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

[Vixen]

Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you really this dense?

Let me repeat... WE HAVE AMANDA'S PHONE LOG AND BANK RECORDS so we know the claims made in the Irish Independent are bogus. THAT is why it never came up in any trial. All the diversionary fluff in your post is irrelevant.

And BTW, you repeating those lies doesn't make them any less of a lie. There was no "known association with a cocaine smuggler" and I find it rather disgusting that you continue to repeat this as if true, and that includes the continued use of "smuggler" when you have repeatedly been reminded he was a dealer, not a smuggler. Oh yeah, you're impartial, neutral and entirely objective! What a joke

Here's what you wrote;

So what/how did you qualify, and what did I "conveniently" leave out?

AFAIAA it is common knowledge. She wrote about it on MySpace for goodness sake. The guy was a cocaine smuggler and received a very stiff prison sentence.

 

[Stacyhs]

As has been explained, Bongiorno took Gill's multi-page report to the Fifth Chambers Supreme Court Appeal hearing, in which each counsel was instructed they had twenty minutes each to present their skeleton arguments to the panel. As already explained, a skeleton argument on paper should be no longer than one page of A4 or two sides, at the outside.

As has been explained earlier, the five judges of the SC appeal controlled who spoke and for how long, not Bongiorno.
Each side was given 20 minutes to outline their arguments. But the judges have control over what and how many questions they ask which takes an undetermined amount of time.

Bongiorno spent two and a half days presenting her case to the court.

Apparently, the five judges considered it appropriate. If not, they had the power to curtail it.

Bruno was once charged with mafia connections. So, surprise, surprise, the family stuck together, so to speak, and fixed it for the Sollecitos of Bari.

Just stop with the mafia crap. You've done it to death.

As for Bruno, you really should stop bringing that up as some kind of evidence because not only was Bruno cleared of all accusations in a scathing judgment against those who brought the charges , he was compensated by the State 12,000 euros in damages and 10,000 euros to pay for legal expenses.

At the request of the Rome prosecutor's office itself, the preliminary hearing judge who dealt with the Paolo Antonio Bruno case in August 2007 definitively acquitted the magistrate of all charges, writing scathing judgments against the actions of his colleagues de Magistris-Lombardi-Spagnuolo.

These judgments were reconstructed and taken up again in the Salerno civil conviction for the actions of the three, where it is written: "The charge against Bruno was completely devoid of adequate evidence. The GUP of the Rome court acquitted not on the basis of investigative supervenings, but on the basis of a mere acknowledgement (in accordance with the indictment of the Roman prosecutor's office itself) that from the beginning there was a lack of any element in the investigations, even of mere suspicion".

You can't see anything amiss with this because you don't understand how fairness in law works. It should mean each party is given the same amount of time to present their skeleton argument in respect of the appeal hearing to the panel of judges. If you cannot see it is unfair that one party got an incredible two whole days and presented a multi-page report by someone not even a witness at the trials/appeals, when the other parties each had a strict twenty-minute time limit to speak and submit a proper skeleton of just one A4 page (double spaced), then you really do not comprehend the meaning of justice needing to be seen to be a level playing field for all parties.

Do you have any evidence that the prosecution was NOT given extra time and was not allowed to present their case to their satisfaction? Were there any complaints by them? If not, then you haven't got a leg to stand on.

 

[junkshop]

King Orange of Don.

OK. I wasn't being dumb, then.

 

[Vixen]

As has been explained earlier, the five judges of the SC appeal controlled who spoke and for how long, not Bongiorno.
Each side was given 20 minutes to outline their arguments. But the judges have control over what and how many questions they ask which takes an undetermined amount of time.

Apparently, the five judges considered it appropriate. If not, they had the power to curtail it.


Just stop with the mafia crap. You've done it to death.

As for Bruno, you really should stop bringing that up as some kind of evidence because not only was Bruno cleared of all accusations in a scathing judgment against those who brought the charges , he was compensated by the State 12,000 euros in damages and 10,000 euros to pay for legal expenses.



Do you have any evidence that the prosecution was NOT given extra time and was not allowed to present their case to their satisfaction? Were there any complaints by them? If not, then you haven't got a leg to stand on.

The Supreme Court is the last word. But we saw how Italy got its revenge when Sollecito applied for millions of euros compensation. The judgment virtually spelt out Italy's firm and final belief in Knox' 'absolute and certain' presence at the cottage during the murder. They see it.

 

[Numbers]

If Gill's report was never entered into evidence, then exactly how did it influence the courts?

When Hellmann referenced Gill and other forensic experts, he was referencing their publications: " (Gill P. et al., 2000; Whitaker J.P. et al., 2001; Kloosterman A.D. et al., 2003; Smith P.J., Ballantyne J., 2007; Forster L. et al., 2008; Budowle B. et al., 2009)" and " (Gill P. et al., 2000; Gill P., 2001; Gill P. et al., 2007)" Or do you think published scientific works should only be allowed when the author(s) can be cross-examined in court?
.....

The references the Hellmann Court of Appeal MR cited were 8 different published scientific papers, in order, they are:

Gill P. et al., 2000
Whitaker J.P. et al., 2001
Kloosterman A.D. et al., 2003
Smith P.J., Ballantyne J., 2007
Forster L. et al., 2008
Budowle B. et al., 2009
Gill P., 2001
Gill P. et al., 2007

From the publication dates, it is clear that 4 of these scientific papers were written before Kercher was murdered, so they are necessarily not specific to the Kercher case. The two papers published in 2007 also were not at all likely to be specific to the Kercher case, because scientific papers are subjected to relatively long periods (many months would not be uncommon) of peer review before publication, and Kercher's murder occurred 1 November 2007. All the cited papers are general scientific papers on topics relating to DNA profiling.

It's unclear what the statements in Vixen's posts about a Peter Gill report presented to the Marasca CSC panel mean, since Vixen has not identified any such report. I suspect those statements in VIxen's posts are from the same place as the many other PGP themes - bent officials, mafia influence, US government orders to acquitting Italian courts, corrupt forensic DNA experts, or maybe orders from the Masons, and don't forget the PR juggernaut.

 

[Stacyhs]

You still don't get it. RG was convicted as being part of a group that committed the crime. It is made clear he was not the one who killed Mez.

You still don't get it. RG was definitively convicted "in concorso" in 2010, AFTER Knox and Sollecito had been provisionally convicted by Massei and well before the prosecution's case against them fell apart in 2011, including the "smoking gun" knife that the prosecution claimed Knox killed Kercher with. That there were more than one attacker then became one of your much vaunted "judicial facts".

Since you love 'judicial facts' so much, now that it has been ruled that neither Knox nor Sollecito killed Kercher, who the hell did if not Guede?

Whilst RS and AK are acquitted of murder and theft, it still holds true that the fact found and which remains, is that AK was the killer. In other words although insufficient evidence to prove murder, she is still factually the killer, albeit she has 'got away with a criminal charge'

You are entitled to your own opinions no matter how illogical, implausible, and ignorant they are. You are NOT entitled to your own facts.

 

[Stacyhs]

It was the Seattle PSI influencer or whatever it is called. It has been discussed before if you do a 'search' for the article in question.

Or maybe it was the NY Times. Or maybe Sky News. Or maybe Corriere della Sera. Or maybe The Telegraph. Or maybe the Daily Mail. Or maybe the Podunk Caller. Or maybe............................................

You're the one claiming it. It's up to you to provide the requested evidence.

 

[Stacyhs]

If it was in the police evidence files then they clearly had the phone logs, the name of the drug smuggler and Knox' bank records.

WE also have her phone logs and Knox's bank records. They do NOT support the 2008 police report.

The fact it was not included in the evidence list for the trial simply means it wasn't considered relevant to the case in hand.

LOL! And there was the prosecution trying to paint Knox in the worst possible light as a slut and druggie but they failed to include her having sex and buying drugs from a convicted drug dealer. Yeah....riiiiiiiight.....

 

[Stacyhs]

It is verified Knox was in contact with the cocaine smuggler

No, it wasn't verified at all. It was a CLAIM by the police.
Unless you can provide evidence that Federico was a drug SMUGGLER and not just a dealer, stop being dishonest by claiming he was.

and that she was getting through money very quickly.

Sigh. You're like a broken record. You know as well as we do that her bank records do not show that at all. She had $1,000 MORE in her bank account than she did a month earlier.

Knox's bank record activity in US dollars from Oct.1 to Nov 5/6 (days of the interrogation and arrest). Irrelevant international transaction/withdrawal fees which ranged from under $1 to $8 have been left out which is why the balance amount is slightly off. Knox typically withdrew €150 or €250 at a time.
Action Balance
Oct 1: -355.75 [€250] $3,593.38 (Rent money)
Oct 3: -354.52 [€250] $3,235.31
Oct 4: +2,052.30 $5,284.07 (Grandmother)
Oct 15: -355.29 [€250] $4,912.78
Oct 23: -355.79 [€250] $4,549.89
Oct 29: -215.90 [€150] $4,333.99 (Trip to Assisi)
Nov 5: -361,54 [€250] $3,9790.30
Nov 5: +562.00 $4,528.69 (paycheck)
Nov 5: -62.18 [€42.92] $4465.89
Nov 11: -8.00 (fee) $4457.89

It wasn't thought pertinent to the murder case which is why it wasn't part of it.

Bull. Any evidence she was consorting with drug dealers and buying drugs would most certainly have been presented in court. The prosecution was all about demonizing her character.
Don't be disingenuous.

The guy does exist you know. I believe the same one she met on a train. She wrote all about it on her MySpace page so it is not anything made up.

No one disputes "Cristiano" on the train is Federico. Yeah...her Myspace page where she posted a photo of David and the PGP claimed she was posting photos of "naked men".

 

[Stacyhs]

What? Perhaps look up how news is syndicated. When something happens across the world, or there is a press conference, do you really believe a reporter is sent out by the Telegraph and all its stablemates, when it is much cheaper and efficient to send along a stringer or journalist already in the region? This small handful of people syndicates the story to the news agencies, Reuters, AP, etc., who then sell it on to the national press. This is why all the newspapers carry the same stories most of the time. Your belief that each of the papers you quoted each went out and reported and verified each of their stories is a misconception. As an example, look up the recent news story of Knox appealing against the calunnia. You'll see half the UK papers and world press use the phrase 'Knox is appealing against the last legal stain'. Those are the words of just ONE person: Collen Barry of AP News. The non-neutral word, 'stain' is her spin as she has long presented Knox as the victim.

I understand perfectly how news syndication works. But your claim that they were from the "same news agency" is utter crap. As is your blah blah blah above.

The first BBC article I quoted was from June 2011.

The second BBC article was from Dec. 2009.

The third BBC article is from April, 2012

The first Telegraph article is from Nov. 2024.

The second Telegraph article is from March 2015.

So Colleen Barry wrote all these articles reported by the BBC and Telegraph over a span of 14 years?
You've made an allegation against Barry with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Not that that's unusual.

ETA: I also notice that you have no gripe with the pro-guilt reporting of Barbie Nadeau and Andrea Vogt. Nah, THEY'RE 'fair and balanced', right?

 

[Stacyhs]

SpitfireIX said:
And, Vixen, I renew my question, which you've avoided several times. How did Vanessa get to become a lieutenant in the Carabinieri if she was from a Mafia family?

Strange question.

And obviously one you are avoiding answering.

 

[Stacyhs]

It is assumed that news agencies such as Reuters, AP News and ANSA et al verify their sources. They are considered by mainstream news outlets, including, for example, BBC News, to be accurate verified information.

So now it's 'assumed' others, not the "UK news media", verify their sources? Move that goalpost, Vixen!

Colleen Barry of AP News has made it a point to present Knox as a victim of a miscarriage of justice. That isn't being impartial but, being based in New York, she seems to have got away with slanting AK news whenever she could.

Has she? Or has she just failed to slant her reports toward guilt? Here's one of her reports on Knox's slander reconviction:

​

FLORENCE, Italy (AP) — An Italian court reconvicted Amanda Knox of slander Wednesday, quashing her hope of removing a legal stain against her that has persisted after her exoneration in the brutal 2007 murder of her British roommate while the two were exchange students in Italy.

The decision by a Florence appeals court panel marked the sixth time that an Italian court found Knox had wrongly blamed the killing on an innocent man, the Congolese owner of the bar where she worked part time.

Knox has argued that her statements to police were forced during an intense night of questioning that included bullying as she relied on her then-remedial Italian when she was a 20-year-old university student.

The panel of two judges and six jurors, however, confirmed the three-year sentence, which she already served during four years in Italian custody while the investigation and multiple trials ensued. The court’s reasoning will be released in 60 days.

OMG! What biased reporting! All that slanting toward Knox being a victim is just horrendous!

So it would not surprise me at all if she is the source of the UK papers stating the claim Guede was a drug dealer.

So it would not surprise me at all if you've just produced this from your guilt-obsessed imagination.

 

[Stacyhs]

And yet, he was the only person definitively found guilty of the murder of Meredith. He was also found guilty of sexual assault. Those are two objective facts.

By the way, you still not understand the original intent of Stacy's post, which I find rather humorous.

Looking at everything through guilt-colored glasses tends to do that.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm afraid you are the one who hasn't followed the argument.

I'm afraid you are the one who is completely twisting what I did say.

Consider this: Stacyhs argues: RG was a migrant, therefore he is the murderer/rapist.I never said that. Not even close. And this is a new twist as earlier you claimed I said he was a murderer because he had a falling out with his foster family:"Claiming that it is obvious Guede is a murderer/ rapist because he fell out with his adopted family is asinine." Now it's because he's a migrant?I point out: being a migrant is no proof you will be a murderer/rapist. Stacyhs: well, he was, so that proves I am right. Me: but the courts after weighing up all of the evidence determined that RG did NOT kill Mez and that it was one of two others. Stacyhs: but I have a strong suspicion and that trumps everything else! You come along: but it's true because the migrant was convicted of murder and sexual assault. Do you see the fallacy in your logic?

I would if that's actually what I said. But it wasn't. This was:

True. it would be asinine. But I've never seen anyone claim that, including me. It takes a special kind of mentality to twist that out of stating why his foster family threw him out.He's not a murderer because he 'fell out with his adopted family". He's a murderer because the overwhelming evidence says he is.

The merits courts determined it was KNOX who killed Mez but your mind just can't cope that it wasn't the migrant of your prejudices.

The Supreme Court annulled the merits courts and determined Knox did NOT kill Meredith.

Seeing how I never mentioned Guede's being a migrant as evidence of anything, much less why he killed Kercher, I'd say you need a good course in reading comprehension. Or Ethics. Or maybe make an appointment to take the MoCA.

 

[Welshman]

To summarise, the main findings of Micheli are :

• Guede definitively did not wield the murder knife.
• He had no meaningful prior contact with Meredith.
• Therefore he was not invited to the cottage or let in by Meredith, nor had any consensual contact.
• The burglary and rape mise en scene was a second stage of the crime after the murder.
• It thus follows that Knox let Guede into the murder cottage.
• The crime was sexually motivated, and not one motivated by theft.
• There were multiple assailants – as per DNA and luminol testing and the fact of a return to the scene to rearrange it.
• Guede did not steal the rent money or the phones.
• He was guilty of aggravated murder because of his complicity in the attack and failure to stop it as soon as knives were produced.
• Complicity: “Above all if the certain facts include the consequent outline of that supposed ‘unknown’ (the presence of the three at the scene of the crime) they are abundant, and all abundantly proven”. – Micheli

These are the findings of the merits courts - trial - as weighed and tested in a criminal court of law. I will try to stick to objective facts, whilst of course, you and others prefer to be guided by 'strong suspicions'.

This post is a perfect example of how flawed the judicial facts are set in stone and must be accepted without question argument Vixen likes to use is. The judgement of Micheli highlights this. A major issue with relying on judicial facts and regarding them as sacred is that judicial fact may conflict with actual facts and there are numerous ways what Micheli wrote bore no relation to actual facts.

Micheli claims that Amanda, Raffaele came together to kill Meredith but as the list shows below, the notion is utterly absurd and has more holes in it than a string vest.

• Amanda barely knew Rudy, Raffaele did not know Rudy at all and Amanda and Raffaele had only been dating six days. Three virtual strangers came together to commit a brutal sex crazed murder.

• Amanda only had brief contact with Guede and in six years the prosecution could not find any evidence of regular contact with Amanda and Guede and Raffaele had never met Guede. Despite this they were able to plan a murder.

• As the links below show witness testimony stated Amanda had a good relationship with Meredith and no evidence has existed Amanda had any animosity towards Meredith. Despite this Amanda was prepared to help a stranger carry out a brutal sexual assault and murder against Meredith.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda...ehavior-myths/

• The phones of Amanda and Raffaele were tapped in the three days between the discovery of Meredith’s body and the interrogations. Despite this Amanda and Raffaele make no mention of Rudy a man they were supposed to have committed a brutal murder and sexual assault with.

• Amanda spoke only basic Italian and Rudy did not speak English. Despite this Amanda and Rudy were able to plan a murder together.

• There is no contact between Amanda and Raffaele with Rudy after the murder. Is it credible that people could committ a brutal sexual assault and murder together and never contact each other again.

• As per the link below, the evidence which should have existed if Amanda and Rafffaele killed Meredith with Rudy is missing.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html

• A woman was supposedly willing to help a stranger carry out a brutal sexual assault and murder against another woman. A scenario with no known precedent.

• The evidence against Guede was solid, credible and irrefutable as seen in the link below.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/rudy-guede/

The evidence against Amanda and Raffaele was full of holes and had no credibility. The knife was an example of this as can be seen from my post below. If Amanda, Raffaele and Guede committed the same crime together, how is the difference in the quality of the evidence explained?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post11377317

• The methods the prosecution had to resort to with regards to Amanda and Raffaele were clearly the methods prosecutors would resort to when they have a weak case, lack of evidence and the facts don’t support their case as can be seen from the links below. The prosecution didn’t have to resort to these tactics when it came to Guede which indicated the prosecution had plenty of evidence and a slam dunk case. How is this massive difference explained if Amanda, Raffaele and Rudy committed the same crime?


http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contam...bwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredi...ry-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-...irs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com/...ele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11071314
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11071314

• The evidence suggests Meredith was killed between 9.00 pm and 10.00 pm. Raffaele was using his computer at 9.10 pm and 9.26 pm which gives them an alibi for the time Guede murdered Meredith.

• The posts below show some of the falsehoods by Vixen in her posts showing PGP have to resort to lying to argue the case for Amanda and Raffaele’s guilt. I have never heard anyone resorting to lying to argue the case for Rudy’s guilt. How is this difference explained if Amanda, Raffaele and Rudy committed the same crime?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11938562
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11942852
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11598412
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11427461
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11951893

Why would it be necessary to stage a rape when Guede had actually raped Meredith which was proved by the presence of Guede's DNA in her vagina. It was proved the luminol prints were not made in blood as they were negative for TMB and didn't contain Meredith's DNA. The notion Amanda and Raffaele came back to rearrange the scene has been debunked.

 

[Stacyhs]

AFAIAA it is common knowledge. She wrote about it on MySpace for goodness sake.

And on this MySpace page, did she write anything at all about his being a drug dealer or that she was still in contact with him in any way or that she bought drugs from him? No. This is what she wrote:

"I met Federico on the train with my sister, while we were going from Milan to Florence. We smoked, my first smoke in Italy", says the girl. "After putting my little sister to bed, we went to his hotel room. I had told my friends that I couldn't imagine myself in bed with some boy I met by chance. But I changed my mind".

The guy was a cocaine smuggler and received a very stiff prison sentence.

Unless you can present evidence of such, using the word "smuggler" is blatantly dishonest. You've had this pointed out repeatedly which, per usual, you ignore. Why? Like Trump, do you subscribe to the idea of never backing down, never admitting error even when you are?

 

[Vixen]

You still don't get it. RG was definitively convicted "in concorso" in 2010, AFTER Knox and Sollecito had been provisionally convicted by Massei and well before the prosecution's case against them fell apart in 2011, including the "smoking gun" knife that the prosecution claimed Knox killed Kercher with. That there were more than one attacker then became one of your much vaunted "judicial facts".

Since you love 'judicial facts' so much, now that it has been ruled that neither Knox nor Sollecito killed Kercher, who the hell did if not Guede?

You are entitled to your own opinions no matter how illogical, implausible, and ignorant they are. You are NOT entitled to your own facts.

It was ruled they did not commit the criminal act of murder. It remains a fact that Knox killed Mez, but it was not proven to be criminal.

 

[Vixen]

Or maybe it was the NY Times. Or maybe Sky News. Or maybe Corriere della Sera. Or maybe The Telegraph. Or maybe the Daily Mail. Or maybe the Podunk Caller. Or maybe............................................

You're the one claiming it. It's up to you to provide the requested evidence.

View attachment 62076

This was already discussed some while ago. I reproduced the newspaper article at the time. I cannot open Seattle PSI 'in your location'.

 

[Stacyhs]

The Supreme Court is the last word.

Now that you've acknowledged that, can we expect a cessation in the constant banging on about the merits court?

But we saw how Italy got its revenge when Sollecito applied for millions of euros compensation.

So Italy was exacting revenge for Sollecito's acquittal? How nice. The State doesn't like the SC annulling a sentence so like a boyfriend who beats up his girlfriend that he thinks is cheating on him, they get 'revenge'. Doesn't say much for Italy, does it?

The judgment virtually spelt out Italy's firm and final belief in Knox' 'absolute and certain' presence at the cottage during the murder. They see it.

Hmmmm.... the you'd expect that they would have confirmed the conviction or at least sent it back down to another appeals court.
But they didn't.

Your ability to know what people 'really think' is mind-blowing. Have you thought of going on tour and dazzling audiences everywhere?

 

[Vixen]

WE also have her phone logs and Knox's bank records. They do NOT support the 2008 police report.

LOL! And there was the prosecution trying to paint Knox in the worst possible light as a slut and druggie but they failed to include her having sex and buying drugs from a convicted drug dealer. Yeah....riiiiiiiight.....

You still don't understand how a trial works. It is not about character assassination or whether you had a lousy childhood (nor whether you left home after falling out with your wealthy adopted parents; nor whether you are a migrant or unemployed or homeless; nor about whether your car is brand new). The aim is to establish the facts of the alleged crime/s and then come to a verdict. Only evidence and witnesses relevant to the case is required.