Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Alt+F4]

In fact, and ironically in the light of what you wrote, there would only be one so-called "decent" piece of forensic evidence still standing, and it would be against Sollecito. Evidently you'd forgotten about the blood/water partial footprint on the bath mat in the small bathroom. The first court accepted that it was almost certainly Sollecito's, and also that it was definitely not Guede's. In my view, the prosecution expert was engaging in useless pseudoscience in its evaluation of that print: the dilute nature of the print, and the extreme roughness of the surface on which it was made, mean that (in my view) it's impossible to attribute it to any specific individual - only to a man with fairly large and reasonably normal-shaped feet.

I think the court will find that it's not possible to determine who that print belongs to. Good for RS, doesn't change anything for AK.

 

[lane99]

...This part of your article represents an attempt to do the same sort of thing and is flawed. The very weak and tenuous reasoning you make regarding the dancer and PQ does not belong in a discussion regarding the case, in my opinion...

How about him apparently accusing Virgin Airlines of acting to hasten the death of elderly people. Also not belonging is a discussion of this case?

If you think not, I disagree with you both times. Both episodes indicate to me the person is a fuming and spiteful crackpot, who is not a credible source of information. Something that most people probably would want to know if they were interested in gathering information about this case.

And I also very much doubt you are correct in your speculation that the only obsession the guiltmongers have is that of being right. Most of them appear to be bitter and frustrated people who need a socially acceptable person to distract them from their own inadequacies. And I would be very much suprised if those inadequacies, amongst others, didn't tend to include some sexual ones.

But I'm merely adding my speculation to what I assume is yours (unless you actually know who these anonymous people are, and have some inside information about them).

 

[Alt+F4]

And I also very much doubt you are correct in your speculation that the only obsession the guiltmongers have is that of being right. Most of them appear to be bitter and frustrated people who need a socially acceptable person to distract them from their own inadequacies. And I would be very much suprised if those inadequacies, amongst others, didn't tend to include some sexual ones.

Or it could just people that people disagree on the evidence (as we understand it). But please, go on, your psychological diagnosis via Internet is quite amusing.

 

[Antony]

If the DNA evidence is thrown out then the easiest face-saving formula would be to find RS not guilty and AK guilty. The Italian national no longer has any forensic evidence against him or motive (most murder victims are killed by someone they know, no one can argue that RS and MK knew each other beyond a few hellos).

If there is no longer any evidence against Raff, then what, pray, is the evidence against Amanda? And since the DNA evidence is melting in front of our eyes, why are you so confident that the verdicts against both of them will be upheld? Come to that, since you have expressed your belief that Raff, not Amanda, is the killer, what is that belief based upon in the first place?

In addition, if the stuff in his appeal regarding the computer evidence is found true by the court, that gives him an alibi, not her.

Err ... no. Once Raff's innocence is established, he gives Amanda an alibi, because she was with him the whole night. You seem to have missed the point that the only reason for scripting Raff into the prosecution narrative was because otherwise he would testify for Amanda's alibi.

I don't think the court can now find Amanda guilty of some kind of infraction since that's not what she is charged with in this case.

I think you're forgetting that today Amanda was in court again, facing the calunnia nonsense. Then there was the fact that she was found guilty of the "staging", and of carrying a kitchen knife around in her bag, so there would seem to be plenty of scope for fudging any "not guilty of murder" decision. Of course the so-called "evidence" should never have led to either of them being arrested or charged in the first place.

 

[RoseMontague]

How about him apparently accusing Virgin Airlines of acting to hasten the death of elderly people. Also not belonging is a discussion of this case?

If you think not, I disagree with you both times. Both episodes indicate to me the person is a fuming and spiteful crackpot, who is not a credible source of information. Something that most people probably would want to know if they were interested in gathering information about this case.

And I also very much doubt you are correct in your speculation that the only obsession the guiltmongers have is that of being right. Most of them appear to be bitter and frustrated people who need a socially acceptable person to distract them from their own inadequacies. And I would be very much suprised if those inadequacies, amongst others, didn't tend to include some sexual ones.

But I'm merely adding my speculation to what I assume is yours (unless you actually know who these anonymous people are, and have some inside information about them).

I once got very upset with some people in public and said some pretty bad things about them. Does that have anything to do with what I post about the case? Does it make what I say somehow less believable?

These personal attacks from one blog owner/author to another remind me of kids exchanging insults and making dire predictions as to who is going to get what's what. I would prefer to discuss the facts of the case.

I appreciate your opinion but I do not agree with it.

 

[Alt+F4]

If there is no longer any evidence against Raff, then what, pray, is the evidence against Amanda? And since the DNA evidence is melting in front of our eyes, why are you so confident that the verdicts against both of them will be upheld? Come to that, since you have expressed your belief that Raff, not Amanda, is the killer, what is that belief based upon in the first place?

My belief that Amanda is not the killer is based on what we think we know...no evidence of her in Meredith's room. I believe her when she said she was in the living room whith her ears covered so she couldn't hear the screams.

Err ... no. Once Raff's innocence is established, he gives Amanda an alibi, because she was with him the whole night. You seem to have missed the point that the only reason for scripting Raff into the prosecution narrative was because otherwise he would testify for Amanda's alibi.

RS changed his story more than once, he's asleep, he's awake on the computer, he's having sex with Amanda, they are watching a movie. He can't provide an alibi for her.

I think you're forgetting that today Amanda was in court again, facing the calunnia nonsense. Then there was the fact that she was found guilty of the "staging", and of carrying a kitchen knife around in her bag, so there would seem to be plenty of scope for fudging any "not guilty of murder" decision. Of course the so-called "evidence" should never have led to either of them being arrested or charged in the first place.

Nothing happened with the calunnia stuff today, yes? Wasn't it put off until November? Amanda was found guilty of staging a crime and carrying a kitchen knife? I thought only of murder and robbery.

 

[katy_did]

I once got very upset with some people in public and said some pretty bad things about them. Does that have anything to do with what I post about the case? Does it make what I say somehow less believable?

These personal attacks from one blog owner/author to another remind me of kids exchanging insults and making dire predictions as to who is going to get what's what. I would prefer to discuss the facts of the case.

I appreciate your opinion but I do not agree with it.

Although it's a tricky issue and I understand the impulse to retaliate in kind, my main reaction to parts of Bruce's article was that it sounded like something Peter Quennell would write...and perhaps that's all that needs to be said! If the arguments on TJMK are flawed, then they can be attacked on their own merits or lack thereof, independently of the person making them. And if I find it deplorable that many of those 'arguments' are really personal attacks, as I do, then I can hardly turn around and agree with someone else making similar personal attacks, even if I share their perspective on the case.

IMO, the reaction on sites like PMF and TJMK to the situation with Frank and 'Perugia Shock' has been more revealing than any juicy fact about an individual's personal life. After the first conspiracy theories about how it was all a big hoax turned out to be, well, crazy conspiracy theories, the approach is now to justify the charges and the deletion of Frank's blog because he must have said something to deserve them. Never mind that we've all read Frank's blog and know that he hasn't said anything to 'defame' Mignini. Never mind that it's an obvious attempt to silence someone who's been critical of the case.

It should be possible to say "I believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty, but at the same time I disagree with Mignini using the threat of defamation charges to silence free speech". Yet so far as I know, only one poster has even come close to saying that. Elsewhere, there isn't even a flicker of doubt about it, simply a blind defence of Mignini at all costs. For me this reveals more about the incredible lack of objectivity of some on those sites than does anything else.

(By the way, what did you say? Inquiring minds want to know. (Joking. Sort of )).

 

[CoulsdonUK]

It is fascinating that “some” supporters on either side of this case say the same things about each other’s view or approach to Meredith’s murder and subsequent trial; it’s like watching 2 groups of kids in a playground shouting pointing their fingers; group A “they started calling us names” group B “no they called us names first”, along with the escalating insults and puerile behaviour.

I am still not ready for international justice via the internet, I do believe in the judicial sovereignty of any democratic state, I still do not think the appeal will be effected by either group of supporters as should be the case.

Very little has actually happened in the appeal I am at a loss as to how anyone can say with any authority the appeal is going this way or that way. Has any member of the jury made any public comments about the appeal so far? Has any of the judge’s made any public statements about the appeal? Have either of the court appointed DNA experts made any public statements about their findings thus far?

As for my personal interest it’s very simple I have four children, my eldest daughter who is a year younger than Meredith read the same degree but opted for French and was at the time Meredith was found busily researching her year abroad (opting for Dakar Senegal). I walk pass the road that Meredith Mother lives on twice a day during the working week as I travel by train to and from central London. I simply identify with the Kercher family’s tragic, pointless and brutal loss of their daughter and sister, I cannot shake the thought they but for the grace of God could go I.

Sadly regardless of the outcome of the appeal nothing will change for the Kercher family!

 

[Chris_Halkides]

being middle aged

How old is middle aged?

It's when broad minds and narrow waistlines begin to change places.

 

[Rhea]

I see the media as focusing on sex, that is to be expected. As far as Mignini and the various prosecution and judges theories of the crime, I believe the sexual motive was about all that they could come up with because there really is no motive for Amanda and Raffaele to kill Meredith Kercher.

I personally don't agree, I think it is interesting that there was this young pretty "girl next door", and very quickly these police-men came up with all kinds of sexual theories, none of them plausible in any way.

And they even made her the instigator of the whole thing, the two men were supposedly only vying for her attention, even though sexual assaults are usually instigated and carried out by men, but Amanda was orchestrating everything in their minds, the spell she could put on men … I think the witch hunt aspect of it is very interesting; the fear of women and their sexual seduction.

Mignini had very conservative conceptions, is very religious, Perugia according to Dempsey's book is generally pretty conservative.

The way they made a saint out of Meredith and a she-devil out of Amanda, even though they were leading pretty much the same lifestyle …

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Waco and Ruby Ridge

CoulsdonUK,

I am glad that you are back. Perhaps you can now explain why you asked about my views of the official versions of Ruby Ridge and Waco. I can add to my previous comment on the matter by saying that if Waco happened exactly as the government first said that it did, it is hardly a blueprint for how to handle a such a situation.

 

[Alt+F4]

After the first conspiracy theories about how it was all a big hoax turned out to be, well, crazy conspiracy theories, the approach is now to justify the charges and the deletion of Frank's blog because he must have said something to deserve them. Never mind that we've all read Frank's blog and know that he hasn't said anything to 'defame' Mignini. Never mind that it's an obvious attempt to silence someone who's been critical of the case.

My take is that the action against Frank wasn't based on anything that he himself posted but was rather based on the comments left. He never seemed to delete any offensive comments, and I don't mean just comments "defaming Mignini" (there was a lot of them). In addition to trash-talking Mignini many of the comments to his posts were very cruel towards members of the Knox/Mellas, Kercher and Sollecito families. Many of his posts had over 300 comments each. It seems to me that his having a high number of comments was more important to him than caring about what they actually said and who they were hurting....and pisssing off.

 

[theRealBob]

And in a new blog post by Frank that evening

CARTHWEELS AT THE POLICE STATION
A new bravery of Amanda Knox was revealed today by the police. While waiting for her interrogation at the police station, in that long night of November 5th that led to her arrest, the vice questore Monica Napoleoni sees her doing the splits and and turning cartwheels in the corridor!

FRANK SFARZO AT 8:39 PM​

The whole situation at the police station would be fraught with anxiety from the start.
Amanda seems to me to be eccentric enough to come up with nutty behaviour anyway. Some people are just odd, or slightly odd.
Sitting on Raffael's knee seems to me to just be a form of comfort and cowering away from the cold glare of Meredith's more sphisticated and really, really upset friends.

Just one last detail which I find quite important in this quote I used....

I wouldn't trust Monica Napoleoni under any circumstance in any tiny thing.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK,

I am glad that you are back. Perhaps you can now explain why you asked about my views of the official versions of Ruby Ridge and Waco. I can add to my previous comment on the matter by saying that if Waco happened exactly as the government first said that it did, it is hardly a blueprint for how to handle a such a situation.

Halides1

I wouldn’t say I am back.

Rather than Waco or Ruby Ridge more recent events covering the right of a sovereign democratic state to exercise its judicial rights when an alleged crime is committed on its soil namely the recent arrest of the head of the IMF, who despite his position as been deemed as a flight risk. As with Italy I absolutely agree America should apply its laws regardless of the nationality or standing of the person under arrest, that he should be subject to judicial process of the state that the alleged crime took place; of course the French media don’t see it that way.

A quote from UK Sky news "It is not unthinkable that certain judicial officials, the prosecutor in particular or the judge, is driven by a desire to take down a Frenchman, a Frenchman who is moreover well known.
Former French minister Jack Lang"

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

My take is that the action against Frank wasn't based on anything that he himself posted but was rather based on the comments left. He never seemed to delete any offensive comments, and I don't mean just comments "defaming Mignini" (there was a lot of them). In addition to trash-talking Mignini many of the comments to his posts were very cruel towards members of the Knox/Mellas, Kercher and Sollecito families. Many of his posts had over 300 comments each. It seems to me that his having a high number of comments was more important to him than caring about what they actually said and who they were hurting....and pisssing off.

This brings up an interesting point. I wonder if Frank had only received 2 or 3 or even 10 comments per article would GM have still taken action? Over the past year or so the number of comments for each blog entry had been steadily climbing which is clearly an indication of the increasing popularity of the blog. Perhaps this didn't go unnoticed by Mignini and it may have helped escalate the conflict with Frank. It seems Mignini went from gently 'leaning' on Frank to sending a few thug cops to rough him up to the lawsuit to the Google blog shutdown.

 

[RoseMontague]

My take is that the action against Frank wasn't based on anything that he himself posted but was rather based on the comments left. He never seemed to delete any offensive comments, and I don't mean just comments "defaming Mignini" (there was a lot of them). In addition to trash-talking Mignini many of the comments to his posts were very cruel towards members of the Knox/Mellas, Kercher and Sollecito families. Many of his posts had over 300 comments each. It seems to me that his having a high number of comments was more important to him than caring about what they actually said and who they were hurting....and pisssing off.

I have seen no indication that his blog was shut down because of comments from other posters.

 

[Alt+F4]

I have seen no indication that his blog was shut down because of comments from other posters.

I have not read anything that he posted on his blog that was defamatory towards Miginini, have you? As for the comments, many were scathing beyond belief regarding almost everyone involved in this case, prosecution and defense. Frank didn't perform due diligence in regard to what was commented, he ignored his legal responsibility as the person operating that blog.

 

[RoseMontague]

I have not read anything that he posted on his blog that was defamatory towards Miginini, have you? As for the comments, many were scathing beyond belief regarding almost everyone involved in this case, prosecution and defense. Frank didn't perform due diligence in regard to what was commented, he ignored his legal responsibility as the person operating that blog.

I agree that Frank has not defamed Mignini.

There is nothing mentioned in the court order (based on Candace's articles). An Italian blogger (Stefano Nazzi) said Frank was simply too harsh and used a strong tone.

The only reason I can see for thinking it must be the comments is simply because there is nothing that Frank said himself that would warrant closing his blog down. The problem with this reasoning is that you are dealing with a prosecutor named Mignini.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I see the media as focusing on sex, that is to be expected. As far as Mignini and the various prosecution and judges theories of the crime, I believe the sexual motive was about all that they could come up with because there really is no motive for Amanda and Raffaele to kill Meredith Kercher.

When we get to the discussion of blogs on the side of guilt, I don't agree with your reasoning. If there is an obsession on their part it is one of being right at all costs and on almost every point that is brought up, despite the strong evidence to the contrary. The claims they make that Amanda's support comes from middle aged men because of an attraction to her is just a way that they can claim people are not forming an opinion based on the facts of the case. They do not want to acknowledge that someone can made a reasoned judgment for innocence so they attack that person's motivation for having that opinion. This part of your article represents an attempt to do the same sort of thing and is flawed. The very weak and tenuous reasoning you make regarding the dancer and PQ does not belong in a discussion regarding the case, in my opinion.

I realize something was said about you and your daughter and I understand the desire to strike back. I do appreciate all your efforts and your blog and you are a great asset for the side of innocence but I still encourage you to take the high road in your responses to these sort of attacks. I am convinced that is the best way to handle it.

We will have to agree to disagree on this topic. Peter Quennell is the leader of the group that spews hate at Amanda Knox and her family. His efforts to destroy Amanda are nothing short of disgusting. People that support his efforts should know who he is. There is no doubt that members of his group have an obsession with sex. True Justice only discusses cases where young women have been murdered. I know of private conversations where Quennell displays his obsession for Meredith Kercher. He has verbally harassed multiple women all while creating the false impression that he is preserving the memory of Meredith Kercher. Much has been left private with regard to Quennell's behavior. He's a complete fraud. By taking the position that he has on his blog, he has opened the door to ridicule. The information obtained about Quennell and the young woman was the result of an inquiry made by me, further investigated by a private investigator, and later found to be criminal by Detectives in Quennell's state. I don't write anything to simply strike back. Everything I write is well documented and well thought out. You may think I'm wrong but be assured that nothing I write is the result of any need to retaliate. I am taking the high road. Hopefully shining light on Quennell's actions will stop him from hurting more women in the future.

 

[lane99]

...please, go on, your psychological diagnosis via Internet is quite amusing.

If you insist:

Although I do have to give you credit for admitting that your opinions are wholly of the unqualified and uneducated variety vis a vis the Knox case, I must admit I find the admission likely is unnecessarily redundant for anyone who has read your posts.

And to the extent you found my comments amusing, I suppose it's only right. After all, turn about is fair play, isn't it.