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

[Machiavelli]

(...)
You're right - I misremembered about the type of establishment: it wasn't a bank, but rather a stationers and mobile phone shop. It's a city CCTV camera. I believe this camera was operable. Why do you believe it was not?

The camera at the corner is operated by the city police. It was not operable, because it would switch on only on the trasnit of veichles. It dos not record people walking by.

 

[Bill Williams]

Kudos to Andrea Vogt for her reporting.

Yes, I said that. (I have a gripe, but on the main issue, AV is to be congratulated.)

The male prison guard who Amanda Knox accused of sexually harassing her is, apparently, going to trial. The prosecutor handling the accusation believes Amanda Knox.

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.poliziapenitenziaria.it%2Fpublic%2Fpost%2Famanda-knox-accusa-di-molestie-sessuali-ispettore-di-polizia-penitenziaria-la-procura-le-crede-e-ac-2890.asp%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BPoliziaPenitenziaria-societGiustiziaESicurezza%2B%2528Polizia%2BPenitenziaria%2B-%2BSociet%25C3%25A0%2BGiustizia%2Be%2BSicurezza%2529

Vogt is taking Knox's side on this, and tweets that she expects flak.

Yet, she does ruin it by expressing a wish that Knox could be "this honest" about the events of Nov. 2007. Why'd she have to spoil it?

But credit needs to go where credit is due. Machiavelli, we have something to go to dinner for afterall.

 

[Strozzi]

IIUC Amanda's defense offered to pay for her drive to be sent to Toshiba, but they were refused. Mind-boggling.

If Mignini had wanted the data recovered he could also have asked that Amanda's computer be sent to the manufacturer. He could have supported any motion for that made to the court by the defense. What a rotten system you have when police experts damage or destroy possible exculpatory evidence and the court and the prosecutor enjoy it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Here's Andrea's piece.......

http://thefreelancedesk.com/front_featured/amanda-knox-appeal-2/

Prosecutors in Perugia this week requested that the head guard who was in charge of Amanda Knox during her incarceration in Capanne prison, Vice Commander Raffaele Agiro’, stand trial for sexual abuse of a female officer who was briefly incarcerated in Perugia during 2007. According to court documents, prosecutor Massimo Casucci decided to require Agiro’ to stand trial after investigating what happened in the women’s section of the high-security prison of Capanne between December 2006 an January 2007. The first trial hearing is Nov. 19th. Specifically — the case involves the jail cell rape of an Italian woman who is now out of prison and working as a city cop in Milan. Agiro’ maintains his innocence. Amanda Knox was incarcerated in Capanne from November 2007 to the fall of 2011, when she was acquitted on an appeal, a decision later anulled by Italy’s supreme court. She is currently appealing again. She claims in her 2013 memoir that she was sexually harassed by Agiro,’ who she describes as having been obsessed with sex.....

It took courage for Amanda Knox to write about her harassment by Agiro’, who has since retired quietly from his job as vice-commander of the Capanne women’s ward. If only she could tap into the same well of courage to tell the whole, unfiltered truth about what happened in Perugia six years ago. All too often in Italy, the corrupt bureaucrats are allowed to retreat all too quietly into retirement . . . leaving justice behind. I hope Perugia prosecutors pursue this. A bad apple is a bad apple.

 

[christianahannah]

Kudos to Andrea Vogt for her reporting.

Yes, I said that. (I have a gripe, but on the main issue, AV is to be congratulated.)

The male prison guard who Amanda Knox accused of sexually harassing her is, apparently, going to trial. The prosecutor handling the accusation believes Amanda Knox.

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.poliziapenitenziaria.it%2Fpublic%2Fpost%2Famanda-knox-accusa-di-molestie-sessuali-ispettore-di-polizia-penitenziaria-la-procura-le-crede-e-ac-2890.asp%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BPoliziaPenitenziaria-societGiustiziaESicurezza%2B%2528Polizia%2BPenitenziaria%2B-%2BSociet%25C3%25A0%2BGiustizia%2Be%2BSicurezza%2529

Vogt is taking Knox's side on this, and tweets that she expects flak.

Yet, she does ruin it by expressing a wish that Knox could be "this honest" about the events of Nov. 2007. Why'd she have to spoil it?

But credit needs to go where credit is due. Machiavelli, we have something to go to dinner for afterall.

Gosh, Bill Williams. Next you'll be agreeing with something Machiavelli writes.

It is a good article as are many of her articles. By the same token much of what Machiavelli writes is good, too and informative.

 

[Dan O.]

The screensaver is prevented from running by an open application, a video-related one of a kind like the VLC reader. The simple fact that the application is not closed, it would block the screensaver.
A 2 seconds internet connection to the Apple site is not a sign of human activity; it can be triggered by copyright metadata (like with the ITunes page) or can be a refresh caused by a scheduled update activity.

You should be referred to as Mister Spin because you repeatedly demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. what part of "going into screensaver mode only for short timespans of 6 minutes max" makes you think that the screensaver never kicked in? Or, is it your contention that someone was starting and stopping VLC all night and that's what caused the anomaly with the screensaver?

Has anyone demonstrated that copyright metadata or scheduled update activity causes an access to the apple.com web site? This particular access was outside the actual window for Meredith's murder but the point is that it was inside the window that the postals were instructed to conduct their search and like Naruto they missed it or simply ignored it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Gosh, Bill Williams. Next you'll be agreeing with something Machiavelli writes.

It is a good article as are many of her articles. By the same token much of what Machiavelli writes is good, too and informative.

I knew you'd fall over!!!

The most recent help Machiavelli has been is clearing up why Mignini is sensitive about..... should I say it, you know, the theory that starts with "S" and has "riti" in it....?

Machiavelli after a lot of back and forth actually answered the question that I was looking for - Spezi's issues in Italy are about to come to the fore and Mignini is doing his version of damage control.

Kudos to Machiavelli for clearing that up!

M. is currently wading in to the DNA debate, and if I can be so bold, is simply showing his ignorance, as well as his obsessive instinct to protect the original prosecutors even at the expense of personal embarrassment. Same with the comments about Amanda Knox having the ability to choose not to sleep, or that Amanda and her mother knew how to talk in "Mafia code". Oh yes, the plausibility that Guede could have been Knox's pimp.... or that Hellmann was paid off by the Masons to throw this case, or that Conti and Vecchiotti are criminals....

So, christianahannah, I don't want you to think that Machiavelli and I are going out for dinner (my treat, except for the wine) just yet. (Only Machiavelli can be trusted with selection of wine, I know when I'm outmatched, really I do!)

But Vogt needs credit where it is due. I just wish that she hadn't ruined the piece by "inserting herself" into the story. Rather than seeing Knox as consistently brave - AV readily admits it is brave for Knox to have written about harrassment at the hands of this ******* in prison... - she sees it as a contrast to Knox's perceived (by Vogt) dishonesty in 2007.

Her mileage obviously varies - but this proves she's a blogger and not a journalist. No shame in being a blogger, really. Just be honest about it - particularly when one is lambasting someone else for a lack of honesty.

Are you worried that me and Machiavelli might be getting all lovey-dovey?

 

[christianahannah]

I knew you'd fall over!!!

The most recent help Machiavelli has been is clearing up why Mignini is sensitive about..... should I say it, you know, the theory that starts with "S" and has "riti" in it....?

Machiavelli after a lot of back and forth actually answered the question that I was looking for - Spezi's issues in Italy are about to come to the fore and Mignini is doing his version of damage control.

Kudos to Machiavelli for clearing that up!

M. is currently wading in to the DNA debate, and if I can be so bold, is simply showing his ignorance, as well as his obsessive instinct to protect the original prosecutors even at the expense of personal embarrassment. Same with the comments about Amanda Knox having the ability to choose not to sleep, or that Amanda and her mother knew how to talk in "Mafia code". Oh yes, the plausibility that Guede could have been Knox's pimp.... or that Hellmann was paid off by the Masons to throw this case, or that Conti and Vecchiotti are criminals....

So, christianahannah, I don't want you to think that Machiavelli and I are going out for dinner (my treat, except for the wine) just yet. (Only Machiavelli can be trusted with selection of wine, I know when I'm outmatched, really I do!)

But Vogt needs credit where it is due. I just wish that she hadn't ruined the piece by "inserting herself" into the story. Rather than seeing Knox as consistently brave - AV readily admits it is brave for Knox to have written about harrassment at the hands of this ******* in prison... - she sees it as a contrast to Knox's perceived (by Vogt) dishonesty in 2007.

Her mileage obviously varies - but this proves she's a blogger and not a journalist. No shame in being a blogger, really. Just be honest about it - particularly when one is lambasting someone else for a lack of honesty.

Are you worried that me and Machiavelli might be getting all lovey-dovey?

Naw. I am always happy when posters on forums, who would probably like one another should they meet in person, can be agreeable towards one another, all the while holding dear to their beliefs or advocacy, yet respecting those of their foe (or at least rebutting in a reasonable manner).

This doesn't apply to those posters who are obvious jerks but I don't place you or Machiavelli in that category.

 

[LondonJohn]

Kudos to Andrea Vogt for her reporting.

Yes, I said that. (I have a gripe, but on the main issue, AV is to be congratulated.)

The male prison guard who Amanda Knox accused of sexually harassing her is, apparently, going to trial. The prosecutor handling the accusation believes Amanda Knox.

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.poliziapenitenziaria.it%2Fpublic%2Fpost%2Famanda-knox-accusa-di-molestie-sessuali-ispettore-di-polizia-penitenziaria-la-procura-le-crede-e-ac-2890.asp%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BPoliziaPenitenziaria-societGiustiziaESicurezza%2B%2528Polizia%2BPenitenziaria%2B-%2BSociet%25C3%25A0%2BGiustizia%2Be%2BSicurezza%2529

Vogt is taking Knox's side on this, and tweets that she expects flak.

Yet, she does ruin it by expressing a wish that Knox could be "this honest" about the events of Nov. 2007. Why'd she have to spoil it?

But credit needs to go where credit is due. Machiavelli, we have something to go to dinner for afterall.

But therein lies the problem....

Vogt perhaps needs to learn that news reportage should be just that: reportage. It's for the reader to draw inferences or have opinions. It's the job of the reporter to present the facts. Otherwise it's an op-ed piece, which is the trap Vogt continually falls into.

Vogt is essentially saying here: "I personally think that Knox was telling the truth when she talked about being abused in prison; that's why I'm writing this piece, and presenting it in the way it's being presented". That's not what news reporters do. News reporters report events without injecting their own prejudices or opinions onto them. Unless Vogt is writing non-news fluff like travel articles, restaurant reviews or interviews with TV stars, she should know it's a massive no-no to even mention the personal pronoun "I" within an article, let alone to express a personal opinion.

Perhaps that's one of the reasons why she never gets published......

 

[Diocletus]

Here's Andrea's piece.......

http://thefreelancedesk.com/front_featured/amanda-knox-appeal-2/

Are there any people involved in Italian law enforcement who aren't perverts?

ETA: what I actually find remarkable is that there is a prosecutor in perugia who has gone after both this prison guard and napoleoni and her crooked goon squad. Now we just need someone honest enough to let the innocent people go.

 

[LondonJohn]

Naw. I am always happy when posters on forums, who would probably like one another should they meet in person, can be agreeable towards one another, all the while holding dear to their beliefs or advocacy, yet respecting those of their foe (or at least rebutting in a reasonable manner).

This doesn't apply to those posters who are obvious jerks but I don't place you or Machiavelli in that category.

I don't place Bill in that category either

 

[Diocletus]

But therein lies the problem....

Vogt perhaps needs to learn that news reportage should be just that: reportage. It's for the reader to draw inferences or have opinions. It's the job of the reporter to present the facts. Otherwise it's an op-ed piece, which is the trap Vogt continually falls into.

Vogt is essentially saying here: "I personally think that Knox was telling the truth when she talked about being abused in prison; that's why I'm writing this piece, and presenting it in the way it's being presented". That's not what news reporters do. News reporters report events without injecting their own prejudices or opinions onto them. Unless Vogt is writing non-news fluff like travel articles, restaurant reviews or interviews with TV stars, she should know it's a massive no-no to even mention the personal pronoun "I" within an article, let alone to express a personal opinion.

Perhaps that's one of the reasons why she never gets published......

This article tells me that she's given up on trying to pass herself off as a legit reporter. She's mailing it in. And for someone who's not smart to begin with, that's not a good place to be.

 

[Bill Williams]

Naw. I am always happy when posters on forums, who would probably like one another should they meet in person, can be agreeable towards one another, all the while holding dear to their beliefs or advocacy, yet respecting those of their foe (or at least rebutting in a reasonable manner).

This doesn't apply to those posters who are obvious jerks but I don't place you or Machiavelli in that category.

I don't place Bill in that category either

That's because you don't know me! For all you know I could be Mach 5! (See, Machiavelli will think of me as a jerk for going on and on about that! Geez, what do I have to do around here to annoy people?)

 

[Grinder]

Grinder, the problem with this process is pretty damn significant. Instead of an organic, go where the evidence takes the investigation. It is clear, that the exact opposite approach was followed.

There are countless knives available to process and only three knives were tested. All belonging to Raffaele? And the only knife subjected to this bizarre process of ignoring the negative results and testing it again and again and again until DNA from Meredith's magically appears on the blade was this cooking knife?

It is just far too big a coincidence to have faith in this process.

I have never said I had faith in the process.

 

[Grinder]

Possible motives:

1. They were incompetent.
2. They wanted to scare Raffaele.
3. ?
4. Frame Amanda.

Is it me, or are you just being difficult and self-contradictory?

Clearly you no matter how many of your fans agree with you.

We all agree that they were incompetent. Raf was already scared but the real question is what did they think scaring more would do. If he had been involved he would know they had a wrong knife and if he wasn't what would he now do because of being scared.

You got me on "?"

They wanted to frame Amanda, whatever.

I doubt they were scheming on the 6th notwithstanding Anglo's theories.

I just wrote this about 12 hours ago. I can't believe you are not hanging on my every word.

Oh but I do.............somethimes.

ETA: But when they snagged the knife, they DID have something on Amanda -- her confession. But they were not looking to make her the stabber at that time anyway.

I just don't buy that at all. Stabber. Pretty sure they were thinking Patrick at the moment they took the knife.

 

[Strozzi]

Now that's an odd drink for you to name



Okay but Raf did make it public and after he did why wouldn't someone back him?

Rafael was interviewed on TV when he first came to the US, before his book was published. He stated during the TV interview that while in prison he had been approached with a suggestion (offer) that if he were to change his story and (falsely) burn Amanda, he would then receive leniency. Rafael's father in Italy was reported in the immediate aftermath of Rafael's statement to be doing damage control to protect Rafael from what he had said on American TV. The reason given is that it is illegal to engage in deal making of that sort in Italy and Rafael was opening himself up to further prosecution by the PLE for saying it occurred.

 

[Grinder]

Really? You think they thought they had enough already? What did they have? Really not much at all.

Confession. Shoe prints. Accomplice. Staged break-in. No verifiable alibi. Inability to remember details of the evening.

 

[acbytesla]

Confession. Shoe prints. Accomplice. Staged break-in. No verifiable alibi. Inability to remember details of the evening.

There wasn't really a confession. Go back and read the statement. It is incredibly vague and she doesn't actually say that Patrick did it. She says she confusedly remembers. What the hell does that mean? There really is no evidence of an accomplice, a staged break-in, lots of people don't have verifiable alibis and their ability to remember the details of the evening actually aren't that bad. The tennis shoe prints is about the only thing, if they were actually right would have been very good. Other than that, it is crap.

 

[Grinder]

The camera at the corner is operated by the city police. It was not operable, because it would switch on only on the trasnit of veichles. It dos not record people walking by.

Would there normally be traffic at 8 to 10 on that type of evening?

 

[Machiavelli]

You should be referred to as Mister Spin because you repeatedly demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. what part of "going into screensaver mode only for short timespans of 6 minutes max" makes you think that the screensaver never kicked in? Or, is it your contention that someone was starting and stopping VLC all night and that's what caused the anomaly with the screensaver?

Has anyone demonstrated that copyright metadata or scheduled update activity causes an access to the apple.com web site? This particular access was outside the actual window for Meredith's murder but the point is that it was inside the window that the postals were instructed to conduct their search and like Naruto they missed it or simply ignored it.

My understanding - which may be incorrect, since I am not a computer expert - is that it is not exactly true that Sollecito's Mac entered a screensaver mode for periods of no longer than six minutes; the correct datum - but just my understanding, as for my memory - is that it was the "windowsserver" system application which did not remain inactive for periods longer than 6 minutes.