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

Stacyhs said:
Sigh. MY statement had nothing to do with "the comparison was laboratory scientists in a university ~vs~ forensic crime scene scientists." MY statement was about the probability of Kohberger's DNA on the sheath being from contamination verses Sollecito's DNA on the bra hook being from contamination. I've explained that to you twice now.

You are trying to redirect from the fact that you falsely claimed I said something I never did.


Have I said otherwise? No. But I think even you would concede that forensic evidence should be collected ASAP and all anti-contamination protocols should be followed. Or do you not?


Yet another false claim. Are you going for a record? I have never denied his DNA is on the bra hook. It's HOW it got there that is important. Sheeeeee-eeeesh!

You mean the ENFSI specified criteria for how to collect evidence that includes:



LOL! I haven't demanded you do any such thing. What I've demanded is that you either prove I said "no evidence collected after 46 days is permissible" or admit I didn't. This entire exchange is just your inability to do either.

By the way, you're resorting to the "when you have no defense, go on the offense" tactic.
Click to expand...
Wow. You know Sollecito's DNA is on the bra-clasp - ripped viciously off the body of Mez - and you know the footprint on the bathmat is certainly Sollecito's complete with hammer toe. And you are laughing. Wow. Just wow.
 
Vixen said:
Wow. You know Sollecito's DNA is on the bra-clasp - ripped viciously off the body of Mez - and you know the footprint on the bathmat is certainly Sollecito's complete with hammer toe. And you are laughing. Wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...

No reason not to laugh at your claims, when they're laughable. It's genuinely funny that you expect anyone to be emotionally aftected by transparent lies that no one believes.
 
Vixen said:
Wow. You know Sollecito's DNA is on the bra-clasp - ripped viciously off the body of Mez -
Click to expand...
I've never denied his DNA is on the bra hook. Irrelevant commentary noted.

Vixen said:
and you know the footprint on the bathmat is certainly Sollecito's complete with hammer toe.
Click to expand...
It's amazing how we've discussed innumerable times, including in the last few minutes, why I don't think it's his footprint, yet you write that.

Vixen said:
And you are laughing. Wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...
Sigh. I'm laughing at YOUR blatantly false claim that I "have the temerity to demand I explain why to you" when I did no such thing.
Clutch those pearls, Vixen!
pearls.JPG
 
Vixen said:
I haven't responded because my perception is you are just being vexatious. You know perfectly well what I was referring to.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but here's what you wrote...

Truth Calls claims that the evidence must reach his personal standards of criteria is just a ruse to deny the full DNA profile of Sollecito on Kercher's bra clasp; on the inner bend of the the clasp. Waffling about RFU's doesn't fool the Italians.
Click to expand...

I don't see any room for misinterpretation. You wrote that I claimed evidence must reach my personal standards of criteria. I never made such a claim... didn't even hint at it. You also wrote that I deny Raffaele's full DNA profile is on the clasp, also a lie as I never made such a claim. That's two lies, I've asked you to apologize for lying about what I've said, and you continue to ignore it. You haven't done any better correcting the false claims you attributed to Stacy.

Now, either admit you lied and apologize, or explain what you meant, including citing what I wrote that justifies the claims. I'll wait....
 
And once again we go round and round and over and over again the same guilter crap and lies.

I don't know how you guys do it, but I swear to God, it's like reading someone who's arguing with a maga weirdo.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Your claim that it can't be Sollecito's footprint on the bathmat because he wouldn't have left it there childlike logic is hilarious. It's his footprint alright. Measured by forensic engineering draughtsmen (=technical drawing experts) to the smallest nano-millimetre, complete with his hammer toe thrown in! Oh dear.
Click to expand...
Complete to the smallest nano-millimeter? First of all, there is no such thing as "the smallest" nano-millimeter, as that size is precisely defined. However, while I get the point you were trying to make, it's a rather bogus claim when they didn't even use the actual bathmat, but rather photographs of the mat, adjusted to account for a less than 'directly above' perspective. Conversely, the defense expert used the actual bathmat to ensure all measurements were precise. Oh dear!

But let's pretend for a moment that it was proven to be Raffaele's (we know it's not, but we can pretend...). Then lets get back to the point Stacy was making. If it's Raffaele's footprint and they performed a clean-up, why did they leave his footprint. You can call it childlike logic, but I prefer to call it a very reasonable, logical question, and I suspect your response is how you handle questions you have no answer for. You could just admit it.
 
Vixen said:
"◊◊◊◊ happens." ~ Amanda Knox. That's the motto. I just hope I never adopt that attitude.
Click to expand...


More proof that objective thinking is NOT the guilter's forte.

Even so, I have hope, and I'm going to root for you anyway.

Life's too short for this BS.
 
Last edited:
AmyStrange said:
And once again we go round and round and over and over again the same guilter crap and lies.

I don't know how you guys do it, but I swear to God, it's like reading someone who's arguing with a maga weirdo.
Click to expand...
Whack-a-mole remains a popular game. Even though you can't ever win, you can gain satisfaction in how many moles you bop on the head.
 
TruthCalls said:
I'm sorry, but here's what you wrote...



I don't see any room for misinterpretation. You wrote that I claimed evidence must reach my personal standards of criteria. I never made such a claim... didn't even hint at it. You also wrote that I deny Raffaele's full DNA profile is on the clasp, also a lie as I never made such a claim. That's two lies, I've asked you to apologize for lying about what I've said, and you continue to ignore it. You haven't done any better correcting the false claims you attributed to Stacy.

Now, either admit you lied and apologize, or explain what you meant, including citing what I wrote that justifies the claims. I'll wait....
Click to expand...
I suggest you get comfortable. You've got a looooooooong wait coming.
 
Stacyhs said:
Because Numbers' case quotes are relevant to the Knox case. Hamza's is not. Hint: when you go into a listening pose, that requires actually listening.
Click to expand...
Ha ha. Human rights go right over your head and I bet Numbers posts on the topic bore you rigid. It's only when you can launch a personal attack at me that suddenly you are the arbiter as to what qualifies as a suitable reference for human rights issues. Let's face it: Numbers mentions an ECHR case: fine with you. I mention one and it's come on everybody let's pretend we strongly object to the reference.
 
Vixen said:
"◊◊◊◊ happens." ~ Amanda Knox. That's the motto. I just hope I never adopt that attitude.
Click to expand...
How about a citation for that "motto" you've attributed to Knox? If she said it, I bet it's not in the context you're implying.

By the way, ◊◊◊◊ does happen.
 
Stacyhs said:
How about a citation for that "motto" you've attributed to Knox? If she said it, I bet it's not in the context you're implying.

By the way, ◊◊◊◊ does happen.
Click to expand...
As I recall, it is what she said to someone shortly after the murder of her 'friend'. Couldn't even be bothered to attend the vigil. Callous. And it's no surprise her fans admire this quality. Most of them seem to think it was OK to lock Mez in her room and stop her from calling her mother to say goodbye. "◊◊◊◊ happens".
 
Stacyhs said:
How about a citation for that "motto" you've attributed to Knox? If she said it, I bet it's not in the context you're implying.

By the way, ◊◊◊◊ does happen.
Click to expand...
You should translate that into Latin and make it your own motto, since you think it strikes a chord. Semper Getting Away With it.
 
Vixen said:
Ha ha. Human rights go right over your head
Click to expand...
So tell me exactly how Hamza's human rights were violated that equate to or are even similar to the 2019 ECHR's and the Italian SC's 2008 rulings that Knox's rights were violated. I'll get the popcorn.
Vixen said:
and I bet Numbers posts on the topic bore you rigid.
Click to expand...
Let's say they did just for ◊◊◊◊ and giggles. How would that change the fact they do, in fact, pertain to Knox's case while the Hamza case does not?

Vixen said:
It's only when you can launch a personal attack at me that suddenly you are the arbiter as to what qualifies as a suitable reference for human rights issues.
Let's face it: Numbers mentions an ECHR case: fine with you. I mention one and it's come on everybody let's pretend we strongly object to the reference.
Click to expand...
Careful, if you clutch those pearls any tighter, you'll break the string and they'll be all over the floor.
Playing the victim is not a good look.
 
Vixen said:
As I recall, it is what she said to someone shortly after the murder of her 'friend'.
Click to expand...
Yeeeeeeeaaaaah...... As I recall, you have a history of claiming people said things when they didn't.
Vixen said:
Couldn't even be bothered to attend the vigil. Callous.
Click to expand...
So Filomena and Laura were callous, too, since they also didn't attend.

Vixen said:
And it's no surprise her fans admire this quality. Most of them seem to think it was OK to lock Mez in her room and stop her from calling her mother to say goodbye. "◊◊◊◊ happens".
Click to expand...
Really, Vixen. Stop embarrassing yourself.
 
Stacyhs said:
So tell me exactly how Hamza's human rights were violated that equate to or are even similar to the 2019 ECHR's and the Italian SC's 2008 rulings that Knox's rights were violated. I'll get the popcorn.

Let's say they did just for ◊◊◊◊ and giggles. How would that change the fact they do, in fact, pertain to Knox's case while the Hamza case does not?


Careful, if you clutch those pearls any tighter, you'll break the string and they'll be all over the floor.
Playing the victim is not a good look.
Click to expand...
Just click upwards. Just because my comments are too intellectual for some, I don't see why I should be victimised for it. But it comes with the territory so I expect it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom