Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[billyryan]

I love the way guilters systematically dismiss every possibility that contamination was the cause of Raffaele's profile showing up when the bra clasp was analyzed. We should encourage this.

Once contamination has been eliminated as a possibility and the presence of Raffaele at the scene is eliminated by the computer logs, what option (however improbable) is going to remain to explain the DNA result?

I await the inevitable denials that such an outcome is even possible.

If Dan O the computer logs evidence stands up,and I hope it does,I can just imagine the headlines the day after on all newspapers covering the appeal.The judge may be willing to wait for months to make his decision but the press and tv wont

FRAMED ALL THE WAY INTO HELL. ARREST MIGNINI AND STEFANONI RELEASE AMANDA AND RAFFAELE

It will take more than indicments for calumnia to silence the press if the computer evidence stands up,Mignini will find having lived by the sword he will die by the sword

 

[Chris_Halkides]

two falsehoods in as many paragraphs

My view of your claims is heavily influenced by the nature of your previous arguments on quite straightforward issues - you refuse to deal with what primary documentation we have available, instead asking for cites or linking to partial & selective docs etc and obfuscating with appeals to what Frank S thinks or C Dempsey opines.

Leaving aside the fact that your claims on what is or isn't correct in Italian Law are neither informed nor disinterested.

.

platonov,

Your reply is false, on at least two counts. First, I use Candace Dempsey's book and Frank Sfarzo's blog as sources of information; rarely if ever do I use their opinions. Second, I have never made a claim as to what Italian law says about the electronic data files. So instead of answer to my questions, I get two falsehoods. I would prefer answers. In addition perhaps you would be so good as to explain your credentials in Italian law (this is only reasonable if you continue to offer your view on who is or is not informed).

 

[platonov]

Hi there Platonov,
I don't about that, for Mr. Sfarzo helped sway me to believe that "Foxy Knoxy" and "Daddy's Boy" were indeed innocent of any involvement in Meredith Kercher's bloody murder...

But hey, next time court convenes feel free to join Frank Sfarzo inside there and help give those of us interested in this brutal murder case the lowdown...
That would be cool, another direct source!
Thanks,
RWVBWL

PS-Also Platonov,
maybe you can ask your own sources in Perugia, Italy the same question I had posed to Frank Sfarzo awhile back
If he knew of any further break-ins to 2nd floor apartments or buildings since Rudy Guede was arrested and imprisoned?
Mr. Sfarzo publicly replied on Nov. 18, 2010 to my querry:
"'No' meaning that I don't know.
But if something like that had happened I would probably know."

It is almost 2 weeks later,
and I do find it interesting that neither you, nor any of the other colpevolisti have been able to refute Mr. Sfarzo's answer, yet...

Maybe it is true that the cops got their man,
you know, the 1 who had broken into the lawyers 2nd floor office and the 1 who apparently broke into Filomena Romanelli's 2nd floor window.
I do wonder, so please let me know if you have any other information to add to my inquiry,
as Frank Sfarzo has publicly given to me.
Thanks,
RW

So you are going with the '2nd storey man' angle & saying that Frank S agrees that all '2nd storey jobs' in Perugia were carried out by RG.
Or else that all other '2nd storey men' retired, as a mark of respect, when RG 'the maestro' was arrested.

OK. If Frank S says so & you believe it - Who am I to raise an eyebrow.

PS The front of the cottage was at grd level - perhaps 'you stick with what you know'

.

 

[RWVBWL]

For those who are interested, Meredith's father wrote an impassioned defence of his daughter here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...attack-cult-Foxy-Knoxy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml.

It's important that we all remember the true victim of this despicable crime.

Hello Stilicho,
I had just visited PMF for an always interesting read,
noticed the Dailymail article and have just finished reading that story that Mr. Kercher has written about his daughter.
Very sad indeed, I can feel his pain.
Thank you for bringing it over here too.
Peace,
RWVBWL

 

[platonov]

Surely, debating stuff nobody has seen is the principle activity of the forum? Bigfoot anyone?

Not to mention the God/religious threads [or the WMD claims ].
Or even the 'evilution' threads.

 

[Katody Matrass]

For those who are interested, Meredith's father wrote an impassioned defence of his daughter here:

Why are you calling it a defense? His daughter is not under any attack and he's not defending her but remembering.

 

[odeed]

Dr. Hampikian is a consultant for the defense. Sarah Gino was a defense witness. I am not sure what you mean.

odeed,

Do you have a citation for your claim about how Dr. Hampikian was hired?

Yes,

Dr. Hampikian is a consultant for the defense. Sarah Gino was a defense witness. I am not sure what you mean.

It does not matter if he is working "pro bono" or not, he was asked by Knox PR to put his opinion in writing, he did not volunteer this information spontaneously. Did he not also travel to Perugia with Charlie Wilkes or Mellas, who paid for this trip if he did?

Anecdotally, I know a number of "consultants" who do "pro bono" work and do very nicely for themselves when claiming the "out of pocket expenses".

You have misunderstood what wrote. No electronic data files were released either to Sollecito's defense or to Knox's defense.

I understood perfectly, however I was trying to point out that Hampikian and the Knox defense have nothing to do with Sollecito defense strategy/appeal, which was being discussed. It does seem to me that Knox supporters conflate the two defense teams into one, but Sollecito lawyers have every right to pursue their own strategy, despite the efforts of Mellas and Knox "clans" to insert themselves into Sollecito problems.

 

[odeed]

You have misunderstood what wrote. No electronic data files were released either to Sollecito's defense or to Knox's defense.

Since the topic of electronic data files have been brought up, I wonder if Charlie Wilkes would be so kind to explain where the screenshots of the electropherogramins in the petition (the one Hampikian put his name to), and quite recently in this post were obtained?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

clarification

Yes,


It does not matter if he is working "pro bono" or not, he was asked by Knox PR to put his opinion in writing, he did not volunteer this information spontaneously. Did he not also travel to Perugia with Charlie Wilkes or Mellas, who paid for this trip if he did?

Anecdotally, I know a number of "consultants" who do "pro bono" work and do very nicely for themselves when claiming the "out of pocket expenses".



I understood perfectly, however I was trying to point out that Hampikian and the Knox defense have nothing to do with Sollecito defense strategy/appeal, which was being discussed. It does seem to me that Knox supporters conflate the two defense teams into one, but Sollecito lawyers have every right to pursue their own strategy, despite the efforts of Mellas and Knox "clans" to insert themselves into Sollecito problems.

odeed,

There is such a thing as the Knox defense team; when you talk about Knox PR, I don't know what you mean. It sounds like something a conspiracy theorist would say. Your other comment is not exactly false, but it is irrelevant. The point is that none of the files were not released, not which team requested which files. Sollecito's lawyers were referring to the files Pasquali requested, and Gino and Hampikian were also clear about being refused files they requested. Moreover, you ignore the fact that some evidence is common to both appeals.

 

[platonov]

platonov,

Your reply is false, on at least two counts. First, I use Candace Dempsey's book and Frank Sfarzo's blog as sources of information; rarely if ever do I use their opinions. Second, I have never made a claim as to what Italian law says about the electronic data files. So instead of answer to my questions, I get two falsehoods. I would prefer answers. In addition perhaps you would be so good as to explain your credentials in Italian law (this is only reasonable if you continue to offer your view on who is or is not informed).

I don't claim any credentials in Italian law - as my previous posts on this issue make very clear.
Nor do I need any to doubt yours [or those of others on this thread who opine on the mistakes of Bongiorno etc]
If you wish to make and back up your claim - have at it.

I see you seem happy to accept the 'not disinterested' description however.

.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not so fast

I don't claim any credentials in Italian law - as my previous posts on this issue make very clear.
Nor do I need any to doubt yours [or those of others on this thread who opine on the mistakes of Bongiorno etc]
If you wish to make and back up your claim - have at it.

I see you seem happy to accept the 'not disinterested' description however.

.

platonov,

Please back up or withdraw your claim that I am not disinterested.

post script

It seems that your original post had three falsehoods.

 

[billyryan]

Hello Stilicho,
I had just visited PMF for an always interesting read,
noticed the Dailymail article and have just finished reading that story that Mr. Kercher has written about his daughter.
Very sad indeed, I can feel his pain.
Thank you for bringing it over here too.
Peace,
RWVBWL

I feel his pain too RWVBWL Meredith was beautiful.
But creating a second tradegy by imprisioning two innocent high achieving young people will not bring Meredith back

 

[RWVBWL]

Greeting Shuttlt,
Yesterday you had asked me this:

What if the police had done a competent job and yet the innocent Amazer was still in jail?

Even though my answer to you was brief, that it would suck,
in the back of my mind I remembered something like this,
which I re-read again when Katy Did posted earlier today in #17934:
"This is the lesson of the ancient habeas corpus.
It is the saying, “better a hundred guilty people free than one innocent behind bars”.

Take it easy,
RWVBWL

 

[Alt+F4]

I feel his pain too RWVBWL Meredith was beautiful.
But creating a second tradegy by imprisioning two innocent high achieving young people will not bring Meredith back

"High achieving"? I think not. Guilty or innocent they are nothing but average.

And no billyryan, you don't feel his pain.

The only tradegy here is Meredith...nothing else.

 

[Kaosium]

For those who are interested, Meredith's father wrote an impassioned defence of his daughter here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...attack-cult-Foxy-Knoxy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml.

It's important that we all remember the true victim of this despicable crime.

Thanks for posting this Stilicho.

I don't blame them being outraged, and I understand them not wanting to question what the authorities concluded about their daughter's death. However that understandable reluctance to confront that they may have been mislead is no reason to perpetuate another injustice.

Had the authorities in Perugia actually assembled a solid case, and had the tabloids not belted the whole sordid affair out to the cheap seats with absurd coverage they could have mourned their loss in peace.

 

[platonov]

The food was terrible - and the portions so small

platonov,

Please back up or withdraw your claim that I am not disinterested.

You accepted it first time around but not my doubt of your 'credentials in Italian law'.
When asked to back up the latter you drop it and now claim to be disinterested.

I don't accept you are disinterested on this issue - this thread is littered with examples.
As you no longer claim 'credentials' the specific point is moot, the general is not* and stands.

*The alternative, should you choose to accept it, is that your arguments are not just uninformed by the facts of this case but skewed in a manner that would interest Randi if it were accidental.

.

 

[Alt+F4]

It does not matter if he is working "pro bono" or not, he was asked by Knox PR to put his opinion in writing, he did not volunteer this information spontaneously. Did he not also travel to Perugia with Charlie Wilkes or Mellas, who paid for this trip if he did?

I agree that whether he is being paid or not doesn't matter. What good is putting his opinion in writing matter if he is not a defense witness in the appeal? It's been reported that he may be. Any confirmation?

...I was trying to point out that Hampikian and the Knox defense have nothing to do with Sollecito defense strategy/appeal, which was being discussed. It does seem to me that Knox supporters conflate the two defense teams into one, but Sollecito lawyers have every right to pursue their own strategy, despite the efforts of Mellas and Knox "clans" to insert themselves into Sollecito problems.

Aren't both the Knox and the Sollectio defense teams presenting a united front in the appeal?

 

[stilicho]

Why are you calling it a defense? His daughter is not under any attack and he's not defending her but remembering.

You're partially right. Mr Kercher is defending the memory of his daughter against cultists who have created a minor celebrity out of one of the three individuals responsible for her death.

 

[stilicho]

Thanks for posting this Stilicho.

I don't blame them being outraged, and I understand them not wanting to question what the authorities concluded about their daughter's death. However that understandable reluctance to confront that they may have been mislead is no reason to perpetuate another injustice.

Had the authorities in Perugia actually assembled a solid case, and had the tabloids not belted the whole sordid affair out to the cheap seats with absurd coverage they could have mourned their loss in peace.

You should read it again. It's not about questioning authorities. Mr Kercher clearly makes the case that creating a cult heroine out of Amanda Knox is offensive to himself, his family, and the memory of his slain daughter.

 

[Alt+F4]

I don't blame them being outraged, and I understand them not wanting to question what the authorities concluded about their daughter's death. However that understandable reluctance to confront that they may have been mislead is no reason to perpetuate another injustice.

You don't know the Kerchers. How dare you assume anything about them?