Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce Fisher said:
The appeal will highlight the complete incompetence of the investigators. The DNA will be challenged.

There is a new witness, and there is more to come about Rudy. I do not know the details of this new information. We will have to wait for the appeal.
Click to expand...

Ahem, isn't that a bit early to say that then? ;)
 
Fiona said:
Does this mean you have not been there?



Presumbly this is one of those sources you cannot disclose. It is a pity: but you can surely post the italian transcripts in support of your claims if you have access to them. There are many Italian speakers at PMF and maybe there are some here. In this way you can back up your statements and this will go a long way to enhancing your credibility. At present you are being put in the position of making assertions which you cannot support and it is not making you look good. I do not know who has put you in that position nor why you have allowed it: but I think it would be sensible to change that situation. Up to you of course
Click to expand...

You can go to Italy and get them yourself. They are not a secret. My source is Italy. I said I have access to them. So do you. I do not have them in my possession. I don't want them. I can't read them. From what I am told, all names are removed. Highly edited.

What exactly can I not support?

We are talking about the window. I have photographs to show exactly what I am saying.

You come here and start making your baseless accusations. We had a good conversation going here.

I am not too worried about enhancing my credibility with you.
 
Last edited:
Bruce Fisher said:
The glass is flat and it was laying flat on a portion of the ledge. A slight majority of that ledge was not covered in glass. It was not like he was pulling his body over large amounts of jagged glass sticking out at him.
Click to expand...

Strawman.

There is no evidence that the glass on the ledge was disturbed by someone pulling themselves over it. No glass was found outside the cottage under Filomena's window. There was no evidence the latch was opened from the outside. There is no evidence on the wall outside the cottage that anyone scaled it.

Therefore, nobody entered the window that way.
 
So you do not have any practical access to the transcripts any more than I do? I wonder who does? No matter. You are being fed your information by a mysterious stranger. It does not seem to be very good information, from what we have seen so far. Since you cannot make the evidence availble, there is no reason to accept that it is better than what we can all share, with all its limitations. I do wonder why you are allowing yourself to be used in this way: but that is of course your choice.

Of course I fully accept that you do not care about your credibility with me (or with anyone else IMO).
 
Bruce Fisher said:
No, not at all. I personally believe that to be true.
Click to expand...

Might be a difference in mentality and conviction, but to me it looks a bit like putting the cart before the horse. There are tons of possibilities why what you predicted may not come true (witnesses caving in, lawyer fails to make a credible case despite valid evidence, etc.).
I also wouldn't rely on the strength of evidence and witness testimony I have no idea about yet.
 
Fiona said:
So you do not have any practical access to the transcripts any more than I do? I wonder who does? No matter. You are being fed your information by a mysterious stranger. It does not seem to be very good information, from what we have seen so far. Since you cannot make the evidence availble, there is no reason to accept that it is better than what we can all share, with all its limitations. I do wonder why you are allowing yourself to be used in this way: but that is of course your choice.

Of course I fully accept that you do not care about your credibility with me (or with anyone else IMO).
Click to expand...

Fiona, we are discussing photographs in relation to the wall climb. You are bringing up nonsense to distract the conversation. What you have said has absolutely no bearing on the current conversation.
 
Bruce: Will you please explain to me how, considering Amanda lived in the cottage, ONLY ONE FINGERPRINT of hers was found on a glass in the kitchen, and NOT one fingerprint of hers anywhere else??? Not even her bedroom?
 
Fiona said:
So you do not have any practical access to the transcripts any more than I do? I wonder who does? No matter. You are being fed your information by a mysterious stranger. It does not seem to be very good information, from what we have seen so far. Since you cannot make the evidence availble, there is no reason to accept that it is better than what we can all share, with all its limitations. I do wonder why you are allowing yourself to be used in this way: but that is of course your choice.

Of course I fully accept that you do not care about your credibility with me (or with anyone else IMO).
Click to expand...

You think that I am a tool that works for Chris Mellas. I like that. It's funny. It's completely untrue but at least you are being creative.
 
capealadin said:
Bruce: Will you please explain to me how, considering Amanda lived in the cottage, ONLY ONE FINGERPRINT of hers was found on a glass in the kitchen, and NOT one fingerprint of hers anywhere else??? Not even her bedroom?
Click to expand...

Completely not true. Research that and get back to me.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
You think that I am a tool that works for Chris Mellas. I like that. It's funny. It's completely untrue but at least you are being creative.
Click to expand...


I have no idea who feeds you your lines. Bruce. I did not know that anyone did till you told us :)
 
Wikipedia: The murder of Meredith Kercher. And while you,re there: Could you also explain how Raffaele, who didn,t live in the cottage, knew nothing had been stolen?? Thanks so much
 
Bruce Fisher said:
Completely not true. Research that and get back to me.
Click to expand...


Well if we are to accept what you said about the shoe print: that an unidentifiable print is not attributable ( and you are absolutely right), then capealadin is correct about this on the same reasoning
 
Last edited:
Fiona said:
I have no idea who feeds you your lines. Bruce. I did not know that anyone did till you told us :)
Click to expand...

What did I tell you? I told you I can't read Italian. I rely on someone else to do that for me. You read more into things than you should.
 
Fiona said:
Well if we are to accept what you said about the shoe print: that an unidentifiably print is not attributable ( and you are absolutely right), then capealadin is correct about this on the same reasoning
Click to expand...

Once again, not true.

All of the shoe prints, set in blood, were identified on the pillow.
 
Last edited:
Bruce Fisher said:
What did I tell you? I told you I can't read Italian. I rely on someone else to do that for me. You read more into things than you should.
Click to expand...

A distinction without a difference, methinks. I am sure it is someone you trust.

You trust Ciolino when he claims that Douglas Preston said things he never said: and you trust Douglas Preston too. You are a very trusting individual, that cannot be denied
 
Fiona said:
A distinction without a difference, methinks. I am sure it is someone you trust.

You trust Ciolino when he claims that Douglas Preston said things he never said: and you trust Douglas Preston too. You are a very trusting individual, that cannot be denied
Click to expand...

Bringing up nonsense again. I just stopped talking to you also. You have no interest in having a conversation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom