Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

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

I don't know about that...Mary H was positively rushing to defend Supernaut.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

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:

[qimg]http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5530/bigrockbigshard.jpg[/qimg]

That window was open when Guede went through. Do you honestly think that I am trying to claim that Guede came though the small opening where the glass was broken?

He opened the window. He pulled himself in. This is not complicated.

Those sharp pieces of glass were out of his way as soon as he opened the window.

 

[Moss]

Is there anything substantial published on the new witnesses for the appeal already?

 

[Fulcanelli]

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

How do you know Bruce?

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.

There's every reason...gravity being the biggest.

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.

Actually, they are taking pictures of evidence. They are not creating entertainment, but recording evidence...it doesn't matter if they're in the shot or not. But for some people, they can't do right for doing wrong.

 

[Fiona]

MaryH has not been a part of this discussion for any length of time, Fulcanelli. From what I have seen of her oeuvre elsewhere she is not really likely to fit in here, though it will be good if she can adapt. On present showing it is possible she is also lost to common decency but I am not sure of it in her case; perhaps she is one who just likes psychobabble and forgot who was being discussed because of that: who knows.

I have no doubt about Supernaut, however. I do not think it need detain us

 

[Bruce Fischer]

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?

Send me an email and I will fill you in on what she wrote. I will not repeat any of it publicly.

 

[stilicho]

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

Can you clarify this? Are you stating that there were no photographs taken outside the cottage beneath Filomena's window? Or are you stating they may or may not have been taken but you haven't personally seen any such pictures?

There is a vast gulf between these two positions.

 

[Fulcanelli]

That window was open when Guede went through. Do you honestly think that I am trying to claim that Guede came though the small opening where the glass was broken?

He opened the window. He pulled himself in. This is not complicated.

Those sharp pieces of glass were out of his way as soon as he opened the window.

Oh, I thought he just pulled himself right through the hole, like a torpedo.

So how did he open the window? The inside latch to open the window is two thirds up the window...he couldn't reach that standing on the bars, so, he'd have to be 'on' the ledge...how was he on the ledge and not knock glass to the ground?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

How do you know Bruce?



There's every reason...gravity being the biggest.



Actually, they are taking pictures of evidence. They are not creating entertainment, but recording evidence...it doesn't matter if they're in the shot or not. But for some people, they can't do right for doing wrong.

I know because the photos were never presented in court.

Gravity would hold the glass on the ledge. As far as I know, gravity does not cause objects to jump up and fly away.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Oh, I thought he just pulled himself right through the hole, like a torpedo.

So how did he open the window? The inside latch to open the window is two thirds up the window...he couldn't reach that standing on the bars, so, he'd have to be 'on' the ledge...how was he on the ledge and not knock glass to the ground?

That is where you keep making the mistake. Rudy could reach the latch. Look at the measurements. Rudy stood on the top row of the bars and he opened the latch with his hand. Then he opened the window and pulled himself into the room.

This is not complicated. This is an online argument. The court has already agreed on this matter.

 

[Fiona]

It seems you have access to transcripts of everything which was presented in court

Care to share?

 

[Juror]

Then it's quite simple...if you won't evidence it, don't make the assertions. That's the rule.

I was referring to comments like this.

Here the Massei report makes an assertion regarding the lack of glass under the window and I was trying to understand the evidence behind it.

On that subject, I don't see the reference to the evidence of "no glass on the ground below" you refer to in any of the paragraphs of the Massei report you posted. There seems to be testimony regarding no vegetation trampled that is referenced but the basis for the glass assertion is not apparant.

I can appreciate the translation and proofreading is not done yet and will gladly wait for such. Thank you for your efforts in organizing the translation project. I look forward to reading it.

 

[Fulcanelli]

MaryH has not been a part of this discussion for any length of time, Fulcanelli. From what I have seen of her oeuvre elsewhere she is not really likely to fit in here, though it will be good if she can adapt. On present showing it is possible she is also lost to common decency but I am not sure of it in her case; perhaps she is one who just likes psychobabble and forgot who was being discussed because of that: who knows.

I have no doubt about Supernaut, however. I do not think it need detain us

Not on the JREF she hasn't, but she has elsewhere (long enough to know better)...and she is rather active on Bruce's site...she's one of those kinds of people Bruce and his site attracts. Supernaught came over from Bruce's site too. Indeed, I believe it was Supernaught's post Bruce found himself suddenly forced to delete. Isn't that right Bob Supernaught?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Can you clarify this? Are you stating that there were no photographs taken outside the cottage beneath Filomena's window? Or are you stating they may or may not have been taken but you haven't personally seen any such pictures?

There is a vast gulf between these two positions.

I am stating that they were never presented in court. If someone can prove that wrong, I would be more than happy to view any photographs.

I also believe that we would be talking about a very small amount of glass.

We would only be talking about the glass that may have flown back toward the object that broke it.

 

[Fiona]

Not on the JREF she hasn't, but she has elsewhere (long enough to know better)...and she is rather active on Bruce's site...she's one of those kinds of people Bruce and his site attracts. Supernaught came over from Bruce's site too. Indeed, I believe it was Supernaught's post Bruce found himself suddenly forced to delete. Isn't that right Bob Supernaught?

I am aware of a few of her posts elsewhere, if it is the same person. But unless there is misinformation she has control of, then what she posts here is suffient to the day

Can we try to stick with real points of disagreement arising here? I am sorry to belabour this but it is really not advancing the thread and the mods exist to deal with OT and uncivil stuff where necessary: we need not do it ourselves

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Not on the JREF she hasn't, but she has elsewhere (long enough to know better)...and she is rather active on Bruce's site...she's one of those kinds of people Bruce and his site attracts. Supernaught came over from Bruce's site too. Indeed, I believe it was Supernaught's post Bruce found himself suddenly forced to delete. Isn't that right Bob Supernaught?

I honestly don't know who Supernaught is. The posts I deleted were from "Bob" I believe. So this could be the same person. It really doesn't matter.

I was not suddenly forced to delete anything. This type of language from you is really childish. Why can't we talk to each other like adults?

I signed in to the blog to post some comments and I deleted the bad ones when I saw them. The blog is separate from my site. My site is protected. The blog is open for people to have a conversation. I do not monitor it daily.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I was referring to comments like this.

Here the Massei report makes an assertion regarding the lack of glass under the window and I was trying to understand the evidence behind it.

On that subject, I don't see the reference to the evidence of "no glass on the ground below" you refer to in any of the paragraphs of the Massei report you posted. There seems to be testimony regarding no vegetation trampled that is referenced but the basis for the glass assertion is not apparant.

I can appreciate the translation and proofreading is not done yet and will gladly wait for such. Thank you for your efforts in organizing the translation project. I look forward to reading it.

Perhaps then, you should reread it. You see his making reference to X or Y and assume that it is a requirement that he do so at every point and in some way, the judge is breaking either the law, or JREF rules? In both cases, you would be wrong. Moreover, I only posted a section...he covers the investigation regarding the examination of the outside of the cottage, in great detail...he even numbers how many points and which on the outside wall were examined. The portion I posted was simply his conclusion of that chapter.

 

[Dan O.]

No he wasn't, the text message was.

Try to explain how the text message could be discussed in the interrogation without implicitly referring to the person that sent the message.

And while you're at it, you can show us the mythological 'stick', for which you have hitherto provided nothing to evidence the existence of.

What's the point in showing a picture of something that you already accept was there. Will the picture change your mind about the break in? Will the picture change your opinion about Massei or the prosecution? If seeing a picture of a stick won't make any difference, why do you keep asking for it?

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

The Kerchers put themselves in this controversy when they gave negative testimony about Amanda. They don't get a one way ticket. Maybe it would be easier to see them as simply victims if they didn't have several million reasons to want to find Amanda and Raffaele guilty instead of just Rudy.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I am stating that they were never presented in court. If someone can prove that wrong, I would be more than happy to view any photographs.

I also believe that we would be talking about a very small amount of glass.

We would only be talking about the glass that may have flown back toward the object that broke it.

Oh, were you in court Bruce?

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I am aware of a few of her posts elsewhere, if it is the same person. But unless there is misinformation she has control of, then what she posts here is suffient to the day

Can we try to stick with real points of disagreement arising here? I am sorry to belabour this but it is really not advancing the thread and the mods exist to deal with OT and uncivil stuff where necessary: we need not do it ourselves

Fiona, the conversation below highlights the real problem.

capealadin: "I think , Michael, that not only do they not care on jot for Meredith or her family, but that they are antagonistic towards them for not stepping up to the plate to save the little angel.This dislike is apparant in many of them, not limited to, and including, Candace."

Michael: "Oh, they resent them greatly...and they have a very hard time restraining themselves from showing it. Some, such as Screaming Bob, can't help themselves though. And the others, well, they let their true colours slip every now and then. Make no mistake, they see the Kerchers as the enemy and they hate them for it. After all, if they'd never have given birth to Meredith Amanda would never have murdered her and so not ruined her life. It's all Meredith's fault and her family's...they should just move on and let Amanda move on, she's far more important."


This conversation between Michael and capealadin is disturbing. It is this type of behavior that discredits everything PMF claims to stand for.

To make the claim that anyone that believes an injustice has occurred resents the Kerchers greatly is a horrible and completely reckless statement to make.

People that support Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are sometimes accused of being disrespectful to Meredith Kercher. I cannot speak for everyone. Of course there are disrespectful people on both sides of any topic. I do not think it shows any disrespect to Meredith Kercher to search for the truth. In fact, I feel that finding the truth in regard to her murder is a sign of respect to Meredith. Meredith and her family deserve justice. Imprisoning two innocent people will bring no justice for Meredith Kercher.

Michael is a moderator on that site. He is spreading these angry lies simply to enrage his readers into hating anyone that disagrees with his agenda. These immoral tactics need to stop.