Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Charlie or Chris or Bruce .... get out the hook or the gong or the fishnet hoop and gag this person!!

This is sincere Public Relations advice: if the supporters of Amanda want to win the hearts and minds of the undecided, then it is a seriously mistaken idea to include in your arguments or talking points criticism of the victim's family. I think that their silence throughout this process has really set them apart as people to be admired. I would think that most other persons, decided or undecided about the guilt of Amanda, Rudy and Raffaele, would feel the same.

Yes, of course you would want to gag me.

But you sincerely want to give people "public realtions" advice that would benefit Amanda Knox? Really? That's novel.

I note more of the fake piety you people parrot without fail

It's getting old.
 
Last edited:
The Kercher family is difficult to fathom ....

Notwithstanding their loss, I’m afraid to say I don't perceive this silence of theirs as "dignified", at all. In my view, they could and should have made an effort to stop this grotesque farce in its tracks long ago
Yes, of course you would want to gag me.

But b you sincerely wnat to give people "public realtions" advice that would benefit Amanda Knox? Really? That's novel.

I note more of the fake piety you people parrot without fail

It's getting old.
.
I told your own people to gag you.

They should know what's at stake (I could be sarcastic and make reference to a million dollar PR campaign, but I won't).
 
Last edited:
.
I told your own people to gag you.

They should know what's at stake (I could be sarcastic and make reference to a million dollar PR campaign, but I won't).

You are being barely coherent.

My "own people"? What are you, paranoid?
 
Mary H said:
I don't know what time Lumumba was taken into custody. I seriously doubt, though, that he was not on the police's radar before Amanda "accused" him, so the question remains of why they did not interview him. They certainly should have. In my opinion, they waited to arrest him in a dramatic way in order to make a big splash for the media and announce "case closed," the next morning. They just used Amanda as a sort of double-check.

In a 'dramatic' way? How was that exactly? Aren't all police arrests rather dramatic by their very nature? What is the 'non-dramatic' way they could have arrested him? How do you think the way they arrested him was dramatic...did the police bring a brass band with them and an aerobatics display team with them when they went to make the arrest?

You are also aware, that under law, the police are required make public an arrest? Or would you prefer 'secret' arrests where people are just 'disappeared' from the streets and the system of the police state and dictatorship? The nature of the crime and those involved that made the press very interested in the case. It was the press that published the newspapers and wrote the reports and sensationalised it, not the police who simply did their duty of giving notice of the arrest. It also was to quell public concerns a killer may still be on the loose. That is not unreasonable.

I should also point out, the police had NO reason to speak to him sooner and as it happen the actual facts prove them right and you wrong on the matter...Patrick had no involvement in the crime and had no information that was useful in solving it. His ONLY involvement and importance to the case is because the lies of Amanda Knox.
 
The Kercher family is difficult to fathom ....

Notwithstanding their loss, I’m afraid to say I don't perceive this silence of theirs as "dignified", at all. In my view, they could and should have made an effort to stop this grotesque farce in its tracks long ago
.
Maybe Supernaut is correct in feeling that from the pro-Knox standpoint, there's nothing wrong with digging into the mourning Kercher family.

Charlie? Chris? Bruce? Could we get your opinion on this issue?

I think that many readers are interested in knowing if Supernaut's words are representative of a cross-section of the Knox camp, or if her words are mere statistical neuron misfirings.
 
.
Charlie? Chris? Bruce? Could we get your opinion on this issue?

I think that many readers are interested in knowing if Supernaut's words are representative of a cross-section of the Knox camp, or if her words are mere statistical neuron misfirings.
Given that it's apparent to everyone that Amanda is innocent and people who profess otherwise are sock puppets for Mignini, pushing an anti-Amanda book, or filled with hate for Amanda, I assume Charlie, Chris and Bruce must agree that the family.
 
Last edited:
Bob wrote: "Did she not allow Lumumba to sit in jail for 2 weeks, all the while knowing full well that Lumumba had nothing to do with Meredith's murder?"

How would Amanda know that Patrick was innocent? She wasn't there at the time of the murder. She had no idea who killed Meredith. The police told her that Patrick was the killer. Why would she know that the police had lied to her?

Oh come on! You are writing license to lie. If I make up a libelous story saying some celebrity is a thief, I can defend myself in court on a suit for saying and never retracting it by saying 'Sure, I made it up but I refused to retract it because I don't know it isn't true, they may well be a thief for all I know! ' can I? And the judge is going to say 'Right you are then, case for libel dismissed!' is he???

Amanda did not offer the police 'conjecture' or 'suggestions', she asserted it to police as a factual and truthful account of what happened that night and she's damned for that, double damned for not retracting it and triple damned for not even apologising to Patrick for it when the multiple opportunities to do so arose!
 
Fiona writes:

The rush was that they had reason to believe he was a murderous sexual predator. Do you think that the public/press etc would have been balanced if he had happened to kill again while they were being "fair"? I think the proposition is fairly silly

It is useful to know something about how police operate in general. Competent detectives who had nothing except a murky accusation from someone they didn't trust would have brought Lumumba in for questioning, to find out if he had an alibi. If they were concerned about public safety, they could have put him under surveillance while they investigated. For example, once the police suspected that John Wayne Gacy was a sex killer, they watched him 24/7 to make sure he didn't so much as jaywalk. But they didn't arrest him until they had a good case. That is how it is supposed to be done.

The cops who ran this investigation were utterly incompetent. That is clear from the way they handled evidence in the crime scene video, it is clear from Giobbi's comments in the UK documentary, and it is clear from the way they jumped to a ridiculous conclusion before they knew what evidence they had or what it meant.


The accusation wasn't 'murky' at all, it was precise, detailed and asserted as fact and truth!
 
The Kercher family is difficult to fathom – they, of all people, must be thoroughly familiar with the facts, and one would assume they would be hell-bent on seeing the real murderer punished.

Nothing much has been heard from them, or about them, excepting the ubiquitous platitude that they “maintained a dignified silence”. But they are, they say, "happy" with the verdict, so presumably they are happy that Knox and Sollicito, who they manifestly can have NO WAY of knowing for sure were involved in Meredith's death, are having their lives destroyed. Nevertheless, they (rather pointedly, it seems to me) avoid expressing any *explicit* belief in the guilt of the two.

Notwithstanding their loss, I’m afraid to say I don't perceive this silence of theirs as "dignified", at all. In my view, they could and should have made an effort to stop this grotesque farce in its tracks long ago, as soon as the prima facae evidence against Guede became known and he was caught while on the run in Germany.

They have, in effect, made themselves complicit in the reduction of Meredith’s killer’s jail sentence from an already lenient 30 years to 14. (I hope this is rectified somehow, and I have to say that I wish Guede all the ill in the world at the hands of his fellow inmates).

As I say, puzzling, but at least one explanation suggests itself.

Westerners are now inured to what is referred to as the 'cult of the individual' (essentially, egoism and self-love), the notion that anyone and everyone is entitled to believe they are 'special', and that any premature death is a 'tragedy'.

One frequently hears about survivors of disasters such as air-crashes expressing feelings of "guilt" for their own survival and that they could somehow have "made a difference" and "done more" to save others.

In fact, they have simply been confronted with the stark reality that they are NOT "special", that any of us can have our lives ended in an instant for no other reason than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They are trying to rationalise their feelings and regain their lost sense of "being in control of their destiny" from which they’ve been so abruptly disabused.

The Italian prosecutions' elaborate and theatrical "narrative" of a "frenzy of drug-fuelled sex and violence" instigated by the charismatic "Luciferina" Knox seems to have hypnotised the Kerchers and served to allow them (and others) to remain in denial of the fact that Meredith’s death was the result of a completely random and meaningless act of savagery by an utter nobody, that she was NOT a protagonist in a tableau resembling a Greek tragedy.

Add to this an undoubted combination of ingratiation and badgering by Mignini (if not his typical bullying), and they simply allowed themselves to become (literally) mute bystanders to the spectacle he was orchestrating.

If this isn’t so, then less charitably, I have to note that if Guede alone had been convicted of the murder, the Kerchers would have had to forget about any financial 'compensation' for Meredith’s death, but with that of two others from relatively affluent families......

If they would come to their senses, they’d put the Italian police in their sights for litigation.

Guede, who by late 2007 had been steadily building a reputation as a drug-using, knife-wielding thief and burglar, should have been arrested before he ever got a chance to be in Meredith's home. The cops’ incompetence and negligence (or worse) had left him on the streets. I'm no lawyer, but I'd say they'd have a good case.

(Guede’s various stories with “some other dude” killing Meredith? Either he cut her throat himself or he FACILITATED IT by taking this “other dude” to her home, and then fleeing to a disco to try and set up an alibi, leaving her to die. Either way, it would make him no less guilty. He remains a God-damned, worthless liar.)

If the Kerchers are able to escape Mignini and his cronies’ (and their own venal lawyers’) ingratiation and distance themselves from them, perhaps this will dawn on them one day.


I've been thinking of an appropriate response (one that wouldn't get me banned) while still conveying the utter disgust that I felt while reading this post.

Unfortunately I'm just not creative enough at the moment to achieve that feat.

As a result you have the dubious honor to be the first person to enter my ignore list.
 
That's quite a leap from what I said, Fiona; so much so that it seems to be a completely different topic. My objection was to the people who claim that Amanda gave her second statement of her own free will.

As far as the police "relying on answers," Charlie Wilkes says it well: "If she told them for four days straight that she spent the night at Raffaele's apartment and they thought she was lying, then why would they believe her when she implicates Lumumba?"

Does Amanda deny that she did Mary H? Perhaps you can provide a cite from her or her lawyers where they stated that it wasn't.
 
Every time I read discussions about this case I begin to feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

I’ve spent more time than probably is healthy reading about it over the last 12 months +. Which includes following this monumental thread from the beginning (although revisiting some of the earlier pages I’ve found a few eye-openers I missed, such as Fulcanelli’s jaw-dropping reply to Halides1’s post about the defamation of Knox with lies published about her sex-life - as if extracting information from her by telling her was HIV+ and simply publicising the actuality of her sex-life wouldn’t be despicable enough).

It’s just not credible that anyone who has taken the time to inform themselves of the facts (NOT the endless, asinine speculation, opinionation and tabloid-propagated lies) can continue to genuinely believe that Knox and Sollicito are guilty of anything except being young and dumb.

It is *perfectly* understandable that people who recognise that a grotesque injustice has been perpetrated are outraged, and continue to argue passionately for the reversal of their conviction.

But how to account for the effort expended by those who continue the remorseless and often shrill advocacy of their guilt (meaning Knox’s, of course, with Sollicito joining her on her hayride to Hell as matter of expediency)? Normal people, even if they believed K and S to be guilty - which would be through a less-than-thorough familiarity with the case, and hence imply indifference - just wouldn’t evince such …. obsessiveness.

Who are they, these “guilters”?

(The temptation to name some of the following is almost irresistible).

- Some are sock-puppets and shills for the corrupt Italian judiciary.

- Some are sock-puppets and shills for the venal low-lifes who are hoping for book-publishing deals whose sales will depend on the perpetuation of the sick fantasies about Knox.

- Some are just ugly, cruel and envious individuals. The kind who take pleasure in seeing their betters humiliated and even destroyed, believing that the context and their faux-righteousness disguises their malice. I’ve never witnessed so many of them outing themselves at once - ever.

- Finally, there are the self-styled, so-called "Skeptics". Their only motivation is to use the “discussion” as a game in which to flatter themselves that they are demonstrating their “intellectualism” with endless sophistry and hair-splitting, this from safely behind the skirts of the “authority” they pathologically side with, oblivious to the harm being done, and their complicity in it.

They know who they are (or maybe not?). A bunch of moral imbeciles, basically.



And this applies only to those who believe that the sentences meted out for the three people convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher were correct?

Give me a frikken break, Mr./Miss "I'm-so-clever-and-smug-for-choosing-a-Black Sabbath-song-for-my-username". Do the names Candace Dempsey, Doug Preston or Bruce Fisher not mean anything? Have you not read some of the comments that both Bruce and Candace have allowed to be posted on their sites regarding the real victim, Meredith Kercher, and her family? All the while deleting comments that have been respectful and courteous to the rules of each of their respective blogs? The only difference being that the comments deleted offered a differing ,and in many cases, reasonable argument to their own opinions. Bruce claims on his site that the Kerchers receive a "free pass", yet he allows vicious remarks to be posted on his site, or at least long enough for people to have plenty of ti me to read them before deleting them. It seems that he would rather have others do his own dirty work in expressing his real feelings towards the real victim, Meredith Kercher, and her family and friends. Candace was the same way. Some things never change, I guess. I honestly don't think that you are the "better" of anyone who does not agree with your opinions. Opinions not facts. Gee, 12 months is an awful long time. Seems like you have no life either, outside of the internet.
 
Fiona writes:

The rush was that they had reason to believe he was a murderous sexual predator. Do you think that the public/press etc would have been balanced if he had happened to kill again while they were being "fair"? I think the proposition is fairly silly

It is useful to know something about how police operate in general. Competent detectives who had nothing except a murky accusation from someone they didn't trust would have brought Lumumba in for questioning, to find out if he had an alibi. If they were concerned about public safety, they could have put him under surveillance while they investigated. For example, once the police suspected that John Wayne Gacy was a sex killer, they watched him 24/7 to make sure he didn't so much as jaywalk. But they didn't arrest him until they had a good case. That is how it is supposed to be done.

The cops who ran this investigation were utterly incompetent. That is clear from the way they handled evidence in the crime scene video, it is clear from Giobbi's comments in the UK documentary, and it is clear from the way they jumped to a ridiculous conclusion before they knew what evidence they had or what it meant.

They had NO EVIDENCE against him, that's why. If a witness had come forward and told them she'd witnessed him murdering someone that would have been evidence and they'd have arrested him. Suspecting someone is not enough to make an arrest, evidence is and witness testimony is evidence.
 
Supernaut said:
I’ve spent more time than probably is healthy reading about it over the last 12 months +. Which includes following this monumental thread from the beginning (although revisiting some of the earlier pages I’ve found a few eye-openers I missed, such as Fulcanelli’s jaw-dropping reply to Halides1’s post about the defamation of Knox with lies published about her sex-life - as if extracting information from her by telling her was HIV+ and simply publicising the actuality of her sex-life wouldn’t be despicable enough).

This was debunked many pages ago.
 
I've been thinking of an appropriate response (one that wouldn't get me banned) while still conveying the utter disgust that I felt while reading this post.

Unfortunately I'm just not creative enough at the moment to achieve that feat.

As a result you have the dubious honor to be the first person to enter my ignore list.

No kidding. I don't believe that the Kerchers ever said that they were "happy" with the results of the trial. "Satisfied" may have been the word used and, if I'm not mistaken, they said that is was not a triumph or victory. I got the impression they meant to say that there were no winners in this case. Geez, talk about a "moral imbecile". Ignore list it is for you, Black Sabbath.
 
The Kercher family is difficult to fathom – they, of all people, must be thoroughly familiar with the facts, and one would assume they would be hell-bent on seeing the real murderer punished.

Nothing much has been heard from them, or about them, excepting the ubiquitous platitude that they “maintained a dignified silence”. But they are, they say, "happy" with the verdict, so presumably they are happy that Knox and Sollicito, who they manifestly can have NO WAY of knowing for sure were involved in Meredith's death, are having their lives destroyed. Nevertheless, they (rather pointedly, it seems to me) avoid expressing any *explicit* belief in the guilt of the two.

Notwithstanding their loss, I’m afraid to say I don't perceive this silence of theirs as "dignified", at all. In my view, they could and should have made an effort to stop this grotesque farce in its tracks long ago, as soon as the prima facae evidence against Guede became known and he was caught while on the run in Germany.

They have, in effect, made themselves complicit in the reduction of Meredith’s killer’s jail sentence from an already lenient 30 years to 14. (I hope this is rectified somehow, and I have to say that I wish Guede all the ill in the world at the hands of his fellow inmates).

As I say, puzzling, but at least one explanation suggests itself.

Westerners are now inured to what is referred to as the 'cult of the individual' (essentially, egoism and self-love), the notion that anyone and everyone is entitled to believe they are 'special', and that any premature death is a 'tragedy'.

One frequently hears about survivors of disasters such as air-crashes expressing feelings of "guilt" for their own survival and that they could somehow have "made a difference" and "done more" to save others.

In fact, they have simply been confronted with the stark reality that they are NOT "special", that any of us can have our lives ended in an instant for no other reason than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They are trying to rationalise their feelings and regain their lost sense of "being in control of their destiny" from which they’ve been so abruptly disabused.

The Italian prosecutions' elaborate and theatrical "narrative" of a "frenzy of drug-fuelled sex and violence" instigated by the charismatic "Luciferina" Knox seems to have hypnotised the Kerchers and served to allow them (and others) to remain in denial of the fact that Meredith’s death was the result of a completely random and meaningless act of savagery by an utter nobody, that she was NOT a protagonist in a tableau resembling a Greek tragedy.

Add to this an undoubted combination of ingratiation and badgering by Mignini (if not his typical bullying), and they simply allowed themselves to become (literally) mute bystanders to the spectacle he was orchestrating.

If this isn’t so, then less charitably, I have to note that if Guede alone had been convicted of the murder, the Kerchers would have had to forget about any financial 'compensation' for Meredith’s death, but with that of two others from relatively affluent families......

If they would come to their senses, they’d put the Italian police in their sights for litigation.

Guede, who by late 2007 had been steadily building a reputation as a drug-using, knife-wielding thief and burglar, should have been arrested before he ever got a chance to be in Meredith's home. The cops’ incompetence and negligence (or worse) had left him on the streets. I'm no lawyer, but I'd say they'd have a good case.

(Guede’s various stories with “some other dude” killing Meredith? Either he cut her throat himself or he FACILITATED IT by taking this “other dude” to her home, and then fleeing to a disco to try and set up an alibi, leaving her to die. Either way, it would make him no less guilty. He remains a God-damned, worthless liar.)

If the Kerchers are able to escape Mignini and his cronies’ (and their own venal lawyers’) ingratiation and distance themselves from them, perhaps this will dawn on them one day.


I find your whole rant and thinly veiled attacks on the Kerchers to be completely disgusting. It deserves no response other then contempt.

Puke
 
smokescreen

Chris, I will not withdraw my comments.


While I have made mistakes, I have admitted as much when I was corrected. Additionally, as I have pointed out previously, those mistakes have little to no bearing on the point I was making.

I was not, in any way, mixed up about the timeline of the photograph in Rome. I very clearly asked for evidence that the Mafia Boss' photograph had not been posted till after he had been convicted, a piece of evidence you were unable to provide. I admitted my confusion between RFU and pg, I also explained that confusion, and then explained that the point I was making is still a valid one - regardless of the unit of measure I used in the initial argument. However, rather than discuss that issue fairly and above board, you would rather simply attack me for my honest mix-up in nomenclature.

BobTheDonkey,

I provided links to when Bernardo Provenzano was convicted in messages #7075 (p. 177) and 7137 (p. 179). Therefore, your statement that I did not provide this information is a lie, though not a very intelligent one, being so easy to disprove. With respect to the units of measuring DNA, if you had carefully checked what you said before commenting, you would have avoided engendering confusion and wasting everyone’s time.

Previously I asked you to apologize for calling me a liar repeatedly after I showed that you were wrong with respect to what I said bleach. Now you are defending yourself with a lie. I reiterate my request and add a new one, that you apologize for lying, for being sloppy with regards to facts and evidence, and for minimizing the severity of your carelessness when others rightfully call you on your errors.

halides1
 
The Kercher family is difficult to fathom ....

Notwithstanding their loss, I’m afraid to say I don't perceive this silence of theirs as "dignified", at all. In my view, they could and should have made an effort to stop this grotesque farce in its tracks long ago ....

... they have simply been confronted with the stark reality that they are NOT "special", that any of us can have our lives ended in an instant for no other reason than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The Italian prosecutions' elaborate and theatrical "narrative" of a "frenzy of drug-fuelled sex and violence" instigated by the charismatic "Luciferina" Knox seems to have hypnotised the Kerchers and served to allow them (and others) to remain in denial of the fact that Meredith’s death was the result of a completely random and meaningless act of savagery by an utter nobody

... less charitably, I have to note that if Guede alone had been convicted of the murder, the Kerchers would have had to forget about any financial 'compensation' for Meredith’s death, but with that of two others from relatively affluent families......

If they would come to their senses, they’d put the Italian police in their sights for litigation.


OPEN LETTER TO MR. DAVID MARRIOTT:

Gogerty Marriott, Inc.
1501 4th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101

Mr. Marriott,

I understand that you manage the Knox-Mellas public relations account. From your website, I see that Gogerty Marriott "builds communication strategies for clients involved in public affairs issues. These issues range from behind-the-scenes to highly controversial, but invariably are crucial to the client's financial success or mission."

I thought that I would take it upon myself to bring to your attention a growing trend amongst pro-Amanda Knox communicators (from "anonymous" blog posters, to significant member-founders of the the Friends of Amanda group) that I think is seriously detrimental to any "communication strategy" which you may hope could be crucial to the Knox-Mellas' financial success or mission.

That is a tendency to start to criticise the family of Meredith Kercher, or even Meredith herself, the defenceless victim of the brutal murder for which Amanda Knox has been convicted together with two other accomplices.

Sometime ago, a barely known food blogger who is associated with the murky Friends of Amanda group in Seattle described Meredith as probably feeling "hung-over" on the day she was brutally murdered.

A certain "Kelly" who we understand is a founder of the Friends of Amanda group wrote an Internet comment telling the Kercher family to "get over their grief" and support Amanda.

More and more we see that the Kercher family, who have always maintained a dignified silence throughout this terrible ordeal, are being subject to taunts and abuse. Most recently, today on a discussion board that I frequent, a pro-Knox poster insinuated that the Kerchers are in this process because of the financial payments they could get from a civil suit against Amanda and Raffaele.

I see from your corporate website that "at Gogerty Marriott we apply campaign-style strategies and tactics to communicate in ways that help clients achieve their goals .... We consider every project individually and assemble a team to suit the client's specific needs. We then develop and implement a plan; usually integrating a range of tactics such as earned and paid media, community outreach, ally development, and government relations among other ways of reaching important audiences."

I assume that you are not in a position to state publicly which types of media ("earned" and/or "paid") you employ in this particular campaign. However, even if some of the pro-Knox / anti-Kercher comments which we see are from the more loosely associated Knox Entourage, and they aren't directly under your control, my most heartfelt advice to you would be to send out signals for these pro-Knox elements to cease and desist in their negative comments about Meredith and the Kerchers.

There is no way that Gogerty Marriott Incorporated will achieve any objectives (other than ongoing billing for services rendered) if you continue down that road.

Yours sincerely,
Kermit
 
halides1 said:
Previously I asked you to apologize for calling me a liar repeatedly after I showed that you were wrong with respect to what I said bleach. Now you are defending yourself with a lie. I reiterate my request and add a new one, that you apologize for lying, for being sloppy with regards to facts and evidence, and for minimizing the severity of your carelessness when others rightfully call you on your errors.

Bleach will always destroy human cells before it destroys DNA. This is because the DNA is inside the nucleus of the cell and it has to destroy the cell to get to the DNA (red blood cells of course contain no DNA). If some cells have survived the bleaching, then therefore so has the DNA inside. Red blood cells are far more vulnerable to bleach then most other types of cells (such as skin cells), because their membranes are different.
 
[/b]


And this applies only to those who believe that the sentences meted out for the three people convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher were correct?

Give me a frikken break, Mr./Miss "I'm-so-clever-and-smug-for-choosing-a-Black Sabbath-song-for-my-username". Do the names Candace Dempsey, Doug Preston or Bruce Fisher not mean anything? Have you not read some of the comments that both Bruce and Candace have allowed to be posted on their sites regarding the real victim, Meredith Kercher, and her family? All the while deleting comments that have been respectful and courteous to the rules of each of their respective blogs? The only difference being that the comments deleted offered a differing ,and in many cases, reasonable argument to their own opinions. Bruce claims on his site that the Kerchers receive a "free pass", yet he allows vicious remarks to be posted on his site, or at least long enough for people to have plenty of ti me to read them before deleting them. It seems that he would rather have others do his own dirty work in expressing his real feelings towards the real victim, Meredith Kercher, and her family and friends. Candace was the same way. Some things never change, I guess. I honestly don't think that you are the "better" of anyone who does not agree with your opinions. Opinions not facts. Gee, 12 months is an awful long time. Seems like you have no life either, outside of the internet.

You are completely out of line. You are referring to the Injustice blog that was set up so people that read my site could talk about the case.

This has been lied about on PMF also. I do not monitor the blog daily. Adults go there to discuss the case. I do not feel the need to watch over the blog daily. When I signed in to the blog to post a couple of my own comments, I deleted the comments about the Kerchers. I have made myself very clear about how I feel about the Kercher family.

This is simply just another attempt to discredit me. It is extremely childish and it needs to stop.
 
I've been thinking of an appropriate response (one that wouldn't get me banned) while still conveying the utter disgust that I felt while reading this post.

Unfortunately I'm just not creative enough at the moment to achieve that feat.


Ditto. The poster known as 'supernaut' certainly scraped the bottom of the barrel with that one.

Desperately sad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom