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

[Vixen]

<snip>

You haven't answered my question: WHAT computer?

You don't get British humour. That's fine.

 

[Stacyhs]

I was not trying to 'discredit' Taramantano's girlfriend. I was pointing out getting your girlfriend or boyfriend to back you up doesn't have the same weight as an independent, arm's length, third party. You just have to accept that his claims went nowhere because they were unprovable due mostly to the fact he failed to report it at the time.

Oh, please!

The point being made is just because Taramontano's girlfriend backs him up means sweet Fanny Adams because the natural response would be, of course she would.

There are only two scenarios:
1. She DID witness the event in Tramontano's apt. that night or
2 She didn't and LIED in order to support him.

You implied she lied in order to support her boyfriend because Tramontano wasn't credible. Pure and simple.
Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

 

[Stacyhs]

Please try to be accurate. Guede was found to be in possession of stolen property. That really doesn't mean the same thing as theft, burglary or robbery.

Oh, good God.

He took the kitchen knife from the school and put it in his backpack! Did he buy that from some guy who was the real thief? Do you want to contend he had every intention of putting it back in the kitchen when he left?
If you take a pair of earrings from a store and stick them in your bra, that's THEFT.

You really need to stop digging.

 

[Stacyhs]

Knox was caught out blurting a confession

Yeah, she just blurted it out for no reason because it's common to implicate ourselves in a murder under the stress of being plied with tea and cakes!

and ever since then she's been trying desperately hard to convince people it was a 'false memory', police brutality, Ficarra cuffing her, tag teams of twelve flying squad from Rome shouting REMEMBER REMEMBER all night long. Icy cold Sollecito on the other hand managed to keep his cool, which gave Mignini the creeps.

Blah, blah, blah.......

 

[Stacyhs]

You can read what the police technical experts at the postal police said, here.

Don't direct us to a long, untranslated and not able to copy and paste into a translator testimony.

They confirmed the laptops of AK, MK, Filomena and one of RS' were fried before they even tested them, trying to extract the hard drives.

NO, THEY DID NOT which is why you did not provide their testimony saying that. Which is why this was NEVER claimed in any court.

Lumumba's laptop which was number two or three being tested was perfectly fine, so there was no problem with the police apparatus.

No one said it was the police equipment, Vixen. They were individually wired up by hand incorrectly which fried the disks. The fact whoever connected Lumumba's laptop managed not to screw that one up has nothing to do with the others.

Sollecito was a fourth year IT/Computer student. He would have known that hard drives are retrievable. He would have had knowledge of how to destroy a hard drive to avoid detection of what was on it .

Yes, he'd have the knowledge but there is NO evidence he did so and plenty of evidence the postal police did.
It is a FACT that his laptop was working when someone used it while he was in custody.
No matter how many times you beat this dead horse, it isn't going to get up and win the Kentucky Derby.

 

[AmyStrange]

Guede was in the room, he said so. A bag is not the same as a knife! It wasn't just DNA on the sheath it was all of Kohberger's attempts to find a replacement, his return to the scene, his super-efforts to conceal where he bought it from. You talk about Guede's DNA in the bag but you never mention the long hair across the bag and the one gripped in Mez' deceased hand. Nor the ladies size 37 trainer print on the pillow. You need to reevaluate why you are in denial.

BTW, did you ever get that meeting set up with Mignini?

 

[LondonJohn]

The context was, 'If they had done it, they would not have pointed it out'. The blood was so obvious, I am not sure what it proves. It certainly doesn't prove innocence.

Wow. No words.

 

[Stacyhs]

There are many people convicted with no previous criminal record.

What the hell has that to do with my post?

You keep getting hoist by your own petard, when you go on and on about Guede being a lazy layabout who couldn't hold a job yet you can't bear anyone to apply the same standards of scrutiny to your pets.

View attachment 63218

British catch phrase from Little Britain.

Please learn to minimize photos. Just clink on the blue box in a corner and drag to a more proper size. At this point, your refusal to do so despite repeated requests is just vexatious.

 

[Stacyhs]

You can read what the postal police had to say about the laptops here, https://themurderofmeredithkercher.net/T-postal-police-notices.html, it is their position the laptops were fried before being received.

No, it is not. The postal police never claimed that. Unless you can quote and cite them saying that, then it's just more of your unsupported claims.

Filomena's came to them from a different source. She had been to the cottage and taken hers away. She discovered it was dead. She took it to the Questura as ordered and the duty sergeant also found this as she reported it and he was a witness to this. The postal police confirmed her laptop was in exactly the same condition as the others: fried.

True. And it was working fine when she last used it before taking it to the police after being told to bring it back in. So when is Raffaele supposed to have fried it, Vixen?

Yet Lumumba's was fine.

Because it was hooked up correctly unlike the others.

Sollecito tried to explain his laptop being dead because the police had ripped it from the wall at the plug and hence ruined it. You be the judge.

Then quote and cite him saying that. I can find no such statement from him. But I do have this from his book:

Only belatedly did the police show any interest in my computer. I suggested the turn it off and close the keyboard before carting it off, but they didn't listen. They pulled the plug out of the wall socket and carried it away still open. I'm convinced to this day that the computer would have exonerated me completely, and probably Amanda too if it had been handled properly. But almost all that evidence would soon be destroyed.

"...would SOON be destroyed".
This is why your claims are not credible.

ETA:
By the way, even Follain acknowledges the laptops were fried AFTER taken by the police:

Besides, none of his other computers had been examined as their hard disks had been destroyed after police seized them.

Follain, John. A Death in Italy: The Definitive Account of the Amanda Knox Case (p. 433). St. Martin's Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

 

[Stacyhs]

At least Guede's account, albeit self-serving and painting himself in a good light, does have an internal consistency, that if it were to be broadly true, one would not be surprised.

No, his story was not consistent.

In his recorded calls with Giacomo Benedetti he said:

"Amanda was not there," and "Amanda had nothing to do with it."

"I have nothing to do with this business. I wasn’t there that evening. If they have found my fingerprints it means I must have left them there before.”

But in his prison diary he wrote:

"“I tried to help her, she who squeezed my hands. She was strong, “But don’t leave me alone,” she repeated to me. I told her “Don’t worry I won’t abandon you.” Damn, if I had only had my cell phone with me, perhaps I might have saved her.”

What a load of self-serving, disgusting twaddle. Once her throat was cut she was incapable of speaking at all.

 

[Numbers]

One might think that after the Italian re-conviction of Knox for calunnia harming Lumumba, the Italian government would send a document to the CoM/DEJ explaining what their courts had done and seeking to present an Action Report to close the supervision of the case. But no such communication is yet listed on the hudoc.exec.com website for the Knox v. Italy case. It's status is still the same.

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen said:
If you read the Micheli report he was convicted of sexual assault, not rape, and murder as being an accessory with others. He was convicted of murder because he failed to stop the killer from doing it.

False. "Rape" is included in the "sexual assault" category in Italy:

Law no. 66 of February 14, 1996, has re-shaped the legal framework and placed sexual violence within the category of “Crimes against personal freedom”. In this way, the Law has put on the same level all conducts that infringe a legal right (the sexual freedom of the individual), eliminating the distinction based on the occurrence of sexual intercourse, introducing much harsher punishments. Sexual violence is now regulated by articles 609-bis et seq. of the Criminal Code, which punish not only rape - understood as sexual intercourse without consent - but more generally any other form of coercion to perform or submit to sexual acts.

He was not convicted of murder because he "didn't stop the killer" but because the pre-2011 courts that convicted him held he did not wield the knife that inflicted the fatal wound. Why? Because at the time, the courts held the kitchen knife to be the murder weapon and Kercher's DNA on the blade to be scientifically valid.

 

[Stacyhs]

LondonJohn said:
Well if he didn't realise he'd left it there, then how/why did he and Knox point it out to the police? Your logic is as bad as your scientific illiteracy, I'm afraid.

Er, they pointed out the obvious to the plainclothes police who turned up.

But according to you, RS didn't realize he'd left it there. Besides, it was Amanda who showed it to the postales, not Raffaele.

Speaking of whom, I do which you make up your mind:

Sollecito shows the same propensity towards meticulous planning

I would imagine, in his short-sightedness he failed to see that the blood on the bathmat was not just an amalgamous blob, vaguely looking like a foot, but that forensic cops had the means to identify whose footprint it was compatible with.

It's obvious he didn't realise he'd left it there.
https://internationalskeptics.com/f...ffaele-sollecito-part-32.363048/post-14643798

So, is Raffaele a "meticulous" planner or "short-sighted"? Did he fail to recognize his footprint from an "amalgamous blob" or did he just fail to "realize he'd left it there"?

RS said Filomena's door was 'wide open' whereas Knox said it was only ajar hence she hadn't seen the burglary mess before supposedly taking a shower.

False. RS said Filomena's door was ajar, not 'wide open':

Then I pushed open Filomena's door, which had been left lightly ajar, and saw that the place was trashed.

(Honor Bound)

The pair were waiting for Filomena to arrive so that SHE could be the one to discover the body.

If that had been their plan, then why not leave her damn door wide open, go to Gubbio, and let Filomena come home to find her body? Think, Vixen, think.

 

[Vixen]

But according to you, RS didn't realize he'd left it there. Besides, it was Amanda who showed it to the postales, not Raffaele.

Speaking of whom, I do which you make up your mind:




So, is Raffaele a "meticulous" planner or "short-sighted"? Did he fail to recognize his footprint from an "amalgamous blob" or did he just fail to "realize he'd left it there"?


False. RS said Filomena's door was ajar, not 'wide open':

(Honor Bound)



If that had been their plan, then why not leave her damn door wide open, go to Gubbio, and let Filomena come home to find her body? Think, Vixen, think.

Your claim that RS could not have left the footprint because otherwise they would not have left the bathmat there doesn't hold water. It is pure conjecture on your part. It is clear it was an oversight, just like Knox' lamp being left on the floor in Mez' room.

 

[Vixen]

But according to you, RS didn't realize he'd left it there. Besides, it was Amanda who showed it to the postales, not Raffaele.

Speaking of whom, I do which you make up your mind:




So, is Raffaele a "meticulous" planner or "short-sighted"? Did he fail to recognize his footprint from an "amalgamous blob" or did he just fail to "realize he'd left it there"?


False. RS said Filomena's door was ajar, not 'wide open':

(Honor Bound)



If that had been their plan, then why not leave her damn door wide open, go to Gubbio, and let Filomena come home to find her body? Think, Vixen, think.

They didn't go to Gubbio so that is just a story.

 

[LondonJohn]

Your claim that RS could not have left the footprint because otherwise they would not have left the bathmat there doesn't hold water. It is pure conjecture on your part. It is clear it was an oversight, just like Knox' lamp being left on the floor in Mez' room.

*sigh* Knox pointed it out to the police. Which means she knew of its existence before the first police arrived. If Knox and Sollecito had indeed participated in the murder, and if Sollecito had washed off blood in the shower, then this means Knox knew, at the very least - and prior to the arrival of the first police - that any visible footprint on the bathmat might/did belong to Sollecito.

So.....taking this fantasy as read, let's imagine what happened in the cottage at some time before the police arrived:

Knox: Hey Raf, I just checked out the small bathroom, and there's clearly a dilute-blood footprint on the bathmat. That wasn't left by your foot, was it?

Sollecito: Oh yeah, it must have been my foot - I stepped out onto the mat when I got out of the shower. Oops!

Knox: Hey - why don't we leave the print on the mat and not bother to wash it away. Then let's play a little game with the police by pointing the print out to them when they arrive - the morons in the police will never be able to match it to your foot.

Sollecito: Yeah, that sounds like a great plan. I'll enjoy toying with the police!

 

[LondonJohn]

They didn't go to Gubbio so that is just a story.

And they didn't go to Gubbio because they had nothing whatsoever to do with the murder, and therefore had no reason to distance themselves from the discovery of the body.

 

[Numbers]

Here are the latest results for pending leading ECHR cases before the CoM/DEJ:

Russia: 245 cases pending - 73 AP/ARs received, 93 not required, 79 awaited
Turkiye: 143 cases - 132 AP/ARs received, 6 not required, 5 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Ukraine: 115 cases - 106 AP/ARs received, 9 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Romania: 99 cases - 92 AP/ARs received, 2 not required, 5 awaited, 3 of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Italy: 75 cases (fifth place) - Awaiting Action Plan/Report: 18 cases, including Knox v. Italy, final judgment 24 June 2019
.....
France: 20 cases - All 20 AP/ARs received
Germany: 8 cases - 7 AP/ARs received, 1 awaited is from the latest case, final judgment 8 July 2025
UK: 8 cases - 7 AP/ARs received, 1 awaited is from the latest case, final judgment 25 February 2025

Source:

HUDOC-EXEC

hudoc.exec.coe.int

 

[Numbers]

Here are the latest results for pending leading ECHR cases before the CoM/DEJ:

Russia: 245 cases pending - 73 AP/ARs received, 93 not required, 79 awaited
Turkiye: 14

​

3 cases - 132 AP/ARs received, 6 not required, 5 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Ukraine: 115 cases - 106 AP/ARs received, 9 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Romania: 99 cases - 92 AP/ARs received, 2 not required, 5 awaited, 3 of which are from final judgment 2025 cases

Bulgaria: 94 cases - 90 AP/ARs received, 1 not required, 3 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases

Italy: 75 cases (sixth place) - Awaiting Action Plan/Report: 18 cases, including Knox v. Italy, final judgment 24 June 2019; the oldest awaited are from final judgment 2018 cases

.....
France: 20 cases - All 20 AP/ARs received
Germany: 8 cases - 7 AP/ARs received, 1 awaited is from the latest case, final judgment 8 July 2025
UK: 8 cases - 7 AP/ARs received, 1 awaited is from the latest case, final judgment 25 February 2025

Source:

HUDOC-EXEC

hudoc.exec.coe.int

Curious what states are in 7th place and immediately lower?]

Moldova: 58 cases pending - 43 AP/ARs received, 9 not required, 6 awaited, all of which are from final judgment 2025 cases
Poland: 55 cases - 49 AP/ARs received, 6 awaited, all of which are from 2025 or 2024 final judgment cases
Hungary: 52 cases - 49 AP/ARs received, 3 awaited, all of which are from 2025 final judgment cases
Azerbaijan: 51 cases - 39 AP/ARs received, 5 not required, 7 awaited, 3 of which are 2024 final judgment cases

Comments:
First, sorry for my blooper in missing Bulgaria when I looked through the CoM/DEJ list. This reply has included it in its proper place, squeezed in between the two parts of the quoted original list above. That means Italy is in sixth place rather than fifth place.

One possible bit of good news is that Italy appears to have caught up a bit in its AP/AR responsibility; the oldest cases lacking an AP/AR have final judgments in 2018. Since Knox v. Italy is of final judgment 2019, one can hope an AP/AR for it will arrive at the CoM/DEJ fairly soon. Just don't hold your breath.


Now I'll call attention to the spot that Italy lands in for the number of pending leading ECHR cases before the supervision of the CoM/DEJ. Note that all the CoE states immediately above or below Italy in the list of pending leading cases are all former component states of the Soviet Union or satellite states of the former Soviet Union. Therefore, their efforts to produce a human rights-respecting democratic modern state are ongoing and incomplete. Turkiye is an exception, since it was never in the Soviet bloc, but it too has problems with ensuring the human rights of its people. Italy is a state that likewise has problems with ensuring the human rights of those living or visiting Italy.

 

[Mojo]

Use the search function or the back arrow. I sense you are just being frivolous.

I've used the search function and the back arrow; I have found no trace of your answers to the questions. Since you are unable to link to them yourself it is reasonable to conclude that they don't exist.