• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

TruthCalls said:
Interesting. Frank Sfarzo lived in Italy, was in court every day and maintained a blog discussing the case every day. You and your fellow pro-guilt attacked Frank at every turn. So being in Perugia, and attending court doesn't impress you, apparently, but what they have to say does. Frank was pro-innocent, so he was denigrated constantly. Naseer was pro-guilt, so he's smart, invested and we should trust him.

But let's remember, it's Naseer who claims to be a messiah and can cure autistic children. Frank was just a normal journalist without any bizarre claims.
Click to expand...
Sfarzo was a twat.
 
Vixen said:
Catechism # two: I believe the entire lower courts in the Kercher murder trial were incompetent and unlawful, and .clearly unreasonable and unsupported by evidence. [Repeat daily.]
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, and correctly enough, this was precisely what the Marasca Supreme Court panel believed as well.

Of course, those of us who understand the scientific method, who understand the abysmal, mendacious and inadmissible low template work from not-a-real-doctor Stefanoni, and who understand the risibly useless and incorrect footprint/shoeprint analysis.... knew all this around 15 years ago. It just took the Italian criminal justice system some 8 years into the case to recognise the abject incompetence and unlawfulness of the Massei/Nencini/Chieffi courts - something we educated and scientifically-literate posters knew all along.
 
Vixen said:
Catechism #4: Only poor people commit sadistic murders. [fx: self flagellates with the forty-eight marks of the wounds of Meredith]
Click to expand...

If this is what you take away from that post, then it goes part way to explaining the utterly woeful argument "skills" demonstrated within most of your posts in this thread.
 
LondonJohn said:
If this is what you take away from that post, then it goes part way to explaining the utterly woeful argument "skills" demonstrated within most of your posts in this thread.
Click to expand...
I am only quoting Stacyhs' theory: that a prolific burglar surrounded by three laptops, a camera and jewellery opts to take a couple of mobile phones, credit cards and cash. Amazingly all belonging to just one person (so no victimisation of Mez there then :rolleyes:). According to Stacyhs, only a poor person would inflict over 48 wounds on a person over a protracted period of time, together with manual strangulation, because, um that's the motive, according to the Book of Stacyhs.

Catechism #7: And I believe in the holey PR of Gogerty-Marriott, where rain falls upwards, grass grows downwards and bunnies hop backwards, so help me Curt. <fx performs rowing motion on floor to oops upside your head>
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Sfarzo was a twat.
Click to expand...
Why, because you disagree with his conclusions? At least he was in Italy the whole time, and reported from the courthouse daily. I think he had a far better grasp of the case and the evidence presented than Naseer ever did, but in your world, if you disagree with someone then they're a twat, whereas you apparently don't care how delusional Naseer is, you agree with him so he's brilliant. Neutral and impartial my butt.

I suppose I'd rather be a twat than a delusional nutcase who thinks he's a messiah who can cure children of autism, and who resolved the case based on astrology. I remember he concluded Guede was the one sympathetic person in this case, and that he predicted redemption for him. Boy, did he nail that, as Guede awaits prosecution for domestic violence and rape. That's your guy...
 
Vixen said:
Indeed. And not a hint of embarrassment from SpitfireIX or TruthCalls in believing the ridiculous notion that Sollecito's DNA on the murder victim's underwear was transferred by a forensic police officer from a door frame. Oh dear, indeed.
Click to expand...
I never said I believe that's what happened, though I do believe there is a good chance. What I have always said was that the SP were completely incompetent, and that the way they handled and collected the clasp left it wide open to contamination. The whole point of ENFSI standards is to minimize as much as possible the risk of contamination. Once you screw things up like the SP did, the risk of contamination can not be ignored. You don't get to ignore the mistakes because 'you' can't visualize where possible contamination might have come from.

Can you offer PROOF she didn't touch Raffaele's DNA on the door jam before collecting the clasp? I mean, let's not forget, incompetent Stefanoni didn't even bother to test the exterior side of Meredith's bedroom door because 'the crime scene was on the other side'. So you can't even say if Raffaele's DNA was on the jam because it was never tested.

And lets also not forget that Raffaele's DNA was not found anywhere else in the room, nowhere on the bra or clasp except for the metal hook, the one place we know Stefanoni rubbed with her dirty gloves. Talk about a coincidence! So how did he manage to get his DNA on the hook, which isn't even exposed when a bra is worn, without getting it on the fabric or elsewhere? I've asked that question hundreds of times and I've yet to see a pro-guilt attempt to answer that.
 
TruthCalls said:
I never said I believe that's what happened, though I do believe there is a good chance. What I have always said was that the SP were completely incompetent, and that the way they handled and collected the clasp left it wide open to contamination. The whole point of ENFSI standards is to minimize as much as possible the risk of contamination. Once you screw things up like the SP did, the risk of contamination can not be ignored. You don't get to ignore the mistakes because 'you' can't visualize where possible contamination might have come from.

Can you offer PROOF she didn't touch Raffaele's DNA on the door jam before collecting the clasp? I mean, let's not forget, incompetent Stefanoni didn't even bother to test the exterior side of Meredith's bedroom door because 'the crime scene was on the other side'. So you can't even say if Raffaele's DNA was on the jam because it was never tested.

And lets also not forget that Raffaele's DNA was not found anywhere else in the room, nowhere on the bra or clasp except for the metal hook, the one place we know Stefanoni rubbed with her dirty gloves. Talk about a coincidence! So how did he manage to get his DNA on the hook, which isn't even exposed when a bra is worn, without getting it on the fabric or elsewhere? I've asked that question hundreds of times and I've yet to see a pro-guilt attempt to answer that.
Click to expand...

If they're incompetent with Sollecito's DNA collection then it follows ipso facto they are incompetent with Guede's.
 
Vixen said:
A flagrant lie. The Nencini trial showed conclusively that Stefanoni did lodge the raw material with the court. Conti & Vecchiotti were less than truthful when they claimed they were not allowed to have it. As Nencini points out (read the MR) all they had to do was make an application for it. This is the umpty-nineth time I have pointed out this matter of fact yet it seems to be part of the Knox fan club catechism to keep repeating it like a religious article of faith. The only way Knox could be innocent is if Stefanoni is guilty, is the warped reasoning.
Click to expand...
Amanda and Raffaele were always innocent. But, if the police, including Stefanoni, had done their jobs properly, the pair would never have been arrested in the first place and Guede would have been the only one convicted. Hasty judgments and the ensuing tunnel vision resulted in three innocent people being arrested.
 
Vixen said:
Catechism # two: I believe the entire lower courts in the Kercher murder trial were incompetent and unlawful, and .clearly unreasonable and unsupported by evidence. [Repeat daily.]
Click to expand...
PGP Catechism #1: All defense lawyers, witnesses, forensic experts, acquitting judges were 'bent', 'bought off', incompetent.

PGP Catechism #2: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Sollecito "mafia" connection got them acquitted .
PGP Catechism #3: They got off on the 'technicality-loophole" of "not proven BARD".
PGP Catechism #4: Deny applied and accepted science if it doesn't serve the guilt narrative.
PGP Catechism #5: Rely on, 'feelings', 'gut instinct', 'Knox's eyes', 'body language', and accusations of sociopathy.
PGP Catechism #6: Push disproved rubbish like "AK blood/MK blood mix", "AK and RS caught with a mop", AK bought
bleach, AK in frequent contact with cocaine 'smuggler', etc.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Catechism #3: I believe in the rotted towels and rusty bra clasp that proves the innocence of Saint Amanda and Raffaele. [fx: makes the sign of the scream, with hands over the ears]
Click to expand...
PGP Catechism #7: When unable to dig your way out of the hole you created, resort to spurious hyperbole, distortion, and misrepresentation, and outright lies.
 
Vixen said:
Catechism #4: Only poor people commit sadistic murders. [fx: self flagellates with the forty-eight marks of the wounds of Meredith]
Click to expand...
Now, see? You've just disproved your claim that you can't do that level of stupidity any more.

Whose DNA in Kercher's blood was on Kercher's purse? Was is Knox's? Sollecito's?

WHY was his DNA on her purse?

Are you now going to claim that his DNA in her blood on her purse got there while he was looking for her phone in order to call for an ambulance during his heroic efforts to 'save' her?
 
Vixen said:
If they're incompetent with Sollecito's DNA collection then it follows ipso facto they are incompetent with Guede's.
Click to expand...
Really? Can you cite something they did wrong with any of the forensics collected against Guede? Clear evidence of incompetence exists for the collection/testing/analyzing/storing of the clasp. Can you cite similar evidence of incompetence on evidence collected against Guede? If not, your comment is illogical and irrelevant.

Did their incompetence produce his bloody palm print, his bloody shoe prints, his DNA in Meredith's blood on her handbag?
 
TruthCalls said:
Really? Can you cite something they did wrong with any of the forensics collected against Guede? Clear evidence of incompetence exists for the collection/testing/analyzing/storing of the clasp. Can you cite similar evidence of incompetence on evidence collected against Guede? If not, your comment is illogical and irrelevant.

Did their incompetence produce his bloody palm print, his bloody shoe prints, his DNA in Meredith's blood on her handbag?
Click to expand...
Guede's DNA was found on the cuff of Mez' blue sweatshirt, under the body. That is how they built a case of his having restrained her by her wrists. The bra clasp was also under the body...and Sollecito's DNA - full profile (let that sink in) - was on it. But you don't do reality, do you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom