• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find Yummi's PMF comment on the upheld calunnia conviction very interesting:

One aspect that is maybe the most striking together with the 530 § 1, is that Knox has been found guilty of calunnia. This is flabbergasting. So there was no coercing, no false memories and no excuse for her false accusation. Pacelli is the only party who won entirely. The question obviously is, how can this go together with the acquittal for murder. If she is guilty of calunnia, then why did she commit it? This is - you all understand it immediately - utterly inconsistent with acquittal; this is appears as something more impossible to explain in a sentencing report. How do can you rationally motivate this calunnia?
Click to expand...

... something that highlights maybe the ongoing of a schyzophrenic voting on a charge after another. Three years for that calunnia is an egregious punishment, plus all legal expenses. It means no excuses at all except generic mitigation. In the framework this is absurd. Nobody commits such a calunnia as a crime itself, for no reason. But how can this be coupled with a 530 § 1 "non aver commesso il fatto" on the rest is a total mystery.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and I've seen London John raise the same question here. It doesn't add up at all. I think this a thing no one on either side can understand and only Lumumba and his lawyer are happy about. In other words: It smells of a very bad compromise. Or is there more to it? Frank Sfarzo seems to suggest that the Hellmann court deliberately is leaving this decision to be overturned by the Supreme court.

There is no motive and there can be no intent to commit a crime of calunnia if Knox is not guilty. So how on earth can they motivate such a sentence?
 
Ah, looks as if everybody else was right about SG's actual question too.

Oh well, it's so late it's early....

Rolfe.
 
By the way, did someone say there had been a tweet saying the verdict was unanimous? If so, is it likely to be reliable?

It seems as if that is the last piece of information needed to send some PMFers right over the edge, and who are we to deny them?

Rolfe.
 
In this video the reporter said Mignini exited the building and tried to make a statement but was jeered ("shouted down"). I really hope that was true. He is an absolute scumbag and complete buffoon.
 
Last edited:
They must forget that she was unable to properly defend this charge of calunnia because of the the murder trial. When the truth comes out about the interrogation she will win this too if the SC don't throw it out first .
 
Rolfe said:
By the way, did someone say there had been a tweet saying the verdict was unanimous? If so, is it likely to be reliable?

It seems as if that is the last piece of information needed to send some PMFers right over the edge, and who are we to deny them?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

That was me. It was @morsels.
 
Last edited:
"Tonight's sentence is wrong and confounding," prosecutor Giuliano Mignini told the ANSA news agency. "There is a heavy conviction for slander. Why did she accuse him? We don't know."

I bet Edgardo Giobbi knows why she said what she said, he was there at the interrogation. He knows how it happened. He knows where the tape went.



The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Winston Churchill
 
Rolfe said:
By the way, did someone say there had been a tweet saying the verdict was unanimous? If so, is it likely to be reliable?

It seems as if that is the last piece of information needed to send some PMFers right over the edge, and who are we to deny them?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

They're not over the edge yet. They appear to be recovering in fact. Knox's slander conviction has become their focal point -- proclaiming that she's a "convicted liar who maliciously and falsely accused an innocent person without any justification" as one PMFer recently put it. Some of them feel that this conviction will somehow result in an overturning of the second trial's verdict by the Supreme Court. I fear that could happen when you consider the corrupt nature of the prosecution. Bribing judges, pulling some strings, it's not beyond them.
 
From PMF:
N.B. If you are reading this board as a non-member and try to sign up, you will find that your registration must be validated by an administrator. Presently, for technical reasons but also to eliminate trolling, we are not validating such requests. Once we have switched to a dedicated server, we will admit new members once again. However, they will be subject to an undetermined period of comment moderation prior to posting. I am getting several request for account activation an hour and am sorry that I must ignore them for the time being.
Click to expand...
Guess there's a bit too much heat in the kitchen for them.


OTOH, I guess they are being hit with a flood of new commenters. But there is a preponderance of confirmation bias there.
 
Last edited:
Ammonitida said:
They're not over the edge yet. They appear to be recovering in fact. Knox's slander conviction has become their focal point -- proclaiming that she's a "convicted liar who maliciously and falsely accused an innocent person without any justification" as one PMFer recently put it. Some of them feel that this conviction will somehow result in an overturning of the second trial's verdict by the Supreme Court. I fear that could happen when you consider the corrupt nature of the prosecution. Bribing judges, pulling some strings, it's not beyond them.
Click to expand...

It appears a new narrative is developing to separate the guilters from the innocentis -- and both are based on the slander charge not being overturned as well as the murder charges. Of course, the guilters are trying to hang their hats on the idea that if she lied, she must have had a reason to lie, and so how can she not have been guilty of the murder? And the flip side is, if she is not guilty of the murder, then why would she lie?

Actually, my take is that the reasoning, when we finally get to hear it, will be as follows:

* Murder, etc. -- TOD, total lack of evidence in murder room, etc. shows they could not have done it.
* Break-in -- evidence shows it is much more likely to be real than staged -- staged break in not proven by evidence, just guessing, in first court
* Slander -- she accused Patrick. Reason, doesn't matter, it is clear she did it, she wrote it in the note.

I see the slander being upheld because it is the only charge that they can't say did not happen. So to overturn it, the court would have had to rule that the cops coerced it out of her, and they were not willing to go that far, especially without a tape. I think if she had not written that "gift" note, the slander would have been thrown out also. (obvious, because the other statements were not admitted)
 
Would be better to just say closed for renovations! Explains why my membership never went through. Mignini getting booed was priceless. I just wish they had it on tape ! LOL I know ... Budget cuts.
 
Paninaro said:
I find Yummi's PMF comment on the upheld calunnia conviction very interesting:

Indeed, and I've seen London John raise the same question here. It doesn't add up at all. I think this a thing no one on either side can understand and only Lumumba and his lawyer are happy about. In other words: It smells of a very bad compromise. Or is there more to it? Frank Sfarzo seems to suggest that the Hellmann court deliberately is leaving this decision to be overturned by the Supreme court.

There is no motive and there can be no intent to commit a crime of calunnia if Knox is not guilty. So how on earth can they motivate such a sentence?
Click to expand...

This is why it's worth reading Machiavelli, he makes the point that it makes no sense unless they're guilty, which suggests to me yet again--and apparently Frank Sfarzo as well--that might well mean it's left to be overturned, and they don't have to be the ones to do it, it can be blamed on Rome. If it makes no sense unless they're guilty, it makes sense if they're innocent to dismiss it--but they didn't and must have had a reason. I suspect local politics. Thus the cops are at least partially happy as their arrest is currently unblemished leaving them a better chance on their trial against Witchgirl for calunnia and not totally dismissing everything they did in the case.

Patrick, who's been described as a leader in his community and who had protesters come out for him when he was jailed is also 'taken care' of, and it occurred to me watching the CNN coverage (I think) that the correspondent might well have run into one of Patrick's supporters, the African lady all fired up about Amanda and Meredith's death, but didn't even seem to know who Rudy was.

Therefore, it was 'obviously' the fault of those bunglers from Rome, Patrizia Stefanoni and her Polizia Scientifica,--stooges who messed everything up--the Squadra Mobile mere victims of those clowns from the capitol!

Or at least that's how its sold in the community, then it goes to Rome for them to decide who's at fault, Amanda or the Polizia di Stato right before a young justice minister who has just won an improbable case and who knows damn well that whole cesspool in Perugia needs an enema. The Supreme Court gets to figure for itself just how much weight they want to give to 'evidence' that they remanded into inadmissibility. Which leaves them with only the note and the arrest for evidence of what occurred....
 
Last edited:
This Yummi / Machavelli guy is so close to Mignini that I suspect that he is Migninis official internet translator. I’m serious.

He presents the same convoluted logic and idiotic arguments.

The Supreme Court will affirm the innocent finding and will overrule the guilty finding on the slander of Lumumba. Why? Because Hellmann was very careful...in fact he gave far more leeway to the prosecution than he should have...I suspect he had to go along with the citizen jurors as Italians still seem certain the false accusation is a crime against Lumumba.

I suggest that Lumumba needs to look into charges against police. On Nov 5th, 2007 after Amandas class Lumumba approached Amanda outside her school. He asked her if she would speak to a reporter (that I suspect was offering money to Lumumba) the request of which she declined. It is certain that Amanda was being followed by police and that they saw this encounter between the two. Not only did Amanda decline Lumumbas offer but she also resigned her job in that very same conversation…( she was afraid to walk the streets)

So...does it really take mental gymnastics that there was never a need to find a black mans hair or even to review a text message for the Perugia Flying Idiots to suspect Lumumba? In fact I suggest it was Lumumbas greed that led him into the police trap in the first place. A trap sprung later that evening ...yes...Nov 5th, 2007.

Amanda is 100 % innocent...how can there be intent if she had no knowledge of what the police promised her they were certain of? Police stated Lumumba was involved. They were positive. I believe Amanda truly thought Lumumba may be guilty. And besides...Lumumbas little greedy larceny with the reporter got his own self in trouble...black man found.

And speaking of snotty remarks any word from CS today? Yuck yuck!
 
Dougm said:
It appears a new narrative is developing to separate the guilters from the innocentis -- and both are based on the slander charge not being overturned as well as the murder charges. Of course, the guilters are trying to hang their hats on the idea that if she lied, she must have had a reason to lie, and so how can she not have been guilty of the murder? And the flip side is, if she is not guilty of the murder, then why would she lie?

Actually, my take is that the reasoning, when we finally get to hear it, will be as follows:

* Murder, etc. -- TOD, total lack of evidence in murder room, etc. shows they could not have done it.
* Break-in -- evidence shows it is much more likely to be real than staged -- staged break in not proven by evidence, just guessing, in first court
* Slander -- she accused Patrick. Reason, doesn't matter, it is clear she did it, she wrote it in the note.

I see the slander being upheld because it is the only charge that they can't say did not happen. So to overturn it, the court would have had to rule that the cops coerced it out of her, and they were not willing to go that far, especially without a tape. I think if she had not written that "gift" note, the slander would have been thrown out also. (obvious, because the other statements were not admitted)
Click to expand...

Thats how I see it, and in a way, it was a wash and prevented legal lawsuits to go on for recouping expenses from the police etc..etc..

I dont think Hellman had a horse in the race. But the interrogation was really the police versus Amanda, and had nothing to do with the Murder.
And the defense never really chose to fight it, they had so many other accusations to defend against.

He left the door open for a separate trial, but he wont be part of it.
I doubt Amanda will return for any of the other trials.
Raffaele is staying in Italy I read. Probably never smoke the pipe again!

What did he call this a Reality TV Show Nightmare....wow?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
From PMF:Guess there's a bit too much heat in the kitchen for them.


OTOH, I guess they are being hit with a flood of new commenters. But there is a preponderance of confirmation bias there.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's been like that for a little while now. Anyone and everyone who doesn't sing the correct tune--whether they think Amanda and Raffaele guilty or not--gets told 'Thanks for stopping by.' They're big into groupthink there, going for the gold in London in '12!

Thus everyone who comes in and doesn't basically agree with the basic assumptions of the board and post their pictures of their kittens and bunnies on cue gets labeled a 'troll.' You see they're convinced there's posters from the sinister FOA, (Friends of Amanda--a shadowy network of evildoers) or IIP (Injustice in Perugia--a consortium of sinister forces), getting paid to troll their website! Actually none of them are getting paid, many of them would actually have been assets to their forum as they believed in guilt but just didn't fall into lockstep quite fast enough, others are newbies coming coming to the case from a media environment far different than the one they experienced before PMF, generally in '08 and '09 when the majority joined and thus don't share as many assumptions about the case.

And of course, they are getting trolled sometimes. Just not nearly as much as they think, being as they lump all the other ones in too, what with being paranoid and all. That naturally provides copious fodder for trolling, some actually being downright funny about it, others just returning some of the bile they spew throughout the ether at all who displease them. That's included a few outings, some employers contacted, and numerous hate campaigns against selected posters or personalities.
 
The Italian Supreme court can do whatever they want, Amanda is never gonna step foot in Italy again. There is no way America will send her back. The guilters know this is over, they have treated it like it was a long drawn out sports game, even if they won't admit it to it. Their team lost and they are trying to rationalize it.
 
Dougm said:
Something I found interesting from the verdict after both viewing the video and reading a translation. Not only did the court find that Amanda and Raffeale did not commit the murder, but they ruled that the crime of staging a crime scene "did not exist". Basically, they ruled that the staged break-in was not staged!!

Isn't that what so many of us have been saying all along?

:D :D :D
Click to expand...

I have been watching CNN and now playing catchup. I am probably way late with this comment but:

If the court ruled the break in was not staged then presumably the court concluded the break in was real. Hopefully the media will now realize and report the true, logical and obvious explanation or the crime. Which is:

The already convicted cat burglar named Rudy Guede broke into the cottage that night. Meredith came home around 9 PM and caught him in the act of burglarizing the cottage. He used his knife to rob, rape and murder her.

BTW I am ecstatic because of the verdict but more to the point:
I am soooooooooo ................. damned ...................... relieved!

Joy to Raffaele, Amanda, their families, the lawyers, the judges and jury, and their supporters.

Rest In Peace Merdith. Your friends Raffaele and Amanda are no longer being persecuted. Your family will understand one day.

Pleasant dreams to all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom