Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[LondonJohn]

I do not think LondonJohn "corrected" Fulcanelli: it has yet to be shown that Fulcanelli is wrong. It is certainly true that is good if we can get the facts. We don't have them: some of us have some bits of information and we can share those: but all our sources are partial. There is certainly no evidence in support of the implication that the police did not make efforts to check Patrick's alibi. Not a shred

I agree - I wouldn't necessarily want to explicitly imply "corrected", rather I think that I argued that the implication of Fulcanelli's post (that the police had unilaterally put in all the spadework to identify, seek out and bring to Perugia the mysterious Swiss professor) was misleading. I based this opinion on explicit information in a published book. However, I got immediately attacked and accused of either being deeply misinformed or of simply making things up. Even when I quoted the source, I was then treated to a slug of "oh that book's generally OK, but it's full of inaccuracies and second/third-hand hearsay". I may not agree with Mary H some of the time, but we can both agree on how this issue was handled by a particular poster.

 

[Fiona]

I am aware that you have problems with particular posters: you are not alone, though of course the ones we have problems with vary. Nonetheless you did not give your source and what you said came across as if it was incontrovertable fact. For example:

This is an astonishing distortion of what actually happened!

<snip>
The way in which the alibi-creating Swiss professor was found is utterly at odds with your fallacy

<snip>

So to say that Lumumba's alibi establishment was the result of dogged and "over and above" police work is arrant nonsense. If anything, the police tried to obfuscate and delay in this regard....

These are very strong statements and they are very aggressive. Far more aggressive than the post you were responding to. You made no mention of the source of your opinion and you did not couch it in terms of an opinion. But that is all it is, notwithstanding the book:for the book does not, so far as I know, go anything like so far as you did in that post. There are a lot of motes and beams in this exchange IMO

 

[tsig]

Your contributions are not.

Looks like valid questions and remarks to me. Are you suggesting that anyone who doesn't write essays and cut and paste from other sites should not participate.

Do you have any answers to the questions I have asked or are you content to merely snipe at my style?

 

[Mary_H]

I am aware that you have problems with particular posters: you are not alone, though of course the ones we have problems with vary. Nonetheless you did not give your source and what you said came across as if it was incontrovertable fact.

As was the case with Fulcanelli, who STILL has not provided a source for his information.

These are very strong statements and they are very aggressive. Far more aggressive than the post you were responding to. You made no mention of the source of your opinion and you did not couch it in terms of an opinion. But that is all it is, notwithstanding the book:for the book does not, so far as I know, go anything like so far as you did in that post. There are a lot of motes and beams in this exchange IMO

Oh my, we wouldn't want to get aggressive with the kind and gentle Mr. Fulcanelli, known only for his calm, enduring tenderness and loving respect for others.

By the way, does anyone have any evidence the police DID make an effort to find Patrick's alibis?

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi all,
I was just having a read over on the forum at Injustice in Perugia, and a recent post by "Kate said..." caught my eye. This is something that I have never thought of, have you?
__________________________________________________________________________
5/14/2010 2:03pm

"Why do you think this call means she couldn't have been attacked at 20:56? I think this call was made right at the end of the ordeal, and almost certainly after Meredith had already died. There are 3 strange calls - 21:58, 22:00, and 22:13, all made on the English phone. Meredith's Italian phone was switched off, but her English phone was left on. Why?
I think it's because the person who took the phones didn't read English, and therefore couldn't navigate the English phone menu. He tried to switch it off - hence the series of odd calls - but couldn't work out how to do it.All the calls that were made (voice mail, first number in Meredith's phone book - Abbey Bank - and a 9 second connection to the internet) could have been made by one key stroke. Rudy was pressing random buttons on the phone, trying to turn it off."
__________________________________________________________________________

Interesting theory, I think. May this be another possible overlooked clue?
The person with the cell phones, who possibly murdered Miss Kercher, could not read English? Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[tsig]

tldr

That's a shame, it was a collection of my posts in this thread and i feel honored that someone cared enough to do all that work.

 

[Mary_H]

Hi all,
I was just having a read over on the forum at Injustice in Perugia, and a recent post by "Kate said..." caught my eye. This is something that I have never thought of, have you?
__________________________________________________________________________
5/14/2010 2:03pm

"Why do you think this call means she couldn't have been attacked at 20:56? I think this call was made right at the end of the ordeal, and almost certainly after Meredith had already died. There are 3 strange calls - 21:58, 22:00, and 22:13, all made on the English phone. Meredith's Italian phone was switched off, but her English phone was left on. Why?
I think it's because the person who took the phones didn't read English, and therefore couldn't navigate the English phone menu. He tried to switch it off - hence the series of odd calls - but couldn't work out how to do it.All the calls that were made (voice mail, first number in Meredith's phone book - Abbey Bank - and a 9 second connection to the internet) could have been made by one key stroke. Rudy was pressing random buttons on the phone, trying to turn it off."
__________________________________________________________________________

Interesting theory, I think. May this be another possible overlooked clue?
The person with the cell phones, who possibly murdered Miss Kercher, could not read English? Hmmm...
RWVBWL

I agree, RWVBWL. Thanks for bringing that post to our attention.

 

[tsig]

See what LondonJohn correctly wrote about my phrase concerning African immigrants. My description here of Amanda implied the point of view of the international media.

So when i read your posts I can't tell if that's what you think or if you're reflecting "the point of view of the international media"?

 

[RoseMontague]

That's a shame, it was a collection of my posts in this thread and i feel honored that someone cared enough to do all that work.

There were some excellent zingers in there. Well worth the read, in my opinion.

 

[stilicho]

Woah: "what we would ask of you" - is there a committee in operation here?! Has every other newbie had to produce a list of what they agree with and what they disagree with?! This is sounding vaguely Orwellian.....

It helps to understand the level(s) of your objections to the results of the investigations, the trials, and the verdicts. If you don't want to, that's your business. Just say so.

I'm not going to go through my views on a point-by-point basis. And, as Ive said many, many times before, I have no agenda and no pre-conceptions. However, my overarching view (which I in fact expressed in my first post on here) is that I have concerns regarding the ways in which AK and RS were convicted. This DOESN'T however mean that I necessarily think they had nothing to do with the offence.

Well, right there, you contradicted yourself. You have no preconceptions and yet you think AK and RS were wrongly convicted. Please correct that.

I believe there may well have been irregularities in the way the police treated RS and - particularly - AK during the interrogations up to and including the first AK "confession". I believe this might come back to bite the prosecution in appellate courts. I believe that the way in which the police and prosecutors aparently treated Lumumba might tend to support any appellate arguments about state propriety - although I think AK's camp have muddied the waters considerably with over-exaggerations of police brutality.

If you are only concerned about the capacity of the prosecution to properly conduct themselves in an appeal, then those concerns are unfounded. Both the Italian system and those involved in it are quite professional. This is a system that has been capable of successfully marginalising such threats as the Mafia. I doubt they're incapable of handling simple appeals in a murder case involving three drifting young people.

I also believe that there may be trouble ahead regarding the DNA on the knife, and that the new super-sensitive "flavour" of LCN analysis may not stand up to further legal scrutiny (regardless of the defence's failure to sent representatives to the testing). And if the prosecution no longer has the knife DNA (which was presented with a fair degree of certitude in court, and which was basically impossible for AK/RS to explain away), holes start to appear.

The law and the scientific method are still safe in spite of your concern.

I'm not suggesting that there aren't many other strands to the prosecution's case, but I suggest that the burden of proof might get harder on appeal. As I say, I argue from a purely legalistic perspective, and NOT from the perspective of "did they do it or didn't they?" Others of course will argue that the case is watertight, even over and above these specific issues. But I'm not so sure...

Your uncertainty has been tabled. Thank you.

Your job is done now so we likely won't be hearing anything further since both Italian jurisprudence and the scientific method have survived intact.

 

[Fine]

The SAME questions

Mary H. wrote today:
"This is a good argument for the claim that the police did not at first question what Amanda and Raffaele did the night before. If they had been asked about it right away and had to repeat it several times, they would have been able to remember. But it appears they were asked about it only after a couple of days."

_____________________________________

Well, Mary, the burden of proof is on your shoulders. Not only is it standard police procedure, but none other than Amanda herself contradicts you. Here is how Amanda describes the beginning of the famous November 5/6 interrogation:
"They [the cops] started asking me the same questions...what I'd done that night...." (See You Tube, Amanda Knox Statement 10/18/08 During Rudy Guede's Trial, posted by AMANDAKNOXARCHIVES, elapsed time index = 1:10)

____________________________

Hello all. This is my first post, though I've been reading for several weeks. I've followed the case since last summer, have posted over on the PMF site, and, yes, I believe that all three suspects are guilty of murder. Sorry, I didn't create a LIVE Link to the You Tube Amanda testimony, but as a new member I'm not permitted to do so.

///

 

[tsig]

There were some excellent zingers in there. Well worth the read, in my opinion.

:

 

[tsig]

Mary H. wrote today:
"This is a good argument for the claim that the police did not at first question what Amanda and Raffaele did the night before. If they had been asked about it right away and had to repeat it several times, they would have been able to remember. But it appears they were asked about it only after a couple of days."

_____________________________________

Well, Mary, the burden of proof is on your shoulders. Not only is it standard police procedure, but none other than Amanda herself contradicts you. Here is how Amanda describes the beginning of the famous November 5/6 interrogation:
"They [the cops] started asking me the same questions...what I'd done that night...." (See You Tube, Amanda Knox Statement 10/18/08 During Rudy Guede's Trial, posted by AMANDAKNOXARCHIVES, elapsed time index = 1:10)

____________________________

Hello all. This is my first post, though I've been reading for several weeks. I've followed the case since last summer, have posted over on the PMF site, and, yes, I believe that all three suspects are guilty of murder. Sorry, I didn't create a LIVE Link to the You Tube Amanda testimony, but as a new member I'm not permitted to do so.

///

Welcome to JREF, Fine.

Post the link with spaces and someone will fix it for you.

 

[christianahannah]

Didn't the image show? Red bucket on bottom left on outside porch entrance?

I'm sorry. Yes the image showed. I didn't realize that was a bucket (still don't see a mop). Obviously, I don't clean as much as I should.

 

[Fine]

Here is the link to Amanda's testimony,with spaces in the link:

h t tp ://w w w.y o u t u b e. com/watch?v=B6CaNlJF4u8


///

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Here is the link to Amanda's testimony,with spaces in the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6CaNlJF4u8


///

Fixed link

 

[stilicho]

Fixed link

That's pretty clear. I suppose Mary will now retract her statement.

 

[Amazer]

That's pretty clear. I suppose Mary will now retract her statement.

You are an idealist aren't you Stilicho?

I have a nagging suspicion that we are instead going to be treated to another spectacular display of mental gymnastics.

 

[RWVBWL]

Mary H. wrote today:
"This is a good argument for the claim that the police did not at first question what Amanda and Raffaele did the night before. If they had been asked about it right away and had to repeat it several times, they would have been able to remember. But it appears they were asked about it only after a couple of days."

_____________________________________

Well, Mary, the burden of proof is on your shoulders. Not only is it standard police procedure, but none other than Amanda herself contradicts you. Here is how Amanda describes the beginning of the famous November 5/6 interrogation:
"They [the cops] started asking me the same questions...what I'd done that night...." (See You Tube, Amanda Knox Statement 10/18/08 During Rudy Guede's Trial, posted by AMANDAKNOXARCHIVES, elapsed time index = 1:10)

____________________________

Hello all. This is my first post, though I've been reading for several weeks. I've followed the case since last summer, have posted over on the PMF site, and, yes, I believe that all three suspects are guilty of murder. Sorry, I didn't create a LIVE Link to the You Tube Amanda testimony, but as a new member I'm not permitted to do so.

///

More "New Blood", cool!
Greetings from Los Angeles, Fine, and welcome to JREF...
Though it sounds like you and I might have different opinions regarding the convictions in this interesting case, I hope that you too can join us often at the table and discuss skepticism and critical thinking in a courteous manner, as most of us here try to do. Myself, I usually try to make it a point to nicely address the person I am responding to, which I see all over the world wide web on different forums, is not done often. It would be nice to see others do the same. How do most people answer the phone? With a simple hello...
I know that you are new here, but being a member of PMF, you probably know alot of this case already.
Question for you, or heck, anyone else that wants to give an opinion regarding this that I had posted earlier:

5/14/2010 2:03pm poster: Kate says... on Injustice in Perugia forum
"Why do you think this call means she couldn't have been attacked at 20:56? I think this call was made right at the end of the ordeal, and almost certainly after Meredith had already died. There are 3 strange calls - 21:58, 22:00, and 22:13, all made on the English phone.
Meredith's Italian phone was switched off, but her English phone was left on. Why?
I think it's because the person who took the phones didn't read English, and therefore couldn't navigate the English phone menu. He tried to switch it off - hence the series of odd calls - but couldn't work out how to do it.All the calls that were made (voice mail, first number in Meredith's phone book - Abbey Bank - and a 9 second connection to the internet) could have been made by one key stroke. Rudy was pressing random buttons on the phone, trying to turn it off."


What do you think Fine? Do you think that the person with the cell phones might not have read English very well and was having a hard time figuring out how to shut down the phone? I wonder about this, and many other odd happenings in the murder of Meredith Kercher.
RWVBWL

 

[RWVBWL]

More "New Blood", cool!
Greetings from Los Angeles, Fine, and welcome to JREF...
Though it sounds like you and I might have different opinions regarding the convictions in this interesting case, I hope that you too can join us often at the table and discuss skepticism and critical thinking in a courteous manner, as most of us here try to do. Myself, I usually try to make it a point to nicely address the person I am responding to, which I see all over the world wide web on different forums, is not done often. It would be nice to see others do the same. How do most people answer the phone? With a simple hello...
I know that you are new here, but being a member of PMF, you probably know alot of this case already.
Question for you, or heck, anyone else that wants to give an opinion regarding this that I had posted earlier:

5/14/2010 2:03pm poster: Kate says... on Injustice in Perugia forum
"Why do you think this call means she couldn't have been attacked at 20:56? I think this call was made right at the end of the ordeal, and almost certainly after Meredith had already died. There are 3 strange calls - 21:58, 22:00, and 22:13, all made on the English phone.
Meredith's Italian phone was switched off, but her English phone was left on. Why?
I think it's because the person who took the phones didn't read English, and therefore couldn't navigate the English phone menu. He tried to switch it off - hence the series of odd calls - but couldn't work out how to do it.All the calls that were made (voice mail, first number in Meredith's phone book - Abbey Bank - and a 9 second connection to the internet) could have been made by one key stroke. Rudy was pressing random buttons on the phone, trying to turn it off."


What do you think Fine? Do you think that the person with the cell phones might not have read English very well and was having a hard time figuring out how to shut down the phone? I wonder about this, and many other odd happenings in the murder of Meredith Kercher.
RWVBWL

Hi guys and gals,
Anyone have an opinion?
There's A LOT of heavy hitter's on JREF right now: "Stilicho, Amazer, tsig, and Bobthedonkey", with some 13,000 posts under your collective belts here. Any of you guys or gals have an opinion on what I am asking of? Hmmm...
RWVBWL