Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

Chris, I know it's terribly exciting to catch me making a mistake but I've explained perfectly clearly that I've already made the same mistake on PMF and been corrected there by more than one poster. It would not be a very sensible deception given that we all know you read that board as well.

I've never posted a cropped photo. Where did you get that idea?

I wouldn't call what you did with the photo a mistake. I would call it deceptive. The reason its deceptive is because when the photos integrity was called into question, you didn't claim my mistake. Instead you made personal attacks against the person. It wasn't until someone posted a previous website where it was discussed that you admitted to the deception.

Have you appologized to Katody?

 

[tsig]

No Mary, you provided no evidence Curatolo is mentally ill. You evidenced only that some homeless people are mentally ill. I don't understand how that can be applied to a specific person. And it is insulting. It is not insulting to call someone mentally ill when they are, bur it is when they are not.

And we come to rank hypocrisy again. Time and again you Amanda defenders have have insisted that claims about whether Amanda is a sociopath, or even gave an opinion that she is, let alone state it as fact...must not be made unless she is personally studied and diagnosed by a psychiatrist. Yet the same is not required of Curatolo to declare him mentally ill.

The double standards just keep on coming!

Double standards not only allow you to have your cake and eat it too it can also be both chocolate and angel food at the same time.

 

[SomeAlibi]

I wouldn't call what you did with the photo a mistake. I would call it deceptive. The reason its deceptive is because when the photos integrity was called into question, you didn't claim my mistake. Instead you made personal attacks against the person. It wasn't until someone posted a previous website where it was discussed that you admitted to the deception.

Have you appologized to Katody?

This argument has gone circular. You claim it is a masterly deception. I've pointed out that it would be a very poor one since the mistake was already out in public knowledge. Once it was pointed out to me just the same as last time, I happily corrected it. It was stupid. We're all fallible. Difference is, I correct myself.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to apologise to Katody for?

 

[Justinian2]

"Why do you need to review the forensic evidence when this conviction is based on much more than the knife and the bra clasp?" Prosecutor Manuela Comodi said.

Much, much more. There were the cartwheels, the pseudo confession, and all of Guede's footprints that had previously been attributed to Raffaele and Amanda. Also there was the confession of a habitual drunk with the DTs that said AK and RS were nearby. And there was the phantom scream from a victim with a knife in her throat. There was a comic book and just all types of evidence that means nothing much, much more.

 

[LondonJohn]

Chris, I know it's terribly exciting to catch me making a mistake but I've explained perfectly clearly that I've already made the same mistake on PMF and been corrected there by more than one poster. It would not be a very sensible deception given that we all know you read that board as well.

I've never posted a cropped photo. Where did you get that idea?

But how many more mistakes might you have made in the presentation of your arguments which might not yet have been discovered? The fact that you still haven't properly explained whether you digitally doctored photographs to help your case, or what you meant by "I just woke up" as an excuse for repeatedly making false claims (even in the light of correctional posts) about the dates of the disco buses, makes it quite hard for people to accurately judge your credibility on other issues of fact.

What time on November 1st 2007 do you think Amanda Knox died?

 

[s_pepys]

What time on November 1st 2007 do you think Amanda Knox died?

she didnt. did she?

lxxx

 

[LondonJohn]

she didnt. did she?

lxxx

On what date do you think she died?

 

[Dan O.]

The only reasonable conclusion I can draw is that these numbers were dialled inadvertently. I would rule out their having been dialled by Meredith leaning on her phone while it was in her pocket or underneath her on the bed - there are, as you say, too many sequences involved to make this a possibility. I think therefore that the only explanation is that somebody pressed the necessary buttons deliberately for some reason. And I can think of no reason why that person would have been Meredith. I can only assume that the buttons were pressed by a person who was unfamiliar with the phone. And that leads me to believe that the buttons were pressed by someone attempting to tun off Meredith's phone.

The call to the bank could not be completed because it was missing the country code prefix. But wouldn't this connect to an automated response that still requires an action to hang up? Similarly for the call to voice mail. The call could have been made accidentally but to immediately hang up after the call requires another intentional key press.

I did speculate earlier about another possible interpretation of these calls: Rudy, who says Meredith was alive when he left her, could be trying to alert Meredith's friends to the fact that she is in trouble.

 

[LondonJohn]

The call to the bank could not be completed because it was missing the country code prefix. But wouldn't this connect to an automated response that still requires an action to hang up? Similarly for the call to voice mail. The call could have been made accidentally but to immediately hang up after the call requires another intentional key press.

I did speculate earlier about another possible interpretation of these calls: Rudy, who says Meredith was alive when he left her, could be trying to alert Meredith's friends to the fact that she is in trouble.

The intl dialling code mistake might have resulted in an automated message in Italian saying the number wasn't recognised, but it would almost certainly then close the connection. However, as you say, I think the voicemail call would have connected (AFAIK it DID contain the international prefixes), and the line would have remained open for some time before perhaps being automatically timed out.

As you've said before, I'd agree that this implies that someone was intentionally pressing random buttons on the handset, and disconnecting calls that were erroneously made as the result of the random pressing. However, Guede would have known full well that he could have called 112 from the phone to summon the emergency services. He didn't do so - instead he went home, got changed, and went out dancing, then fled to Germany. For those reasons, I'd doubt whether Guede was pressing buttons to try to contact Meredith's friends or family.

 

[LondonJohn]

I wonder on what date "The Bard" thinks Meredith Kercher died? Funny how groupthink can work....

EDIT apologies - I hadn't noticed I'd got the name wrong. I had mistakenly thought that people were referring to the date and not the name. My mistake.

 

[SomeAlibi]

What time on November 1st 2007 do you think Amanda Knox died?

Morally? Who knows. But without doubt, by the late evening of November 1st when she murdered Meredith Kercher with Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede.

 

[Dan O.]

I would like to see a map of the cell tower coverages to view while reading this section in the Massei Report.

It should be fairly straight forward for someone in Perugia to put together a coverage map of the cell towers involved. They need only subscribe to google latitude with a similar cell phone on the same network and then walk the various routes while keeping a detailed time log of where they are. Google though doesn't report the cell sectors either. There may be hacked phone applications that display the current cell number and this could be used to distinguish the different sectors.

 

[Jungle Jim]

The call to the bank could not be completed because it was missing the country code prefix. But wouldn't this connect to an automated response that still requires an action to hang up? Similarly for the call to voice mail. The call could have been made accidentally but to immediately hang up after the call requires another intentional key press.

I did speculate earlier about another possible interpretation of these calls: Rudy, who says Meredith was alive when he left her, could be trying to alert Meredith's friends to the fact that she is in trouble.

Huh? Please explain.

 

[LondonJohn]

Morally? Who knows. But without doubt, by the late evening of November 1st when she murdered Meredith Kercher with Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede.

Ah yes, I've just spotted my error - which was a slip of the mind. But I apologise. I haven't just woken up, and nor have I made the same error on another site previously. It was simply an error.

At what time on November 1st 2007 do you think that Meredith Kercher died?

 

[SomeAlibi]

Ah yes, I've just spotted my error - which was a slip of the mind. But I apologise. I haven't just woken up, and nor have I made the same error on another site previously. It was simply an error.

Mistakes happen.

At what time on November 1st 2007 do you think that Meredith Kercher died?

The time range is in Massei. It is fallacious to try and establish a precise time as much as its been extensively attempted.

The mobile calls from Meredith's phone are a matter of lightweight concern to me. I know that I've done similar with unlocked phones in my pocket however. I saw someone a long time ago point out that Abbey could well have been the first entry in her phonebook and that it could have been activated by repeatedly pressing the same button on the phone. Don't know if that works on the phone in question but it is something I've done.

 

[LondonJohn]

Mistakes happen.




The time range is in Massei. It is fallacious to try and establish a precise time as much as its been extensively attempted.

The mobile calls from Meredith's phone are a matter of lightweight concern to me. I know that I've done similar with unlocked phones in my pocket however. I saw someone a long time ago point out that Abbey could well have been the first entry in her phonebook and that it could have been activated by repeatedly pressing the same button on the phone. Don't know if that works on the phone in question but it is something I've done.

Do you think that Massei has the outer (i.e. later) limit of the time range correct?

PS Using terms such as "groupies" is hardly likely to work to your advantage in terms of argument in good faith..........

 

[Dan O.]

I wonder on what date "The Bard" thinks Meredith Kercher died? Funny how groupthink can work....

EDIT apologies - I hadn't noticed I'd got the name wrong. I had mistakenly thought that people were referring to the date and not the name. My mistake.

That's a relief. I was afraid that we were going to get into another body swap conspiracy.

Meredith's death certificate probably lists Nov 2nd as the date when the coroner pronounced death.

 

[s_pepys]

I wonder on what date "The Bard" thinks Meredith Kercher died? Funny how groupthink can work....

EDIT apologies - I hadn't noticed I'd got the name wrong. I had mistakenly thought that people were referring to the date and not the name. My mistake.

hey lj

who is "the bard"?

lxxx

 

[LondonJohn]

That's a relief. I was afraid that we were going to get into another body swap conspiracy.

Meredith's death certificate probably lists Nov 2nd as the date when the coroner pronounced death.

Haha I knew Mignini was getting to me

I wonder what the death certificate does in fact say as to the date of death. I don't think that it's entirely predicated on the date on which death is discovered and/or pronounced. I think there's scope on UK death certificates for putting a range (e.g. when elderly people living alone lie dead in their homes for days or even weeks before being discovered). Still, it's not really important in a wider context, but it would be interesting to know what happens in such circumstances.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Mistakes happen.




The time range is in Massei. It is fallacious to try and establish a precise time as much as its been extensively attempted.

The mobile calls from Meredith's phone are a matter of lightweight concern to me. I know that I've done similar with unlocked phones in my pocket however. I saw someone a long time ago point out that Abbey could well have been the first entry in her phonebook and that it could have been activated by repeatedly pressing the same button on the phone. Don't know if that works on the phone in question but it is something I've done.

You take this position because Meridith's phone activity contradicts your opinion. Her phone activity must not be ignored or taken lightly. Do you honestly think that Meredith was playing with her phone like a child?