Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[quadraginta]

<snip>

I am still waiting on confirmation in regard to Doug Preston. Either way, it makes no difference on the final conclusion. The discrepancy has to do with the actual time that Preston was questioned by Mignini.

Wow, you guys sure did do an amazing job discrediting me. You should feel proud.

The discrepancy (as you well know) has to do with the portrayal of Mignini as a callous, brutal antagonist, abusing his position and running roughshod over anyone he chose to with impunity. Preston wasn't dragged into Mignini's office in "the middle of the night". He was told he needed to go there and went the next day, apparently at his convenience. This version of events is the one offered by ... wait for it ... Douglas Preston, whose own account of what really transpired is apparently not sufficiently authoritative for you.

Your portrayal was intentionally distorted, and the purpose of that distortion is obvious to anyone with even the least of analytical ability.

Your protestations to the contrary, and sudden dismissal of the import of the Paul Ciolino quote on your website are equally transparent, and equally dishonest.

You don't need the assistance of anyone here to discredit you, you're doing fine without any help.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

The discrepancy (as you well know) has to do with the portrayal of Mignini as a callous, brutal antagonist, abusing his position and running roughshod over anyone he chose to with impunity. Preston wasn't dragged into Mignini's office in "the middle of the night". He was told he needed to go there and went the next day, apparently at his convenience. This version of events is the one offered by ... wait for it ... Douglas Preston, whose own account of what really transpired is apparently not sufficiently authoritative for you.

Your portrayal was intentionally distorted, and the purpose of that distortion is obvious to anyone with even the least of analytical ability.

Your protestations to the contrary, and sudden dismissal of the import of the Paul Ciolino quote on your website are equally transparent, and equally dishonest.

You don't need the assistance of anyone here to discredit you, you're doing fine without any help.

I don't need to distort anything to prove that Mignini is a corrupt man that should be no where near a court room.There is plenty of other information. I don't need the time of Preston's interrogation for that. Once I get confirmation. I will change it.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I don't need to distort anything to prove that Mignini is a corrupt man that should be no where near a court room.There is plenty of other information. I don't need the time of Preston's interrogation for that. Once I get confirmation. I will change it.

If you don't need it, then why insist on using this particular "trivial detail" rather than one of the multitude of others you claim to have?

I mean, really, why not just use one of the others that is, without doubt, accurate?

After all, it is trivial, and thus your website shouldn't be affected by any means if you were just to change it to reflect what evidence has been presented to you here...

 

[Bruce Fischer]

This is Preston talking to Candace Dempsey.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

Whether you agree with him or not, the time of the interrogation is of little importance.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

If you don't need it, then why insist on using this particular "trivial detail" rather than one of the multitude of others you claim to have?

I mean, really, why not just use one of the others that is, without doubt, accurate?

After all, it is trivial, and thus your website shouldn't be affected by any means if you were just to change it to reflect what evidence has been presented to you here...

I currently have a conflict of sources that needs to be addressed. As you can see from previous posts, when you find these little details, I will correct them if they are proven to be incorrect.

 

[quadraginta]

I don't need to distort anything to prove that Mignini is a corrupt man that should be no where near a court room.There is pleny of other information. I don't need the time of Preston's interrogation for that. Once I get confirmation. I will change it.

Cool.

It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his involvement in the "Monster of Florence" case. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his treatment of Douglas Preston. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his treatment of Knox during her questioning. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his handling of her status as a witness and a suspect.

That's just in the last few pages of this thread.

What else ya got? You're batting 1,000 so far.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

This is Preston talking to Candace Dempsey.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

Whether you agree with him or not, the time of the interrogation is of little importance.

No, actually, the way you present it on your website, the time is of great importance.

Otherwise, you'd change it given the amount of evidence that indicates your currently posted information is incorrect.

 

[Fiona]

The reference about the soap was due do the bleach smell and possible bleach traces on the knife. Of course those were never proven. Many dish detergents in Italy contain bleach. So it would not be unreasonable to say that any bleach smell or possible residue could have come from soap. This wasn't really important because it was never proven that the knife was scrubbed with bleach.

I think this is the real problem. From the start there has been a tendency to make up stories. No matter what we have each concluded about this case we none of us have all the evidence. There is a very strong human tendency to fill gaps to make coherent narrative: and it is one of the things which makes criminal justice in the real world so difficult.

I do not say this is confined to one "side" or the other. But I do say that if you cannot see that your post shows a very real and big problem then I do not know what to say to you. It is not about soap: it is about a mindset which says that any story which will explain away a suggestion is a legitimate part of the facts of the case.

Bleach has been suggested: it may or may not have been proved (we do not have all the evidence presented in court). The legitimate responses are to point out that we do not know if bleach was used: or that we do know but that the inference we take from it is wrong (as Halides1 has consistently attempted to do). What is not legitimate is to make up a fairy story and bury it amongst the facts as if it had equal status. That is what undermines credibility and that is why it is important

 

[quadraginta]

This is Preston talking to Candace Dempsey.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

Whether you agree with him or not, the time of the interrogation is of little importance.

I found it rather interesting how much his stories about the "Monster of Florence" case resembled one of his novels until I realized that it was one of his novels. (See Brimstone)

I have enjoyed his fiction for years, even though it tends somewhat towards the repetitive like so many genre novels. When his fiction starts repeating into his reality, though ... that's just creepy. Or contrived.

You choose.

 

[Kermit]

This is Preston talking to Candace Dempsey.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

Whether you agree with him or not, the time of the interrogation is of little importance.

.
If you base the "facts" presented on your site on food-blogger-turned-bloodhound Candace Dempsey articles and Paul "Private Eye" Ciolino quotes, then your website has serious problems.

By the way, Perugia is almost a couple of hours drive away from Florence. In spite of Preston's own words in an article he wrote, you continue to maintain that "Douglas Preston was interrogated by Mignini. He was brought in during the middle of the night." ... Are you saying that the cops picked him up in Florence in the middle of the night and drove all the way to Perugia? Did they return him to Florence later that night, or did Preston have to hitchhike back? Or did the interrogation take place in the back of a Perugian police van parked in Florence?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Cool.

It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his involvement in the "Monster of Florence" case. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his treatment of Douglas Preston. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his treatment of Knox during her questioning. It's been shown that you misrepresented (read lied) about his handling of her status as a witness and a suspect.

That's just in the last few pages of this thread.

What else ya got? You're batting 1,000 so far.

You think that it has been shown but it simply has not.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I think this is the real problem. From the start there has been a tendency to make up stories. No matter what we have each concluded about this case we none of us have all the evidence. There is a very strong human tendency to fill gaps to make coherent narrative: and it is one of the things which makes criminal justice in the real world so difficult.

I do not say this is confined to one "side" or the other. But I do say that if you cannot see that your post shows a very real and big problem then I do not know what to say to you. It is not about soap: it is about a mindset which says that any story which will explain away a suggestion is a legitimate part of the facts of the case.

Bleach has been suggested: it may or may not have been proved (we do not have all the evidence presented in court). The legitimate responses are to point out that we do not know if bleach was used: or that we do know but that the inference we take from it is wrong (as Halides1 has consistently attempted to do). What is not legitimate is to make up a fairy story and bury it amongst the facts as if it had equal status. That is what undermines credibility and that is why it is important

Who is making up any stories? I made a mistake about soap. It's pretty simple. it was wrong and I edited it.

Let's talk about it forever.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

.
If you base the "facts" presented on your site on food-blogger-turned-bloodhound Candace Dempsey articles and Paul "Private Eye" Ciolino quotes, then your website has serious problems.

By the way, Perugia is almost a couple of hours drive away from Florence. In spite of Preston's own words in an article he wrote, you continue to maintain that "Douglas Preston was interrogated by Mignini. He was brought in during the middle of the night." ... Are you saying that the cops picked him up in Florence in the middle of the night and drove all the way to Perugia? Did they return him to Florence later that night, or did Preston have to hitchhike back? Or did the interrogation take place in the back of a Perugian police van parked in Florence?

Who cares!

This is what Preston says. This is what he says happened. It looks bad for Mignini. The time doesn't matter.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

 

[Bruce Fischer]

No, actually, the way you present it on your website, the time is of great importance.

Otherwise, you'd change it given the amount of evidence that indicates your currently posted information is incorrect.

How many times do I have to type something before you read it?

When I confirm the time, I will make any needed changes. I am looking into it.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Goodnight everyone. Go back and read more of my site. Maybe you can find the misuse of a question mark or a comma and you can really discredit me!

 

[Kermit]

I currently have a conflict of sources that needs to be addressed.

.
You have no conflict of sources.

In one corner you have Paul "Private Eye" Ciolino, the one and only person on this whole Earth who believes has stated that "Douglas Preston got picked up in the middle of the night, and he got dragged down to police headquarters".

And in the other corner you have Preston himself who describes being requested to go down to Perugia (a couple of hours away) from one day to the next, and the next day going with his wife and family, and hoping to be out of the questioning in time to have lunch with them in a nice restaurant.

WHICH ONE are you going to believe? I don't understand (and neither do the rest of the many readers here) why you hesitate to recognise that Ciolino's words are falsehoods.

Are you worried that such a recognition may set a trend for other statements by Paul "Private Eye" Ciolino? Like him stating that Amanda had "never set eyes" on Rudy? I'll get you more examples if you want.

FOA has stated on their website that your own website "is part of a wave of activism that continues to build in support of Amanda and Raffaele. This wave is spontaneous, it is not under the control of any individual or agency ..." Yet the wave of supposed spontaneous activism is somewhat lacking in solid facts.

======================

Maybe the mystery as to why you don't update your site is simpler, and more human focussed on your own pride. Maybe one correction of facts per day is all that you can emotionally handle. Don't worry, there'll be more with each passing day.

However, before we get into more erroneous data, let's let you correct the time of day when Preston "got dragged down to police headquarters" first. You could also eliminate the insinuation of being physically "dragged down" by stating something like: "when Preston went voluntarily to Perugia for a prearranged late morning questioning session as a witness with Prosecutor Mignini".

That's much cleaner and more honest.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I went ahead and edited my own posts. I need to remember not to let your pointless nonsense bother me. You have absolutely intention of seeking the truth. That is your problem, not mine.

It's the same concept as counting to 10 before yelling at your kids. I need to be mindful of who I am dealing with.

 

[Fiona]

Who is making up any stories? I made a mistake about soap. It's pretty simple. it was wrong and I edited it.

Let's talk about it forever.

You are making up stories, Bruce Fisher. Or perhaps you are repeating stories made-up by someone else. If you cannot see how damning that is on the basis of the part of your previous post which I bolded I cannot think of a different way to express it which will help you. But I thnk others will see the point I am making about this approach (which you share with Dan_O) and maybe they can find a better way of conveying the very real problem it typifies

 

[Fiona]

Who cares!

This is what Preston says. This is what he says happened. It looks bad for Mignini. The time doesn't matter.

"When I lived in Italy, I was the target of an investigation by Mignini in which he tapped my cell phone, bugged my writing partner's car and hauled me down to Perugia for an interrogation," Preston says. "He accused me of obstruction of justice, perjury, planting false evidence and even being an accessory to murder. I am still under indictment in Italy for a string of secret crimes."

No mention of pulling him in in the middle of the night, then. Nobody is denying Mignini interviewed him. Nobody is denying that he was suspected of interfering with a murder investigation: in fact Preston himself concedes that he and Spezi were doing just that. What do you think would happen in those circumcstances anywhere in the world ?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Kermit, the point is, it doesn't matter but you will go on forever like a child that wants a sucker. It will change nothing on the site. As a matter of fact, when I do edit the page, I will be sure to add a couple more paragraphs exposing Mignini for the corrupt man that he is. the edit will make my site stronger. I have no problem with edits. I edited the very small discrepency on the Mignini page already. "he got involved in the case" "He took the case"

That edit changed nothing. Mignini was involved in the MOF case and he made a complete fool of himself. The point is proven either way. I have no problem making edits that need to be made.

I am surprised that you have chosen such weak points to try and discredit me.

Have you taken the pillow powerpoint off of PMF yet that shows where you think a shoe print might be? You know, the one you outlined with a red line. You show no print at all, you just guess.

If you want the photographs to prove your pillowcase theory wrong, here you go.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-04.html