• 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 Six: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
But the word "honest" associated to Amanda Knox - an obvious liar and convicted felon - no it's not fit....

You must have mistaken me for someone who believes in the legitimacy of this so-called conviction; instead, it is apparent that the cops violated this person's rights and abused her, and then the court convicted her just to save face. It's very simple: if the cops hit her, and they did, then the conviction is illegitimate.
 
Q.E.D.

I really wish that Machiavelli would stop making pronouncements on things that he doesn't understand. It's transparent, biased, and increasingly embarrassing.

You just asserted that a catalyst is not a catalyzer, and you also said blood "oxidizes" lminol, you did so in the attempt to put a patch to some previous expressions of incredible presumption, where you were attempting to "mock" me calling youself "educator", bragging some "superior culuìture" and alleging my ignorance about science... Nobody asked you to put yourself into such an incredibly self-discrediting situation. You did so all on your own.
And you also went on bragging educated consideration about allegedly improper or unorthodox use of gram/millilitre for drugs in medicine (you suggested things like morphine or sodium tiopenthal should be quantified in volume units because they are liquids :covereyes)...
 
Last edited:
Oh and the linking of the windowserver activity to the activation and deactivation of the screensaver is not just "guesswork" in the way that Machiavelli would like us to believe: it's a logical deduction based on the evidence, and one which carries the weight of probability (although it will be impossible to prove it with 100% certainty).
 
Bill Williams said:
(...)
He now answers a question, "Would you agree that that animation is prejudicial?" with, "actually the concept does not even belong to the Italian justice system."
(...)

Believe me or not, it's like that. It is inconcievable that evidence is prevented from entering the court because deemed "prejudicial".
Such a decision by the judge would be regarded as "prejudicial"!
In a system with inquisitory features, evidence cannot be subject to filters. The Court is regarded as a panel of investigators, not as a jury.
There is only a Code that determines what kind of evidence can and cannot be entered/used.
Machiavelli, I do not doubt you for a second, that the Italian system is "like that", as you say.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, you are describing the very mechanics of the railroad job. In this, the sixth anniversary of the horrible events, the night of the death of the first victim here... I am sitting here stunned that you would just lay it out without comment.

On another matter. Il Messaggero is just reporting that the Ris folks are reporting to the court that the knife in question was probably only ever used in cooking, and is not the murder weapon.

http://www.ilmessaggero.it/mobile/iphone/articolo.php?id=347918&sez=PRIMOPIANO#_articolo

There is to be seen whether to peel potatoes or to kill the roommate Meredith as the prosecution believes, however, that now will have to demonstrate how you stabbed someone with no traces of DNA that remain.
 
However for what I've read about the defence computer report, and since I submitted it to some computer experts, I only had negative and skeptical feedbacks.
The two experts I asked to explained me that the defence report was unconvincing.

Were these, perchance, Italian "experts"? Sigh.
 
You just asserted that a catalyst is not a catalyzer, and you also said blood "oxidizes" lminol, you did so in the attempt to put a patch to some previous expressions of incredible presumption, where you were attempting to "mock" me calling youself "educator", bragging some "superior culuìture" and alleging my ignorance about science... Nobody asked you to put yourself into such an incredibly self-discrediting situation. You did so all on your own.
And you also went on bragging educated consideration about allegedly improper or unorthodox use of gram/millilitre for drugs in medicine (you suggested things like morphine or sodium tiopenthal should be quantificated in volume units because they are liquids :covereyes)...


You're getting yourself all mixed up. Is something clouding your judgement?

1) A catalyser is a substance that is involved in the process of catalysis. It's not the same meaning as "catalyst". In the TMB process, the iron in haemoglobin acts as a catalyst, and it acts upon the peroxide (the catalyser) to free oxygen atoms (which then oxidise the TMB itself, causing the colour change)

2) Where did I say that blood "oxidises" Luminol?

3) Where did I call myself "educator"?

4) Where did I "brag" about "superior culture"?

5) You ARE ignorant about science. Fact.

6) How and why is my "situation" "self-discrediting"?

7) Interesting misrepresentation of my position on g/l - either you don't understand it, or you're deliberately trying to misrepresent me. It's not about "drugs in solution", it's about "liquids in solution".

8) When a doctor prescribes an intravenous infusion of liquid morphine, does (s)he specify a mass amount or a volume amount (hint: it's the latter).


Please, give it up. You're wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must have mistaken me for someone who believes in the legitimacy of this so-called conviction; instead, it is apparent that the cops violated this person's rights and abused her, and then the court convicted her just to save face. It's very simple: if the cops hit her, and they did, then the conviction is illegitimate.


Well, it's broader even that that.

If it can be shown on balance of probabilities that Knox was coerced into naming Lumumba (and especially if she did so with the police saying things like "we know Lumumba was there - you can help protect yourself from him if you confirm that to us"), then the calunnia conviction is unsafe. The alleged physical violence is only one part of the coercion process.
 
Massei, Hellmann and Nencini refused to even accept the last update of their report, by now.

This is what's so silly. How can they be pretending to run a legitimate process, when the cops damage the alibi evidence, and then the defendant can't get in the alibi evidence that he was able to recover. It's not like it's a surprise at this point--it's FOUR years later.
 
Well, it's broader even that that.

If it can be shown on balance of probabilities that Knox was coerced into naming Lumumba (and especially if she did so with the police saying things like "we know Lumumba was there - you can help protect yourself from him if you confirm that to us"), then the calunnia conviction is unsafe. The alleged physical violence is only one part of the coercion process.

Well, that's true, but I'm a simple guy. To me, if they hit her, then the conviction is illegitimate.

Frankly, we shouldn't even be in a extradition relationship with a system that thus rewards the cops for abusing a person in custody.
 
There isn't a ROFL emoticon.....

Yes, I know. You also think that they hit her, but you don't think that that has any impact on the reliability of the resulting statements or the legitimacy of the conviction.

I have to admit, that I have a lot of difficulty getting my head around why anyone would think that way. This position implies a blind deference to authority, submission, a disregard for human rights and I suspect a bit of jingoism and racism against gringos.
 
Last edited:
This is not what Sollecitos' computer activity reports.

Incidentally. There seems to be a misuse, and abuse, of the word "independent" here. A defence expert is an expert hired by the defence, or volutneering for the defence at best; not an "independent" expert.
Experts are hired or appointed by someone, they are not expected to be independent. Only the judge is expected to be independent.
Ok the defence wanted the judge to appoint another expert to review their findings.
Massei, Hellmann and Nencini refused to even accept the last update of their report, by now.

However for what I've read about the defence computer report, and since I submitted it to some computer experts, I only had negative and skeptical feedbacks.
The two experts I asked to explained me that the defence report was unconvincing.
It is not true that there is a finding able to link the windowserver logs with activations of the scrensaver; in the very defenci report this is a guesswork, a speculation.
And there is no other activity: there is no listening to music, until very late (or "early" in the morning"), maybe something like 5.30 am (at a time like that, or maybe even later, there is a half an hour listening of music). But over the rest of the night, including the time frame that matters, there are no runnings of the music player. So there is no review of any playlist and there are no playings.

See what Machiavelly is doing here. Exactly what I said the prosecution would do if the defense presented this information instead of a court ordered independent expert.

If you want guesswork, it's my guess that Machiavelli never consulted any experts. If he does have access to experts, he should ask them what evidence there would be of listening to music. Especially music that was put into a playlist and that was played later in the next few days or music sitting on a p2p share accessible by anyone on the Internet at any time. Remember Stardust.
 
Rudy has agreed to appear on Porta a Porta

Yes, of course. He's going to be given leave from jail to appear on TV to falsely accuse the defendants in an ongoing, unsequestered trial, so that Rudy can build his case for parole release in May, and the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito will have the benefit of an accusation against the defendants against which they will be unable to defend themselves via confrontation and cross-examination. What a complete joke this system is.
 
billyryan said:
Rudy has agreed to appear on Porta a Porta

Yes, of course. He's going to be given leave from jail to appear on TV to falsely accuse the defendants in an ongoing, unsequestered trial, so that Rudy can build his case for parole release in May, and the prosecution of Knox and Sollecito will have the benefit of an accusation against the defendants against which they will be unable to defend themselves via confrontation and cross-examination. What a complete joke this system is.
What will the guilters do with this news? Rudy speaks out on the sixth annoversary of his horrible crime.

Yet 2 years ago, Amanda went to a Hallowe'en party dressed as a French soccer player, and she's hounded for mocking Meredith - on the day before the anniversary and the hounding says she's dressed as a cat-burglar, which she clearly isn't.

Maybe "soccer player" is Mafia code for "cat burglar". Maybe "game" is Mafia code for "riti".

Where's the shouting about Rudy? Why is Rudy given a free pass through all this?
 
Last edited:
What will the guilters do with this news? Rudy speaks out on the sixth annoversary of his horrible crime.

Yet 2 years ago, Amanda went to a Hallowe'en party dressed as a French soccer player, and she's hounded for mocking Meredith - on the day before the anniversary and the hounding says she's dressed as a cat-burglar, which she clearly isn't.

Maybe "soccer player" is Mafia code for "cat burglar". Maybe "game" is Mafia code for "riti".

Where's the shouting about Rudy? Why is Rudy given a free pass through all this?

The ante has been upped considerable,the consequences of loosing to the prosecution must be dire or they would not risk letting Rudy talk
 
Machiavelli, I do not doubt you for a second, that the Italian system is "like that", as you say.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, you are describing the very mechanics of the railroad job. In this, the sixth anniversary of the horrible events, the night of the death of the first victim here... I am sitting here stunned that you would just lay it out without comment.

On another matter. Il Messaggero is just reporting that the Ris folks are reporting to the court that the knife in question was probably only ever used in cooking, and is not the murder weapon.

http://www.ilmessaggero.it/mobile/iphone/articolo.php?id=347918&sez=PRIMOPIANO#_articolo

The longer version:

Il Messaggero via google translate 10/31/13 said:
New twist in the investigation into the murder Meredith. According to rumors, the alleged murder weapon there would be no traces of DNA of British student, who was killed in Perugia on November 6, 2007. On the knife, however, there are traces of Amanda Knox, accused of the crime along with Raffaele Sollecito. This is the result of the survey carried out by the experts of the Ris of Parma, which will be filed today. A result that is a point in favor of the defense.

The examination of the trace of DNA repertata "the point of contact between the blade and the handle 'seized the knife in Raffaele Sollecito's house has allowed us to" experience a high degree of compatibility, statistically supported, including the genetic profile of Amanda Marie Knox and the genetic profiles of the 'track', the so-called trace I, is written in the expert's report ordered by the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Florence during the trial into the murder of Meredith Kercher. Instead, there is a "side degree of incompatibility" with the genetic profiles of Meredith, Sollecito and Rudy Guede, cotinuano Surveyors. "This evidence - is written again - indicating with reasonable certainty, that the genetic profile of Amanda Marie Knox proves this, in a consolidated manner, the track I '. During the examination, is explained in a passage of expertise, checks were made ​​specifically aimed at excluding "potential, even though they are extremely unlikely event of contamination of the genetic material."

The processes. For the murder of Meredith Kercher has already ended up in jail Rudy Hermann Guede, who was sentenced to 16 years' imprisonment on summary judgment. His conviction became final, and next year could start benefiting from some permission prize. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, waiting for the fifth verdict from an Italian court against them, were first convicted and then acquitted. Sentenced to 25 and 26 years of imprisonment by the Court of Assizes of Perugia, acquitted by the Assize Court of Appeal, are now on trial before the Court of second degree of Florence after the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment with reference of acquittal. By the end of next month could receive a new sentence. Or a new absolution, since at this point seems to have disappeared even the murder weapon.
The fact that these particles are of biological Amanda Knox could lend itself to be read in many ways. The defense, his own and that of Sollecito, along with all the "innocentisti", will hasten to say that having attended the Amanda Raffaele Sollecito's house - where the knife was found in it - there is nothing strange if his DNA remained on that blade. How to - at least that has been established peacefully - Amanda's DNA was on the handle of the weapon. The presence could be justified by a trivial task in the kitchen. And indeed, just the defense of Knox, has always maintained that the hotly contested track "H", the other isolated on the blade of the knife to someone who is Meredith's DNA, is nothing but potato starch.
So Amanda its traces on the knife could have left them for a trivial operation of the kitchen. It is evident, however, as the prosecution could say that the very presence of the DNA of Amanda on the blade of the knife could be evidence that the Knox touched him. There is to be seen whether to peel potatoes or to kill the roommate Meredith as the prosecution believes, however, that now will have to demonstrate how you stabbed someone with no traces of DNA that remain. Amanda Knox has, however, made it known for some time that they have no intention of returning to Italy from the United States for trial.

Some interesting bits highlighted.
 
Meanwhile....

Vogt tweeted the following this afternoon:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 2h

RIS:New trace of DNA found on knife blade is #amandaknox, near other trace attributed prior to Meredith, according to @lastampa update.


So it appears that the early leaks were exactly correct: only Knox's DNA was found on the 36I swab examined by the Carabinieri, albeit only at extraordinarily low-template levels. This is obviously not probative evidence against Knox, since she was known to have handled the knife in entirely innocent circumstances at Sollecito's apartment, plus her DNA had already been clearly identified on the knife handle (again, entirely compatible with her innocent use of the knife).

So what are we left with? Well, the big elephant in the room is the alleged finding of Meredith's DNA at spot 36B on the knife blade. Now, if this were robust, reliable, credible evidence, then of course it's fair to say that it would be fairly strong evidence against both Knox and Sollecito.

Unfortunately (for the prosecution), the linking of Meredith's DNA to the knife blade cannot - and will not - stand up as either robust, reliable or credible. That's because several absolutely fundamental criteria were either not met or ridden roughshod over: a) the knife itself was collected, handled and transported in ways that manifestly failed to take reasonable precautions against contamination; b) the knife was tested for low-template DNA in a lab which dismally failed to follow pretty much every single mandatory protocol for working at these hyper-sensitive low-template levels; c) the test which allegedly discovered Meredith's DNA was not repeated, and is not now repeatable (again, breaching a fundamental tenet of working at these low-template levels).

Incidentally, Vogt should know better - even if La Stampa apparently does not - that this new discovery of Knox's DNA (at super-low-template levels, remember) is in no reasonable sense "near" to where Meredith's DNA was allegedly found. The alleged Meredith DNA location was at 36B - half way along the blade of the knife, near to the cutting edge - while the new Knox sample came from the swab taken by Vecchiotti at 36I - right down at the joint between the blade and the handle. The two spots are not, in any reasonable interpretation of the word, "near" to each other, in the context of the knife as a whole.

It seems to me that the (apparent) use by La Stampa - and re-use by Vogt - of the term "near" is an attempt to suggest that this misleading mention of physical proximity somehow implies something more: that perhaps Knox's DNA and Meredith's (alleged) DNA were not only deposited "near" each other, but at the same time.....
 
Bill Williams said:
What will the guilters do with this news? Rudy speaks out on the sixth annoversary of his horrible crime.

Yet 2 years ago, Amanda went to a Hallowe'en party dressed as a French soccer player, and she's hounded for mocking Meredith - on the day before the anniversary and the hounding says she's dressed as a cat-burglar, which she clearly isn't.

Maybe "soccer player" is Mafia code for "cat burglar". Maybe "game" is Mafia code for "riti".

Where's the shouting about Rudy? Why is Rudy given a free pass through all this?

The ante has been upped considerable,the consequences of loosing to the prosecution must be dire or they would not risk letting Rudy talk
You can bet that if Rudy was going to say something favourable to the defence, that he'd have shown up dead in the prison yard a log time ago...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom