugs or have sex with her?

Yet again, you assume to know what people were thinking and feeling. Now, it's Deanna.


Sigh. Why do you insist of repeating a long and repeatedly disproved lie?
Vixen hyperbole: "Wrote gory detailed essays". It was ONE class assignment and there were no "gory details" about the rape at all. And it was an ANTI-RAPE story; Kyle was the BAD GUY and Edgar was disgusted with him.



There's such a gish-gallop of previously covered rubbish in the above that I'm not even going to waste my time with it.



Nice try at minimizing Guede's history of repeatedly lying, not attending school or tutor sessions, being FIRED from and quitting several jobs, being in possession of stolen goods, trespassing, and burglary.
NONE of which is true of Knox.

Guede had a history of moving around with no permanent home because he couldn't/wouldn't keep a job.

Stop trying to white-wash Guede's pattern of pathological lying, breaking the law, and general irresponsible and immature behavior.

Once again you are failing to follow the argument under discussion, which was whether Guede leaving home as a young person and being unemployed/employed for short periods is in anyway particularly unusual as you keep claiming. You fail to acknowledge he was not a homeless hobo, he had his own bedsit, so not much different from Sollecito. Once again you have falsely claimed he had convictions for burglary, so it is clear you are a stranger to factual information. Like Joanna Denehy, Knox seems to revel in having little or no empathy. Sollecito was described by the prosecution to the court as being 'as cold as ice'.

 

[AmyStrange]

If I was a guilter, I wouldn't keep even one irony meter anywhere near me. Look at what happened to three of them above. Kablooie!


-