• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fiona said:
From post #207



That is why
Click to expand...

I think if the defense were to demonstrate how easy this move is in court, the jury would think twice. There is no doubt Rudy was in a hurry, and was not going to waste time he didn't have by locking the door in the least efficient way as opposed to the most efficient way.

Your description of how courts work seems a little backward to me. It is the prosecution's job to show that things happened; it is the job of the defense to show there is reasonable doubt around those claims.

Did the prosecution even make the claim that Amanda or Raffaele and not Rudy had locked the door?
 
RoseMontague said:
I understand it may be possible to lock the door in this manner. So, Mary H, do you really think this is what happened?
Click to expand...

Ah, good question, Rose. There are a lot of doubts surrounding the footprints, e.g., which ones were made with blood, which ones were made at which times, the route Amanda took out of the bathroom, the police scrubbing them up on the first day, etc. To me, they are just not that reliable a set of evidence to go on to prove anything.

I don't really care how Rudy locked the door; I just know Amanda and Raffaele didn't.
 
Mary H said:
Well, that's an illuminating response.
Click to expand...

Well, you gave to be bright enough in the first place to get it. I suppose you should should just accept your limitations if you're unable to rise above them.

Mary H said:
LOL! I see both Fulcanelli and stilicho have signed off, no doubt to spend the rest of the day trying the door-locking maneuver, and hoping that the subject will have changed by the time they get back. I will use this interval to take a walk on a beautiful spring day in Seattle.
Actually, tonight I was more concerned with what was going on with the government of my country. You were way down on my list of priorities, despite your inflated belief in your importance.

Mary H said:
Have you tried it? Stand at the hinge side of a door, facing away, and without moving your feet, turn your body and reach for the key or area where a key would be under the doorknob. No rubber arms necessary. And Rudy has several inches on me, plus he was a basketball player.
Click to expand...

You know what Mary...I'm not even going here with you. Your ridiculous argument doesn't deserve the dignity of a response. You have no honest debate, nor honour and truth is at the bottom of your priority list. If that's how low you want to go, go there and let it reflect on you. I'm not getting down there with you.

If you have an issue with that, then offer your 'back to the door door locking technique' to the judge. I'm sure he'll be as bowled over as I am, I'm sure he'll enjoy having his intelligence insulted. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Fulcanelli said:
Well, you gave to be bright enough in the first place to get it. I suppose you should should just accept your limitations if you're unable to rise above them.

Mary H said:
LOL! I see both Fulcanelli and stilicho have signed off, no doubt to spend the rest of the day trying the door-locking maneuver, and hoping that the subject will have changed by the time they get back. I will use this interval to take a walk on a beautiful spring day in Seattle.
Actually, tonight I was more concerned with what was going on with the government of my country. You were way down on my list of priorities, despite your inflated belief in your importance.



You know what Mary...I'm not even going here with you. Your ridiculous argument doesn't deserve the dignity of a response. You have no honest debate, nor honour and truth is at the bottom of your priority list. If that's how low you want to go, go there and let it reflect on you. I'm not getting down there with you.

If you have an issue with that, then offer your 'back to the door door locking technique' to the judge. I'm sure he'll be as bowled over as I am, I'm sure he'll enjoy having his intelligence insulted. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

Wow, talk about a sore loser.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
stilicho said:
I call shenanigans.

This is another in an unbelievably long line of complete fabrications. You don't do that all the time; nobody does.

It might be a good idea, some time, to re-read your posts before submitting them. It will save you from embarrassment.
Click to expand...

Shame is an unknown country to Mary.
 
Mary_H said:
Ah, good question, Rose. There are a lot of doubts surrounding the footprints, e.g., which ones were made with blood, which ones were made at which times, the route Amanda took out of the bathroom, the police scrubbing them up on the first day, etc. To me, they are just not that reliable a set of evidence to go on to prove anything.

I don't really care how Rudy locked the door; I just know Amanda and Raffaele didn't.
Click to expand...

It is nice to be so certain, Mary H.
 
Mary_H said:
I wouldn't even be bothering with this if I weren't, Rose.
Click to expand...

Good for you, and if you see yourself as helping the cause of AK and RS, even better. I think your heart is in the right place. I don't think the back to door locking scenario is one of your better efforts, however. To me it just points out how unlikely it was that Rudy locked the door. Perhaps if you think hard enough, you could come up with a more plausible theory.
 
Mary_H said:
I think if the defense were to demonstrate how easy this move is in court, the jury would think twice. There is no doubt Rudy was in a hurry, and was not going to waste time he didn't have by locking the door in the least efficient way as opposed to the most efficient way.

Your description of how courts work seems a little backward to me. It is the prosecution's job to show that things happened; it is the job of the defense to show there is reasonable doubt around those claims.

Did the prosecution even make the claim that Amanda or Raffaele and not Rudy had locked the door?
Click to expand...

Tell you what Mary...why don't you do it for us on web cam, record it and post it up for us...just uo prove your point? Alternatively, you can stop spouting *****.
 
RoseMontague said:
Good for you, and if you see yourself as helping the cause of AK and RS, even better. I think your heart is in the right place. I don't think the back to door locking scenario is one of your better efforts, however. To me it just points out how unlikely it was that Rudy locked the door. Perhaps if you think hard enough, you could come up with a more plausible theory.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Rose, for not being abusive. :)

I tried to clarify that his back was not to the door -- it is very simple to be facing away from the door, and turn and lock it. The point was not to prove that is how Rudy locked the door, it was to show there is no evidence proving he didn't lock the door, as Fulcanelli claimed.

I thought it was a relatively insignificant point (especially if it wasn't even a part of the prosecution's argument), but judging from the reaction, I guess I was mistaken.
 
Fulcanelli said:
She is certain...certain it's rubbish. It's called sophistry.
Click to expand...

I think it is more of a case of reductionism. Each of these things taken individually can possibly be explained requiring a bit of a stretch in some cases. Taken with all of the other evidence, it would require a stretch, a cartwhell or two, and perhaps an Olympic gymnastics routine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom