Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

Fulcanelli, why don't we discuss your conversation with capealadin? You are spreading outright lies.

There you go again. An assertion without explanation. Look, I'll educate you, free of charge. This is how it should be done:

Fulcanelli, you are telling lies, these are the lies you are telling -

1. (blah blah)

2. (blah blah)

3. (blah blah)

This is why they are lies:

1. (blah blah)

2. (blah blah)

3. (blah blah)


Comprehend?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Let me explain this for you. Guede puts his hands inside the window, he pulls his body through the window. He is not pulling on the outer ledge. His hands are inside the window, when he pulls, he drags himself through the window, bringing glass toward the room with his body.

This is very simple. No need to complicate this.

I see, he just fired himself through that narrow window in one smooth fluid movement, moving in only one direction? Not done much climbing have you?

How'd he open the window in the first place by the way?

 

[capealadin]

Bruce: By your not condemning Supernaut for his disgusting post, and saying : well Barbie Nadeau did it, you are complicit in agreeing with what he wrote. By allowing derogatory posts about Meredith and her family to stay up on your board, long enough for people to read them,and then deleting them with no word of censure, is transparently clear, that you don,t care about the Kercher's pain at all. For you, it is all about your obsession with Amanda.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

There you go again. An assertion without explanation. Look, I'll educate you, free of charge. This is how it should be done:

Fulcanelli, you are telling lies, these are the lies you are telling -

1. (blah blah)

2. (blah blah)

3. (blah blah)

This is why they are lies:

1. (blah blah)

2. (blah blah)

3. (blah blah)


Comprehend?

I posted the conversation above and you ignored it. Do I need to post it again?

 

[Juror]

Massei Report regarding Glass outside window

What???

The section of the Massei report you posted said

"The next fact to considered is that the pieces of glass from the broken pane were distributed in a homogeneous manner on the inside and outside parts of the windowsill, without any displacement being noted or any piece of glass being found on the ground underneath the window. This circumstance, as confirmed also by the consultant Pasquali, tends to exclude the possibility that the rock was thrown from outside the house to create an access to the house through the window after the breaking of the pane. The climber, in leaning his hands and then his feet or knees on the windowsill, would have caused at least some piece of glass to fall, or at least would have been obliged to shift some pieces of glass in order to avoid being wounded by them. Instead, no piece of glass was found under the window, and no sign of any wound was seen on the pieces of glass found in Romanelli's room."

This building block of their conclusion did not have any reference like other parts of the document do like "..."grass attached to the shoes" (p. 145, cf. also declarations of the assistant Zugarini, hearing of Feb. 28, 2009, p. 133)."

 

[Fiona]

Can people please try and keep the Kercher family out of the debate and discussion? It really is not fair to them at all.

Seconded

 

[Fulcanelli]

What was Rudy holding on to to begin with to be able to reach into the window in order to catch a grip and pull himself up? It could only have been the outer ledge. But the outer ledge is covered with glass right up to its outer edge...so what was he holding on to? And in holding onto that, how was he not able to knock glass to the ground below?

 

[stilicho]

Supernaut, yours was an intriguing post; I hope you don't allow the bullies to chase you off.

Somehow I don't think Amanda is going to lose any of her support because of what Supernaut wrote.

It's all right. Supernaut's screed against the Kerchers has been duly reported as a violation of Rule 0.

I doubt AK will lose much support, either, since very few people support her anyhow. How much did they raise for her at the ill-conceived comedy fundraiser?^* Maybe they netted a few hundred bucks?

------------

^*: http://www.westseattleherald.com/20...family-comedy-night-fundraiser-welcomed-break. For those unfamiliar with the case, her parents held a chuckle-fest in Amanda's honour at a Seattle-area nightclub. Nothing cures the conscience like a good belly laugh. How hilarious is it that your eldest daughter is in prison for knifing her roommate and leaving her to die?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Bruce: By your not condemning Supernaut for his disgusting post, and saying : well Barbie Nadeau did it, you are complicit in agreeing with what he wrote. By allowing derogatory posts about Meredith and her family to stay up on your board, long enough for people to read them,and then deleting them with no word of censure, is transparently clear, that you don,t care about the Kercher's pain at all. For you, it is all about your obsession with Amanda.

I deleted the comments on my blog when I signed in to comment myself. I do not monitor the blog daily. I feel the adults on the board can handle the conversation.

I already made myself very clear that I did not agree with Supernaut's post. I see no place for that type of behavior.

With your last comment about me, you have completely lost all credibility. You are simply angry and you are speaking irrationally. I have been very clear about my feelings in regard to the Kerchers.

 

[shuttlt]

Bruce,

I have a copy of Barbie's book, but only skim read it because I was looking for the answers to specific questions (I was disappointed). Could you possibly post a page number so that I can look up the quote you are referring to?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Bruce: By your not condemning Supernaut for his disgusting post, and saying : well Barbie Nadeau did it, you are complicit in agreeing with what he wrote. By allowing derogatory posts about Meredith and her family to stay up on your board, long enough for people to read them,and then deleting them with no word of censure, is transparently clear, that you don,t care about the Kercher's pain at all. For you, it is all about your obsession with Amanda.

And he only deleted it because he read elsewhere the comments about that post condemning him for it. It was on his board for days and days. Since his arrival on the JREF Bruce has been here day in and day out...yet he's asking us to accept he didn't read his own board for many days and so failed to notice the post...pish!

If nobody had commented on it here or elsewhere, that post would still be up on his board.

 

[stilicho]

The section of the Massei report you posted said

"The next fact to considered is that the pieces of glass from the broken pane were distributed in a homogeneous manner on the inside and outside parts of the windowsill, without any displacement being noted or any piece of glass being found on the ground underneath the window. This circumstance, as confirmed also by the consultant Pasquali, tends to exclude the possibility that the rock was thrown from outside the house to create an access to the house through the window after the breaking of the pane. The climber, in leaning his hands and then his feet or knees on the windowsill, would have caused at least some piece of glass to fall, or at least would have been obliged to shift some pieces of glass in order to avoid being wounded by them. Instead, no piece of glass was found under the window, and no sign of any wound was seen on the pieces of glass found in Romanelli's room."

This building block of their conclusion did not have any reference like other parts of the document do like "..."grass attached to the shoes" (p. 145, cf. also declarations of the assistant Zugarini, hearing of Feb. 28, 2009, p. 133)."

Wait for the whole report to be translated. It's no use debating portions of it without the full text. That section itself is a little rough and "un-English", which leads us to believe it was not fully translated and proofread for clarity.

 

[capealadin]

Bruce: Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Action speaks louder than words. Should any readers be in any doubt: I highly recommend the article written by: Miss represented: Lies our mother told us : tag: language. Your feelings about Meredith and the Kerchers are transparent, as any readers are able to discern. You mouth words, with a complete lack of sincerity, and the obviousness is painful. Don,t treat people as fools. Your agenda , to free Amanda, at any cost, including letting posts maligning the Kercher family, speaks for itself. IMO.

 

[Fulcanelli]

The section of the Massei report you posted said

"The next fact to considered is that the pieces of glass from the broken pane were distributed in a homogeneous manner on the inside and outside parts of the windowsill, without any displacement being noted or any piece of glass being found on the ground underneath the window. This circumstance, as confirmed also by the consultant Pasquali, tends to exclude the possibility that the rock was thrown from outside the house to create an access to the house through the window after the breaking of the pane. The climber, in leaning his hands and then his feet or knees on the windowsill, would have caused at least some piece of glass to fall, or at least would have been obliged to shift some pieces of glass in order to avoid being wounded by them. Instead, no piece of glass was found under the window, and no sign of any wound was seen on the pieces of glass found in Romanelli's room."

This building block of their conclusion did not have any reference like other parts of the document do like "..."grass attached to the shoes" (p. 145, cf. also declarations of the assistant Zugarini, hearing of Feb. 28, 2009, p. 133)."

Perhaps you didn't notice, but Massei already noted in an earlier paragraph that below the window had been investigated and no glass had been found and he refers to a report.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

What was Rudy holding on to to begin with to be able to reach into the window in order to catch a grip and pull himself up? It could only have been the outer ledge. But the outer ledge is covered with glass right up to its outer edge...so what was he holding on to? And in holding onto that, how was he not able to knock glass to the ground below?

You are mistaken. When Rudy was standing on the top level of the bars from the window below, He had plenty of reach to unlatch the window and put his hands inside the window to pull himself through.

Some posters have been going back and forth about a stick. A stick would have worked but it was not necessary. Rudy could reach the latch. Even if he came up a little short, he could have opened the latch with his knife. But this is a moot point because Rudy could reach the latch.

You need to do the measurements and you will see this fact.

This is why this argument is strictly an online argument. This will not be a factor on appeal. The prosecution already agreed that Rudy could pull himself through that window.

I am looking forward to Kermit's powerpoint. We will see how he manipulates the measurements.

 

[Fulcanelli]

The section of the Massei report you posted said

"The next fact to considered is that the pieces of glass from the broken pane were distributed in a homogeneous manner on the inside and outside parts of the windowsill, without any displacement being noted or any piece of glass being found on the ground underneath the window. This circumstance, as confirmed also by the consultant Pasquali, tends to exclude the possibility that the rock was thrown from outside the house to create an access to the house through the window after the breaking of the pane. The climber, in leaning his hands and then his feet or knees on the windowsill, would have caused at least some piece of glass to fall, or at least would have been obliged to shift some pieces of glass in order to avoid being wounded by them. Instead, no piece of glass was found under the window, and no sign of any wound was seen on the pieces of glass found in Romanelli's room."

This building block of their conclusion did not have any reference like other parts of the document do like "..."grass attached to the shoes" (p. 145, cf. also declarations of the assistant Zugarini, hearing of Feb. 28, 2009, p. 133)."

I'm also wondering, what JREF rule it is you are trying to claim has been broken? Or, do you think you are on the In Session board?

 

[Fiona]

I would just like to say that I do not think everyone who believes there has been an injustice therefore believes all the things stated by anyone who holds that position. We have had an instance of that before when Fulcanelli linked to a truly disgusting attack on Meredith kercher put up by someone who appeared to believe knox innocent. It had nothing to do with anyone here at all and I do not believe they approved of it in any way. Supernaut is more of the same. I do not think anyone who has been here for a while would support that kind of post and I do not like to see that insinuation being made.

We have differing views and some people hold their position very strongly: but we are none of us completely lost to comnon decency. We may lose sight of that fact as tempers rise, and so it is helpful when a poster like Supernaut comes on to remind us. I think it would be well to keep that in mind and return to our normally scheduled argument. One such as that is winning if we allow ourselves to bicker over that which is merely disgusting

 

[capealadin]

And Bruce, Instead of spending so much time here, you should be more responsible, and monitor your site much more frequently. As it is a Pro Amanda propoganda site, it is expected to find deragatory posts. Since you *care * so much about Meredith, do your job better.

 

[Fulcanelli]

You are mistaken. When Rudy was standing on the top level of the bars from the window below, He had plenty of reach to unlatch the window and put his hands inside the window to pull himself through.

Some posters have been going back and forth about a stick. A stick would have worked but it was not necessary. Rudy could reach the latch. Even if he came up a little short, he could have opened the latch with his knife. But this is a moot point because Rudy could reach the latch.

You need to do the measurements and you will see this fact.

This is why this argument is strictly an online argument. This will not be a factor on appeal. The prosecution already agreed that Rudy could pull himself through that window.

I am looking forward to Kermit's powerpoint. We will see how he manipulates the measurements.

He wasn't an orangatang Bruce. And, need I refer you back to the photo Kermit posted of those very sharp shards of glass still in the bottom of that window? He'd have 1) lacerated his arms and 2) broken those shards put of the frame. here's a reminder:

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Perhaps you didn't notice, but Massei already noted in an earlier paragraph that below the window had been investigated and no glass had been found and he refers to a report.

First of all, there is no photographic evidence showing the lack of glass on the ground.

Second, there is no reason to find noticeable glass outside. I believe that Massei is incorrect with his theory. He has no evidence to prove his theory.

Maybe there isn't any photographs of the ground outside because the investigators wasted all of the film taking pictures of themselves in the mirror.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us