Continuing from the
Masonic CT recap and
the half a dozen false stories smack down . . .
Do you think you can say whatever unproven thing you want about someone because has a pending charge? (which you don't even know about)
Amanda Knox prosecutor Giuliano Mignini convicted of ‘abuse of office’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6999196.ece
Amanda Knox Leaves Italian Prison Following Acquittal
http://abcnews.go.com/International/amanda-knox-innocent/t/story?id=14654317
Deal with it.
Your is a dirty campaign, made of falsehoods. The conviction of Mignini is for you merely an instrument to take advantage from in order to insinuate lies that have nothing to do with it.
What are the falsehoods here? That Mignini was convicted? Or that he has said some nutty stuff about Satanism and conspiracies against him? Both are true and I've already proven it.
In fact, you don't even know anything about Mignini's conviction nor about his actual personal credibility.
Too bad those things aren't covered in the PMF archives. I wonder why that is? Prior to him being convicted Mignini and everyone at PMF was saying how it just a normal thing in Italy for a PM to have charges like that brought against him and how it wouldn't amount to anything because Mignini was completely innocent. Then Mignini was convicted and regardless of what happens next nobody at PMF (including you) spoke of him being convicted as a possibility. You have a very poor track record of predictions; you made a huge fuss about the overwhelming guilt of two people just found innocent of murder while hyping the innocence of the lead prosecutor who was recently found guilty abuse of office. Why are you so still so confident that future court rulings will go as you predict?
And you seem to ignore the chain of judges and prosecution offices that do the same things Mignini does.
It is common for PM's to get 16 month convictions for abuse of office in Italy? Or are you saying there was a conspiracy against Mignini because he was convicted of doing something that is regular behavior for a PM in Italy?
I think you are all quite crazy here, in fact. There is no shed of rationality in your immagination about Mignini. Your assertions and speculations about "leaks" or "crimes" by Mignini are nonsense.
To you saying Mignini was convicted of abuse of office or pointing out the large number of false stories printed against Knox is nonsense speculation. . . But you think it is sensible when Mignini talks about the unprecedented American media conspiracy against him that is really being driven by sinister forces in Italy (masons or satanist I guess) out to get him ever since he started investigating the Narducci suicide . . .
(Has anybody pointed out to Mignini that the sinister forces out to get him are just common sense reporters and fair minded officials trying to stop him from wreaking judicial havoc due to his delirious theories? He is actually probably correct about one detail. The campaign against him may have in fact started with the Narducci investigation, because that is when it became readily apparent that he is deranged.)
First of all they will be "found" innocent or guilty only after the Cassazione. By now, Knox is actually convicted for calunnia, not innocent.
And calunnia is not abuse of office.
Yes, abuse of office is a much bigger deal. Most people understand that young people sometimes do very stupid things but when an elder PM breaks the very laws he should be upholding it is very serious problem.
No "sect". And nothing "satanic".
I already accurately quoted Mansey and Nadeau using those words. Why should I believe you over them? Do you honestly think I am ever going to agree with you just because you insist you are right over and over again?
Kate Mansey:
Mignini told the court: "There was a
sect-like aspect with cultural connections to Halloween and All Saints Day playing a part. The killing actually happened the next day. Japanese comics found in Raffaele Sollecito's possession had pictures of murdered female vampires which were eerily similar to the scene of the crime."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20081026/ai_n30949025/
John Follain:
Italian prosecutors yesterday accused Amanda Knox of stabbing to death the Leeds Univeristy exchange student Meredith Kercher in a
satanic ritual with the complicity of her former boyfriend and an Ivory Coast drifter.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4968044.ece
Barbie Nadeau:
Mignini also contends that Knox’s one-time boyfriend, Rafaelle Sollecito, instigated the orgy, and has suggested that he was inspired by the Halloween-themed Japanese Manga comics found in Sollecito’s bedroom, which have been described as a cross between
Satan worship and pornography.
Nick Squires reporting what Judge Micheli said about Mignini's theories:
He dismissed as “fantasy” prosecutors’ claims that the sex game in which Miss Kercher is alleged to have died was inspired by Satanic rites, Halloween rituals or violent Japanese ‘manga’ comics about dead vampires.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...f-disappointment-at-being-sent-for-trial.html
John Kercher:
The prosecutor was criticised for mentioning this, but she was killed on the eve of the Day of the Dead, November 2. Sollecito was said to have Japanese manga comics that described the rape and killing of female vampires. Meredith had been dressed as a vampire to celebrate Hallowe’en.
http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...irl_meredith_was_funny_clever_and_extremely_/
^story first printed at Sunday Times
A very important point here is that the PMF clan has made up a narrative where Preston gets blamed for all these descriptions and in fact in your response to my "Masonic CT recap" post you were trying to blame Preston even though I hadn't mentioned him at all and was just quoting you and Mignini.
Mignini described a sexual murder, in which Meredith was killed in a sexual context by more than one individual. In describing his idea of the dinamic, he defined it "rito sessuale casereccio", which roughly could be translated as a "home made sexual rite". But be careful! The translation is improper, word "rito" in Italian has a much wider meaning than "rite" or "ritual". In fact it is a much commonlyu used word in wide contexts. For example, the short track trial chosen by Rudy Gude is called "rito abbreviato".
"Rito" means in most cases, "procedure", or "custom", or even "practice".
Then Mignini speculated that the murder could have originated by some kind of meeting or night students meeting/party or prank that could have been vaguelly inspired in some way to the atmosphere of Halloween.
You are clearly giving a very incomplete version of what Mignini said, if you want to provide more complete statements by Mignini (ideally a transcript) I will be very interested to read it. I even provided you with the court date I think you would want to be looking into. I am actually trying to help you research an argument against my position but apparently any research is too much for you.
Then he also mentioned some material that would show some complex aspects of the personality of defendants: Sollecito's penchant for knifes, violent and bestiality porn, and his favourite mainstream manga, the main charachter of which is a young man - shy, nerd kind - whose mind is telepatically captured by the thoughts of a serial killer who kills nude girls with a knife on a sacrifice altar, by the ende the main charachter is transformed into a devil.
What comic are you describing? What is your source here because you are describing a different story then the vampire killing comic usually mentioned. I do acknowledge that Raffael probably had multiple comics so I am not saying you are wrong here at all, just that I would like more information if you have it.
Material like this is merely elements to show aspects of the personality of defendants, as he is required by law to do, in order to show that their personalities are complex and not the stereotypes they may try to look like.
I didn't find this thoughts by Mignini entirely irrational.
It really depends upon how that is done. Something like Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula movie is full of occult themes around sex and violence, with a mass killing blood oath to evil, and things like nude vampire vixens feasting on a baby, and a bestiality rape scene . . . so if one wanted to they could twist ownership of the DVD into something pretty sinister involving bloody sacrifices and amoral sexual tendencies. But in reality the movie is just a R-rated big budget vampire flick with some gorgeous visuals, horrendous acting, and a lame ending. The only thing one could conclude about someone owning the DVD would be that the person
probably owned a DVD player.
Think of it this way. Every Halloween college youths in Perugia dress up in costume, usually picking something scary and supernatural to be for the night. Meredith picked a vampire, an evil entity known for it's need to drink blood to sustain itself. Meredith's costume even accentuated this point with a fair amount of fake blood trickling out of her mouth and down her chin. At the Halloween party she was at there were other similar scary costumes with fake blood, you can see two pictures demonstrating that at the link below:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article424024.ece
Ok, now ask yourself this simple question: Was there anything abnormal about Meredith choosing to dress up like an evil supernatural entity known for drinking blood and going to a gathering with many similar costumes? Obviously not. Anyone who would try to suggest she was involved in some sort of sinister cult because of those pictures is sick. I hope we can all agree on that.
But then if it is so obvious that Meredith's vampire Halloween costume shouldn't be used as evidence against her character why is it so hard to realize the ridiculousness of using Raffael's manga comics against him?
I think instead this is stereotypical and superficial by you and the innocentisti.
How so? All the initial actual physical evidence collected only pointed to Guede. Guede had a history of burglaries one of which had a rather unique modus operandi of throwing a rock threw a second story window identical to the break in at Meredith's house. Guede had recently escalated to violent behavior and had threatened an occupant of a home he broke into with a knife. Guede had a history of harassing women at clubs. Guede had zero meaningful interaction with Knox, in fact what Massei quotes as the most significant evidence of any kind relationship between Guede and Knox is actually just Guede telling one of the downstairs boys he was attracted to Knox. Which considering that Guede broke into her apartment and was hanging out there and then ambushed and sexually assaulted Knox's room mate is pretty damn creepy. No stereotyping involved in that description, just the facts.
I think the idea of a sexual murder originated from a sexual meeting of drugged students, where conflict among Amanda and Meredith and an escalation due to the presence of two rival guys - Guede and Sollecito - is the actual frame in which the incident developed.
I don't think the evidence point in the direction of a burglar at all.
What drug? marijuana? Have you ever even smoked it Machiavelli? People don't flip out and kill their room mates spontaneously on it. If they did west coast college students would be dropping like flies.
Consider your opening reply to me:
"Do you think you can say whatever unproven thing you want about someone because has a pending charge?"
Notice the double standard you are engaging in. When I say Mignini was convicted of abuse of office you want to argue it's not true even though it is just because the conviction hasn't gone through every stage of the Italian legal process. But when talking about the circumstances of Meredith's murder you continue to preach a theory of the crime that was just soundly rejected by Hellman's jury.
Preston is an example of dirty campaign by a liat. A comparison between a consistent, normal and logical account (by Mignini) and an impossible absurd story by Preston. This is an example of how Mignini is trustworth compared to one of his detractors.
If Preston is so wrong about Mignini then why did Mignini get convicted for abuse of office?
You did not say half dozen false stories. You said the police (they, who?) leaked false information.
You are wrong to the point of ridiculousness. Here is what I said before:
"Note at the time
Mignini's prosecution had already leaked at least a
half dozen false stories to the press yet when he is criticized for that he sees it as evidence of a conspiracy against him."
Where is the evidence, and the logic of this. Nowhere.
On any case, in Italy, there is leak of anything from the investigation. Always. It is unavoidable. It is not the police. It is the structural lack of secrecy due to the huge number of lawyers that can access the evidence files: it is an eccess of transparency. The problem is, that you don't live in Itlym so you don't know this.
First note that prosectors are lawyers, and by using the broad term "prosecution" I was including anyone involved wether they were lawyers, police, or aides, etc. . . Next notice that the problem isn't that there were leaks, it's that there were so many obviously false ones.
Never heared this story in Italy.
So? Either you weren't paying attention to what was being reported at the time in Italy or the Italian press wasn't paying attention to what was being said about Knox in English speaking papers.
Who is the leaker? Moreover they had a footage some believed to be Knox. They were following that path. And where is the lie?
(moreover, cite Italian sources, not second hand reports from another countries)
It is a lie because I've seen the footage and it was not "clear" like they said it was. It actually
clearly turned out to be Meredith. The police were the ones with the CCTV footage and that story was very widely reported with the police always described as the source.
As far as citing Italian press, Kestrel gave a cite ( thanks Kestrel!) but here is a problem you need to understand. If the UK press crucified Knox with false stories dishonestly sourced to the Italian police then someone within the Italian prosecution needed to respond to that. So now you give me the Italian sources that show how back in 2008 Mignini acknowledged how unfair the media had been to Knox. A honest prosecutor would have been willing to acknowledge there had been a stunning amount of falsehoods demonizing Knox and and been troubled by sources consistently being described as the Italian police. If it wasn't the police doing it Mignini should have been furious with the UK media for implicating Italian law enforcement in a such a bigoted smear campaign.
Instead, Mignini said:
"They have attacked in an undignified manner, with total lack of arguments, and striking superficiality this Country's judicial system, the only one having jurisdiction on this matter. Amanda in listening, motionless. Even when Mignini says that "Nodoby in Italy would have done so much as denigrate and attack in such a shameless manner USA prosecutors. Moreover, Mignini says " no Italian journalist, nobody working in the judicial field would even dream to libel and slander an American prosecutor investigating an Italian suspect".
As if the message isn't clear enough, Mignini adds: " I am bewildered and shocked by this behavior. It is the first time-and I don't think it will even happen again- that I face such arrogance and superficiality. A minimum of experience and prudence should prevent these sketchy judgments, expressed from 9000 km distance."
(Translated by Nicki and posted with pride at PMF in 2008)
(Distance between Seattle and Perugia 9008 km)
Note how the PMF clan Marriot PR supertanker myth propagates the same view as Mignini here. After Knox had been thoroughly thrashed by the media (far beyond the half dozen false stories I provided) the Knox family efforts to respond to lies against Knox were described by the PMF clan as an unprecedented American propaganda campaign funded by the "ruling class" Knox family.
Again, recepts were indeed found and collected.
No Machiavelli, those receipts never existed. The story was a lie. That is the whole point I am making with the proof you said I couldn't provide. The proof is staring you in the face and you still can't see it, not only were you lied to you are still trying to convince others of those same lies.
You just don't like these leaks. But what does that mean? Where is the lie? Where is malice, purpose, logic? And who did the leak?
And what does the original source say exactly?
You have been preaching down to people about this case for two years and you still don't know there were no receipts?! How can someone spend so much time being so arrogant about a case and still not know the most basic of details?
If there were multiple recieipts for bleach the morning after the murder that would be incredibly damning evidence against RS and AK, it breaks there alibi and also undeniably implicates them in a clean up. The receipts alone could have convicted them, so if you still don't know the story was a lie then your entire understanding of what has being going on with the trials is deeply flawed.
As for the malice . . . You may be a victim of that malice too, think of all the time you've spent trying to convince others of the righteousness of your position due to you being lied to and not even realizing it. Rather sad really.
Pure nonsense. The photo only appeared on a British tabloid. You think the police purposely deciodes to chose a picture and send it to a newspaper (a British one) in order to deceive the public with red colour. But do you realize how stupid and obtuse this idea is? And do you realize that this is your imagination working up the scenario? The photo was chosen by journalist with the purpse of selling copies on morbid arguments. It was chosen from a huge set provided by some of the tens (hundreds) of lawyers and officers who accessed the court chancelry. Lawyers even remotely related to a firma linked to one of the seven legal parties involved in the investigation or to a preliminary investigation judge office.
You are stating things as fact that you clearly do not know. The photo of what looked like a bathroom smeared with blood was a police forensics photo. Everyone besides the forensic team that sprayed the bathroom with the chemicals that turned red thought that was a genuinely gruesomely bloody for good reason, because that is exactly what it looked like. Anyone, wether police or lawyer, leaking that photo to the press was clearly intending for that photo to be used as it was.
The timing of it was incredibly damaging to Knox's credibility because everyone had already heard the story of how she showered in the bathroom before going back to Sollecito's house so it made Knox look like a total psycho. Plus there were the fake accounts of bleach being bought to clean up the super bloody bathroom so it fit in perfectly with the prosecutions narrative.
The only real unlawful and malicious leak was made by Sollecito's family using Telenorba and local pres in Puglia.
That is the statement that absolutely destroys any credibility you have left. See, in all fairness leaks and inaccurate press reports do happen everywhere and you could still argue that AK and RS were guilty despite the many apparent false leaks but you have to demonstrate at least a little empathy for the implications of all the false stories, and you just can't do it.
A reasonable person who believed in guilt would still be able to say something like, "yeah, those 6 examples do make it look like there was dishonest media campaign against AK and RS. I could understand how that created agitation around the trial." That is what a reasonable person would say, but you say, "the only real unlawful and malicious leak was made by Sollecito's family."
It's like you are not even a real person, just a propaganda script.
I skip the rest, including the Harry Potter book, they are to be treated like the first ones.
You are transparent. You started writing your reply to me without even reading the full list and example number five included a direct quote from Giobbi telling the media incorrect information so it completely killed your line of reasoning that the police weren't the source of false stories the UK media was reporting. Your argument was incredibly weak in general but example 5 proved it undeniably false, so you invent rhetoric to avoid dealing with it. It's obvious how you operate Machiavelli.
What I see is that you infer things against the police (who?) or the procura, from these media issues which are, instead, to me totally irrelevant. They mean nothing. There is nothing of what you say against magistrates or police in these press information.
All of them list the police as their source of information! Either the Italian police or the UK media were lying on a massive scale, either way it is something that needed to be addressed before Mignini (or PMF) ranted about the vast American pro Knox conspiracy.
You blame people that have nothing to do with it for rubbish published on newspapers (maybe British tabloids).
How could you know who was to blame Machiavelli? Even if you want to believe that the UK press was lying en masse about what their sources were how could you be so sure? What you are doing is a form of lying, you are stating facts with absolute certainty that which you have no way of knowing for sure are true.
In my mind, and my mindset, thing like thse have nothing to do with "police leaks" or police lies. These are leaks and stories that occurr always on any case in Italy and have nothing to do with police or prosecution.
If dishonest media smears are so common in Italy why was Mignini freaking out about the American media criticizing him?
They are endemic to the Italian system, they are simply not prevented from happening. Take as an opposite example, all the leaks and press campaigns against the police that occurred on Italian magazines like Oggi, Panorama, on Telenorba. You don't have the slightest idea of what the Italian press passes along in campaigns against magistrates.
It sounds like you are describing a very broken system. Maybe instead if defending it you should be trying to fix it.
, but I get the feeling Amanda Knox would feel differently (especially if, as I recall was mentioned at one point or another, she was hoping to become a translator).
