Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

They did say they watched the movie, ate, smoked-up, surfed, washed dishes and had a leak. The Patrick message was proved and the Popovic visit was documented.

I doubt they recorded the evening on a video, if thats what you want.

Many people don't record themselves during an evening.

Even the police of Perugia and Romes finest, the great Edgardo Giobbi, didn't record an evening of the Great Confession.

So I guess no one really records their evenings very well.

And every single one of those things happened before 8:42 PM.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Bil Edelblute is not reporting on the murder case, per se. He is a political reporter ("Spokane Political Buzz Examiner") who is using the case as a platform from which to criticize Senator Maria Cantwell, who is a member of a different political party.

Accordingly, Edelblute did not start covering the case until after the verdict in December, when Senator Cantwell made a public protest against it. Five out of the first six pieces he wrote about the case had Senator Cantwell's name in the title, as does the current piece and a few others. In order to make a case against the senator, he has to take the opposite side in the murder case; in other words, any friend of Senator Cantwell is an enemy of Bill Edelblute.

In general, his pieces are blatantly slanted in favor of the verdict and against Amanda. He parrots the guilters' arguments to the extent that truejustice has reprinted some of his pieces on their site, providing links for its readers so they can scurry over and leave praise for the author in the comment sections.

As a rule, Edelblute leaves out evidence that supports the pro-innocence side; worse, he liberally weaves editorial comments into his pieces but is unclear about where the reporting stops and his opinions start, leading people to believe that his opinion is a fact of the story.

I will give him credit for one relatively objective article, in which he discussed Mignini's penchant for filing defamation suits.

http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spo...ecutor-Migninis-tactics-may-taint-Knox-result

So Edelblute doesn't doesn't hold much stock in the claims for Amanda's innocence and hasn't swallowed the BS offered by the PR campaign. I don't blame him. So...what's your point?

'I' certainly don't buy your claim that he hasn't bought Amanda's PR campaign only because he supposedly (according to you) has something against Cantwell.

 

[Fulcanelli]

From that point of view (not that I agree with it), it should be even more apparent that they were evading the issue. Later on in their writings, they both talked about having made love that night; something they hadn't mentioned right out of the gate -- who would?

Ehhh...no they don't Mary. Amanda does, because that's one of the things she said to the police they did from the beginning. Raffaele does not, he NEVER claims or even suggests in any of his writings they made love. His only mention of it ever is as a negative. When he stated Amanda returned to his apartment about about 1 am, he says he 'doesn't remember' if they made love 'then' or not. He claimed and has ALWAYS claimed, he spent the whole evening on his computer.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Stilicho writes:

It is inconceivable--in a murder investigation--that anyone would refuse to say exactly what they were doing when asked by the police. Only in FOA-World would this be considered remotely possible.

What if you tell the truth about what you were doing and the police don't believe you?

They clearly weren't telling the truth. Amanda and Raffaele certainly weren't on the computer all night, were they?

The thing that amazes me about you people, as EAGER as you all are to blame everyone and anyone else for Amanda's problems and accuse all of wrongdoing, not a single one of you ever blame or criticise Raffaele for putting Amanda in that situation in the first place by withdrawing her alibi and then after never speaking out to give her one. But don't worry, I realise 'exactly' why that is

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Does anyone know what the sign on Amanda's door at the cottage said?

 

[Lallante]

For a lawyer you seem remarkably certain about the outcome of a case you never tried.

Here in this thread the opinion seems to be against you.

Why did Amanda lie Patrick into jail?

Sleep deprivation, suggestion and intensive (and quite probably illegal) police interview techniques. Why wasn't a lawyer present during the interview in which Amanda gave those statements?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Does anyone know what the sign on Amanda's door at the cottage said?

Does it say something important Charlie?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Sleep deprivation, suggestion and intensive (and quite probably illegal) police interview techniques. Why wasn't a lawyer present during the interview in which Amanda gave those statements?

She wasn't deprived of sleep, she named Patrick at 1:45 am. It's a little late, but not that late.

Amanda didn't have a lawyer because she was being interviewed as a witness.

 

[Lallante]

They had elaborate and shifting stories about being together, surfing the internet, watching a movie, reading Harry Potter books, making love, not being together, smoking pot, not remembering what they were doing, eating variously at 9 pm, 10 pm or 11 pm, playing with bleeding fish, looking at a swamp forming under the sink, and so forth. Those are just the stories you and I can get from publicly available articles. I haven't even included AK's statements about witnessing Patrick sexually assaulting and murdering her roommate or the Kate Mansey interview with RS.

You are either hopelessly naive or being outright intellectually dishonest. There is absolutely no way I could give an hour by hour summary of what I did last night, let alone several days ago with a traumatic event in between. My answer would be just like theres - a hodge podge of all the individual incidents I could remember over the course of an evening, getting times wrong and listing lots of different things.

If you have a perfect memory of the events of each day, congratulations. I for one could barely tell you a single detail of my journey to work this morning let alone my evening several nights ago.

 

[Mary_H]

They clearly weren't telling the truth. Amanda and Raffaele certainly weren't on the computer all night, were they?

The thing that amazes me about you people, as EAGER as you all are to blame everyone and anyone else for Amanda's problems and accuse all of wrongdoing, not a single one of you ever blame or criticise Raffaele for putting Amanda in that situation in the first place by withdrawing her alibi and then after never speaking out to give her one. But don't worry, I realise 'exactly' why that is

Why would we blame Raffaele? The police are at fault, not he.

What's this about Raffaele never speaking out to give Amanda an alibi? Who was saying recently that Raffaele's diary was written for public consumption?

"Nov 12 2007

The facts are taking their course and slowly I am realizing that according to the fact which you, dad, that night sent me a message of 'goodnight' and also for the fact that the first statement made by me saying that Amanda was all the night with me, I must say that 90% I said the fat cavolata in my second statement. And that is:

1 that Amanda brought me to say something stupid and I have repeated that over and over again in the court of the squadra mobile;

2 reconstructing I am realizing that Amanda was actually very likely with me all night, never leaving. And I certainly wouldn't mind to help in the investigation and put freely in all the troubles. Indeed, for me it would be fabulous if Amanda had done nothing, as it becomes impossible to find whatever trace on my shoes and my knife and this
story will have a happy ending for me and for you ..."

 

[Mary_H]

You are right about saying just enough to the police. You sound clever enough to know that if they're asking more pointed questions about times and places that they aren't just interested in shooting the breeze. You'd probably "lawyer up" pretty quickly.

If I were innocent of a crime, it would not even cross my mind to "lawyer up."

Your position is a little different. You're suggesting that they were at home making love all night but deceived the police by creating scenarios that turned out to be lies. I don't know where you're going with this but it ought to be interesting.

I don't know of any scenarios that turned out to be lies.

 

[Mary_H]

You're sidestepping the issue. Did Edelblute lie when he said Ms Dempsey was musing about AK's makeup?

Oh, I didn't realize that was an issue. I have no idea; I wasn't there. He probably didn't.

 

[Lallante]

She wasn't deprived of sleep, she named Patrick at 1:45 am. It's a little late, but not that late.

Amanda didn't have a lawyer because she was being interviewed as a witness.

I would genuinely enjoy watching you try to keep a clear head and a straight story after many many hours of questioning by angry, overzealous police in a second language after finding out your housemate has been brutally raped and murdered.

I'm sure your story would stay precise, detail your exact movements and never express any doubt despite police pressure.

Answers given after hours of interrogation without the presence of a lawyer are fundamentally suspect in any case.

 

[Fulcanelli]

You are either hopelessly naive or being outright intellectually dishonest. There is absolutely no way I could give an hour by hour summary of what I did last night, let alone several days ago with a traumatic event in between. My answer would be just like theres - a hodge podge of all the individual incidents I could remember over the course of an evening, getting times wrong and listing lots of different things.

If you have a perfect memory of the events of each day, congratulations. I for one could barely tell you a single detail of my journey to work this morning let alone my evening several nights ago.

But they can't seem to remember ANYTHING they did after 8:40 PM. And that they do claim to remember has either been disproved by the actual facts or is completely contradicted by the alibi of the other.

Raffaele claims to have been on his computer all night until 1 am. The last human activity on his machine was at 9:10 pm and that may not even have been human contact but the automatic closing of a program on the completion of a task. Raffaele also says Amanda went out and left him at about (shortly before) 9 pm.

Both of them claim while Meredith was being murdered, they watched a movie, they had dinner and after washed up and there was a leak under the sink. Except it's been proven that all those events happened before 8:42 pm. Raffaele claims he spoke to his father on his landline phone at 11 pm. Phone records show there was no such phone call (although they did speak on Raffaele's mobile at 8:42 pm).

And here's the rub...they both seem to have a perfect memory of events leading up to 8:40 pm, yet abrubtly after 8:40 pm they either can't remember what they did, or the events they cite never happened that night as proven by the facts, or the events they claimed happened all happened before 8:40 pm (a combination of those three). You can't have it both ways...where they remember all the facts leading up to 8:40 b ut not one after that time.

 

[Lallante]

They clearly weren't telling the truth. Amanda and Raffaele certainly weren't on the computer all night, were they?

The thing that amazes me about you people, as EAGER as you all are to blame everyone and anyone else for Amanda's problems and accuse all of wrongdoing, not a single one of you ever blame or criticise Raffaele for putting Amanda in that situation in the first place by withdrawing her alibi and then after never speaking out to give her one. But don't worry, I realise 'exactly' why that is

Its a simple "save yourself" reaction. If the police are convinced that either one or both of you did the murder, and you know for certain it wasn't you, then you don't deny its the other person. Its simple game theory.

If you were to ask someone what they did "last night" they would probably (if they could remember) list anything they did between supper and bed. If they spent 2 hours on the PC, then made love for 3 hours (its sad if you dont think this is realistic), the fact they didnt use the pc after 9 doesn't make anything they have said a lie.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Why would we blame Raffaele? The police are at fault, not he.

Why are they at fault...the police didn't drop Amanda's alibi, Raffaele did?

What's this about Raffaele never speaking out to give Amanda an alibi? Who was saying recently that Raffaele's diary was written for public consumption?

"Nov 12 2007

The facts are taking their course and slowly I am realizing that according to the fact which you, dad, that night sent me a message of 'goodnight' and also for the fact that the first statement made by me saying that Amanda was all the night with me, I must say that 90% I said the fat cavolata in my second statement. And that is:

1 that Amanda brought me to say something stupid and I have repeated that over and over again in the court of the squadra mobile;

2 reconstructing I am realizing that Amanda was actually very likely with me all night, never leaving. And I certainly wouldn't mind to help in the investigation and put freely in all the troubles. Indeed, for me it would be fabulous if Amanda had done nothing, as it becomes impossible to find whatever trace on my shoes and my knife and this
story will have a happy ending for me and for you ..."

That's commitment! Do you know what weasel words are Mary?

Raffaele has never once supported Amanda's alibi in a police or court room. Let's see what Raffaele said to the Italian High Court AFTER he wrote his diary:

Raffaele:
The clues against Amanda have been arbitrarily transferred to me on the erroneous assumption that we must have been together that evening.
Supreme Court:
For the same reasons given above, we can exclude that clues against Knox have been arbitrarily transferred to you.

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=1173#p1173

 

[Lallante]

But they can't seem to remember ANYTHING they did after 8:40 PM. And that they do claim to remember has either been disproved by the actual facts or is completely contradicted by the alibi of the other.

Raffaele claims to have been on his computer all night until 1 am. The last human activity on his machine was at 9:10 pm and that may not even have been human contact but the automatic closing of a program on the completion of a task. Raffaele also says Amanda went out and left him at about (shortly before) 9 pm.

Both of them claim while Meredith was being murdered, they watched a movie, they had dinner and after washed up and there was a leak under the sink. Except it's been proven that all those events happened before 8:42 pm. Raffaele claims he spoke to his father on his landline phone at 11 pm. Phone records show there was no such phone call (although they did speak on Raffaele's mobile at 8:42 pm).

And here's the rub...they both seem to have a perfect memory of events leading up to 8:40 pm, yet abrubtly after 8:40 pm they either can't remember what they did, or the events they cite never happened that night as proven by the facts, or the events they claimed happened all happened before 8:40 pm (a combination of those three). You can't have it both ways...where they remember all the facts leading up to 8:40 b ut not one after that time.

Please show me evidence that they 'dont know' or 'cant remember' anything they did after 8.40?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Its a simple "save yourself" reaction. If the police are convinced that either one or both of you did the murder, and you know for certain it wasn't you, then you don't deny its the other person. Its simple game theory.

If you were to ask someone what they did "last night" they would probably (if they could remember) list anything they did between supper and bed. If they spent 2 hours on the PC, then made love for 3 hours (its sad if you dont think this is realistic), the fact they didnt use the pc after 9 doesn't make anything they have said a lie.

Save himself from what? They weren't accusing him of being involved in the murder.

It does make it a lie. Raffaele claimed he was on his PC ALL night, until he went to bed at 1 am.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Please show me evidence that they 'dont know' or 'cant remember' anything they did after 8.40?

Do you want fries with that? This is open knowledge to anyone who has followed the trial and the case...it's basic knowledge. If you haven't familiarised yourself with the case then I siggest you get your secretary to go and get the research for it.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I would genuinely enjoy watching you try to keep a clear head and a straight story after many many hours of questioning by angry, overzealous police in a second language after finding out your housemate has been brutally raped and murdered.

I'm sure your story would stay precise, detail your exact movements and never express any doubt despite police pressure.

Answers given after hours of interrogation without the presence of a lawyer are fundamentally suspect in any case.

Only, I've no idea where you're getting this 'many hours' from, you seem to be pulling it out of thin air.

As far as I was aware, in the UK, witness statements are considered to be quite valid, unless they can be shown to be false or any wrongdoing is shown.