Since I was the one that asked for evidence of this often repeated story of Dempsey, I did not have to 'prove' anything so claiming otherwise is a lie.
I wasn't talking about you, Odeed, I was thinking of Kermit, actually. I miss him, he was good at what he did and had a sense of humor. I'd forgotten you were involved in that discussion. Thus I will have to disappoint you horribly and not admit to my 'lie.' I will try to make it up to you by 'lying' about you in the future if it will make you feel more oppressed!
As for the links which show how well Dempsey "sourced" her story,
I tried to sum up previously. The sources given to back up Dempsey story, were of Lumumba arrest going to the Questura in the early morning of 6th November, and that halides1 tried to justify by saying that
“approach” should be changed to “leave.” (
direct quote from halides1).
Yeah, I think you'd have been better off had you not called Halides1 'dishonest,' being as his reasoning was perfectly sound, and if anything he was merely mistaken. Maybe he doesn't have the same sense of amused surrealism as I do about someone accusing him of 'lying' about such tiny details in order to confuse or frighten Odeed.
So just to be absolutely certain of what you're arguing: you believe all those reports were of Lumumba being driven to the
Questura?
If that's the case, I disagree, only one is, the seven car one. All the rest detail the trip from the
Questura to the Central Jail, which they called a 'police station' or the 'central police station.' Thus they both had to 'approach' and 'leave' what they were calling a 'police station.' Confusing? Yes, it's what happens when you rely overmuch on tabloids for sources, they tend not to be too particular about terminology or details at times. If you prefer to believe that big display was all about the arrest of Patrick and not the 'perp drive' through Perugia, feel free, that's your prerogative, and just like your dogged belief in Amanda's guilt I'm sure you'll take it to the grave.
However, what I was getting at was the following:
Machiavelli (16195 p. 405) wrote,
“So now you can take note about one proven point in Candace Dempsey's narrative: she reports a false fact, unsupported and not found in any source. It is evident her only source of inspiration for this piece of description was Frank Sfarzo's blog, who, commenting number of police cars and frenzy police activity, compared the arrest of Amanda Knox with the arrest of Giovanni Brusca (an obviously subjective association in Frank's style). The "parade" on a circuitous track is nothing more than an "integration" of the half info/comment by Frank, by the typical Candace style of reporting.
As you can see, that account is found in
many sources, that you have so thoughtfully provided. It is not limited to Frank's blog, nor is it "a false fact, unsupported and not found in any source." Nor is it specific to who was being transported and to where, as that's really immaterial to
actual point that the police made a display of themselves with frenzied activity like they'd just captured a mafia don.
That's what I meant by "They got drowned in links until it was revealed just how well sourced..." As I said, if you want to believe those sources say it was transporting Patrick Lumumba, feel free. I find that a curious reading of those sources and it seems to me logic and common sense suggests they'd do their celebrating with all their 'perps' in one basket on the way to the jail, but I'm not going to argue it with you. You can argue it with Candace if you want, she has a blog.
That wasn't my point, nor Machiavelli's, nor Halides1's for that matter. I think you merely misunderstood.
