Continuation Part Six: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bill Williams said:
I do appreciate now why you (and Mr. Migini) now wish to distance Mignini from Ms. Carlizzi. No matter. Their relationship is simply a matter of the public record.
Click to expand...

Machiavelli said:
Again, you are doing nothing to verify yourself. You buy a story from Spezi and Preston.
What is in the record - visible in *your* records - is that the alleged "relation" between Caralizzi and Mignini is just the main topic of Spezi's narrative. It is a fact that Spezi spent years of his life building a narrative about an alleged relation between Carlizzi and Mignini. This is in Spezi's book. It's his story, the story he created to serve his own interest, is the main theme in his defamation campaign. It's not something from the real world.
Click to expand...
.... and you buy a story from Mignini....

So?
 
Machiavelli said:
I'm not an expert about theological issues since I'm not a Catholic, but from what I know, I actually doubt that it's entirely correct to say Catholics are supposed to "believe in the devil". But actually I don't know.
Click to expand...

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia disagrees with you:

Antonin Scalia said:
I even believe in the Devil.

You do?
Of course! Yeah, he’s a real person. Hey, c’mon, that’s standard Catholic doctrine! Every Catholic believes that.
Click to expand...

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/07/scalia_i_believe_in_the_devil/
 
Machiavelli said:
Mignini, for what I know, is a person fond about local culture and about culture and history of communities in general. He is very "Perugian" and Perugians don't have any particular sympathy nor for Catholic hierarchies, neither they have any hystory about witches or devil. They have instead a lot of heretics, pagans, religious dissidents protesters (and they have Francesco, the proto-ecology nature-lover mystic).

"Hazing", well, that's an English word; it's a translation.
The original is:

We translated "gioco erotico" with "sex hazing", but in fact Mignini wrote "gioco" which literally means "game".
(btw, actually, a game is a ritual too)..
Click to expand...

No it's not. A game is NOT a ritual. In fact, I can't find an English dictionary anywhere that defines a ritual as a game.
 
Machiavelli said:
Certainly, it is not the descritpion of a ritualistic murder.

And, it is not written by Mignini.


Exactly. And when you say Mignini accused someone of engaging in a Satanic ritualistic murder, you are lying.
Click to expand...

At the hearing in question, the information comes from the prosecutor. The judge in question has done no independent investigation.

What is interesting here is that you're implying that Mignini now wants to distance himself from the judge in question....

.... which brings up the point above, that Mignini now seems to be wanting to blame all his troubles, which he himself said started with the Narducci case, on others.

Now Mr. Mignini (more probably you, though) is blaming the very judge which supported Mignini by allowing two innocents to be locked up over a crazy Satan ritualistic killing theory, one in which Mignini's colleague, Comodi, said (acc. to Nadeau) that she'd quit the case if Mignini took that theory to trial. (Are you or Vogt accusing Nadeau of lying?)

Now you're implying that Mignini never said it - it's the judge who thought it up out of thin air.

Wow. Honour among theives.
 
Last edited:
Mary_H said:
Okay, I can see that. I do have one question, though -- has Mignini made it known before this that he does not want this misrepresentation to continue? Because it has been in the mass media since the first week of the case.
Click to expand...

In the American media.
It's a bit less successful in Italy, where the latest Spezi's book wasn't even published.

In Italy, judicial organs can be rather vulnerable to defamation campaigns since, normally, magistrates are not allowed to release declarations to the press about open cases. They can be allowed to release an interview but that requires an authorizaiton. In other words they are not free to speak.

Anyway, any person or any institution is potentially a victim of a defamation campaign and may be just impossible to counter the "representaion" that the media is giving. This is the core of the whole issue. And this is the reason for my actual interest in this case.
 
Machiavelli said:
<snip>Exactly. And when you say Mignini accused someone of engaging in a Satanic ritualistic murder, you are lying.
Click to expand...

I, for one, am willing to let go of the whole meme around Mignini calling the murder a demonic ritual. He, you or someone may be able to convince me eventually that Mignini never said anything about "satanic orgies on the occasion of Halloween for Amanda, and ritual blood sacrifices as a worship to the Devil in the Monster of Florence case…” (although I reserve the right to see the transcripts of his complaints and his arguments at trial before changing my mind).

I would rather focus on what he says here:

The purpose – quite overt – of such endlessly repeated lies, is to defame the investigator, picturing him as a magistrate who is following alleged personal obsessions rather than sticking at facts, as instead he is.
Click to expand...

To hell with the devil, but NO ONE will EVER convince me that this case is not about Mignini's personal sexual obsessions preoccupations.
 
Bill Williams said:
.... and you buy a story from Mignini....

So?
Click to expand...

But no, I don't buy any story fro Mignini! I can read documents an names. I can check if Carlizzi was arrested by Mignini and why. I can see how Spezi was caught when he attempted to place false evidence in somebody else's house. I can see and read the falsehoods he told. That's not something Mignini tells me. But really, do you realize I have been living in this country for a few decades?
If Mignini opens his mouth to say something you can't even understand what he says. You don't know anything about this country, you have no direct experience of things people talk about. If I tell you Spezi was caught together with Ruocco, a member of the Casalesi clan, you say... huh?
 
Machiavelli said:
In the American media.
It's a bit less successful in Italy, where the latest Spezi's book wasn't even published.

In Italy, judicial organs can be rather vulnerable to defamation campaigns since, normally, magistrates are not allowed to release declarations to the press about open cases. They can be allowed to release an interview but that requires an authorizaiton. In other words they are not free to speak.

Anyway, any person or any institution is potentially a victim of a defamation campaign and may be just impossible to counter the "representaion" that the media is giving. This is the core of the whole issue. And this is the reason for my actual interest in this case.
Click to expand...

Well, if Mignini is not going to be suing all the media who claimed he talked about Satanism, along with all other kinds of "lies," then he may not be able to get very far with his case against Perugia Shock.
 
Machiavelli said:
But no, I don't buy any story fro Mignini! I can read documents an names. I can check if Carlizzi was arrested by Mignini and why. I can see how Spezi was caught when he attempted to place false evidence in somebody else's house. I can see and read the falsehoods he told. That's not something Mignini tells me. But really, do you realize I have been living in this country for a few decades?
If Mignini opens his mouth to say something you can't even understand what he says. You don't know anything about this country, you have no direct experience of things people talk about. If I tell you Spezi was caught together with Ruocco, a member of the Casalesi clan, you say... huh?
Click to expand...

Huh?

There - are you coming to dinner or not?
 
Mary_H said:
To hell with the devil, but NO ONE will EVER convince me that this case is not about Mignini's personal sexual obsessions preoccupations.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but... based on what?

I mean, the crime was obviously a sexual murder. There might have been other motives and causal factors too, but there was also a sexual context.
Then, if you take in account that obvious physical evidence indicated multiple perpetrators (and even if you disagree, you may take in account that there are people - like me - who believe they can see such physical evidence as obvious), and if evidence points to Knox (who was obviously a liar from the beginning), then you must assume that Knox was involved in some sexual scenario, and you need to consider clues of her possible sexual attitude, I don't see any logical alternative.
 
Last edited:
Machiavelli said:
Sorry, but... based on what?

I mean, the crime was obviously a sexual murder. There might have been other motives and causal factors too, but there was also a sexual context.
Then, if you take in account that obvious physical evidence indicated multiple perpetrators (and even if you disagree, you may take in account that there are people - like me - who believe they can see such physical evidence as obvious), and if evidence points to Knox (who was obviously a liar from the beginning), then you must assume that Knox was involved in some sexual scenario, and you need to consider clues of her possible sexual attitude, I don't see any logical alternative.
Click to expand...

This is Mach 2.
 
Machiavelli said:
1. Micheli is not Mignini.
2. "rito/i" means a lot of things. It's a more comon word in Italian than English, used to mean more things than the English "rite"/"ritual".

It means "rite", but it also means "procedure" or "practice". For example: the abbreviated trial, like the Guede trial presieded over by Micheli, is called in Italian "rito abbreviato". (sc MOTIVATIONS quoting Hellmann: "dal momento che il giudizio che ha riguardato il Guede e stato celebrato con il rito abbreviato") (obviously here you would translate "rito" with ="procedure").
You find the word again at p. 59:
"Non può portare ad opinare diversamente il fatto che le violazioni al codice di rito pacificamente consumate (per stessa ammissione della difesa Sollecito) sarebbero incorse su impulso del rappresentante della pubblica accusa".
If you refer to customs, things usually done or repeated, the translation may be "practice", or the expression is translated with an adjective (such as "usual", or "required", or "due" etc.). On a birthady you may say "auguri di rito" (the usual/due birthday wishes); when you meet a person "saluti/conversazioni di rito" (the usual/due greetings/conversation); "frasi di rito"= "common phrases"; "documenti di rito" would be "required documents".
Outside colloqualism, rito/i is still rather common; for example the Tango (a dance) due to its precise style can be referred to as rito as in this book http://www.ibs.it/code/9788888475387/de-marchi-lucia/tango-venezia-espressioni.html.
Or intended as just "custom", "traditional habit", "practice", it may be just used to address parts of the culture life such as eating food, like in this book: http://sellerio.it/it/catalogo/Cibo-Rito-Gesto-Parola-Alimentazione-Tradizionale/Grimaldi/5260 .
Can be referred to holidays. Children holidays at the seaside is called "rito" fby this newspaper: http://www.ilgiornale.it/news/interni/e-i-bambini-dellera-internet-torna-rito-delle-vacanze-941236.html; it means obviously a precise "habit". A usual holiday habit "interrupted", is described by this article: http://corrieredelveneto.corriere.it/veneto/notizie/cronaca/2013/31-agosto-2013/vacanze-estive-la-madre-rito-interrotto-la-nomina-2222846203627.shtml.
This mother writing on a forum calls parenting techniques are "riti": (repeated actions, habitual events)http://www.nostrofiglio.it/forum/nanna-106/rito-della-nanna-vacanza-15090/
A habit to make your child sleep: rito della buonanotte (good night practice): http://www.momentimagici.com/consigli/sonno-32/i_primi_sogni-65/il_rito_della_buonanotte.-67.html

Anyway, the meaning of "rito" has the same semantic basis of the English word so the nucleus of its use is similar, the whole use is a bit wider but the word is similar.
Magic/Pagan rites and rituals - that may be partly superimposed to the concept of "holiday" - do exist in Italy. This article for example, tends to use the word meaning both the holiday event and the magical rituals through the town (Nights of Magic, in a Southern Italian village) http://www.basilicatavacanze.com/riti-e-spiritualita-nelle-notti-della-magia-ad-albano-di-lucania-pz/

This is what the word means, but pay attention, Mignini doesn't use it.
I read elsewhere reported that Mignini (maybe in a court reply) also defined the "festino" as "rito casalingo" (house-made-rite), but this is was reported within inverted commas and it is almost an oximore ("rito" and "casalingo" tend to be opposites, "rito" meaning precise, due, exact, predictable and some established practice; "casalingo" meaning imprecise, gross, casual, clumsy and impractical, non-established and house-made).
This is the only context in which the Italian press reported the word "rito" as being used by the prosecution (that would be, obvious, a slightly ironical context), however I never found this word in the trial papers.
Click to expand...

LOL. Back to my big riti.
 
Machiavelli said:
Sorry, but... based on what?

I mean, the crime was obviously a sexual murder. There might have been other motives and causal factors too, but there was also a sexual context.
Then, if you take in account that obvious physical evidence indicated multiple perpetrators (and even if you disagree, you may take in account that there are people - like me - who believe they can see such physical evidence as obvious), and if evidence points to Knox (who was obviously a liar from the beginning), then you must assume that Knox was involved in some sexual scenario, and you need to consider clues of her possible sexual attitude, I don't see any logical alternative.
Click to expand...

I do: Rudy raped and murdered her. And Mignini is a pervert.
 
Machiavelli said:
Sorry, but... based on what?

I mean, the crime was obviously a sexual murder. There might have been other motives and causal factors too, but there was also a sexual context.
Then, if you take in account that obvious physical evidence indicated multiple perpetrators (and even if you disagree, you may take in account that there are people - like mee - who believe they can see such physical evidence as obvious), and if evidence points to Knox (who was obviously a liar), then you must assume that Knox was involved in some sexual scenario, and you need to consider clues of her possible sexual attitude, I don't see any logical alternative.
Click to expand...

Yikes.

Who thinks another woman is involved when one woman is brutally beaten and slashed? Practically no one. The logical conclusion is the initial conclusion -- one man perpetrated the crime, as is the case everywhere, daily.

And why you guys see Amanda as a liar, I don't know; you have never been able to explain it beyond the claim that she forgot the exact times of the phone calls she made. There was no requirement that she talk to anybody about her phone calls or anything else she thought or said. She did it out of generosity and in return was exploited by opportunists. Amanda did not run to Germany like Rudy nor home like the British girls. You guys probably had never encountered anybody so unselfish before. There had to be something wrong!

Lalli said he could not confirm rape, therefore, it was premature for anybody to be saying anything about it being a sexual crime. If you won't agree the stain is semen, then where is your evidence for a sexual crime, other than what the medical examiner found in Meredith's vagina? By what date was it found, tested and reported on?

I don't know when the medical examiner suggested there may have been more than one attacker, but I bet it was not before the arrests, which also happened before anyone knew anything about Amanda's "possible sexual attitude" -- except in their own minds.

The most ridiculous part of all, though, is how you get from all these suppositions to the point where Mignini was saying things like "the men held Meredith down while Amanda menaced her with the knife." Where was the evidence for that?
 
Last edited:
Machiavelli said:
Seems you have run out of ideas.
I wait for the moment when you can see you lost and you don't attempt to use any argument any more; now I anticipate you turn to the "flippant-nursery-schoolgirl" mode and tell us some pun, to show us that you can still ring-around-the-rosey clapping your hands and he is the bad guy....
Click to expand...

MY idea is that Migi talked about a ritual murder. Your vocabulary lesson only convinces me of your desperation to deny what is obvious to everybody else. You can however, keep digging. I can see by your "flippant-nursery-schoolgirl" comment that my argument is having an impact. This encourages me to continue. I will just have to try harder.
 
Machiavelli said:
I mean, the crime was obviously a sexual murder. There might have been other motives and causal factors too, but there was also a sexual context.
Then, if you take in account that obvious physical evidence indicated multiple perpetrators (and even if you disagree, you may take in account that there are people - like me - who believe they can see such physical evidence as obvious), and if evidence points to Knox (who was obviously a liar from the beginning), then you must assume that Knox was involved in some sexual scenario, and you need to consider clues of her possible sexual attitude, I don't see any logical alternative.
Click to expand...

The logical alternative is that your theory is simply a fantasy. So is this the reasoning that leads you to believe that Amanda was sexually attracted to Meredith?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom