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

[Vixen]

LOL. Assfact!


Provided for you yet again...and which you'll continue to ignore:

Knox:
PL sends text not to come to work (20:18:12). Reads and replies to him (20:38) and then turns off phone.
Testified she did not want to chance being called into work later.
Logical reason to turn off phone.

Sollecito:
At 20:40, just after AK sends text to PL, Jovana Popovic dropped by RS's apartment. She spoke to Amanda and tells her she no longer needed a ride to the station.
At 20:42:56, Raffaele received a call from his father lasting 3 min and 40sec., then turns off phone.

Both find themselves with an unexpected night off. Logical reasons to turn off phones. But there are no innocent reasons for any of their actions according to you. Everything must have a pro-guilt interpretation.


The message where he told her a holiday evening had few customers (as verified by him and the Swiss professor) so to take the night off but to come in on her next regularly scheduled night? THAT made her think he'd offered Meredith her job? Only in your imagination.

Cottage, not Questura. Yet again a misrepresentation of what was actually said by Battistelli:



Nowhere in his testimony did he say they were "visibly shocked". That's all you.

Marsi:




The "visibly shocked" bit is just your usual misleading exaggeration.

Of course she would say that wouldn't she? As if you need to switch off your phone in order to ignore a message, and as if any boss ever said take the day off and then call back later to say come in. What rot! It was hardly key work, handing out leaflets.

You falsely claimed, or tried to give people the impression, that the PR Agency interference in the case was all a 'conspiracy theory'. Likewise Trump's involvement. And you added a load of 'crazy' emoji for effect in your usual reasoning-free playground style. .For those want to know more you can read about both here as being far from conspiracy theories:

NBC News

Gerald L. Shargel, a lawyer who was not involved with the case but has represented other high-profile clients, said that Ms. Knox’s image had undergone a considerable change since the early days. “Now, this didn’t happen overnight, but her image has been airbrushed over the past several years, and now she is the all-American girl who is presented as some conventional young lady abroad who was in the wrong place at the wrong time,” he said.

The media interest was huge, and now networks are gunning for interviews. Bookers representing several television shows were on the same flight as Ms. Knox on Tuesday, two network executives said. And some media analysts predict that the next step may be selling a book, which would help defray the legal fees.

“Her story has all the makings of a top-selling book and a made-for-TV movie,” said Lee Kamlet, dean of the school of communications at Quinnipiac University and a former ABC News executive.

LA Times

Yes, Trump donated to my defense. And yes, Trump defended my innocence, recognizing that coercive interrogations produce false testimony authored by the interrogators themselves, a well-studied and documented fact.


But Trump claimed the exact opposite in the Central Park Five case, calling for the death penalty even though the accused teens’ rape convictions rested solely on coerced false confessions. Even now he views them as guilty, years after they were exonerated based on DNA evidence.

Trump recognized me as a fellow American who deserved to be assumed innocent until proven guilty, but he condemned the Central Park Five as “other” — guilty until proven innocent. Loyalty motivated Trump to call for all Americans to boycott Italy, even though, ironically, it only served to amplify anti-American sentiment in the courtroom, stacking the deck against me.

BTW What are you talking about? I clearly stated IN THE QUESTURA not Battistelli and the cottage. Once again pretending I said something other than what I did say. It really is like trying to pin jelly to a tree.

And you know very well Lumumba had expressed appreciation at Mez' ability to shake a Mojito cocktail (real bar work).

 

[Vixen]

Really? You're actually claiming I've denied Curt Knox hired G-M? Are you OK?

You tried to make out the PR hoax was a conspiracy theory and now you have to back track because the fact of the matter is, it is in the public domain as a well-known fact. Curt Knox said it was the best investment he ever made (taking the case outside the courts to disseminate misinformation and disinformation to reconstruct Knox' image as the girl next door and the Italians as a backward third world country that tortured young girls into admitting murder). Truth is, teams of agents were commissioned to flood the internet, such as amazon book reviews and forums, with positive reviews and opinions gushing about Knox' 'innocence', which is still going on today. (Those of you doing it for free should demand your fair share of the commission available, up to US$2m by all accounts.) And your adopting a familiar tone with me is not welcome.

 

[Vixen]

Oh, good god almighty! A SCIENTIFIC FACT DOES NOT CHANGE UNDER ANY OF THE CONDITIONS ABOVE. Does the law of gravity change if Isaac Newton doesn't testify to it in court?



Ah, yes; Garofano. So, quote where he says mixed DNA must be deposited at the same time and that when each was deposited can be determined. Go on, give that a whirl.
Can you present a single forensic expert who agrees with Garofano on his claim the peak heights show Knox was bleeding? Because I can present several who do not:

(Prof. Greg Hampikian, Ph.D. biochemistry)

Even Massei accepted this forensic fact:



In contrast to your usual hyperbole, you now attempt to minimize Halkides' qualification as a BIOchemist. You asked what my qualifications were as a BIOchemist so I provided a Ph. D. BIOchemist and others as well.



Your habit of accusing me of things I have never said just reveals your own dishonesty... or delusions. Unless you can provide evidence that I ever said the above, which you can't, then stop it.

Erm, even expert scientific witnesses have to turn up to the trial, as did Dr. Stefanoni and the defence opposition. The panel of judges and lay judges must ONLY consider evidence heard in court. What is said in West Seattle Herald or by 'Frank Sfarzo', or Doug Preston, John Douglas and his minions, really really is not how the criminal justice system works. You just don't seem to get it.

 

[Vixen]

Oh, good god almighty! A SCIENTIFIC FACT DOES NOT CHANGE UNDER ANY OF THE CONDITIONS ABOVE. Does the law of gravity change if Isaac Newton doesn't testify to it in court?



Ah, yes; Garofano. So, quote where he says mixed DNA must be deposited at the same time and that when each was deposited can be determined. Go on, give that a whirl.
Can you present a single forensic expert who agrees with Garofano on his claim the peak heights show Knox was bleeding? Because I can present several who do not:

(Prof. Greg Hampikian, Ph.D. biochemistry)

Even Massei accepted this forensic fact:



In contrast to your usual hyperbole, you now attempt to minimize Halkides' qualification as a BIOchemist. You asked what my qualifications were as a BIOchemist so I provided a Ph. D. BIOchemist and others as well.



Your habit of accusing me of things I have never said just reveals your own dishonesty... or delusions. Unless you can provide evidence that I ever said the above, which you can't, then stop it.

For goodness sake, Chris Halkides' qualifications are not your qualifications and you shouldn't be claiming to speak on his behalf. BTW Knox agrees she must have been bleeding to have left her blob of blood there.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen doesn't love Guede but she does minimize what he did in order to place blame on Knox and Sollecito. With an emphasis on Knox.

I go by what the courts found tried and tested at the trial and appeal. Italy is a right wing 'racist' anti-African migrant country so you cannot claim they were 'Guede-lovers' to use another poster's revolting Jim Crow-style terminology. The courts found as a fact there were multiple assailants - facts based on at least two pathology examinations - given the 42 wounds including many stab wounds and flicks and almost zero defence wounds showing SOMEONE was restraining Mez from behind (rather like the Manson killer, Susan Atkins, who didn't actually stab the victim but was just as guilty for forcibly holding Abigail's arms behind her back whilst the other woman did); the different sized knives used, the dragging the body by the hair and repositioning it some time later; the factual staged burglary, which as a finding of fact, occurred after the murder. We can also note the perp/perps returned later to clean up, carefully leaving Guede's own remains untouched but as often happens, unwittingly leaving theirs behind also. Knox probably reasoned it didn't matter, as she lived there. So the idea the high level Italian courts were all 'Guede-lovers' and 'Amanda haters' is the ridiculously childish view we have come to expect from you.

 

[Vixen]

Maybe, but it's just interesting to me that he doesn't belittle Guede like he does Amanda, and calling Meredith "Mez" is so transparent, it's not even funny.

I just wish he'd tell us what his mission here is. I mean, you can tell he's not reading everyone's responses all the way through. I suspect he only reads the first sentence or paragraph.

I also wish he did what you do and break down his responses in the same way, sentence by sentence, or paragraph by paragraph.

As usual, these are just my opinions.

Your mileage may vary of course.

Mez is what the family agreed she could be called and was thus called in court. I have been on forums since the unoffmensa-lists (LISTSERV) of the mid-90's and I have never liked the format of answering people sentence by sentence; usually it is just a sign of pretentiousness or querulousness. The lack of continuity of it does not appeal to me. Sometimes you can tell from the first sentence what drivel is likely to follow so why would you read all the way through? I would point out I do read through though. I do note your lack of providing any reasoning for dividing people into 'haters' and 'lovers', so maybe instead of critiquing my skills, concentrate on honing some of your own.

 

[Vixen]

Yada yada yada. It is amazing that someone spends this amount of time writing complete fiction, including even admitting that 'we can also guess', when the issue is not guessing, it is what the evidence says.

One bit of evidence? It's available without guessing. When the victim's boyfriend testified at trial about his girlfriend's relationship with AK, he basically said it was normal. I am sure that you will now make more guesses as to why he might say that, guesses which impeach his testimony, while claiming he was really saying that the two of them were scrapping.

Yet, your posts/fictions still leave the taste that the victim did something to rile someone else to kill her. All that, when EVRY COURT, convicting and acquitting, said that both AK as well as RS had had no motive to do the deed. The guilt-finding courts all found that it was, for them, a spur of the moment thing. And yes, that was decided by the courts as the various prosecutions came up with motives for the killing by the truckful.

Are you okay? You spend a lot of time writing this fan-fiction about a character who never existed - the guilter Amanda Knox.

Yes, as I said, that is because Crini - yes, there was more than the one prosecutor! - decided it was easier to ditch Mignini's thrill killing motive for a more straightforward one of some kind of housemate conflict. A motive wasn't needed but if we look at what happened immediately before the crime: Knox met by her own account Guede in the basketball court when she got Lumumba's message not to come in and by her own account, took him to the cottage to make out with Mez, whereupon, she exits the scene as star player reverting to portraying herself as an innocent bystander crouching in the kitchen whilst Guede/Patrik raped and killed Mez. We can see Knox knew about the scream before even the police. They had yet to hear from the two witnesses who also heard it. So, working on the detective's theory Lumumba's message was directly related to what set off the chain of events...what would incite rage and anger...other than (a) having been snubbed and excluded from raucous Halloween partying the night before (b) having been aware of Lumumba's enthusiasm over Mez' cocktail making skills and then being told not to come in, and (c) having had the audacity - in AK's eyes - to steal the handsome skiing hulk downstairs...well, yeah we can see the formation of a vicious intent to exact revenge. In mitigation, she and Guede were still quite young undeveloped adults, whereas Sollecito is the archetypal cold blooded puppet master of it all, relishing the opportunity to enact a pornographic and violent anime theme of vampire slaying, with his extenisve knife collection. Every now and then a detective meets one of these types and their blood runs cold. They talk of their crime as though speaking about the weather. Mignini described Sollecito as being 'as cold as ice'. And we see, RS thought nothing of blatantly lying in his police witness statements, was happy to throw Knox under the bus by saying she went out without him until 1:00am, which he has never officially retracted. Refused to take the witness box; his entire alibi was a pack of lies. The fact he got away with it, doesn't make him innocent. The Italians know this and won't compensate him due to his own proven 'gross misconduct' in his dealings with the law enforcement. As you should know a cold sociopath with no feelings doesn't need a motive, other than immediate self-gratification.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Of course she would say that wouldn't she? As if you need to switch off your phone in order to ignore a message, and as if any boss ever said take the day off and then call back later to say come in. What rot! It was hardly key work, handing out leaflets.

How could anyone take you seriously? Look at yourself.

You obviously never had a job where you could be on standby if someone else dropped out. Turning off your phone so a day off is a day off is completely routine. If your employer wants to keep you formally on standby there should be a payment for that. For a casual job you just fix that problem yourself by switching off. This is reality not your storyland. Your "argument" that it was a ◊◊◊◊◊◊ job anyway is pure snobbery and makes zero point.

 

[Vixen]

There are lies in Vixen’s posts which have been constantly repeated. It was never part of the prosecution’s case that Amanda’s hair was in Meredith’s room or mentioned in any motivation report. Raffaele’s knife didn’t match the bloody imprint on the bed. Vixen constantly bangs on about Amanda and Raffaele telling numerous lies but says several lies in a short post. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was so solid, why is it necessary for Vixen to resort to lying to support her claims? Why is it necessary to lie about non-existent evidence to argue Amanda was in Meredith’s room? Vixen lies that the notion there was no trace of Amanda in Meredith’s room is a hoax when in reality it is the notion there were traces of Amanda in Meredith’s room which is a hoax.



Post dated 20.03.2016

Claim: and even defense forensic expert 'Photoshop' Vinci discovered Amanda's DNA on the bra, together with Rudy's.

Truth: Amanda’s DNA was not on the clasp and this has never been part of the prosecution’s case. There is no record of the defence agreeing Amanda’s DNA was on the clasp.

Post dated: 07.06.2016

Claim: A ladies size 37 footprint in Mez' blood.

Truth: There was no size 37 female footprint in Meredith’s room. The defence clearly showed all the footprints belonged to Rudy as detailed below

The Truth About the Shoe Prints in Meredith's Room

A site detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito.

www.injusticeinperugia.org

Not every instance of facts found is entered into the Motivational Report, only the ones that are to be strict legal facts bound in stone. Part of the judges' job is sifting out what is absolutely germane to the case and leaving out ones that can be ignored as a 'benefit of doubt' as it doesn't swing the verdict one way or another.

 

[Vixen]

Marasca did not conclude that at all. Nor did Hellmann.

Which she retracted several times remember, by her own account and the ECHR and anyone without selective memory.

The prosecution never claimed Knox's DNA was on the bra fabric or anywhere in Kercher's bedroom. Would you care to hazard a guess why? Take a few moments and ponder that.

So now it's "counsel" that walked when before it was always Vinci who walked? A claim which you've never once presented evidence for despite repeated requests to do so. Quelle surprise! As I've pointed out before, but which you yet again ignored, Vinci testified in court for the defense on Sept. 18, 2009, more than a year after the "Knox DNA MIGHT be on Kercher's bra" story came out in Oct. 2008.

Additionally, as expert David Balding concluded:



If one ignores that employed Knox had several thousands of dollars in her back account and unemployed Guede had none.

As has been pointed out to you innumerable times but which, true to form, you ignore: they were not dyed blonde which Knox was as the time.

Stop just ignoring anything and everything that doesn't suit your narrative.


Not even Massei accepted that. Claiming it, even in capital letters, does not make it true.

Paper that could have been on the duvet when pulled off the bed and placed over the body or knocked/blown off the side table.

Jesus Christ. The knife outline on the bed is considerably smaller than the kitchen knife as presented in court. Even the prosecution admitted that the kitchen knife could NOT have made some of the smaller cuts.

No one has said it wasn't. HOW and WHO brought it into the room has never been established.

Mere speculation not founded on any evidence.


Guede knew Meredith whilst alive. Nor was he a random burglar as he had been in the downstairs apartment before, including while Meredith was there. At least you're not repeating Mignini's nonsense that only a woman would cover the body. Some progress at least.


Hoax? You sound like Trump.
Did the PR declare that no evidence of Knox was found in the bedroom and that the single piece of evidence against Sollecito was most likely due to contamination? And here I thought that was the Marasca SC.


Great examples of judicial facts that do not agree with the actual facts. Both Micheli and Giordano created those 'facts' BEFORE the first appellate trial where C & V decimated the bra and knife evidence and that court found otherwise.

Dyed blonde hair is exactly the same as natural blond hair. It is simply hair bleached of its melanin, which blonde hair has little to none of. You have been told this several times already. Stop claiming that Knox' bleached hair can't have been the two long golden-coloured hairs, one gripped in Mez' hand and the other across the top of Mez' bag (therefore, AFTER Guede had rummaged through it).

 

[Vixen]

How could anyone take you seriously? Look at yourself.

You obviously never had a job where you could be on standby if someone else dropped out. Turning off your phone so a day off is a day off is completely routine. If your employer wants to keep you formally on standby there should be a payment for that. For a casual job you just fix that problem yourself by switching off. This is reality not your storyland. Your "argument" that it was a ◊◊◊◊◊◊ job anyway is pure snobbery and makes zero point.

Imagine you are Jody Arias or Bryan Kohberger and the cops ask, why was your phone switched off for the duration of the crime? Of course they are going to answer, Oh I was afraid someone might demand my time elsewhere or, in the case of Kohberger, I was out watching the night sky and didn't want to be disturbed. Sure. All you need do is turn the volume down to zero. Switching it off is to switch off your GPS location. This really isn't necessary to deflect your barroom-tender boss who couldn't give a toss as to your location. So yeah, to claim oh we switched off our phones because we wanted a romantic evening watching The Wonderful World of Amelie without being disturbed by pesky text messages really rings true. As for needing to be on standby, I have always had a separate work phone for that. On the rare occasions my boss has needed me urgently, for example, in needing an SMS code in order to reset some account playing up, he never says 'Do it now!!!' So I have never had any urge to switch the thing off completely. By contrast, you are involved in a crime; cops find your behaviour suspicious. Well, you would find an innocuous 'reason' for switching off your phone, wouldn't you?

 

[Welshman]

Imagine you are Jody Arias or Bryan Kohberger and the cops ask, why was your phone switched off for the duration of the crime? Of course they are going to answer, Oh I was afraid someone might demand my time elsewhere or, in the case of Kohberger, I was out watching the night sky and didn't want to be disturbed. Sure. All you need do is turn the volume down to zero. Switching it off is to switch off your GPS location. This really isn't necessary to deflect your barroom-tender boss who couldn't give a toss as to your location. So yeah, to claim oh we switched off our phones because we wanted a romantic evening watching The Wonderful World of Amelie without being disturbed by pesky text messages really rings true. As for needing to be on standby, I have always had a separate work phone for that. On the rare occasions my boss has needed me urgently, for example, in needing an SMS code in order to reset some account playing up, he never says 'Do it now!!!' So I have never had any urge to switch the thing off completely. By contrast, you are involved in a crime; cops find your behaviour suspicious. Well, you would find an innocuous 'reason' for switching off your phone, wouldn't you?

If there was hard evidence against Amanda and Raffaele as Vixen constantly boasts, why resort to arguments which reek of desperation such as trying to make switching phones sound incriminating. This proves Vixen has no real evidence to base her arguments on.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Imagine you are ...

All you do is imagine. And the stuff you imagine is fantastical. Turning off your phone to make a day off your own, at least in the days before everyone lived on their iPhone, was completely ordinary and not suspicious. Not to anyone objective, at least.

 

[AmyStrange]

Mez is what the family agreed she could be called and was thus called in court. I have been on forums since the unoffmensa-lists (LISTSERV) of the mid-90's and I have never liked the format of answering people sentence by sentence; usually it is just a sign of pretentiousness or querulousness. The lack of continuity of it does not appeal to me. Sometimes you can tell from the first sentence what drivel is likely to follow so why would you read all the way through? I would point out I do read through though. I do note your lack of providing any reasoning for dividing people into 'haters' and 'lovers', so maybe instead of critiquing my skills, concentrate on honing some of your own.

I'm just returning your ridiculous reasoning back at you.

Maybe, instead of critiquing Amanda and Raffaele, you should concentrate on critically analyzing your own "objective" (egoistic) take on things like you do for the fat clown.

Good luck, because I'm actually rooting for you.

 

[AmyStrange]

Mez is what the family agreed she could be called and was thus called in court. I have been on forums since the unoffmensa-lists (LISTSERV) of the mid-90's and I have never liked the format of answering people sentence by sentence; usually it is just a sign of pretentiousness or querulousness. The lack of continuity of it does not appeal to me. Sometimes you can tell from the first sentence what drivel is likely to follow so why would you read all the way through? I would point out I do read through though. I do note your lack of providing any reasoning for dividing people into 'haters' and 'lovers', so maybe instead of critiquing my skills, concentrate on honing some of your own.

Of course you don't, because you don't have the ability to do it correctly.

All you do is ramble on and on about things that everyone here has proven wrong over and over again.

 

[Vixen]

All you do is imagine. And the stuff you imagine is fantastical. Turning off your phone to make a day off your own, at least in the days before everyone lived on their iPhone, was completely ordinary and not suspicious. Not to anyone objective, at least.

Not of itself but for the duration of a murder with one thousand and one other pieces of evidence, together with Sollecito's blatant lie about his phone being in a position that couldn't be registered by mast pings means it doesn't pass the sniff test. If you want to take time off to canoodle with a love interest to watch a soppy film, just send your boss a text saying, sorry won't be in today, not feeling well. End of.

 

[AmyStrange]

Mez is what the family agreed she could be called and was thus called in court. I have been on forums since the unoffmensa-lists (LISTSERV) of the mid-90's and I have never liked the format of answering people sentence by sentence; usually it is just a sign of pretentiousness or querulousness. The lack of continuity of it does not appeal to me. Sometimes you can tell from the first sentence what drivel is likely to follow so why would you read all the way through? I would point out I do read through though. I do note your lack of providing any reasoning for dividing people into 'haters' and 'lovers', so maybe instead of critiquing my skills, concentrate on honing some of your own.

You still haven't answered my question as to what your end game is here.

It's certainly not to prove that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.

 

[Vixen]

You still haven't answered my question as to what your end game is here.

It's certainly not to prove Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.

You first. Tell us your 'end game' and we'll tell you ours.

 

[AmyStrange]

You first. Tell us your 'end game' and we'll tell you ours.

My end game is to enjoy the laughs of watching you fumble you're way through life with no real purpose except to hate Amanda.

Now, it's your turn.

 

[AmyStrange]

You first. Tell us your 'end game' and we'll tell you ours.

We? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?