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

[Bill Williams]

Thanks for the link, Bill. This article concurs with Machiavelli's claim that it was the court/judge, not the prosecutor, who described the defendants' psychology, but it is not from the original Matteini report of November 9th, it is from the motivations released the first week in December, the one denying bail or house arrest.

The subject of the article is interesting:



Apparently these people did not agree that even the Italian press coverage was positive or neutral.

Yet all of that is strangely missing from the Massei motivations report published 26 months later.

Meaning that once it got to trial, the arm-chair pop-psychological assessments of Raffaele and Amanda ceased.... Massei found that there was no psychopathology in them, as opposed to the musings and conspiratorializing of the judges before them.

And if it is true, Mary_H, that procedural judges before Massei were making these psychological assessments WITHOUT prima facie evidence submitted by the prosecution, then Italy is worse off than either you or I would imagine, or Machiavelli would admit.

So far Machiavelli has one of the early judges, not Mignini, also responsible for the Satanic Rite theory gaining currency and publicity. If I were Italy, yes all of it, I would dump all this manure under a bus and land it on Mignini and be done with him.

Machievelli seems to be wanting to splash the mud on judges, and defend Mignini against all odds.

Otherwise there's something very structurally wrong here, which even Machiavelli admits to with his wild claim that the Masons bribed Hellmann and Zanetti.

 

[snook1]

I just can't at PMFers aka guilters. Right now they're praying for Guede to give a detailed, matched to evidence scenario as to how it happened. For years now not one person that believes in guilt of AK and RS (incl MACH, Massei, Mignini and co) came up with a plausible scenario that would match the evidence, so now they're asking their idol, Guede, to come up with one.

Give it up, haters. It's never gonna happen. There is no evidence.

 

[acbytesla]

I just can't at PMFers aka guilters. Right now they're praying for Guede to give a detailed, matched to evidence scenario as to how it happened. For years now not one person that believes in guilt of AK and RS (incl MACH, Massei, Mignini and co) came up with a plausible scenario that would match the evidence, so now they're asking their idol, Guede, to come up with one.

Give it up, haters. It's never gonna happen. There is no evidence.

Of course it is not going to happen. You're right, there is no evidence.

The guilters' prayers are going to go unanswered at least until the next trial. That's right. Guede isn't going to appear at this trial. He's been determined by both Massei and Hellman not to be credible and the Florence court doesn't want to hear from him at all. So unless it goes back up the Supreme court and that court demands that another court hear Rudy again, its not going to happen.

 

[moije2]

Not exactly an answer to my question.

What evidence is there that the murder(s) were on drugs?

What percentage of the college students "had contacts with drug dealers"? What do you mean by contacts?

What percentage of people in their twenties have "some issue with their sexual conduct"?

My SO watches Walking Dead does she have some relation to zombies?

Catnip reads Manga and posts graphic violence. Does he have relation to violence?

What actual violence did any of the three participate in precious to Nov. 1, 2007?

Do you believe that and do you see any evidence that the murder was associated with any sort of sex game, satanic rite or a ritual of any sort?

What about the murder distinguishes it from a simple assault and murder?

I think we know the answers to these questions, although I would also be interested in Machiavelli's take on this. Of course many many kids (American usage please) on campus have "contact" with drugs and drug dealers. Especially perhaps in Perugia if we are to believe Nadeau's descriptions of life there for students. And of course currently the popular media, television shows etc, are permeated with vampire and similar themes involving fictional/fantasy violence as the core theme. Similar to the manga stuff, but I don't personally know it. And of course they, along with every other college age person, were having sex. I will let someone else submit proof of that, but I would enjoy hearing what involves having "issues" with sex. I have always wondered about the sex life of both Mignini and Comodi for starts. They are the ones offering up this theory of "sex games" gone wrong after all. Maybe Machiavelli can tell us what "normal" sex (without "issues") is like in Italy. Different than the UK? Different than the US? So maybe of course the answer is it is different for certain people like Mignini et al. Or how about (forgot his name) Giacomo Silenzi (?) who was having a relation of some sort with Meredith? I had read that in public he would barely acknowledge Meredith. Is that true? What kind of relationship is that? Was Meredith just having a f*** buddy? She was certainly in the same environment as AK and RS, but I hardly think she killed herself for crying out loud. But people have consumed this story....

So a couple questions: what evidence is there regarding a sex game? Is this just a sexual fantasy of Mignini and Comodi? Perhaps first, was it Mignini and/or Comodi that advance this theory of the crime? Has it in fact been advanced? Much in the same fashion that there has been this verification about "satanic" or "ritual" etc.

I have heard nothing at all mentioned to support a "sex game". We have brutally murdered young woman found naked with DNA evidence found in her of RG, and a group of people who all partook in the spliff.

Next question: Machiavelli states: "I also see evidence that the crime was committed by someone under drug effect and that all three were on drugs that night." What evidence? "Drug effect" - huh? What is that - by the nature of the wounds or something? I am waiting for that. Evidence they were on drugs that night? That they used marijuana? Or are you meaning something more? I know of no evidence of any other drugs and would like to know about that if there is. If it is marijuana, well, all I can say is... somewhere Bill Williams have offered to have dinner with Machiavelli. I don't know how serious that was, but I will offer to smoke a joint with Machiavelli before that dinner - even Italian food will taste better! And we can see if either one of us will have the energy to get off the couch to join up with Bill!

Last question: I have read a few times that Mignini is a staunch conservative god fearing Catholic. Is this true? How do we know this? What do we know about this? I am suspicious that a mind that accepts mythology/mysticism/Catholic dogma is one that also accepts or invents cases like this. Again, just a suspicion.

 

[Antony]

I just can't at PMFers aka guilters. Right now they're praying for Guede to give a detailed, matched to evidence scenario as to how it happened. For years now not one person that believes in guilt of AK and RS (incl MACH, Massei, Mignini and co) came up with a plausible scenario that would match the evidence, so now they're asking their idol, Guede, to come up with one.

Give it up, haters. It's never gonna happen. There is no evidence.

Well, of course we could have had that at the Hellman trial if Guede had been subjected to cross-examination. Maybe that's why the ISC nullified the Hellman verdict - pity they didn't instruct the new court to call Guede back and have him cross-examined.

 

[Bill Williams]

Well, of course we could have had that at the Hellman trial if Guede had been subjected to cross-examination. Maybe that's why the ISC nullified the Hellman verdict - pity they didn't instruct the new court to call Guede back and have him cross-examined.

You'd think this would be something everyone could agree on. This and the non-testing of the presumed semen-stain.....

The Kerchers have written a letter to the Nencini court requesting that ALL the evidence be tested. Presumably this includes that ALL material witnesses be examined and subject to cross examination.

Someone knows something they're not telling us, and it is neither Knox nor Sollecito.

 

[Antony]

You'd think this would be something everyone could agree on. This and the non-testing of the presumed semen-stain.....

The Kerchers have written a letter to the Nencini court requesting that ALL the evidence be tested. Presumably this includes that ALL material witnesses be examined and subject to cross examination.

Someone knows something they're not telling us, and it is neither Knox nor Sollecito.

I'd like to see the Kerchers give instructions to "their" attorney Maresca to demand the testing of all evidence and the calling of all testimony that hasn't been covered by the previous trials.

 

[moije2]

You'd think this would be something everyone could agree on. This and the non-testing of the presumed semen-stain.....

The Kerchers have written a letter to the Nencini court requesting that ALL the evidence be tested. Presumably this includes that ALL material witnesses be examined and subject to cross examination.

Someone knows something they're not telling us, and it is neither Knox nor Sollecito.

It is difficult to reconcile the "just want the truth for Meredith" comments with the actions of Maresca in objecting to examination of evidence. I know there are issues of control with respect to one's attorney, but this is a repeated happening with Maresca and puts the Kerchers in potentially bad light. In other words, do they want the truth or not? My feeling is they have an affirmative duty to correct this, or at least be consistent. By hiring Maresca they are letting him be their proxy, and that is an affirmative act in itself so it seems it needs correction on their part. They are in a difficult position - they appear to want to let things play out and keep their hands clean so to speak, but in fact they have an aggressive partisan involvement in this case, and their spokesperson Maresca is contradicting their public statements. I will say that so far they have been successful AFIK in playing both sides of this public relations game.

 

[GreyFox]

Nope..pretty sure this is Mignini. Profazio dresses in clothes that would show thru the white suit. Yellow Homer Simpson sweater, brown leather (two cows must die) pants...etc. No way is it Profazio...wrong skin color.

Yep, I would recognize that mop AKA Richard Kranium out of a crowd any day !!

In reference to the bathroom photo:
Machiavelli would seem to say the photo means nothing. The British tabloids published it so it's their fault. No Italians have seen those papers so it did not influence the jury pool.
Yet he's Italian and has seen it? Did he go to visit the Queen and just happen to see it at a news stand???? Not !! Poppycock!

He also dodged the question about why there was no investigation. As if to say it's only a crime when Italian law needs it to be a crime.

What was it's real purpose ? How about to influence British media and tourist that the American did this so they wouldn't feel their students were unsafe in a little drug infested town called Perugia !! Yeah, that's it... Anything but reveal that Patrick or Rudy (locals) did it.
He don't have to answer because the average Joe already knows.

 

[GreyFox]

I just can't at PMFers aka guilters. Right now they're praying for Guede to give a detailed, matched to evidence scenario as to how it happened. For years now not one person that believes in guilt of AK and RS (incl MACH, Massei, Mignini and co) came up with a plausible scenario that would match the evidence, so now they're asking their idol, Guede, to come up with one.

Give it up, haters. It's never gonna happen. There is no evidence.

At least him or Ergon could tell us where the real knife is hidden ??? That would at least give guilters a future hearing perhaps. Guess we'll have to wait and see if they need a miracle !

 

[codyjuneau]

I just can't at PMFers aka guilters. Right now they're praying for Guede to give a detailed, matched to evidence scenario as to how it happened. For years now not one person that believes in guilt of AK and RS (incl MACH, Massei, Mignini and co) came up with a plausible scenario that would match the evidence, so now they're asking their idol, Guede, to come up with one.

Give it up, haters. It's never gonna happen. There is no evidence.

.
So guilters are dismayed because they cannot find a Rudy, Raffaele, Amanda solution?

Here is a hint guilters. A Rudy only scenario solves itself.

If the mountain won't come to you, ......
.

 

[Bill Williams]

I can just see it now. Someone asks Machiavelli if he is in favour of testing the presumed semen-stain.

My guess is that this would be his answer: but why would you test it? It's only because you mistakenly presume what it is with your confirmation bias, that you'd want to test it to begin with. This is the problem with you FOA's, you're always presuming you know what something is.

Someone asks Machiavelli if he's in favour of Nencini calling Rudy to court and subjecting him to cross examination.

My guess is that this would be his answer: but that presumes that Guede has not already given testimony to the court. Guede already has implicated Knox and Sollecito, who after all were customers of his. There is reason to believe that Knox traded sex for drugs using Guede as her go between. Besides, Knox could choose not to sleep, and careful analysis of her writings show that she was immune to the effects of sleep deprivation.

Remember, you saw it here first.... and if you scroll back, WAYYYYYY back in JREF, you can see Machiavelli saying stuff like this for himself.

 

[snook1]

.
So guilters are dismayed because they cannot find a Rudy, Raffaele, Amanda solution?

Here is a hint guilters. A Rudy only scenario solves itself.

If the mountain won't come to you, ......
.

And they know it, well, most of them at least. They know perfectly well that there is nothing that proves Amanda, Raffaele and Guede acting together. Never was and never will be.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't like the idea of criticizing the Italian Supreme Court. It's not America vs Italy. It's not Italians are any more corrupt that some American officials either. There is plenty to criticize about our own country.

Never the less, I just can't believe that there has been an argument about this cooking knife. I can't believe that it has ever played a role in this story. How could anyone ever consider that this knife could be the murder weapon? Now Italy's highest court ordered that another swab of genetic material from this knife be tested, has left me shaking my head.

I don't like saying anyone is stupid. Mistaken, fine, but calling people stupid always seems wrong. It's over the top and not very kind.

But I'm left wanting to slap all these people and ask "where's your brain"?

 

[billyryan]

Thanks Mason2. Aviello was in fact a prosecution witness this time around and he served his purpose brilliantly - he showed how absurd one has to be to conjure up a story that does not involve the three.

I copied and pasted a comment I read about the guilters yesterday,Yimyyammer did not appreciate it,the above is a quote from the head Honcho the top dog Peter Quennell Machiavelli's friend and fellow supporter of a guilty verdict no matter what evidence is delivered.Aveillo dressed in a dress claimed that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent that his brother and an accomplice murdered Meredith in a botched robbery,this is part of the mountain of evidence the prosecution has got this is strong evidence of guilt according to these creeps,I suppose now that the knife is gone they have not got anything else

 

[Bill Williams]

Machiavelli - your posts seem to have the subtext of concern for your friend Mr. Mignini.

True, Judge Nencini is probably like everyone else, scratching his head as to why the Hellmann acquittals didn't end this.

But your perceived concern is well placed, if my tea-leave reading is at all correct. Soon some will be looking for others to throw under the bus. My guess is that Mr. Mignini hopes Monica Napoleoni is thrown there before he is.

The only question: will Andrea Vogt keep referring to McCall's Wiki as authoritative when Nencini acquits the two for a second time?

Please, I beg you. Let's do dinner!

 

[charlatan]

Wow, this is eerie -- in looking for some other information, I was taken to a page of this thread from October 16, 2011 (exactly two years ago), and I find we were talking basically about exactly the same things we were talking about yesterday. charlatan and bri1, you're there (I mention it because you guys don't post that often but you've been here this week, too).

Ha! I'm trying to have a life... going to see this tonight.

I find it encouraging that we're having the same discussion now that we were just after the wheels came off the prosecution's short bus. Despite all the bluster around the ISC ruling and the new trial the evidence looks as weak as ever. The PGP are adamant that additional investigation could bury the defense (though the knife results would appear to contradict this assertion) yet the PGP are unwilling to call the defense's 'bluff'. I find this telling.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Somewhere in Time

Ha! I'm trying to have a life... going to see this tonight.

I find it encouraging that we're having the same discussion now that we were just after the wheels came off the prosecution's short bus. Despite all the bluster around the ISC ruling and the new trial the evidence looks as weak as ever. The PGP are adamant that additional investigation could bury the defense (though the knife results would appear to contradict this assertion) yet the PGP are unwilling to call the defense's 'bluff'. I find this telling.

The prosecution would probably like to go back Somewhere in Time, maybe late 2007, when everyone lapped up their lies.

 

[acbytesla]

Ha! I'm trying to have a life... going to see this tonight.

I find it encouraging that we're having the same discussion now that we were just after the wheels came off the prosecution's short bus. Despite all the bluster around the ISC ruling and the new trial the evidence looks as weak as ever. The PGP are adamant that additional investigation could bury the defense (though the knife results would appear to contradict this assertion) yet the PGP are unwilling to call the defense's 'bluff'. I find this telling.

There are some very important facts that contradict this assertion. One, the prosecution actually came out against additional investigation and the court is actually saying they have enough information and further investigation is not needed. They also have cancelled hearings. So far nothing is going the prosecution's way and the court seems like they are trying to get to a judgement as fast as they can.

I can't imagine the Florence court ruling against Amanda and Raffaele without some new incriminating evidence. But that sure doesn't seem forthcoming.

I've been wrong before, like with the ISC so I'm going to wait. But at the moment, it sure seems encouraging for Amanda and Raffaele.

 

[davefoc]

...
Please, I beg you. Let's do dinner!

As I have noted before, I have been curious about the nature of Machiavelli. He* seems to be an individual with above average intelligence that has a deep seated belief in something that looks foolish on its face to me. He seems to have an unusually even temperament which for most people would be almost impossible to maintain in the face of routine interaction with people who disagree with him on a significant issue.

I thought one of his most impressive posts was the tactful way that he explained why he did not want to go to dinner with Bill Williams. I think he not only is interested in this case from an intellectual stand point he sympathizes deeply with Kercher and her parents and he would not enjoy going to dinner with some one that favors a verdict of not guilty for two people that he sees as brutal murderers. I can relate to his sentiment on that.

I had a similar, but short lived emotional moment when I realized that Mignini was actively working to put two people in jail for the rest of their lives that appear to be completely innocent to me. Perhaps I would be more emotionally invested if I thought there was any chance that this was going to happen, but for better or worse my interest in this case has largely devolved into an academic interest about the nature of people's beliefs, the nature of criminal systems and the details of this particular crime. So, I would very much like to have dinner with Machiavelli, but I can completely understand why he would not want to have dinner with me.

* My guess is that Machiavelli is a man but I'm not sure.