• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Vixen said:
If that person, charged with murder, was well known nationally because of the sensationalist news reports, then yes, you do get cranks coming forward.
Click to expand...
So now Tramontano and his girlfriend are "cranks" in addition to her lying in order to "naturally" support her BF.

In his deposition, he also says Monika (his GF) called 113 to report the burglary:
I was scared and ran away and went back upstairs. Meanwhile my girlfriend had alerted 113. In the meantime, the boy managed to escape, and I was waiting for a police car to arrive.
Click to expand...
Why would he lie about that when it's common knowledge that these calls are recorded or at least logged in with the pertinent info?

Vixen said:
It's all very well only coming forward weeks later. A least at the Milan nursery, police witnessed RG on the premises so had probable cause to prosecute.
Click to expand...
He contacted the police when he saw the photos of Guede in the paper after his arrest. Since the burglary was the 1 or 2 of Sept., of course it was "weeks later". How could it be earlier?
 
Vixen said:
I didn't say it was discounted. I said it didn't much strengthen his claim because of the third-party thing.
Click to expand...
What you claimed is this:

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.
Click to expand...
You're attempting to discount Monika's verification of Christian's deposition because she's his girlfriend.
 
Vixen said:
I was referring to what Bastistelli testified. He was the one who noticed lack of affect and hanging back.
Click to expand...
AFTER their arrest where everything is re-evaluated looking through guilt-colored glasses.

Vixen said:
Then you had her ringing her mother in the USA west coast pacific time (4:00am) ahead of the door being kicked down.
Click to expand...
AFTER her first trip where she was spooked by what she'd seen in the bathrooms. Take off the guilt-colored glasses and you just may see things have entirely plausible and innocent reasons.

Vixen said:
This was the FIRST time Knox had rung home since being in Italy! In court she claimed she couldn't remember it much to Edda's surprise..
Click to expand...
What was the COST of a trans-Atlantic call vs. a text in 2007?
Considering everything that happened that day, including multiple calls, it shouldn't be surprising that she'd forget a call.
 
Stacyhs said:
TruthCalls has already corrected you on when she called Edda.

"Some think". Some can't think their way out of wet paper bag.
Click to expand...

Vixen's posts, and the "arguments" they contain, betray a bitter and vindictive anger that she read this crime so wrong, and that the actual critical thinkers on this forum got things so right. It was patently obvious to those of us who have a sufficient understanding of the "evidence" in the trial process against Knox and Sollecito, that all the forensic "evidence" against them was entirely bogus.

And we knew this from 2009 onwards, thanks to the exposition of the forensic "evidence" in the Massei trial, together with the egregiously unlawful judgement by his court. It was abundantly clear to those of us with sufficient intellect and analytical ability that the PMs and the convicting courts in this case behaved just as they had done in the bad old days of inquisitorial "justice", wherein the PM was viewed by the court as representing the "truth" of the crime and challenging the defence to disabuse the court of this "truth" - otherwise the court would merely and meekly accept the PM's position as binding.

between 2007 and 2013 at least, Italian criminal justice was still an abominable, unscientific and unlawful warping of natural justice and the adversarial justice principles. We educated and well-informed commentators here on JREFF/ISF could easily spot this. And we were vindicated by the ultimate decision of the Marasca SC panel. Vixen's posts demonstrate a blind, illogical, ill-informed and legally/forensically inept attempt to yell into the abyss. We were right, and the pro-guilt ignoramuses (who probably now number in the low single figures) were/are wrong. End of.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Vixen's posts, and the "arguments" they contain, betray a bitter and vindictive anger that she read this crime so wrong, and that the actual critical thinkers on this forum got things so right. It was patently obvious to those of us who have a sufficient understanding of the "evidence" in the trial process against Knox and Sollecito, that all the forensic "evidence" against them was entirely bogus.

And we knew this from 2009 onwards, thanks to the exposition of the forensic "evidence" in the Massei trial, together with the egregiously unlawful judgement by his court. It was abundantly clear to those of us with sufficient intellect and analytical ability that the PMs and the convicting courts in this case behaved just as they had done in the bad old days of inquisitorial "justice", wherein the PM was viewed by the court as representing the "truth" of the crime and challenging the defence to disabuse the court of this "truth" - otherwise the court would merely and meekly accept the PM's position as binding.

between 2007 and 2013 at least, Italian criminal justice was still an abominable, unscientific and unlawful warping of natural justice and the adversarial justice principles. We educated and well-informed commentators here on JREFF/ISF could easily spot this. And we were vindicated by the ultimate decision of the Marasca SC panel. Vixen's posts demonstrate a blind, illogical, ill-informed and legally/forensically inept attempt to yell into the abyss. We were right, and the pro-guilt ignoramuses (who probably now number in the low single figures) were/are wrong. End of.
Click to expand...
The problems with the Italian justice system did not end in 2013. They continue to this day, as evidenced by the status of the many (75) leading final judgment ECHR cases pending, many without even an initial Action Plan, before the CoE Committee. And also evidenced by the re-conviction of Knox for calunnia in another deeply flawed re-trial. Even as the Marasca CSC panel verdict and MR correctly acquitted Knox and Sollecito on the murder/rape charges, the MR went out of its way to reinforce the wrongful view that there was lawful evidence independent of the violations of Knox's human rights that could be used against her to re-convict her of calunnia, even in the face of an ECHR finding of an unfair trial.
 
TruthCalls said:
Wrong. The last call between Amanda and Filomena was at 12:34, and that's when she told her about the window. Amanda then called her mother to tell her about the broken window at 12:47, and it was during that call that Edda told her to call the police and Chris said to get out of the house. The Postal Police arrived well after that, while both Amanda and Raffaele were waiting outside. And Raffaele absolutely called the Carabinieri before the Postal's arrived, as proven in court, and as accepted by all courts but Nenicni.
Click to expand...
Naughty. That is not true. Nencini established, after receiving fresh evidence of video footage, that the postal police arrived before RS rang his sister (..!) in the Carabinieri, some twenty minutes after FILOMENA rang AK, 12:34. His call 12:54. Vanessa advised him to call the the police. You say Knox didn't know the window was smashed until as of the time FR called her, and shortly after the cops arrived. If the pair only knew about the smashed window as of that moment, HOW WAS SOLLECITO ABLE TO TELL THE COPS ON THE PHONE, 'NOTHING HAS BEEN TAKEN'"?
 
Stacyhs said:
Earlier you claimed they wanted to "distance themselves". How is being there when the body is discovered distancing themselves?

Why would it be any more suspicious than Laura, Filomena, and the boys downstairs not being there? Is it any more suspicious than Filomena being at the fair?

They had no idea that Filomena would bring Paola or that Marco and Luca would also come so no crowd was anticipated to 'mingle with' in the first place. They were there alone when RS called 112 and they had no idea how long it would take Filomena to arrive. The carabinieri office isn't far from the cottage (just north of RS's apartment) and they would have arrived earlier except for having trouble finding the cottage, even having to call to get directions.

Why on earth would they think anyone suspected them immediately?
"Even ghoulishness".......oh, for Christ's sake. You just can't help injecting your own fantasies.


That's why she tried to see if she could see into her window from the terrace. You call it 'foolish' while I see it as deep concern.


Injecting your own guilt spin yet again. There were 6 people in addition to them in that corridor. The later arrivals and the police had naturally gone to the end of the corridor where they could see the bedrooms and bathroom and then backed up so Luca could kick down the door. But leave it to you to see that as RS and AK hanging back intentionally for some nefarious reason.


First you say that AK hung back when she should have been at the door out of concern for her "dear friend" and then complain that she didn't call FR immediately about a broken window instead of trying to see into MK's bedroom out of concern for her. I get whiplash from your posts.
Click to expand...
Distance themselves as in, letting A.N. Other find the body.
 
Stacyhs said:
True. And the only evidence of anyone in that room aside from Kercher was Guede.


No one disputes it happened after the murder so why harp on about it? And I fixed you typo for you.


Which shows the glass was broken before the murder.

Oh, god...that one yet again? No matter how many times Garofano's false claim is countered by other forensic experts, you just keep repeating it.


There was zero, zippo, zilch forensic trace of Knox is MK's room at all, even though she was supposed to have violently struggled with MK and forcibly held her down, according to your story. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you want it.

No one has claimed but you that "he was supposed to have come in all muddy and leafy through her window". In fact, we've said just the opposite.
Click to expand...
No DNA of AK in the room even though HER lamp was on Mez' floor. Did she wipe her DNA off it, then?
 
Stacyhs said:
So now Tramontano and his girlfriend are "cranks" in addition to her lying in order to "naturally" support her BF.

In his deposition, he also says Monika (his GF) called 113 to report the burglary:

Why would he lie about that when it's common knowledge that these calls are recorded or at least logged in with the pertinent info?


He contacted the police when he saw the photos of Guede in the paper after his arrest. Since the burglary was the 1 or 2 of Sept., of course it was "weeks later". How could it be earlier?
Click to expand...
It would depend on whether Taramantano was another of RS' friends, like Popovic. What did the court have to say about his allegations?
 
Vixen said:
I don't answer hypothetical questions. I abhor what-if, would could and should nonsense. There needs to be context.
Click to expand...
You say this, while proposing the following:

Vixen said:
Because they wanted to be there when the body was found. If they were not there it might be suspicious but to mingle with the crowd and gauge everyone's reactions, to carefully watch whether anyone suspects them, even ghoulishness. In her email to her 25 contacts AK said she had been frantically worried about Mez, banging on her door, calling her name, trying to look in her window (an incredibly foolish enterprise given it was fourteen feet off the ground at the back), it was all very strange that in reality, she wasn't at the forefront of when the door was kicked down to see whether her dear friend was all right. Instead, the pair hung back in the kitchen. Whilst Filomena was freaking out and having a meltdown, AK was telling the cop it wasn't unusual for the door to be locked. She didn't even tell Filomena her window was smashed until FR rang HER, after the police had already arrived, to let her know. FR rang AK, not the other way round.
Click to expand...

You make up a fantasy about how Amanda acted and what was on her mind, using hyperbole and misrepresentations. In your little fantasy world and Amanda's "ghoulishness", wouldn't it have made more sense for her to be at the forefront to see her work again? Break down at the sight of the body to show how it affected her? You should work on your fanfic.

Also in your fantasy world, a locked door distances one from the murder scene more than actual distance.
 
Stacyhs said:
AFTER their arrest where everything is re-evaluated looking through guilt-colored glasses.


AFTER her first trip where she was spooked by what she'd seen in the bathrooms. Take off the guilt-colored glasses and you just may see things have entirely plausible and innocent reasons.


What was the COST of a trans-Atlantic call vs. a text in 2007?
Considering everything that happened that day, including multiple calls, it shouldn't be surprising that she'd forget a call.
Click to expand...
That might be a fair point. Hindsight colouring one's view of an event. For example, the convicted murderer and suddenly everyone from his past comes forward with tales of how weird he was and of telling signs. Yes, hindsight and confirmation bias is a real thing. Good point. However, Battistelli wrote his report immediately on returning to the police station. When he gave his deposition re the murder scene would have been long before the pair were charged some eight months later and probably before they were arrested, although, of course, he will have been interviewed more than once.
 
Disbelief said:
You say this, while proposing the following:



You make up a fantasy about how Amanda acted and what was on her mind, using hyperbole and misrepresentations. In your little fantasy world and Amanda's "ghoulishness", wouldn't it have made more sense for her to be at the forefront to see her work again? Break down at the sight of the body to show how it affected her? You should work on your fanfic.

Also in your fantasy world, a locked door distances one from the murder scene more than actual distance.
Click to expand...
In order to understand a murder scene, it is important to establish what happened immediately before, during and after it. So it does become salient as to who was where, who said what, who made a phone call and at what time.
 
Vixen said:
In order to understand a murder scene, it is important to establish what happened immediately before, during and after it. So it does become salient as to who was where, who said what, who made a phone call and at what time.
Click to expand...
Which has ◊◊◊◊ all nothing to do with a locked door providing more distance than actual distance. You use the same stupid justifications for your position as 9/11 truthers.
 
Vixen said:
Naughty. That is not true. Nencini established, after receiving fresh evidence of video footage, that the postal police arrived before RS rang his sister (..!) in the Carabinieri, some twenty minutes after FILOMENA rang AK, 12:34. His call 12:54. Vanessa advised him to call the the police. You say Knox didn't know the window was smashed until as of the time FR called her, and shortly after the cops arrived. If the pair only knew about the smashed window as of that moment, HOW WAS SOLLECITO ABLE TO TELL THE COPS ON THE PHONE, 'NOTHING HAS BEEN TAKEN'"?
Click to expand...
Who cares what Nencini established. He got a lot wrong, and his court was the ONLY court to come to this conclusion. Further, there was no new or "fresh evidence of video footage", he just chose to re-swizzle what the other courts concluded.

It was proven in the Massei trial that the garage CCTV clock was 10 minutes SLOW. The very first time the Postal Police's Fiat is seen on CCTV is at 12:36. At 12:41 the Fiat is again seen driving past the gate, and an image believed to be Battistelli is seen walking away from the cottage towards the Fiat. At 12:48 two figures appear to meet and talk near the gate, one of which is believed to be Battistelli. Given the clock is 10 minutes slow, it shows them actually arriving at 12:58, which is AFTER the call to 112. This timeline is also consistent with what Amanda and Raffaele told the Postal Police when they arrived, that they were surprised the Carabinieri arrived so soon after calling them, only to learn they weren't the Carabinieri.

No, that is NOT what I said. I said Amanda told Filomena of the broken window during her last call with her at 12:34. I made no mention of when she learned the window was broken, but I think we all know they both said it was discovered shortly after their arrival at the cottage and it was at that time that Amanda told Raffaele it didn't appear like anything was stolen. Raffaele called the Carabinieri about 20 minutes after Amanda spoke with Filomena last, or 12:54. THAT'S how he was able to tell the Carabinieri that nothing was stolen. The Postal Police arrived shortly after that, and the Carabinieri arrived roughly 30 minutes after that (they called Amanda's phone at 13:29 looking for directions).
 
Welshman said:
As per usual Vixen can't provide any evidence to support her claim which proves the claim is a lie.
Click to expand...
Welshman, I'm not sure why this is even an issue. I would imagine it very unlikely Amanda never once spoke with her mother after arriving in Italy, but even if that were the case, how does that make her calling her mother the morning of the discovery even remotely suspicious? She called her after having found the cottage door open, blood in the bathroom and an unflushed toilet. It's very reasonable to conclude she was distressed, and she turned to the person she trusted the most for advice and comfort. Further, that she forgot she called her mother, an action that was not the least bit suspect or incriminating, proves just how distressed she was, further proven by the fact she forgot she replied to Lumumba the night of the murder. Neither of these actions were the least bit suspicious, yet she forgot them. That Vixen thinks there's some 'value' to these facts speaks far more of Vixen and her motives than Amanda.
 
TruthCalls said:
Welshman, I'm not sure why this is even an issue. I would imagine it very unlikely Amanda never once spoke with her mother after arriving in Italy, but even if that were the case, how does that make her calling her mother the morning of the discovery even remotely suspicious? She called her after having found the cottage door open, blood in the bathroom and an unflushed toilet. It's very reasonable to conclude she was distressed, and she turned to the person she trusted the most for advice and comfort. Further, that she forgot she called her mother, an action that was not the least bit suspect or incriminating, proves just how distressed she was, further proven by the fact she forgot she replied to Lumumba the night of the murder. Neither of these actions were the least bit suspicious, yet she forgot them. That Vixen thinks there's some 'value' to these facts speaks far more of Vixen and her motives than Amanda.
Click to expand...
A point I keep making is how do you explain the arguments Vixen has resort to if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was a slum dunk. Why is it necessary to make something normal such as phoning your mother sound incriminating which reeks of desperation. Why resort to unsupported claims such as Amanda had never phoned her mother prior to the morning Meredith's body was discovered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom