Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
RW, What would convince me" Common sense, for starters. N-one, no-one, would accuse an innocent man of murder.

Let's start there.
 
Uffa, Grinder. He bought things, when he was ahead. but too soon, he lost it all. Hence, he HAS TO SELL. SIMPLES.
 
capealadin said:
Umm. Could someone please tell me when the bullying pile on happens? Because I have a rather busy day ahead. Thanks so much :)
Click to expand...
Hi CapeAladin,
Gosh, I remember readin' elsewhere one Christmas and seein' a hot lookin' picture of you back in the day, I'm sure many here would have luved to dog pile you back then, :D

Kidding aside,
Can I get your opinion on something?

From what I know by reading around a little,
the prosecution wants to increase the prison sentence of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox.

But yet Rudy Guede had his original 30 year conviction reduced by 6 years.
And this same prosecution did not appeal his sentence reduction.

Afterwards, Rudy Guede had his sentence automatically reduced by 1/3 due to his opting to have a fast-track trial. So Rudy Guede has only 16 years to spend in prison, even though his DNA was inside Meredith Kercher's body.

Word on the street is that ol' Rudy Guede,
with time off from good behavior, will be out of prison in just few more years.

Do you think that this is fair,
to allow the only person whose DNA was found in a place it definately did not belong, to get such a short prison sentence?
RW

PS-Thanks for the nice words about my dog Tang. :)
 
Last edited:
By th way, Grinder, It has nothing to to do * With sticking with Michael.* I am a member of PMF. Michael started PMF, is PMF, is highly knowledgeable about this case, and therefore I am part of the original site. Clear, cut and dried.

Btw, Loyalty is part of whom I am. Something wrong with that ??????????
 
capealadin said:
Dougm said:
The problem here is your wording of INNOCENT. Insufficient evidence is a whole different meaning.

Sympathy on your lovely dog, Tang. i'm sure he was loved.
Click to expand...

So you agree there is insufficient evidence?

And, much as I am saddened by the loss of the lovely dog, Tang, he/she did not belong to me. Tang was RW's dog. I guess all of us "Knoxians" sound alike.
Click to expand...
 
capealadin said:
Doug, Hon. Don't beLieve everything you read. Grinder hasn't a bean.

Nope. Not Anne Coulter, however, we're prolly on the same page. BTW, Is he known to be a dumb a**ss?

Oh, and Grinder. {lay poker ofen enough, grinders are our bread and butter, SO predictable :)
Click to expand...

Hon?? LOL.
 
No, RW, I do NOT think that it's fair. Rudi deserves a life sentence,

However, he took advantage, and got got a reduced sentence. Way too little.

Well, thank you, for my pic. Did you know I;ve seen you at Tito's, and you have much to be be proud of ? Wonerful pic's of nature. I absolultely love them.

My birthday is December, and I will be posting a pic of me, in Muizenberg. Love the surfers. Stint, who occasionally lurks here, has convinced me that you're really a very nice guy.

So, cheers, mate.
 
capealadin said:
By th way, Grinder, It has nothing to to do * With sticking with Michael.* I am a member of PMF. Michael started PMF, is PMF, is highly knowledgeable about this case, and therefore I am part of the original site. Clear, cut and dried.

Btw, Loyalty is part of whom I am. Something wrong with that ??????????
Click to expand...

Ah Capealadin, I complemented you for sticking with Michael which to my mind is being loyal. I think it might be time for sleep for you.

Want to compliment you for sticking on michael's .net after .org was taken from him.
Click to expand...
 
No worries, Grinder. BTW, It's COMPLIMENTED. Michael, however, needs no loyalty. He is simply truth, and and a wonderful example of wanting justice, We agree on the basic principles of such.

There will be no no rejoicing, no matter which way justice decides.

As London John says: There are no winners here. None.
 
Hi CapeAladin,
With it being Halloween right around the corner, I am seeing many stores here in Los Angeles with the masks and costumes out for sale already. Heck, my sis Teresa and her old man are excitedly figuring out how to outdo last years haunted house that always scares the lil' kids, some who will start crying and some who won't even come up to the door for trick or treat candy. My sis just bought an evil lookin' girl named "MaryAnn", who is holding her brains in her hands and when you walk by, she starts moving, nibbling on her brains and then talking also as her eyes light up. Hahaha, it'll scare the the little ones for sure! :D

Being an L.A. native, 1 who worked in retail in Hollywood many, many years ago,
who is drinkin' some Sangria right now just down the street from The Sony Studies,
I wondered earlier tonight how come, with it being Halloween and all that, Raffaele and Amanda weren't watching a scary movie the night Meredith was killed?

You know, something along the lines of Nightmare on Elm Street or Dawn of the Living Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Psycho, or better yet Scream? Something that would keep them in the holiday spirit, so to say...

I mean, come on now,
who watches a chick flick like Amelie
before they grab a huuuge kitchen knife to take it over to kill a friend?

See ya next time, I'm out.
RW
 
Last edited:
capealadin said:
Forgive me, Douf..In calling you Hon. It's just my warm nature. Please ignore,
Click to expand...

Maybe I should change my name to "Douf". But then you would say I don't know how to spell. Maybe we could meet at Tito's? Do you hang there?

Let's hope Amanda and Raff get to enjoy some food at Tito's soon.
 
Paninaro said:
What is Curatolo saying? Anyone? 1.28.30.
Click to expand...

Most of it is what we already know. He says he saw them there talking animated; every so often one of them (AK or RS) would look under the railing overlooking the basketball court. He says he (curatolo) was there from 9 or 9:30 to 11 or 11:30. He doesn't say whether AK and RS were there for the whole of that time, although it seems sort of implied. He had seen them before sometimes previously and so knew of them. He knew it was that evening because the next morning there was all the commotion with the police. He realizes his testimony is important, but is sure of it. He would never be responsible for taking away two kids' freedom by giving false testimony. So, when he found out what had happened, his concience told him to come forward, given that he's a Christian,
 
I should add, I am guilty of many errors : re : spelling. I type very fast, and, I admit, don;t take the trouble of spell checking :(

This case is very emotional, those for and agin. In truth, many of us will be perhaps be of a like mind, on a different subject.

Different strokes, for different folks, I guess.

There have been many different points for innocence. I accept such. However, there have been many for guilt.

We agree to disagree?

On a different thread, a different topic, we may be on the same page. See you later, perhaps?
 
capealadin said:
No worries, Grinder. BTW, It's COMPLIMENTED. Michael, however, needs no loyalty. He is simply truth, and and a wonderful example of wanting justice, We agree on the basic principles of such.

There will be no no rejoicing, no matter which way justice decides.

As London John says: There are no winners here. None.
Click to expand...


Do you think you could pull on the edges of that truth and come up with a detailed timeline of what happened that night? We have our own theory but it would really be nice to have an alternative for comparison.
 
Apologies, Doug. At leat it wasn't Douche, right>:)

Rw. I have never liked Halloween. Always had the candy out, but am not American by birth. Love the kiddies, though, and really took pleasure in having great treats for them.

I suppose, I love sunsets, nature, * SECRETARIAT* where I almost jumped out of my chair, loving the nature of the beast. Well, I'm from South Africa. I'm in awe of nature, how animals love their young.I am so impressed with * Rolfe*. Someone who understands the pathology of animals. I grew up with many, and never could uderstand what made them tick.

Many were my pets,from babies, lions, baboons, cheetahs. I guess we knew nothing, In fact, we really did know nothing.

However, it instilled in me a love of animals . I so wish humans had the same instincts.
 
Grinder said:
From the DailyMail today:

Stephanie said: 'In this whole case over the last four years Meredith has been completely forgotten but we need to find justice for her, the truth.

This must be devastating for two web sites.
Click to expand...


Speaking of the truth, may I explain to new readers and remind others that there are two competing explanations for this crime.

The first explanation:

  • - is sensational and gets virtually all the publicity, discussion and controversy.
  • - has no reasonable or plausible motive.
  • - is statistically rare to the point of being almost unheard of
  • - begins with an illegally obtained statement, a hasty false arrest and a case closed statement by police.
  • - requires trust of investigators who have repeatedly and blatantly betrayed that trust before and after the murder.
  • - has been distorted by a fog of false and misleading reports by police, media and bloggers.
  • - uses arguably planted and certainly flimsy and improperly collected, stored, processed and analyzed forensics.
  • - requires a non scientific Time of Death
  • - uses belated, conflicting and possibly coerced statements from a few mentally challenged and/or criminal and/or serial witnesses
  • - requires fantastical speculations (for example: Amanda carrying a huge kitchen knife in her purse to a non premeditated burglary)
  • - and is absurd
The other explanation:

  • - is (tragically) not an uncommon crime,
  • - is not sensational,
  • - spawns little attention.
  • - would have been a slam dunk conviction,
  • - and is vastly more probable
  • - it is:

  • The perpetrator was a cat burglar.
  • One who was previously described as very dangerous.
  • One who had threatened occupants with a knife when caught.
  • One who would throw a rock through a window to gain entry.
  • One who had broken in through a second story window.
  • One who had been caught and released without charge by the police.
  • One who admitted to being with Meredith that night.
  • One who left his fingerprints and his shoe prints embossed in Meredith's blood.
  • One who left his DNA inside Meredith.
  • One who left his DNA on Meredith's purse.
  • One who was known to the police by the name of Rudy Guede.
Rudy Guede broke into the cottage through Filomena's second story window. Meredith came home around 9 PM and caught him in the act. He used his knife to rob, rape and murder her.

Afterwards he went dancing. Later he fled to Germany.

Simple enough for a fifth grader to understand. But perhaps not complicated or tantalizing enough for a prosecutor whose superior intellect requires more of a challenge.
 
You know, I'm reading this truejustice site written by the creepy career loser Peter Quennell, and I can't help but think even the guilters know it's over. All of the sudden we're being reminded that the case isn't over until the final appeal to the Supreme Court. We weren't hearing this in guilterland much after the Massei ruling. They know. The writing is on the wall.

Edit: I'm sorry, I don't mean to harp. I really don't, but just look at quotes like this. "In effect what Judge Hellman’s court will issue is a provisional finding, and Sollecito and Knox may not know their final verdict and sentence for a year and a half." Good lord someone get this man some valium to put him to sleep for a few months. I gotta ask, do you guilters seriously take this guy seriously? Are you still behind him?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom