Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[tsig]

It wouldn't surprise me either - nothing would surprise me about the incompetence, corruption or simple disregard for basic human decency of the prosecution team at this stage given all we know already - but it would be an incredibly serious ethical breach if the police had forensic data in hand to show that the putative semen stain was a real semen stain which had been tied to Rudy and they concealed this from the court.

It would also mean that they had done Rudy a huge favour by concealing this evidence at his trial, since knock-down evidence that he had sexually assaulted Meredith after she was fatally wounded until he climaxed would (you would think) count as an aggravating circumstance that would have gotten him the maximum 30-year sentence instead of the lighter 24-year sentence he got (reduced to 16 by the fast-track mechanism).

However such a serious accusation really needs to be backed up by something more than the word of Barbie Nadeau in my view. The allegation should be investigated, to be sure, but Barbie's sloppy enough that she could easily have just gotten confused.

Given that you think that Italian Law is entirely corrupt why do you think the current judge will free Amanda?

 

[quadraginta]

My husband thinks you're a jerk.

Get it?

I don't see why we should care about his opinion if he doesn't participate on the board.

Unless he posted it on PMF, of course. That would be different.

Somehow.

 

[AmyStrange]

Touche!!!

My husband thinks you're a jerk.

Get it?

Mary H,

Hehehe, I get it and that's funny, and even though I agree with HBlue about many of your post being more interesting than lock lectures, I still like long lectures about door locks too. Sorry.

I also find it interesting how hate for Amanda overides some people's critical thinking skills concerning the evidence,

Dave

 

[AmyStrange]

Thank you for your input...

I don't see why we should care about his opinion if he doesn't participate on the board.

Unless he posted it on PMF, of course. That would be different.

Somehow

quadraginta,

by the way, it's called ironic sarcasm and I think it's funny. Hehehe.

But while you are here, what do you think the time of death is and what evidence can you offer to prove it?

Dave

 

[AmyStrange]

That's an interesting question...

Given that you think that Italian Law is entirely corrupt why do you think the current judge will free Amanda?

tsig,

but I can't recall Kevin ever saying the whole Italian system is corrupt, but since you asked, it's pretty obvious Hellmann isn't corrupt.

And oh yes before you go, what do you think the time of death is and what evidence do you have to back it up?

Dave

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>

That may be the first time I've ever gotten a smiley face out of you.

 

[quadraginta]

quadraginta,

by the way, it's called ironic sarcasm.

What is?

I didn't think Mary was being sarcastic in the line of hers I quoted. Neither was I. I did think the irony was spectacular, especially considering the amount of fodder used in this thread from 'people who don't participate on this board.'

But while you are here, what do you think the time of death is and what evidence can you offer to prove it?

At this stage in the thread I don't think of it at all, and hence would not presume to offer any evidence.

That pick-up line is getting a little long in the tooth anyway. You're not gonna score with anything that lame.

 

[Mary_H]

Mary H,

Hehehe, I get it and that's funny, and even though I agree with HBlue about many of your post being more interesting than lock lectures, I still like long lectures about door locks too. Sorry.

Thanks, Dave. It's okay, a lot of people are more interested in the engineering aspects of this case than I am. If you like lock lectures, I think there's a bunch of them on the second incarnation of this thread.

I also find it interesting how hate for Amanda overides some people's critical thinking skills concerning the evidence,

Dave

I was just talking to my husband about that on our walk around Green Lake.

 

[quadraginta]

That may be the first time I've ever gotten a smiley face out of you.

I'll try to do better.

 

[AmyStrange]

Ok, I'll give you that...

At this stage in the thread I don't think of it at all, and hence would not presume to offer any evidence.

quadraginta,

but you could say that about ALL the evidence, so why (and I assume you think Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, and I apologize if I am making the wrong assumption here) do you think they are guilty and what evidence are you using to justify this thought (especially considering what you said in your quote above) or is it just a gut feeling?

Dave

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Mary,

I find your posts much more interesting than long boring lectures on door locks, if that makes you feel any better.

My cat likes door locks because they are shiny. Too bad he can't read those wonderful posts you refer too.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

Pilot,

If you have a question about something I have written then why not just ask? I personally believe that the West Memphis Three were wrongfully convicted. They got a crap deal because the prosecution refuses to admit mistakes. I don't blame the three for taking the deal as one was facing death. I am hopeful they will be able to eventually clear their names.

I am well aware of the fact that the three are on probation and the court has not acknowledged any wrongdoing.

 

[quadraginta]

quadraginta,

but you could say that about ALL the evidence, so why (and I assume you think Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, and I apologize if I am making the wrong assumption here) do you think they are guilty and what evidence are you using to justify this thought (especially considering what you said in your quote above) or is it just a gut feeling?

Dave

Apology accepted.

(Hint: In spite of the predominant attitudes reflected in this thread the choice is not a binary one. It is exactly the "If ya ain't with us, yer agin us." mentality which has earned the thread the reputation it has. It also sets the stage for apparently limitless entertainment, but that's a different subject.)

 

[Chris_Halkides]

admiration

I can't bring myself to condemn the "case closed" remark because it has been thoroughly vindicated. The authorities have my admiration for investigating thoroughly and not doing it the most convenient (and crooked) way by being satisfied with an African man under arrest. (which is exactly what AK and RS hoped/expected they would)

bucketoftea,

Were the authorities being crooked when they claimed to have damning CCTV footage of Amanda but did not? When they claimed that Amanda's clothing was missing when it was right where she said it was? When they claimed that the German-language Harry Potter book was at the girls' flat when there was a second copy at Raffaele's? When they said that there were hundreds of picograms of DNA from the knife blade and there were not?

How eager were the police to investigate Patrick's alibi? If they still have your admiration after the things I listed in the first paragraph and the other things that have been brought to your attention (more than once IIRC), then what behavior (aside from continuing to hold Patrick) would cause you to lose admiration for them?

 

[AmyStrange]

Thank you...

Apology accepted.

(Hint: In spite of the predominant attitudes reflected in this thread the choice is not a binary one. It is exactly the "If ya ain't with us , yer agin us." mentality which has earned the thread the reputation it has. It also sets the stage for apparently limitless entertainment, but that's a different subject.)

quadraginta,

so basically, you're here for the entertainment value? I can see that, but regardless of the apparent bias "mentality" you think is on display here, at least opposing views are allowed, and although people sometimes do tend to gang up here; it is still way more civil than many of the comment sections of major websites like huffington post and msnbc etc.

But (that being said) there are thoughtful people who do post here and try to explain their positions calmly and politely, and (maybe it's me) but the pro-guilters do tend to spend more time arguing semantics of people's post and/ or the bizarre behavior (or presumptive lies) of Amanda and Raffaele than anything else.

And that is what many of them lay their hat on, but draw the line there and will not argue the time of death which (as they say) is "contested". In reality (like you said) at this point, it's all "contested", but that doesn't mean it still isn't worth discussing. This IS a discussion forum after all and a "skeptical" forum to boot and one about the Kercher case.

Sorry for the long rant but thank you for your apology acceptance and explanation of your position. It is definitely interesting to say the least and also does have a little truth behind it to back it up,

Dave

 

[HumanityBlues]

quadraginta,

so basically, you're here for the entertainment value? I can see that, but regardless of the apparent bias "mentality" you think is on display here, at least opposing views are allowed, and although people sometimes do tend to gang up here; it is still way more civil than many of the comment sections of major websites like huffington post and msnbc etc.

But (that being said) there are thoughtful people who do post here and try to explain their positions calmly and politely, and (maybe it's me) but the pro-guilters do tend to spend more time arguing semantics of people's post and/ or the bizarre behavior (or presumptive lies) of Amanda and Raffaele than anything else.

And that is what many of them lay their hat on, but draw the line there and will not argue the time of death which (as they say) is "contested". In reality (like you said) at this point, it's all "contested", but that doesn't mean it still isn't worth discussing. This IS a discussion forum after all and a "skeptical" forum to boot and one about the Kercher case.

Sorry for the long rant but thank you for your apology acceptance and explanation of your position. It is definitely interesting to say the least and also does have a little truth behind it to back it up,

Dave

C'mon Dave. We're all on the fence here. Didn't ya know?

 

[AmyStrange]

oooops...

C'mon Dave. We're all on the fence here. Didn't ya know?

HBlue,

my bad. I forgot,

Dave

P.S. where is this fence by the way. Hopefully it's not topped with barbed-wire, but the real question has to be, can we get cable there? Hehehe.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

I've thought of a fun trolling game. I think you could have a lot of fun trolling Amanda Knox threads just by following these rules:

1. Snipe at pro-innocence posts with standard guilter talking points without actually asserting that Sollecito and Knox are guilty.
2. If someone assumes you are a guilter, act butthurt and complain that everyone here is mean.
3. If someone asks you a question about the case that guilters can't discuss rationally, avoid discussing it. Any excuse will do. If pressed, act butthurt some more.

 

[Alt+F4]

I've thought of a fun trolling game. I think you could have a lot of fun trolling Amanda Knox threads just by following these rules:

1. Snipe at pro-innocence posts with standard guilter talking points without actually asserting that Sollecito and Knox are guilty.
2. If someone assumes you are a guilter, act butthurt and complain that everyone here is mean.
3. If someone asks you a question about the case that guilters can't discuss rationally, avoid discussing it. Any excuse will do. If pressed, act butthurt some more.

You do know that proposing/adovcating/promoting a trolling game makes you a troll, right?

 

[HumanityBlues]

I've thought of a fun trolling game. I think you could have a lot of fun trolling Amanda Knox threads just by following these rules:

1. Snipe at pro-innocence posts with standard guilter talking points without actually asserting that Sollecito and Knox are guilty.
2. If someone assumes you are a guilter, act butthurt and complain that everyone here is mean.
3. If someone asks you a question about the case that guilters can't discuss rationally, avoid discussing it. Any excuse will do. If pressed, act butthurt some more.

Lets not beat around the bush here any longer. Quadraginta obviously thinks Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.