Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[shuttlt]

How is what people are saying on the Internet, in English, destroying the lives of Amanda and Raffaele?

It doesn't. In the scheme of things the profile of this forum and PMF is so close to zero as to not be worth counting. Skeptical Bystander has given a few interviews, so I suppose she counts for more than the rest of us,but even then, it's the events of November 2007 that have destroyed them, everything else is just consequences from that. Most of us are just driving by on the motorway turning out heads to look at an accident.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

How is what people are saying on the Internet, in English, destroying the lives of Amanda and Raffaele?

I didn't say they were actually succeeding. They don't have the power that they think they have. I said they have tried. There little friends like Harry Rag have spread lies all over the internet for 2 years.

 

[Fulcanelli]

The English always talk about the weather to foreigners, it doesn't make us meteorologists.

Indeed. The English are obsessed about the weather, the Italians are obsessed about food.

Yet, we (the English) are fatter and less healthy. Maybe it's better to obsess about food which is something we can change, rather then the weather which is something we cannot.

Apologies for the whimsical philosophical interlude

 

[Bruce Fischer]

It doesn't. In the scheme of things the profile of this forum and PMF is so close to zero as to not be worth counting. Skeptical Bystander has given a few interviews, so I suppose she counts for more than the rest of us. Most of us are just driving by on the motorway turning out heads to look at an accident.

Once again, they are having little success, there are only a few of them. Next to no one reads PMF. I read it because I find it interesting to watch people who feel important. Of course I have to anonymous surf because they blocked my ISP. I think that is very funny. Block Bruce from reading PMF. He is an Intruder!

They won't succeed in their efforts. That doesn't mean that they are not trying. Harry Rag "The Machine" has tried the hardest. His lies have been posted everywhere. Of course they always link back to true justice and PMF.

I love Kermits powerpoints. They are very scientific. They prove without a doubt that Amanda is guilty. I am surprised that Mignini didn't show those in court with his ridiculous cartoon.

 

[shuttlt]

Of course, all evidence is always accepted 100% of the time. Courts never throw out anything.

I am talking on JREF. the phrase "screw up" is fine for use here. Of course in court you would use professional language to describe the "screw up"

Why is so much time wasted on this board explaining simple logic. Do you really not know what I mean when I say "screwed up"


Are we on the same planet?

Bruce,

"screw up" covers a lot of ground. Presumably you don't mean that the evidence should be excluded just because it was an error, and therefore a "screw up", not collecting it on day one. You mean to say that it should be excluded on the basis of some argument about contamination. Try to be more specific. Personally, I felt like I was walking into a trap where, if I said it was a "screw up" not to have collected the bra clasp, unless I was very specific about my answer,I would be agreeing that the bra should be thrown out.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I didn't say they were actually succeeding. They don't have the power that they think they have. I said they have tried. There little friends like Harry Rag have spread lies all over the internet for 2 years.

What about the lies your site spreads. You know, the ones that have repeatedly been pointed out and evidence provided and yet you continue to refuse to change your site to eliminate these lies (switching from arguing how important the details are to how trivial they really are and back again).

Edit: If they're really trivial details, then why fight against updating your site to be more factually accurate? Surely since they're trivial details, it shouldn't affect the conclusions that are drawn from someone perusing your site...

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

So then if bleaching a surface removes any trace of DNA, how did the contamination happen in a lab that bleaches all surfaces regularly?


Doh. Misstepped again there, Bruce.

That's why machines in labs have levels of reliability. Labs can only be kept so clean. When you ignore those limits you get unreliable results. That is what happened in this case.

How did the knife get tot the cottage Bob? Remember, the murder wasn't premeditated.

 

[Alt+F4]

Of course, all evidence is always accepted 100% of the time. Courts never throw out anything.

Again, do you have any case studies where DNA evidence was thrown out of a criminal court in Italy (or anywhere else) based on nothing other than an accusation of "screwing up"?

Of course in court you would use professional language to describe the "screw up"

Wouldn't evidence be needed?

Do you really not know what I mean when I say "screwed up"

If you don't mind, can you provide a legal or scientific definition?

 

[shuttlt]

Bruce,

I'm posting this to keep it current rather than to nag. Could you at some point provide the quote from Amanda's appeal document supporting this:

The Italian supreme court. If you are a suspect you must be offered an attorney.

The police treated her as a suspect. They did not formally make her a suspect so that they could avoid dealing with an attorney.

This will be addressed on appeal. I am not making this up. This is listed in Amanda's appeal.

Also, how's it going with the hunt for the clip of Giobbi taking about the suspicious pizza?

 

[Alt+F4]

That's why machines in labs have levels of reliability. Labs can only be kept so clean. When you ignore those limits you get unreliable results. That is what happened in this case.

So which is it then? Did the contamination occur when the clasp was picked up or in the lab?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

What about the lies your site spreads. You know, the ones that have repeatedly been pointed out and evidence provided and yet you continue to refuse to change your site to eliminate these lies (switching from arguing how important the details are to how trivial they really are and back again).

Edit: If they're really trivial details, then why fight against updating your site to be more factually accurate? Surely since they're trivial details, it shouldn't affect the conclusions that are drawn from someone perusing your site...

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?

Point them out Bob. I corrected the only error that has been proven. I corrected the information about the soap.

Make me a list Bob. By the time you finish reading my site you will realize that you have been wrong all along.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Why should they talk to you here? Are the signatures not proof enough that they agree with the petition?

I know the petition bothers you because it is written by experts that disagree with you but sometimes you just have to deal with things in life.

The two of them? They don't have to talk to anyone 'here', they can talk to anyone 'anywhere', except they're not talking to anyone anywhere, are they?

Or is their purpose scientific dictate rather then scientific debate?

And no, signatures are not enough (which basically mean...'Because I said so').

 

[tsig]

I didn't say they were actually succeeding. They don't have the power that they think they have. I said they have tried. There little friends like Harry Rag have spread lies all over the internet for 2 years.

As far as I know there's no Italian judges registered at JREF and I doubt that they go to the internet for evidence.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

What about the lies your site spreads. You know, the ones that have repeatedly been pointed out and evidence provided and yet you continue to refuse to change your site to eliminate these lies (switching from arguing how important the details are to how trivial they really are and back again).

Edit: If they're really trivial details, then why fight against updating your site to be more factually accurate? Surely since they're trivial details, it shouldn't affect the conclusions that are drawn from someone perusing your site...

Does your hypocrisy know no bounds?

The two of them? They don't have to talk to anyone 'here', they can talk to anyone 'anywhere', except they're not talking to anyone anywhere, are they?

Or is their purpose scientific dictate rather then scientific debate?

And no, signatures are not enough (which basically mean...'Because I said so').

They provided an expert opinion.

 

[Alt+F4]

I didn't say they were actually succeeding.

First you say they are destroying the lives of Amanda and Raffaele, now you say they are not actually succeeding. Which is it?

 

[Fulcanelli]

I have already edited the very minor error that I made about the soap.

I asked you for the list of all of the factual errors on my site.

Why don't you make a power point showing me? Hey why not cut out some shapes with construction paper and paste them on a mural. Better yet, why not draw me a picture with crayons.

Yeah, so 'minor' you used it to assert he had a dishwasher and that his DNA wasn't on his own knife because he'd washed it in the dishwasher.

So, what's the new reason?

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Point them out Bob. I corrected the only error that has been proven. I corrected the information about the soap.

Make me a list Bob. By the time you finish reading my site you will realize that you have been wrong all along.

Kermit has pointed out a few errors on your site regarding Mignini and his connection with the Monster of Florence case.

Have you updated your site to reflect the information Kermit has presented you?

 

[shuttlt]

How did the knife get tot the cottage Bob? Remember, the murder wasn't premeditated.

1. Random chance, had it not been there they'd have grabbed one from the kitchen, or just stuck with the one knife.
2. They planned something a bit scary, but not murder, and picked it up because you could do a nice 'Psycho' action with it.
3. Amanda had been carrying it about with her for protection.

Doubtless there are others. Personally I find 3 pretty unconvincing. I hope the report makes it seem more plausible that it has been put thus far.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I am done here for today. I think I have wasted enough time. I think I will go talk to my fish now. The results will be the same, I will talk and they will swim in circles.

 

[odeed]

Point them out Bob. I corrected the only error that has been proven. I corrected the information about the soap.

Make me a list Bob. By the time you finish reading my site you will realize that you have been wrong all along.

Sorry to nitpick, but I might of missed the full discussion on this, but did Sollecito apartment have a dishwasher?