Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
shuttlt said:
Fulcanelli,

how's the translation coming on? It'll be nice when we have an injection of new information to go over.
Click to expand...

It's coming along well. 35 portions have been translated with 13 sections totally completed and 6 other sections are being translated as we speak.
 
Shuttit wrote:

But nobody is saying that any given adolescent is remotely likely to turn out to be "a homicidal nut", or even that, prior to the murder, Amanda was necessarily particularly likely to kill someone. Surely the fact that someone she lived with was murdered alters the odds enormously? It's ludicrous to apply the same odds before and after we know a murder has been committed.

I don't agree with your reasoning. Kelly Michaels was convicted of molesting dozens of kids on a daily basis over a period of months. Does that change the odds of her being a child molester? No, because she didn't actually molest any kids. Michael Crowe's sister was murdered and he confessed to doing it. Does that change the odds of him being a murderer? No, because it was a false confession and he had nothing to do with the murder.
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
Shuttit wrote:

But nobody is saying that any given adolescent is remotely likely to turn out to be "a homicidal nut", or even that, prior to the murder, Amanda was necessarily particularly likely to kill someone. Surely the fact that someone she lived with was murdered alters the odds enormously? It's ludicrous to apply the same odds before and after we know a murder has been committed.

I don't agree with your reasoning. Kelly Michaels was convicted of molesting dozens of kids on a daily basis over a period of months. Does that change the odds of her being a child molester? No, because she didn't actually molest any kids. Michael Crowe's sister was murdered and he confessed to doing it. Does that change the odds of him being a murderer? No, because it was a false confession and he had nothing to do with the murder.
Click to expand...

But you are using those sorts of examples to try and prove that those sorts of crimes by those sorts of people don't happen, which is patently false, because in the process you are ignoring the may crimes where they 'did' do it.

You are cherry picking and then trying to use those to paint a picture of 'these sorts of people never commit these sorts of crimes and going further still to try and use them as proof that Knox didn't do it when those crimes have nothing whatsoever to do with this one.

In short, you are trying write 'laws' and use those to make pronouncements under your arbitrary laws.
 
Fulcanelli said:
Shuttit, I would strongly advise that you NOT do that. Doing so is more likely to lead to confusion and misinterpretation then understanding. It is best to have patience and wait for a professional translation to be done.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the concern. To be honest about all one can tell is that the report goes into A LOT of detail. Pages and pages about allele's. I don't think though it would be more confusing than chewing over things Google throws up that none of us are qualified to understand.

An example of what I've got is:

basic clinical mere hypotheses and deductions ( "since © has not been mentioned in any RTIGF
concentration of DNA that estxattomderiviamo quam of
DNA extracted à © that was put in the mix of PCR and that a maximum of 10 mcl
means that the total DNA used in the reaction was 1.14 ng to
maximum ") and a report of the DNA of the victim and the conuibutori
rnisura 10 to 1 Tagliabracci evaluated by the same, as we have seen, in excess.
Passanclo then for alliriterpretazione which should boil down to the track 165B
of Raffaele Sollecito, interpretaziorme offered by Dr. Stefanoni and
shared by Dr. Torricelli, Professor, Tagliabracci examined various loci
gene to challenge this interpretation and demonstrate € ™ error. It should however
immediately revealed that the 15 loci gerrjci piih qdello sex, the ncostituent · 1
full profile, prof. Tagliabracci challenged the interpretation of some € ™
Soltari of these loci: the D21S11 (pages 55 and 65 of the transcript of the minutes of
hearing), the D5S818 (p. 59), the D7SB_20 (p. 67); the CSFIPO (p. 68), the D16
A (page 70). With rilerimento to D5S818 has however observed that: "Now I do not
I can say that here there is also a reminder, but there arxche urn third person
has a genotype different "(p. 71 minutes hearing). In its statement dated 15
July 2009 filed all'udier1za of 14/9/2009 lâ € ™ i11terpretazione exposed by
Dr. Stefanoni been challenged and even corn reference acl other loci. Based
consideraziorni carried out in the report of the Professor. Tagliabracci argues that (
genotypic combinations portarno possible to affirm that "the profile of
Raffaele Sollecito is not compatible with those who have contributed to
track 165B for seguemti loci ": D8S1179, D21S11, D7S820, CSF1PO;
D16S539, D5S818, FGA. From these findings it appears that for the other loci, in
higher number then the profile of Raffaele Sollecito would be compatible and
would arxche for the locus D5S818 as indicated by the same consultant
the hearing (see also p. 71).. This results in a large number of loci
not contested, that number is higher than that of the loci
claims exceeds the number of six loci corn respect of which the prof.
Tagliabracci said earlier, when there are not enough
atbuali systems "there bastavamfacevamo assumptions with six loci" (p.
Click to expand...

I think the translators can rest easy knowing that I am not going to detract from their glory. If anyone does want to hire me for translation services at $10 per page, please feel free to PM me. :D
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
Shuttit wrote:

But nobody is saying that any given adolescent is remotely likely to turn out to be "a homicidal nut", or even that, prior to the murder, Amanda was necessarily particularly likely to kill someone. Surely the fact that someone she lived with was murdered alters the odds enormously? It's ludicrous to apply the same odds before and after we know a murder has been committed.

I don't agree with your reasoning. Kelly Michaels was convicted of molesting dozens of kids on a daily basis over a period of months. Does that change the odds of her being a child molester? No, because she didn't actually molest any kids. Michael Crowe's sister was murdered and he confessed to doing it. Does that change the odds of him being a murderer? No, because it was a false confession and he had nothing to do with the murder.
Click to expand...
Are child molesters normally deranged strangers, or somewhat closer to home?
 
Charlie Wilkes said:
But that doesn't mean any given adolescent may unexpectedly turn out to be a homicidal nut. If that were the case, no one could ever trust their kids with a babysitter.
Click to expand...

Everyone is capable of committing a homicide. It has little to do with trusting your babysitter.
 
shuttlt said:
I appreciate the concern. To be honest about all one can tell is that the report goes into A LOT of detail. Pages and pages about allele's. I don't think though it would be more confusing than chewing over things Google throws up that none of us are qualified to understand.

An example of what I've got is:



I think the translators can rest easy knowing that I am not going to detract from their glory. If anyone does want to hire me for translation services at $10 per page, please feel free to PM me. :D
Click to expand...

I for one object to the gerrjci piih qdello. Looks like contamination to me.
 
stilicho said:
I for one object to the gerrjci piih qdello. Looks like contamination to me.
Click to expand...
Nonsense, I will defend my translation to the last breath and confidently predict Fulcanelli's translation will support me! If I posted "gerrjci piih qdello", then that's what the report says. I think perhaps Massei had a stroke while dictating.
 
Given that there are technical terms like "gerrjci piih qdello", I guess we can all appreciate the translators have their work cut out.
 
Reading the Barbie Nadeau book. She has this to say about the knife:


"Stefanoni tested the blade sample alone in her lab. Her notes indicated that her initial finding was, as she wrote in English on the report, "too low". But then she amplified the settings of her equipment to the very limit of Italian and International guidelines. Only then did she find a match to Meredith's DNA. Because she had no material left to double-test, the result should have been thrown out-no forensic protocol allows for single-tested evidence. But the prosecutors took it anyway and built their case around it."
 
Fulcanelli said:
Perhaps you could give us a link to where Mignini mooted a 'demonic ritual' in the trial. I must have missed that day's proceedings.
Click to expand...

In Nadeau's book she confirms that Mignini was behind the "satanic ritual" scenario and tried to introduce it multiple times (at the pre-trial and end of the trial) in court, but the judge rejected it each time. She also confirms his relationship with the psychic. She states he brought her in during the Monster of Florence case to "advise him personally on Satanic signs and symbols". She continues by stating that when Mignini first got involved in the Kercher case he "thought he had stumbled on another Satanic rite".

The whole "satanic ritual" aspect of this case is not due to any exaggerations made by Preston or Sollecito's lawyers. They came directly from Mignini.
 
Malkmus said:
Reading the Barbie Nadeau book. She has this to say about the knife:


"Stefanoni tested the blade sample alone in her lab. Her notes indicated that her initial finding was, as she wrote in English on the report, "too low". But then she amplified the settings of her equipment to the very limit of Italian and International guidelines. Only then did she find a match to Meredith's DNA. Because she had no material left to double-test, the result should have been thrown out-no forensic protocol allows for single-tested evidence. But the prosecutors took it anyway and built their case around it."
Click to expand...

Welcome to the JREF.

By a strange coincidence, your first post here is an exact copy of this post to a CBS comments site:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20000775-504083.html

by where_oh_where March 19, 2010 4:11 PM EDT From the new barbie nadeau book:
""Stefanoni tested the blade sample alone in her lab. Her notes indicated that her initial finding was, as she wrote in English on the report, "too low". But then she amplified the settings of her equipment to the very limit of Italian and International guidelines. Only then did she find a match to Meredith's DNA. Because she had no material left to double-test, the result should have been thrown out-no forensic protocol allows for single-tested evidence. But the prosecutors took it anyway and built their case around it.""
Click to expand...

Are you sure you read the Barbie Nadeau book? Or just the comment on the CBS site?
 
Malkmus said:
Reading the Barbie Nadeau book. She has this to say about the knife:


"Stefanoni tested the blade sample alone in her lab. Her notes indicated that her initial finding was, as she wrote in English on the report, "too low". But then she amplified the settings of her equipment to the very limit of Italian and International guidelines. Only then did she find a match to Meredith's DNA. Because she had no material left to double-test, the result should have been thrown out-no forensic protocol allows for single-tested evidence. But the prosecutors took it anyway and built their case around it."
Click to expand...

Fair enough, it's 'opinion' and Ms Nadeau's entitled to it. But it isn't Italian law.

I could go into further detail of explaining exactly 'why' it was accepted, but strangely enough I can't be bothered.
 
Malkmus said:
In Nadeau's book she confirms that Mignini was behind the "satanic ritual" scenario and tried to introduce it multiple times (at the pre-trial and end of the trial) in court, but the judge rejected it each time. She also confirms his relationship with the psychic. She states he brought her in during the Monster of Florence case to "advise him personally on Satanic signs and symbols". She continues by stating that when Mignini first got involved in the Kercher case he "thought he had stumbled on another Satanic rite".

The whole "satanic ritual" aspect of this case is not due to any exaggerations made by Preston or Sollecito's lawyers. They came directly from Mignini.
Click to expand...

Ms Nadeau was not in the pre-trial, no reporter was...it was behind closed doors. The only direct information came out of the court room from the lawyers that appeared on the steps after. The only people to mention anything 'Satanic' were the Sollecito lawyers and the media duly quoted them...and then after a time didn't even bother reporting that it was the Sollecito lawyers who actually said it and instead directly ascribed the language to Mignini. The only other source from the court room and the truly valid one, is the judge...Judge Micheli. His report makes no mention of any allegations of Satanism, which it surely would have had there been any.

Therefore, the 'Mignini Satanism' argument is little more then a straw man.

However, if you are going to assert that 'they came directly from Mignini', perhaps then you could provide us with a direct quote from Mignini saying it. If he said it, such a quote shouldn't be so hard to find...should it?
 
stilicho said:
Welcome to the JREF.

By a strange coincidence, your first post here is an exact copy of this post to a CBS comments site:

Are you sure you read the Barbie Nadeau book? Or just the comment on the CBS site?
Click to expand...

I'm sure that quote is going to be recycled a lot. Yes, I'm sure I read the book, or as I said "reading" it. I'm about 70 percent done with it. It did just come out last night, so I did try to squeeze some sleep in too, and now I'm at work. That is a coincidence, I assure you. I'll be done reading it by tonight. In the meantime, you can quiz me on it if you desire further proof. I recommend it to anyone interested in the case, whether pro-Amanda or not. It offers plenty of fodder for both sides, much of which I'm sure will be discussed here. She kills many of the rumors laid by both sides.

The book is very interesting so far. To sum up what I've read, Nadeau casts a lot of doubt on the majority of the forensic evidence (pretty much all of it, except for the drop of blood in Filomena's room), but puts a lot of weight in to the circumstantial, mainly Amanda's behavior and their back and forth alibis.
 
stilicho said:
Are you sure you read the Barbie Nadeau book? Or just the comment on the CBS site?
Click to expand...

If he copied that from the CBS site he should file his application for the $1 Million Paranormal Challenge. :)


And welcome to JREF Malkmus.

It's obvious what brought you here but now that you've taken the time to sign up, I hope you will also take some time to browse the other discussions that JREF offers.
 
Last edited:
Malkmus said:
I'm sure that quote is going to be recycled a lot. Yes, I'm sure I read the book, or as I said "reading" it.
Click to expand...

Where did you buy it? I thought it wasn't released yet. ( Source: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Angel-Face-Student-Killer-Amanda/dp/0984295135 ) It could be it's been released somewhere but just not available on Amazon.

It's odd that Ms Nadeau would argue that the prosecution built their case around the DNA results. The original reason for pursuing multiple attackers was actually the medical examiner's report and not the DNA results. The second reason was AK's accusation against Mr Lumumba. I don't even think the DNA results were anywhere close to completion by the time those two things happened.

Was that quote recycled? Or were you inspired by its earlier appearance at the CBS news site? Do you have a page number cite from Ms Nadeau's book?
 
stilicho said:
Where did you buy it? I thought it wasn't released yet. ( Source: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Angel-Face-Student-Killer-Amanda/dp/0984295135 ) It could be it's been released somewhere but just not available on Amazon.

It's odd that Ms Nadeau would argue that the prosecution built their case around the DNA results. The original reason for pursuing multiple attackers was actually the medical examiner's report and not the DNA results. The second reason was AK's accusation against Mr Lumumba. I don't even think the DNA results were anywhere close to completion by the time those two things happened.

Was that quote recycled? Or were you inspired by its earlier appearance at the CBS news site? Do you have a page number cite from Ms Nadeau's book?
Click to expand...

It's downloadable as an ebook.
 
stilicho said:
Where did you buy it? I thought it wasn't released yet. It could be it's been released somewhere but just not available on Amazon.
Click to expand...

I bought it from Amazon last night as soon as it was available at midnight. It's the Kindle version. The paperback is not available yet. You can buy it now and use the Kindle reader app.

stilicho said:
Was that quote recycled? Or were you inspired by its earlier appearance at the CBS news site? Do you have a page number cite from Ms Nadeau's book?
Click to expand...

I did not see the CBS story. Not sure why that's so hard to believe. I read up to that passage and last night and posted it here this morning. The Kindle app doesn't let you copy text so I had to type it out manually. Someone else obviously thought the same thing.

Thanks for the welcome, guys :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom