Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kaosium said:
That's not what happened though. They arrested both of them after mentally and emotionally abusing Amanda all night long, then lied about having a 'clear cut' CCTV image of her at the scene, took a knife out of Raffaele's drawer that couldn't possibly be the murder weapon but said it was, then claimed Raffaele, Amanda and Patrick raped and murdered Meredith Kercher with absolutely no evidence that would stand scrutiny.

Then the press went through their myspace pages looking for anything that could possibly be damning, and found that innocent story about a boy confronting the fact his brother had done Something Awful, which couldn't possibly be construed as a rape fantasy except to the deluded. That Raffaele had knives and naughty pictures puts him in the company of many boys his age and again isn't something the cops found out until after they arrested him.

I think those methods could be applied to just about anyone their age, in fact as far as 'rape fantasies' go, anyone who likes romance novels could be described as drawn to them from my limited exposure to the genre. Would you like to see a female with a dozen Harlequin romance novels denigrated in court as 'addicted to rape fantasies' if they were sexually assaulted?

Think of other ways this pseudo-psychology could be applied! Can you imagine what kind of implications could be drawn from associations to things like cats or rabbits? Why, isn't the felis catus male known as a rapacious sexual predator, a 'tom cat' as it were? What if there was a correlation between the ownership of cats and romance novels like the stereotype suggests? Think of what that implies! As for oryctolagus cuniculus we know all about bunnies! They breed exponentially! I read an article once that suggested they practically overran the continent of Australia when they were introduced and are considered little more than vermin by some still. They just can't keep it zipped!
Click to expand...
:p<snip>

Excellent response, Kaosium.
 
tsig said:
LJ if you want to argue with a poster on another forum then why not go to that forum and do it? I see no point in posting your arguments here where the other person may not see them.
Click to expand...

I disagree. LondonJohn's comments are interesting. Also they spare us the doubtful pleasure of browsing "the other forum" while keeping us informed.
Don't worry that the other person might not see LJ's comments. The other person reads here religiously and is fully up to date :)
 
tsig said:
LJ if you want to argue with a poster on another forum then why not go to that forum and do it? I see no point in posting your arguments here where the other person may not see them.

From this forum it looks a lot like you're arguing with an empty chair.
Click to expand...


He's a member of JREF, and though he pretends not to read here, it's obvious that he does. He could choose to come and debate this issue here, but he prefers to do so from a distance. On the other hand, I - in common with practically every other person who argues for acquittal - have been permanently banned* from the forum where he chooses to post. So I don't have the option of visiting there to debate directly. I'm sorry if you're only hearing one side of the debate: I am trying to include enough context and argument for my posts to carry some relevance in and of themselves anyhow.

* For reasons that are more akin to The Party in Orwell's 1984 than a well-run forum
 
Mary_H said:
Judge Claudia Matteini stated in her report of November 9th, 2007, that Raffaele Sollecito had told her (probably through his attorneys) that Amanda Knox was with him all night.

Does anyone here have a copy of the complete report?
Click to expand...


I don't know of any online access to the whole report. The closest I've come to it is the Telegraph article that contained numerous extended excerpts:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1568861/How-the-sex-game-went-wrong-Judges-report.html

Note the title of this article: "How the sex game went wrong"........
 
p.s. How does it feel to have your intellectual leader as a fur coat salesperson or the administrative support to people who sell furcoats (sic) in a (expletive deleted) mall near Chicago? I note that Bruce says that the pro-Meredith camp has no experts and yet it's self evident that we have doctors, forensic scientists, lawyers in the US, UK and Italy and plethora of professionals and scientic (sic) orientated people in 4 continents. Surely that sort of blanket denial must be embarrassing to you? Why are you putting your trust in a guy who lives in a (expletive deleted) mall and rips off his employer's time for many hours a day? How do you defend the unbased (sic) allegations of a lack of expertise when it's obvious? Do you actually have no shame? I give some credit to Rose when (s)he at least comes out and speaks his/her mind. LoJo just parrots whatever is pro-Knoxian. Where's your balls son? Have you got any?
Click to expand...


Any thoughts or comments, anyone......?
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
I don't know of any online access to the whole report. The closest I've come to it is the Telegraph article that contained numerous extended excerpts:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1568861/How-the-sex-game-went-wrong-Judges-report.html

Note the title of this article: "How the sex game went wrong"........
Click to expand...

There is a report at PMF.net which is a pdf file titled "ordinanza perugia meredith" (which can be downloaded) in the Legal Context section under "Judges Report From The First Hearing." There is also some commentary concerning the report. Parts are redacted.
 
LondonJohn said:
Any thoughts or comments, anyone......?
Click to expand...

Beats me, LJ. If they have so many experts why are they not posting articles? Instead I see astrology and statement analysis. Some of their scientists have even been in a bit of a dispute with the non-scientists lately over the science of the CV report.

Bruce has always said he was just an ordinary guy and so what is the big surprise that he is just an ordinary guy with an interest in the case?

It would be hard for me to pick an intellectual leader, do we really even need one? There are a lot of smart posters here and at IIP.
 
LondonJohn said:
Any thoughts or comments, anyone......?
Click to expand...

Sounds like a guy that needs to drink decaf. He has lost the argument so now he is lashing out. He claims that he is to intelligent to come here to discuss the case so he waits for someone else to cut and paste the comments, then he responds on another forum. Yeah, that sounds intelligent. Remember that this is the same guy that wrote the article about big knives and little knives. He is part of a group that likes to stalk people and contact employers all while hiding like a coward. I offered to discuss this case with SimeAlibi but he declined. This case has nothing to do with me or SomeAlibi. It's over, Amanda and Raffaele will soon be free and SomeAlibi and his clan don't like it. I expect to see a lot more lashing out as this case comes to a close.

I did write about their group but I did my homework and stuck to the facts. I was accused of libel but those accusations were baseless and no one contacted me to make a single correction. PMF has no interest in the truth. Peggy's most recent explanation of how I became involved is sufficient proof of that.
 
RoseMontague said:
Beats me, LJ. If they have so many experts why are they not posting articles? Instead I see astrology and statement analysis. Some of their scientists have even been in a bit of a dispute with the non-scientists lately over the science of the CV report.

Bruce has always said he was just an ordinary guy and so what is the big surprise that he is just an ordinary guy with an interest in the case?

It would be hard for me to pick an intellectual leader, do we really even need one? There are a lot of smart posters here and at IIP.
Click to expand...

So I just read this "SomeAlibi" guy's post on TrueJustice about Curatolo. Apparently he was able to look in the guy's eyes and see truth like George Bush could see into Putin's heart. Then, in show of gratitude, gave him 20 dollars to go buy heroin. He's a funny guy.
 
LondonJohn said:
p.s. How does it feel to have your intellectual leader as a fur coat salesperson or the administrative support to people who sell furcoats (sic) in a (expletive deleted) mall near Chicago? I note that Bruce says that the pro-Meredith camp has no experts and yet it's self evident that we have doctors, forensic scientists, lawyers in the US, UK and Italy and plethora of professionals and scientic (sic) orientated people in 4 continents. Surely that sort of blanket denial must be embarrassing to you? Why are you putting your trust in a guy who lives in a (expletive deleted) mall and rips off his employer's time for many hours a day? How do you defend the unbased (sic) allegations of a lack of expertise when it's obvious? Do you actually have no shame? I give some credit to Rose when (s)he at least comes out and speaks his/her mind. LoJo just parrots whatever is pro-Knoxian. Where's your balls son? Have you got any?
Click to expand...
Any thoughts or comments, anyone......?
Click to expand...

Meredith would be appalled.

Any decent person would.
 
Quote: by SA
p.s. How does it feel to have your intellectual leader as a fur coat salesperson or the administrative support to people who sell furcoats (sic) in a (expletive deleted) mall near Chicago? I note that Bruce says that the pro-Meredith camp has no experts and yet it's self evident that we have doctors, forensic scientists, lawyers in the US, UK and Italy and plethora of professionals and scientic (sic) orientated people in 4 continents. Surely that sort of blanket denial must be embarrassing to you? Why are you putting your trust in a guy who lives in a (expletive deleted) mall and rips off his employer's time for many hours a day? How do you defend the unbased (sic) allegations of a lack of expertise when it's obvious? Do you actually have no shame? I give some credit to Rose when (s)he at least comes out and speaks his/her mind. LoJo just parrots whatever is pro-Knoxian. Where's your balls son? Have you got any?


For the record SA I consider myself Pro Meredith and I also happen to think two innocent persons are being falsely accused of her murder. I think these things because of the facts revealed so far. Id venture a guess that Meredith would consider PMF to be full of Loons...same goes for TJMK. I cant imagine she would ever wish her memory to be attached to either group at this point.

If you had any cahonies you might come here to debate rather than throw darts while hiding behind Peggy Ganong's skirt. BTW your one remaining scientist finds the independant expert report to be sound. What is your take on that little factoid?
 
Last edited:
Rape fantasies?

-

or any kind of violent murder fantasy for that matter.

Stephen King should stay as far away from Italy as he possibly can. Not saying Italy is an evil country, but if any kind of murder ever happens anywhere near where he is ever at, and he can't come up with an airtight, ironclad alibi; he is in big-time trouble.

Dave

-
 
Pro-Meredith camp?

LondonJohn said:
Any thoughts or comments, anyone......?
Click to expand...

Did Bruce really use the term "pro-Meredith"? I don't believe it. This just doesn't sound like the Bruce me and my roommate both love and hate. Hehehe just kidding Bruce.

No way he used that term, "pro-guilter camp" maybe.

We never knew or met Meredith, but we feel a sadness towards her that is simply impossible to express in words.

True justice my a**,

Dave

-
 
AmyStrange said:
Did Bruce really use the term "pro-Meredith"? I don't believe it. This just doesn't sound like the Bruce me and my roommate both love and hate. Hehehe just kidding Bruce.

No way he used that term, "pro-guilter camp" maybe.

We never knew or met Meredith, but we feel a sadness towards her that is simply impossible to express in words.

True justice my a**,

Dave

-
Click to expand...

No Bruce didn't use the term, it's SA that did in a way of poisoning the well by suggesting that anyone that doesn't support a guilty verdict is anti-Meredith. The fact that one can be for justice, and believe that means that possibly innocent people shouldn't be held culpable due to reasonable doubt to their guilt seems totally lost on some people.

I'd also point out that the best evidence as to ToD is that the one person that we can conclusively say was there at the time Meredith died puts it at about 9:20-9:30pm. I see no evidence to disbelieve him on that account, and in fact plenty of evidence to accept that he's telling the truth about it.
 
And her family and friends too...

AmyStrange said:
We never knew or met Meredith, but we feel a sadness towards her that is simply impossible to express in words.
Click to expand...
-

I can't even begin to imagine what they are going through.

One day her father will realize what really happened and ALL HELL is going to break loose. He is not a stupid idiot like some other people (who will remain nameless) are.

He had to read that May 21st article questioning Amanda and Raffaele's conviction in order to respond to it and we bet that made him think a little.

Right now, he's probably still stuck in some kind of emotional hell and his intellectual side is still swimming through some pretty murky waters trying to get to the surface. It's going to happen though, because (like I said) he's not stupid.

It might happen when Guede is set free in a few short years, or maybe the day Maresca gives them his bill after Amanda and Raffaele are set free and he loses the civil suit. Sorry old chap, even though I was working on a contigency fee, you still have to pay my expenses.

I hate to be in Maresca's shoes when that happens; but on the plus side, I look forward to that day when Meredith and Amanda and Raffaele's family come together and have a group hug and cry and grieve and remember together in Meredith's memory.

Dave

-
 
Last edited:
Thank you Phantom...

PhantomWolf said:
No Bruce didn't use the term, it's SA that did in a way of poisoning the well by suggesting that anyone that doesn't support a guilty verdict is anti-Meredith. The fact that one can be for justice, and believe that means that possibly innocent people shouldn't be held culpable due to reasonable doubt to their guilt seems totally lost on some people.

I'd also point out that the best evidence as to ToD is that the one person that we can conclusively say was there at the time Meredith died puts it at about 9:20-9:30pm. I see no evidence to disbelieve him on that account, and in fact plenty of evidence to accept that he's telling the truth about it.
Click to expand...
-

for setting the record straight. Didn't think he did. It has always been our contention (me and my roommate) that you can tell the bias of an article by the adjectives used. Now with these articles about Amanda and Raffaele, we can add, you can tell the bias by the picture of Amanda they use.

Sure that has nothing to do with your comment, but just thought I'd throw that out there. Other people here have pointed this out also, so it's good to know we're not alone in that kind of thinking,

Dave

-
 
RoseMontague said:
Beats me, LJ. If they have so many experts why are they not posting articles? Instead I see astrology and statement analysis. Some of their scientists have even been in a bit of a dispute with the non-scientists lately over the science of the CV report.

Bruce has always said he was just an ordinary guy and so what is the big surprise that he is just an ordinary guy with an interest in the case?

It would be hard for me to pick an intellectual leader, do we really even need one? There are a lot of smart posters here and at IIP.
Click to expand...
Hi RoseMontague,
I agree with your post, as I usually always do.
But I'd nominate Frank Sfarzo for intellectual leader. This guy went to practically every single court hearing, speaks the language and knows the culture well, and walked a very fine line to become the 1st person covering the case, that I am aware of, to start to publicly think that something was very wrong in Perugia. The guy went out on a limb, in my humble opinion, as dangerous as that could be to go against the system and tried, as carefully as he could do, to get the truth out for the world to see. I believe he succeded, even getting arrested in the process for his reporting.

Bruce Fisher has also been an incredible champion for the truth that the innocentisti side badly needed after the convictions of Amanda Knox and Rafaele Sollecito. Though he did not attend any of the court trials nor speaks the language as far as I know, he too helped the truth come out for the world to see. Oddly though, I've yet to read of Bruce giving anyone a Thanks for stopping by kick out the door as he revoked the persons posting priviledges on his website. And who cares that he might sell furs somewhere, or sells cars, operate a camera. What does Peter Q, or Micheal H or Peggy G. do for a living? Not a single crime investigator amongst 'em, I believe.

You know something? In the early stages of the investigation after Meredith's murder, I recall reading thru the postings and noticed that Peggy, Michael, Candace, and Frank were all very friendly with each other as the evidence unfolded. In the beginning, didn't Peggy even work with Frank Sfarzo translating too? Too bad the attitudes changed when Frank and Candace started questioning the official version of what had happened to Meredith Kercher the night she was brutally slain. I guess that is human nature.

As far as I can tell, neither Peggy G. at .org or Michael H. at .net, or heck, even Peter Q. at TJ have ever been to any of the court hearings either. As far as I know, not 1 of them even knew Merdith Kercher. Do any of them even know her family? So what gives these folks their seemingly holier-than-thou attitude that they know it all? I wonder...
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Well there's also the "testimony" of ear witness Nara Capezzali, who claimed to have heard a scream at around 11.30pm that was extraordinarily haunting and bloodcurdling, but that she then neither woke her daughter nor called the police/paramedics. And who can forget that Capezzali was the witness about whose reliability and veracity Massei gave the following priceless analysis:
Click to expand...

That got 'moved' though, as it says on Frank Sfarzo's post circa December first 2009 when he's trying to make sense of Mignini's 'logic.' He 'hypothisized' she got up at a different time due to her bladder capacity or somesuch.


LondonJohn said:
And the first court apparently also believed the ear witness testimony of two other women (Monacchia and Dramis), both of whom were "half-asleep" at the time, and neither of whom either took any action at the time or the following day (or days, or weeks). Call me Mr Cynical, but my reasonable assessment of these three individuals' testimony is that they either imagined what they think they heard (influenced by subsequent knowledge of the crime), or they completely fabricated their testimony in order to insert themselves into a sensational and high-profile case. Either way, one thing is clear: their evidence, and the way in which it was obtained, simply cannot be relied upon as accurate, reliable, probative evidence.
Click to expand...

Is there a specific time for these screams? They set ToD in Rudy's trial at 10:30, did that rely on any screams?

BTW, I wonder if SA will address my conundrum: which of his posts regarding communication with Pepperdine University about Steve Moore was true, and which was a lie? Did he communicate with Pepperdine to try to influence Moore's wrongful dismissal case (which turned out rather badly for Pepperdine, incidentally), or did he not? Surely it can't be that hard to set the record straight.....
Click to expand...

I know what I saw, and when he came over here when I first joined I suggested that he ought not be posting that he called Pepperdine to nitpick every single possible wholly irrelevant misstatement and send it to them whist an online harassment and defamation campaign was going on against him and his wife. Incidentally, did you know that George Will (bigshot political analyst over here) 'corrected' Steve Moore in his appearance on that show? It just so happens that particular 'error' was on that laundry list of 'lies' that was going around at the time, Harry Rag's I think, at the same time they were posting about the 'press kits' they were sending to media outlets.

It was the one about how many blows Amanda was supposed to have 'delivered' in Massei's totally evidence-less 'recreation' of the murder. Now I suppose George Will, who's known as bright guy, might have read the Massei Report overnight and memorized all the little details like that and instantly knew to correct him on that 'point,' but wasn't bright enough to realize it didn't matter as Massei just made it all up which Steve Moore immediately pointed out if I recall correctly, or maybe some functionary saw that list in their inbox and just included it in his preparation materials....
 
Last edited:
Kaosium said:
<snip>
I think those methods could be applied to just about anyone their age, in fact as far as 'rape fantasies' go, anyone who likes romance novels could be described as drawn to them from my limited exposure to the genre. Would you like to see a female with a dozen Harlequin romance novels denigrated in court as 'addicted to rape fantasies' if they were sexually assaulted?
Click to expand...

A bit off topic but I believe the US publishing industry refers to this genre as "bodice rippers". Remember the granddaddy of the romance novel? -"Gone with the Wind" - the scene the morning after Rhett has forced himself on Scarlett - she's in heaven - er so to speak.:) Then to keep with the Girl finds Boy - loses same process that recurs throughout the book (and movie) Rhett comes in and apologizes for his behavior tht night and takes off for London with daughter Bonnie. Gee my mom loved that movie and she was a prudish Irish Catholic to the core. :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom