Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[JREF2010]

I thought the claim was Patrick that was paraded around, I must have missed the one with Amanda. It is hard to follow all these posts from one day to another. I am however in agreement with good Mochavente's post just add a dab of whip and some pumpkin spice, hold the spew.

I read the article and took a lot of searching. Candace lists the media source, but it has been removed form various sites. The one I finally found it on has been shut down.

But its there, and if someone wants to put in the search effort they'll find it most likely.

It was one of the hardest to find articles though...go figure why?

 

[pilot padron]

Nope. It has Meredith dying at 23:30, which is impossible given the state of her stomach contents, and it has Amanda and Raffaele both out and about from 21:27 onwards when at least one of them was at home doing things on Raffaele's computer.

So in some fairly major ways it does not fit the facts as we now know them.

What else do you have?

Only that I respectfully note your skillful moving of goalposts and parsing by you changing your original post from "facts" to the much more convenient, but obviously totally different "facts as we now know them"

Again, respectfully, but ever so obviously, the Motivations Report was not blessed with your self aggrandized, self annointed TOD conclusions as 'facts as we now know them'..

The Appeals Court will soon be the 'authoritative' resolution of the above, assuming of course that your arguments will now allow this 'appeal to authority'.

Although in a skeptics gathering, seeking information from others, use of 'ignore' seems rather counterproductive, inane, and childish, I am gratified that see here that you did not carry out that threatened disposition you directed to yours truly in your last argument.

 

[Chris C]

3) You repeatedly insult the Motivations author and ridicule his lengthy and coherent presentation.

What Motivations report did you read?

 

[pilot padron]

What Motivations report did you read?

Not sure I understand your question.
(unless you have unstated implications or intentions in asking).

As fellow informed followers of the case.... I stated to L.J:

1)The 427 page report is......

Please tell me again what exactly you need clarification of....

Is there more than one 427 page report, per chance ??

Or is your unstated implication and intention just another tired worn, repetitive regurgitated personal opinion factless attempt to also insult the contents of the Report and its author ?

1)The 427 page report is certainly a self evident 'single coherent story that fits the facts'.

 

[Dan O.]

.
Well, I had decided to put the issue to bed, but since you have joined the fray, Dan O, let's talk.

You say that the "one small detail" about Amanda being driven around Perugia in a police van along a purposefully circuitous route "may have been misreported".

If it's true that Candace Dempsey's book includes such a description maybe you could ask her to remove it.

For being such a "small detail" you all have spent a lot of effort trying to reorient this accusation.

Since you aren't actually going to put the issue to bed but continue to use it as a diversion, why don't you tell us what really happened at the time of the arrests and provide sources to back it up.

By the way Dan O., months ago you were going to tell us about some special evidence hidden in crime scene photos when one is turned to the left and the other is turned to the right. We're still waiting.

Still more diversions? If you read back through the thread you will see that I did answer your questions but you still led the PMF groupies to repeat this badgering that you are reintroducing here rather than discuss the relevant facts. That behavior is childish and it earned you a place on my ignore list before.

 

[Chris C]

Not sure I understand your question.
(unless you have unstated implications or intentions in asking).

As fellow informed followers of the case.... I stated to L.J:

1)The 427 page report is......

Please tell me again what exactly you need clarification of....

Is there more than one 427 page report, per chance ??

Or is your unstated implication and intention just another tired worn, repetitive regurgitated personal opinion factless attempt to also insult the contents of the Report and its author ?

1)The 427 page report is certainly a self evident 'single coherent story that fits the facts'.

You said coherent. There was an attempt to make the report coherent to fit the facts, but thats not what the result was. Your clearly using the motivations document as a paper shield to support your beliefs. Yet the simple truth is the report is far from coherent and full of contradictions.

 

[pilot padron]

You said coherent. There was an attempt to make the report coherent to fit the facts, but thats not what the result was. Your clearly using the motivations document as a paper shield to support your beliefs. Yet the simple truth is the report is far from coherent and full of contradictions.

Thank you for exposing the underlying intent of and motivation for your 'question'.

I now understand and accept *your personal opinion* of the Report as your motivation to ask.

However, comparing your qualifications to blog here with the qualifications to become a respected Judge, please understand that I accord your 'opinion' of that Document in your argument, each and every bit of the adulation it rightfully deserves.

Permit me an anology.
Personal opinions of the Report from bloggers here have about as much significance and useful credibility as one attending a football game and polling only the Home Town Team bleachers as to which team has the best fans.

 

[Chris C]

Thank you for exposing the underlying intent of and motivation for your 'question'.

I now understand and accept *your personal opinion* of the Report as your motivation to ask.

However, comparing your qualifications to blog here with the qualifications to become a respected Judge, please understand that I accord your 'opinion' of that Document in your argument, each and every bit of the adulation it rightfully deserves.

Permit me an anology.
Personal opinions of the Report from bloggers here have about as much significance and useful credibility as one attending a football game and polling only the Home Town Team bleachers as to which team has the best fans.

So what your saying is, If i was a respected judge my opinion would have more weight then someone that is a Doctor or an expert in DNA. Yet how does a judges opinion outweight expert testimony of Doctors or DNA experts. Should not that testimony have more weight than a Judges opinion.
Yet this is not a courtroom, its like you said a blog/forum. Therefore someone's opinion has more weight if someone is more knowledgeable about a subject when it comes to medicine or dna.

 

[odeed]

Kermet is simply trying to avoid discussing the embarrassment of the press conferences by focusing on one small detail that may have been misreported.

Your initial point that started this chain is still the most pertinent: "These things don't happen in Britain."

Actually, it is you that is trying to avoid the discussing basis of the claim, and I will repeat

Yes, I believe the that Dempsey's story of Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba being paraded/driven around Perugia on the 6th November to be false.

Since you have been repeating the story

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/socia...nda-knox-accused-of-sl_n_595759_49273472.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6432094&postcount=10396
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5992657&postcount=572
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5947215&postcount=12869
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6113605&postcount=3474
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6375494&postcount=7609
http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2...howComment=1284241875901#c1958514519953625076
http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/single/?p=400610&t=2609363

do you have any evidence to say it is true?

I will point out that some of the links I posted which repeat the false statement, do not make any reference to the "press conference" or "case closed" that you and others are using to derail from the discussion.

 

[Withnail1969]

Actually, it is you that is trying to avoid the discussing basis of the claim, and I will repeat



I will point out that some of the links I posted which repeat the false statement, do not make any reference to the "press conference" or "case closed" that you and others are using to derail from the discussion.

Nobody is trying to derail anything, i just think everyone is now extremely bored with this futile discussion of the exact details of the police victory parade which took place in Perugia on the morning of Nov. 6th 2007. Please do not attempt to engage me on this point as i will not discuss it further, and i suggest everyone else also ignores it.

 

[Dan O.]

Actually, it is you that is trying to avoid the discussing basis of the claim, and I will repeat



I will point out that some of the links I posted which repeat the false statement, do not make any reference to the "press conference" or "case closed" that you and others are using to derail from the discussion.

Are you making a claim or just saying you are ignorant of the facts. I recall that the "press conference" and "case closed" comment were noted in the press on the 7th or 8th. If you want to clearly express a claim that they never happened, I might be motivated to dig up the research to verify or dismiss your claim. Alternatively, you could do the research yourself and offer a detailed explanation of the veracity and source of these statements.

 

[JREF2010]

the perugia police parade

I will point out that some of the links I posted which repeat the false statement, do not make any reference to the "press conference" or "case closed" that you and others are using to derail from the discussion.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-560129/As-new-evidence-throws-Meredith-Kercher-case-chaos-just-DID-kill-her.html

This is one of the articles that state this.
I think the search was April 17, 2008 By TOM RAWSTORNE

There's another article, from a different source, that states the same thing but had a few different comments.

 

[Justinian2]

In a strongly-worded appeal, her legal team will argue that the conviction was against Italian and international law because it was so flawed. They will claim that because of the amount of attention focused on the case, the decision was biased and not a fair trial.

‘The court has grossly violated these principles (of law) and has therefore committed serious noncompliance and misapplication of assessment criteria,’ the papers read. ‘This alters the very nature of the ‘fair’ and ‘just’ process.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...breached-international-law.html#ixzz15kiFtb6F​

Will the absolute truth win over the Italian judges or P them off?

 

[odeed]

Are you making a claim or just saying you are ignorant of the facts. I recall that the "press conference" and "case closed" comment were noted in the press on the 7th or 8th. If you want to clearly express a claim that they never happened, I might be motivated to dig up the research to verify or dismiss your claim. Alternatively, you could do the research yourself and offer a detailed explanation of the veracity and source of these statements.

I am not making the claim, I am questioning the often repeated statement that Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba were driven or paraded through the old city of Perugia with lights and sirens going, I have made no mention of the statement made by the police so please do not try and derail the discussion.

I have asked for evidence, but so far the only accounts given are of Lumumba arrest on the morning 6th November.

 

[RWVBWL]

I have read conflicting reports about the dryer part of the combo not working or not working properly or taking too long, to the same as what you have quoted from Nadeau that there was no dryer. I am not sure what the state of the dryer was.

I hang quite a bit of my clothing on a rak even though a dryer is available because the directions say not to put in a dryer or I don't like what a dryer does to my clothing.

Well I'm sure they would have but Meredith's clothes where in the dryer and they didn't feel like folding and putting them up.

Meredith's cloths were in the washer. There was no separate dryer. The washer could have been a European combination washer/dryer with the dryer part not working, or just a plain washer. But there was no working dryer in the apartment.

Hi ChristianaHannah, Chris C, and El Buscador, LondonJohn and others,
I was just digging thru Frank Sfarzo's Perugia Shock, -(a goldmine of information!) and I found this photograph and article

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/02/perfect-too-perfect.html

about the washing machine in the girls apartment and Meredith's clothes that were found in it that we have discussed...
Imo, it's worth a read again.
RWVBWL

 

[pilot padron]

So what your saying is, If i was a respected judge my opinion would have more weight then someone that is a Doctor or an expert in DNA. Yet how does a judges opinion outweight expert testimony of Doctors or DNA experts. Should not that testimony have more weight than a Judges opinion.
Yet this is not a courtroom, its like you said a blog/forum. Therefore someone's opinion has more weight if someone is more knowledgeable about a subject when it comes to medicine or dna.

Your argument above is understood and accepted for what it says
But please allow me to repeat to help you understand just 'what I am saying'.

Unless *you* are indeed a Doctor or DNA expert who has had the same exposure to the evidence that the Judge has had, and can document equal academic achievements and professional certification, *your opinion* here has in no way improved itself from the lower than low 'adulation' I originally accorded it when comparing your qualifications as an anonymous blogger to that of a distinguished and peer respected senior Jurist.

Please also skim my suggestions above relevant to parsing and/or changing words, and moving goal posts to attempt to enhance or add credibility to weak and/or easily negated arguments when responding.

 

[el buscador]

Hi ChristianaHannah, Chris C, and El Buscador, LondonJohn and others,
I was just digging thru Frank Sfarzo's Perugia Shock, -(a goldmine of information!) and I found this photograph and article

http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/02/perfect-too-perfect.html

about the washing machine in the girls apartment and Meredith's clothes that were found in it that we have discussed...
Imo, it's worth a read again.
RWVBWL

Thanks, RWVBWL, it's always interesting to take time to read or reread Frank's blog. I always learn something new or get reminded of something I had forgotten about this tragic case.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Odeed,
Question for you.
If someone was involved in a bloody murder, such as the 1 we debate here, and their phone rang at 10:00pm, and it was the police,
do you think it would be "normal" for that person to then answer that phone call?

Why wouldn't that person, who has already been subject to hours and hours of police questioning,
and who surely must have had some kind of idea that the police were getting suspicious and possibly were on to him,
just screen the phone call and let it go to voicemail?
Who wants to talk with the police at 10:00pm at night?
Especially if he were stoned, much less in the midst of having dinner with a couple of friends?

What if the that phone call said "private", "unavailable", or "unknown"?
At 10:00pm on a late fall evening, while stoned and having dinner with friends,
what would you do if you were involved in a horrible crime?
Answer it?

Myself, if I were involved in that horrible of a crime, I would just screen the call and let it go to voicemail.
Heck, the last thing that I would be doing was cooperate with the police whatsoever on my own free will.

That Raffaele Sollecito did not do this, BUT instead DID ANSWER that phone call and afterwards, while so stoned he forgot that his knife was on him as he went down to the questura for further questioning, without lawyering up, further re-inforces my opinion that, in my mind at least, he did not have any involvement whatsoever in the brutal, bloody murder that took Meredith Kercher's life.

I find the comparison between the 2 males convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher quite interesting:

Rudy Guede, when he closed his eyes, saw RED and then split town.

What did Raffaele Sollecito do.
Never split the scene, stayed visible in public, answered questions, answered questions, and answered more questions, even shortly after getting stoned, without lawyering up!
Hmmm...
RWVBWL

 

[Solange305]

Or is your unstated implication and intention just another tired worn, repetitive regurgitated personal opinion factless attempt to also insult the contents of the Report and its author ?

Ding ding ding ding ding! The price is right!

 

[Chris C]

Your argument above is understood and accepted for what it says
But please allow me to repeat to help you understand just 'what I am saying'.

Unless *you* are indeed a Doctor or DNA expert who has had the same exposure to the evidence that the Judge has had, and can document equal academic achievements and professional certification, *your opinion* here has in no way improved itself from the lower than low 'adulation' I originally accorded it when comparing your qualifications as an anonymous blogger to that of a distinguished and peer respected senior Jurist.

Please also skim my suggestions above relevant to parsing and/or changing words, and moving goal posts to attempt to enhance or add credibility to weak and/or easily negated arguments when responding.

So basicly what your saying is our opinions are worthless and to shut up and bow down to the motivations report. Thats a strawman defense.
Then again, there where plenty of experts that the Judge and Jury refused to acknowledge. Including the coroner who puts the death between 2000hrs and 2130hrs. Aparently your stance is, that the judge and some person that didn't even watch the recorded autopsy, opinions weigh more than the coroner who performed the autopsy.