• 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.
Dan O. said:
Is the old guard still pulling Rudy's strings or is there a new sherif in town convincing Rudy to come clean with the whole truth in order to put Mignini & co. squarely under the disco bus.

And speaking of disco busses, why in these last 6 anniversaries has there not been anyone reporting live from the square in front of the university for foreigners to give us the real scene on the streets of Perugia on the night of the dead?
Click to expand...

Rudy is not the type I would like my freedom to depend upon,would you like your freedom to depend upon him if somebody offered him a better deal,my gut feeling is the old guard would like to keep him far away from the microphones,only someone with a new agenda would be encouraging Rudy to talk
 
Amelie would have ended about now if they had watched it straight through. But the computer records show that it doesn't end for another half hour.
 
What's even more sickening is that the interview will start around 21:10 Perugia time... Isn't it just horrible? Here we have Rudy Guede giving interview in which he will claim he's innocent while at this very moment six years ago he was with Meredith in her room, ending her short life.
 
Amanda sends her reply to Lumumba saying "ok, see you later, good evening" in the best Italian she can produce after living in Italy for only a couple of months. The text from her boss came in earlier while they wer busy watching the movie.
 
It's 20:42 in Perugia and Raffaele receives another phone call from his father. Amanda answers the door chime and speaks to Jovana Popovic. Raffaele will explain over dinner that he had agreed to take her to the train station to pick up a package that was being shipped but the package was not sent so he didn't have to go.
 
At 20:45, Meredith and Sophie Purton leave Robyn Buttrworth's home where they enjoyed a home made pizza, watched the movie Netbook and Snacked on an apple crumble.
 
Diocletus said:
OK. I think I understand the whole “Dr.” thing now.

1. Stefanoni does not have a PhD. We know this because Machiavelli has refused to admit or deny after being asked about this several times.

2. Machiavelli thinks, though, that Stefanoni has done so much research that she has a de facto Ph.D. The fact that she doesn’t have one is just like forgetting to put the dot on the “i”. Either that, or she’s a lazy, underqualified charlatan. You decide.

3. In Italy, unlike the rest of the world, everyone who graduates from college gets to call themselves a “Dr.” So, everyone runs around calling themselves and each other “Dr.,” which is kind of embarrassing. So, being a “Dr.” in Italy is like being the tallest midget in the circus.

4. The reason the Italians do this “Dr.” thing is because it seemed like a good idea 1,000 years ago, when there were like three universities in the world, and guys would study to get bachelors’ degrees in alchemy, witch-burning, and siege warfare.

5. Italians are so mesmerized by this “Dr.” thing that they have actually passed a law decreeing that they can be called “Dr.” in Italy, even though they’re not a “Dr.” anywhere else in the world. On the other hand, they don’t have a law requiring the government to turn over investigative material to criminal defendants.

6. The fairest ways to refer to an Italian “Dr.” is “BS” or “Dottore di Bologna” which, roughly translates to “doctor of baloney”.
Click to expand...

:D:D:D

Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches
Had bellies with stars
The Plain-Belly Sneetches
Had none upon thars....
 
Whereas the guilters (aka the pro-Rudy lobby!) are saying that the Ris report to the Nencini court will be the last nail in the coffin for Raffaele and Amanda, cooler heads are giving the report the proper interpretation - which, apparently, is the interpretation every Italian news course now seems to be taking.

Since it is someone else's post, I'll only summarize it here. But this seems to be Custer's Last Stand for the guilters.... trying to get the Ris report to say the exact opposite of what it is saying.

The start was a tweet from Steve Moore, who I trust you all know by now: "Great day for Amanda & Raff. DNA results finally remove knife as murder weapon. Bleach myth dead. Absent corruption, case effectively over."

To this a guilter responded.... "Flat wrong. Dr Stefanoni's finding of Meredith's DNA in a removed sample emerges stronger, because the Carabinieri lab used the same LCN technique. And Moore's endemic "corruption" smear is quite baseless. Get a grip."

The "someone else" then analysed this bit of give and take that was a comment on the blindingly obvious....

"The same LCN technique", meaning the same technique as Stefanoni in 2007?

Aside from ridiculing this guilter for seeming to think that the 2013 Caribinieri were using 2007 techniques of a "Dr." technician....... who had obvious flaws in her work.... this poster then cuts to the chase and gives the real summary of this latest DNA finding.....

- the INDEPENDENT experts distanced themselves from Stefanoni's work.
- They very carefully explained the weaknesses of LCN analysis and that there would be deficiencies in (Stefanoni's) results
- they admitted their own trouble in analysing this new substance, which was many times larger than the controversial Meredith substance.
- unlike Stefanoni they ran both positive and negative controls
- unlike Stefanoni they have shared the raw data with the defence (no legal wrangling about such a basic step denied by Massei's court)
- regardless of what this new testing accomplishes, the defence now is in a position to challenge the presumed Meredith sample on the "no blood on the blade" and the "LCN-only detectable human DNA sample on the blade," which is, afterall, only detectable on the lowest setting possible, inadmissible in most courts in the world for obvious reasons​

So the guilters may as well declare victory, just in case disinterested people actually don't read this new report, and simply assume Amanda and Raffaele should be convicted regardless of the facts.

Steve Moore is right. This prosecution of two innocents, this day the 6th anniversary of the horrible event, is over.

All except for possible corruption.
 
Last edited:
At 20:55 Sophie leaves Meredith on the corner where she lives and gets home in time to catch her program starting on TV.

A couple minutes later Meredith tries to phone her mother but the call cannot reach a cell tower so is recorded only in the phones memory.
 
At 9:04 PM, a figure thought to be Meredith is seen on camera crossing the street in front of the car park headed for the cottage. This car park video will be the source of endless confusion for the prosecution as the officer charged with it's collection failed to properly ascertain the correctness of the camera's clock.

Meredith will be in her home by 9:05. She has a few chors to do before settling in to study the history book she borrowed. There's the wash she started before leaving that needs to be set out to dry. And she still needs to call her mother. The cat downstairs may need to be fed.
 
Last edited:
billyryan said:
Is it tonight that Rudy is interviewed on Italian tv,on the sixth anniversary of his brutal ending of Meredith Kercher's life,which led to another set of thugs doing such irreversible damage to two innocent defendants and their families,I won't comment on whether or not he should be interviewed but I think tonight is not the night it should happen
Click to expand...

I agree, Billy. It's a mockery.
 
At 21:10, the file Amilie on Raffaele's computer is accessed for the last time.
 
All of this makes me feel very sad. Sad for Ms Kercher, and about murder/ violence in general and the scumbags who murder and the freaking Italian authorities that make a damnable charade out of this horribly hurtful situation.
 
"Rudy speaking" turns out to be a letter. He claims his innocence. Only a veiled reference to others. Something to the effect he did not accuse others like some do.

I could have some details wrong. But suffice to say unless there's more, this is a non event.
 
Last edited:
Rudy Guede will report to his friend in a Skype call that at this time Meredith's scream is so loud that he is afraid it will be heard in the street. Rudy claims that he himself is on the toilet listening to his iPad. Will Rudy finally come clean 6 years later to the day, perhaps even to the hour, and put an end to the prosecution ruining two more innocent lives.
 
At 21:26 Raffaele starts an anime, Naruto playing. The runtime is 24 minutes.
 
Dan O. said:
A ways up thread, Machiavelli quoted from Barbadori's testimony to support his claim that the camera at the head of Raffaele's street was for traffic control. I had unsuccessfully searched for this testimony before but Machiavelli's quote gave me renewed interest. Searching for phrases from the English translation gave nothing. But then I searched for just the name and there it was at the top of just a handfull of results. It wasn't until much late that I noticed the spelling of that name was different from what everybody else had been using.

Anyhow, what I am posting about has to do with how certain guilters continue to post that Raffaele called the police after the postals had arrived. In researching this, I found on one of the PMF sites where someone claimed that the courts only heard testimony from Barbadori that the CCTV clock was fast, claiming that the defense's explanation of the clock being slow was not testimony and therefore the court did not hear it. This is a bogus argument because the defense simply presented the factual hard evidence which even an Italian with "Dr" after their name could put together.

In reading the testimony, I was particularly interested in how Barbadori figured the correction for the CCTV time. And the defense was interested in this too. Throuout their cross they would bring up the question of the time correction and Barbadori would babble something about checking the time on the Internet and Daylight Savings Time but kept avoiding answering the question. Finally, we find the truth with this exchange:

QUESTION - On what grounds she claims that the time indicated by the cameras of the car park is not accurate and fits ten minutes ahead*?
ANSWER - I checked out , I went on the internet and looked at the time legal.
QUESTION - I explain this finding , " looked at "*?
ANSWER - I looked at the summer time , I also saw through the scanned images , which were given to me by the technicians of SIPA , there were ten minutes ...
QUESTION - How do you make sure they have ten minutes? without suggest*!
PRESIDENT - I'm sorry , asks the defendant, she said: " 20:51 , but in reality were 20:41 ," this " actually" from what came out?
ANSWER - An analysis of the cameras, I saw that it corresponded in substance.
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - She said: " I ​​went on Internet and saw daylight saving time . "
ANSWER - Yes
QUESTION - Daylight saving time is first and foremost an hour which means that if 12 becomes 11 is a time , daylight saving time is not ten minutes.
ANSWER - No daylight saving time, the actual time in substance.
PRESIDENT - So now the real?
ANSWER - Yes , the real time.
PRESIDENT - This real- time as he pulled out*? this diversity of ten minutes? What kind of assessment*? This calls for the Defense.
ANSWER - I honestly do not remember which was the figure .
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - In its disclosure if it is to I submit it to him , she does not explain how .
PRESIDENT - It is authorized to consult .
ANSWER - No, there is the annotation.
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - There is a record in a manner in which lapidary she concludes*: "It is necessary to consider that the time the equipment is moved than ten minutes about ahead of daylight saving time . " What do you want mean?
ANSWER - No, daylight saving time is in fact a mistake.
QUESTION - So it is legal to read real?
ANSWER - Yes , yes.
APPLICATION - We establish , however, that there is a statement according to the which you are rebuilding schedules and stuff like that we must now analyze in detail , then establish because these ten minutes, as he did to count these ten minutes are so important .
ANSWER - I do not remember how I became aware of this difference in ten minutes. From memory I do not remember .
QUESTION - How do we do this to rebuild his assessment*?
PROSECUTOR - DR.SSA COMFORTABLE - He did not do him the finding.
DEFENSE - AVV . BONGIORNO - So who did this finding ten minutes?
ANSWER - It was probably done by the coach of SIPA , that is, the technician from whom I acquired the images of parking lot that is the one who told me this figure .
PRESIDENT - He knows the name of this technical SIPA*?
ANSWER - No, I could track down , definitely yes.
PRESIDENT - I could track down but at the moment he does not know the name?
ANSWER - Yes​

So there it is. The prosecutions claim that the CCTV clock was fast is only hearsay. The courts have only the evidence that shows that the clock was in fact 12 minutes slow.


What we also see from that exchange is that Barbadori is willing to stretch the truth beyond reality to support the prosecution. The prosecutor has to step in and provide the truth to keep him from digging his lie deeper when it was obvious that the defense had the truth.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the post but I guess I'm an idiot because I can't make any sense out of that translation, am I alone?
 
Rest in peace Meredith.

We should not be remembering the anniversary of your death. Your friends and family should be remembering the anniversary of your life. It is shamefully that the prosecution and courts in italy drag out the witch hunt against Amanda and Raffaele? I hope for their ordeal to end soon so that we may forget you and this tragic event that took your life.
 
yimyammer said:
Thanks for the post but I guess I'm an idiot because I can't make any sense out of that translation, am I alone?
Click to expand...


When you,ve seen enough Google translations you learn how to read it. One of the biggest sources of confusion is that Google can't keep the gender straight. You need to ignore the He/She distinctions.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom