Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mary H said:
There is nothing particularly startling or unlikely about Rudy's skype conversation and it seems to have beeen quoted by more credible sources. I don't have knee-jerk reactions to Rudy's writings just because they're by Rudy. When I first started looking at this case, I didn't even believe Amanda had written the first e-mail she sent to her friends and family.
Click to expand...

What 'more credible' sources?
 
Fulcanelli said:
No...not on the 8th. Amanda was interrogated only twice...once by the police on the night of the 5th and a second time in December. She 'was' questioned by Judge Claudia Matteini in court on the 9th, as part of the hearing.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that Fulcanelli? I seem to remember she was interviewed by Mignini on the 8th. I recall that she was asked by Lumumba's lawyer why she did not tell him that Lumumba was innocent on that date. I do not have time now to dig up that reference but I am fairly sure I read that in the testimony
 
Last edited:
Bruce Fisher said:
The room wasn't ransacked. Filomena's room was messy. There was no intentional ransacking to be seen.
Click to expand...

Both Filomena and Amanda are liars then...yes or no?

See, here's your bind...if you are going to insist Filomena trashed her own room (don't spin it with untidy...if someone's room is untidy, then they've trashed their own room) then you have to call Amanda herself a liar...and that goes against your religion.
 
Fiona said:
Are you sure about that Fulcanelli? I seem to remember she was interviewed by Mignini on the 8th. I recall that she was asked by Lumumba's lawyer why she did not tell him that Lumumba was innocent on that date. I do not have time now to dig up that reference but I am fairly sure I read that in the testimony
Click to expand...

She wasn't questioned again until she went before Matteini. She was then questioned once more after that in December...you can hear excerpts from that interrogation in this video: http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/.../71545/rewind---delitto-di-perugia---iii.html
 
Fulcanelli said:
This was cited as the reason that police called them back in again for questioning.
Click to expand...

I don't follow.

And that double edged sword goes both ways, you can't claim as a 'fact' that they 'didn't' change their stories as you did here, can you?:

That's a statement of fact. How do you know they didn't when even you admit you don't know what they said before? It seems simply that it's a point of faith with you.
Click to expand...

The difference is Amanda is being prosecuted. She doesn't have to prove these things didn't happen, the prosecution has to prove they did.
 
Fulcanelli said:
No, he said it to the police instead and that carries far more weight. His diary was intended for an audience, so no surprises there.
Click to expand...

Sorry, he didn't say it to the police either.

The interview Raffaele never denied having.
Click to expand...

Did anyone actually ask him? Was he even aware of it? Did he read the English language newspapers?

Odd that it can be found in so few places -- you would think the rest of the press would have run with an extra like that one.
 
Mary H said:
I don't follow.
Click to expand...

The police called Raffaele back in because of 'discrepencies' in his story...do you follow 'now'?

Mary H said:
The difference is Amanda is being prosecuted. She doesn't have to prove these things didn't happen, the prosecution has to prove they did.
Click to expand...

Yes, to the courts...not to Mary on the JREF. And the courts would have had all these statements. You can't hear them, because they are classed under the banner of 'self incriminating' and as those statements were given when Amanda and Raffaele were witnesses, they can't be made public. However, the defence are legally entitled to make them public should they wish, so maybe you should ask them. Since they haven't and it doesn't look like they are going to, one can only conclude as a euphemism, 'they don't help Amanda and Raffaele'.
 
Fulcanelli said:
They were in the public bar of Salty's...the event took place in a function room downstairs into which they didn't enter, that was for guests of the function (of which Candace Dempsey was one). The PMF team remained in the public area and watched everyone arrive for the function downstairs. Two of our members were even interviewed by reporters and their interview was broadcast on television.
Click to expand...

What a lucky coincidence they happened to be in the public bar to watch everyone arrive -- this doesn't strike you as a bit "stalker"-ish? I still don't get what purpose it served.
 
Mary H said:
Did anyone actually ask him? Was he even aware of it? Did he read the English language newspapers?
Click to expand...

Nah, not if he and his legal team are completely dumb and they've all been living on Planet X.

But, tell you what Mary, just in case they don't know, why don't you write to them and get a comment?
 
Mary_H said:
What a lucky coincidence they happened to be in the public bar to watch everyone arrive -- this doesn't strike you as a bit "stalker"-ish? I still don't get what purpose it served.
Click to expand...

No coincidence about it. The fundraiser was advertised to the public by the media. They were reporters for PMF...that's their job, to watch and report. I'm just waiting for you to spell out your beef.
 
Fulcanelli said:
Both Filomena and Amanda are liars then...yes or no?

See, here's your bind...if you are going to insist Filomena trashed her own room (don't spin it with untidy...if someone's room is untidy, then they've trashed their own room) then you have to call Amanda herself a liar...and that goes against your religion.
Click to expand...

Stop the nonsense. Look at the room and tell me it looks ransacked. What was thrown around? Filomena did not trash her room on the morning after the murder. It was simply not clean.
 
Fulcanelli said:
The police called Raffaele back in because of 'discrepencies' in his story...do you follow 'now'?
Click to expand...

This is the kind of information I have been asking for. What were the discrepancies?

Yes, to the courts...not to Mary on the JREF. And the courts would have had all these statements. You can't hear them, because they are classed under the banner of 'self incriminating' and as those statements were given when Amanda and Raffaele were witnesses, they can't be made public. However, the defence are legally entitled to make them public should they wish, so maybe you should ask them. Since they haven't and it doesn't look like they are going to, one can only conclude as a euphemism, 'they don't help Amanda and Raffaele'.
Click to expand...

Or they don't exist. I can't imagine the prosecution would forgo the opportunity to demonstrate Amanda and Raffaele's lack of credibility at trial.
 
Fulcanelli said:
She wasn't questioned again until she went before Matteini. She was then questioned once more after that in December...you can hear excerpts from that interrogation in this video: http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/.../71545/rewind---delitto-di-perugia---iii.html
Click to expand...

This is what I am remembering

CP: Patrick was in prison because of YOU! You didn't even say it to the PM on the 8th.
Click to expand...

You are correct. It does not say that she was interviewed by Mignini on that day: that was an inference I drew and drew wrongly.
 
By the way, I've got a REALLY CREEPY picture of Candace Dempsey stalking the backs of the Kerchers with her camera if you'd like me to post that up?
 
Fulcanelli said:
No coincidence about it. The fundraiser was advertised to the public by the media. They were reporters for PMF...that's their job, to watch and report. I'm just waiting for you to spell out your beef.
Click to expand...

My beef is, what's to watch and report? Do you want to know what the people in the Friends of Amanda look like? Why? So you can stalk them again?

I find this very ironic -- dare we say hypocritical? -- in light of the grief you guys give Candace for being photographed behind the Kerchers in Perugia.
 
Bruce Fisher said:
Stop the nonsense. Look at the room and tell me it looks ransacked. What was thrown around? Filomena did not trash her room on the morning after the murder. It was simply not clean.
Click to expand...

No Bruce, YOU stop the nonsense. The question is simple. IS Filomena a liar? IS Amanda a liar? Yes or no? Either you are wrong and they are not liars, or you are right and they are liars....which is it?
 
This has nothing at all to do with anything. Can we please leave it?

ETA: referring to the fundraiser
 
Fulcanelli said:
Nah, not if he and his legal team are completely dumb and they've all been living on Planet X.

But, tell you what Mary, just in case they don't know, why don't you write to them and get a comment?
Click to expand...

How about I put in a note to Kate Mansey instead. I'll get back to you on that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom