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

[kwill]

Guede is a nobody - lazy, never had money, probably low IQ - no-one has ever referred to him as "fun", "witty" or "good company", and I reckon THAT's why women, especially the numerous intelligent ones from abroad studying in Perugia, had little interest in him.

Actually I believe there was a time when Rudy knew how to ingratiate himself with others. I read that he was more or less adopted by one of his elementary school teachers because she felt sorry for such a promising kid being left to shift for himself so often. And there is the rich family that actually brought him to live among them, right? They had daughters at the time? It seems obvious that he must have had something going for him by way of impressing people.

The mystery is what happened . . . why was he unable to take advantage of what the rich family was offering in terms of education and work opportunity? What did he do that made them disown him so completely? It's long, difficult work to overcome certain kinds of childhood abuse & trauma and become part of ordinary life . . . if I had to guess, I'd say that he took an easily available path toward drugs instead of doing that work. And that required dealing, or stealing, or being a snitch, or all three.

It's what is to be called something made up.
Mignini read his letter. This was not embarassing, and this happened not because Guede couldn't read the words. These allegations are made up and are false.
They are also legally impossible btw.

They lied. They twist facts.

I'm shocked, shocked that anybody would ever do such a thing in this case. How dare they?

Guede could have never been requested to read a letter he wrote to a newspaper. That request would have been inadmissible.
Mignini never asked him to read the letter. He only asked Guede to look at the photocopy and say if that was the letter he wrote. Guede said yes.
That was all Mignini asked him about the letter.

Interesting. When did you hear Guede being questioned in court that made you think of him as a good speaker?

 

[Dan O.]

And there goes another lie by Machiavelli which he has repeated several times recently. Hasn't anyone else caught it? We should make a game out of this to see who is first to catch and document each new lie.

Machiavelli is claiming that Rudy wrote that letter to a newspaper. Evidence that this is false is given in Rudy's own testimony:

CPH:
He acknowledged that he wrote this letter himself.
RG:
If may I be allow to speak please.
DCS:
Excuse me, did you read it…
RG:
If may I be allow to speak.
GB:
The defence also asked to speak, sooner or later.
RG:
No in the sense that I did write that letter and I sent it to my lawyers, I was asked if I had send it to TGCOM, I have never sent it to TGCOM directly.
CPH:
I’ve not understood anything please repeat.
RG:
I said that the letter I wrote, when I wrote it I sent it direct to my lawyers but I personally did not send it, as I was asked, to TGCOM. This is it, as to whether the letter was written by me yes it was.
CPH:
You admit of having written that letter but not addressing…
RG:
… directly to TGCOM.
DCS:
President excuse me, Rudy Hermann Guede has acknowledged that it is a letter addressed to his legal defence, I request that the letter does not get admitted into the case file, to reject it.
CPH:
Okay, we will hold back on the outcome, till after we review what is written in this letter.
GM:
Or else I read it to you. “Viterbo, March 7, 2010.
...
-- Guede Rudy”.​

ETA: if that's not clear enough, previous in his testimony Guede says:

RG:
Look, as I said before I decided to write to my lawyers then soon after I do not know how my letter came to arrive at News Mediaset.
​

 

[tsig]

I didn't say it was "Fascism." I said that it was "fascist." And what I mean, is that the justice system functions in much the way that I imagine a justice system would function within a fascist system. I imagine that authoritarian police, lack of transparency, fundamental unfairness, and a judiciary that is politically-motivated and not concerned with truth or justice.

See, your problem is that you went to Daniel Webster's dictionary instead of the Diocletus Dictionary.

ETA: I did say that Italy is no stranger to fascism, which is obviously true. Indeed, reading further down the page in the Webster dictionary, we can see that the Italians invented the word. Go figure.

See your problem?

 

[Grinder]

Long, long ago, I had a brief discussion with Grinder which started when he said that he'd heard (lol - 'hearsay', anyone?) that Guede had a "reputation as a womaniser".

I read where he was living with his girl friend at the time in Milan and had a job at a restaurant. Wasn't that the article written by the pro Knox Patrick King? Yes it was.

Yes many people after his arrest made remarks about him something like what the british girls said about Amanda after the arrest.

I doubt you have any first hand knowledge of Rudy's dating or sex life therefore it is all hearsay.

This, I have to say, is redundant, and bordering on obtuse.

Well, everything ALL of us think we know about the world and everything in it, that we don't have "first hand knowledge of", is "hearsay".

Does your head know what your fingers are doing?

 

[Poppy1016]

It's what is to be called something made up.
Mignini read his letter. This was not embarassing, and this happened not because Guede couldn't read the words. These allegations are made up and are false.
They are also legally impossible btw.



They lied. They twist facts.

Guede could have never been requested to read a letter he wrote to a newspaper. That request would have been inadmissible.
Mignini never asked him to read the letter. He only asked Guede to look at the photocopy and say if that was the letter he wrote. Guede said yes.
That was all Mignini asked him about the letter.
Knox and Sollecito are obviously lying in their boks.

Could you please explain to me why this letter was allowed in the AK and RS trial?

 

[Grinder]

Could you please explain to me why this letter was allowed in the AK and RS trial?

It was allowed in because the defense had requested/demanded that one of the jailhouse snitches testify to Rudy confessing to him in jail. The letter refuted the claim. The defense was only allowed to question on the narrow point of the jailhouse confession.

 

[Poppy1016]

It was allowed in because the defense had requested/demanded that one of the jailhouse snitches testify to Rudy confessing to him in jail. The letter refuted the claim. The defense was only allowed to question on the narrow point of the jailhouse confession.

So his accusation of RK and RS is admissible without the possibility of cross examination?

 

[Bill Williams]

I am not confident that Machiavelli's statement that Rudy's testimony, read by Mignini, qualifies as a "lie" on Machiavelli's part. I mean if it is it's such an awkward lie.

It reminds me more of the inventions used as backfill all the way through the first prosecution, all the way to Massei's motivations where he simply has to invent things to make sense of the nonsensical.

Or the ISC's motivations report which has to reinvent science, all to waro things around a predetermined conclusion.

How much of this needs to happen before it's the predetermined conclusion which is doubted?

 

[Grinder]

I am less inclined to believe a coordinated conspiracy took place and think it was more likely a series of people more interested in self preservation than truth and justice. It reminds me of the cultures that existed in Nazi Germany and post WW2 countries behind the iron curtain. Self preservation caused people to silently agree to things they would never do in a free world without fear, throw in some righteous indignation and one can justify about anything. I'm in no way comparing Italy to those times/places, I'm just saying that self preservation can rear it's ugly head in the same way, even in free countries across the world today and wreak havoc on the truth.

Seems to me it would be more likely she just falsified a report or tested a known sample of Rafs DNA and said it came from the bra clasp and then put the clasp in a container she knew would destroy it making it useless for further testing or verification. How would anyone know what she did? Was her work filmed, were other people with her through all stages of the testing?

I'm not saying that's what happened, I don't know and find the bra clasp the most troubling piece of evidence to explain away. Despite the method and length of time it took to collect it, I wouldn't expect Amanda's place to be littered with Rafs DNA that could contaminate it, so how it got there is perplexing to me.

The only thing that seems possible is if Rafs DNA was on the doorknob and it got transferred from the Knob to the clasp by one of the techs but how do you prove that? I am still not clear on whether DNA can easily be transferred in this way as I've heard it argued that it can't but I don't know enough about the science to say one way or the other.

It is one of the most troubling pieces along with the spot in Filomena's with both Amanda's and Meredith's DNA. I think it is possible that he touched it while it was on the drying rack or maybe when it fell off. I doubt the DNA came from being on the floor but more likely from tertiary transfer from the door knob for example when the ICSI entered the room and touched the clasp.

It could have been planted in the usual incompetent PLE fashion containing multiple profiles.

 

[Grinder]

So his accusation of RK and RS is admissible without the possibility of cross examination?

yes and it makes no sense. I recall that he walked a fine line when he accused. Someone will supply that last sentence of his letter.

 

[Diocletus]

See your problem?

Thanks, but you're late to the party. I already pointed this out. And, it's not a "problem."

 

[Grinder]

What I'm not going to do is comb through your 4 thousand posts one by one. And from what I can tell, with this site, it is impossible to really search through it with Boolean logic operators.

But you probably never actually said those words specifically, just the logic and some of the crazy scenarios you are willing to entertain shows that you are unwilling to filter out the absurd and ridiculous.

Tesla you make stuff up and then defend it by saying well it was sort of true. Just yesterday or the day before you said Amanda had met Rudy once a month before Meredith's murder. Then you waved away the fact that it was more like two weeks. You doubled the time for effect and then made it seem it was nothing.

You accuse me of saying what C&V are alleged to have said about anything is possible when I NEVER said that. Now you add to your lies by saying that I am unwilling to filter out the absurd and ridiculous. You will demur from producing those examples with some excuse.

If you are still on the idea that Amanda and Raf couldn't possibly have transported the knife because you think they are innocent and therefore they DIDN'T transport the knife it just shows your inability to separate yourself from your bias.

Your prejudice against Rudy also stands out. RW's capture from FB or wherever that mugging shot came from or his actual mug shots hardly are the best pics of him but I still think of him as a perfectly fine looking man and can imagine Amanda thinking that.

What I can't imagine is Amanda not letting everybody know that Rudy was that guy when she met him the first time with the boys downstairs. That's where Mach's idea falls flat. She wasn't with Raf at the time (unless you want to change when they met for your convenience) and would have taken advantage of the meeting to get to know him better as she has made clear in interviews - you know maximizing experiences.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...) I'm shocked, shocked that anybody would ever do such a thing in this case. How dare they?

I mean that Knox and Sollecito lied in their books, if they reported the episode as you quoted it.

Interesting. When did you hear Guede being questioned in court that made you think of him as a good speaker?

I heard him speaking at the appeal trial. For an Italian mother-speaker it is obvious that Guede expresses himself properly; while Sollecito does not.
Guede spoke a perfect Italian, sometimes rather sophisticated, making no mistake when talking; he did make a few mistakes in his letter though. This is the consequence of the fact he chose to write it in a very sophisticated style. He also wrote some things revealing that he is not a 100% mother tongue but he is a bilingual with French as a background language: the adjective "blasfemico" for example is French not Italian. The Italian language lacks this adjective and requires nominalization, whereas French has it; Guede "creates" an adjective with Italian declination out of the French grammar and synthax.

 

[Diocletus]

I heard him speaking at the appeal trial. For an Italian mother-speaker it is obvious that Guede expresses himself properly; while Sollecito does not.
Guede spoke a perfect Italian, sometimes rather sophisticated, making no mistake when talking; he did make a few mistakes in his letter though. This is the consequence of the fact he chose to write it in a very sophisticated style. He also wrote some things revealing that he is not a 100% mother tongue but he is a bilingual with French as a background language: the adjective "blasfemico" for example is French not Italian. The Italian language lacks this adjective and requires nominalization, whereas French has it; Guede "creates" an adjective with Italian declination out of the French grammar and synthax.

LOL. That was Mignini talking. And yes, he does speak in forked tongue.

 

[HumanityBlues]

I haven't followed the conversation enough as to why Rudy Guede's attractiveness is relevant (I'm not saying it isn't, but I have only been skimming the thread as of late), but I would say, if I didn't know anything about the case and just saw his picture, I would describe him as a pretty good looking man.

 

[acbytesla]

Tesla you make stuff up and then defend it by saying well it was sort of true. Just yesterday or the day before you said Amanda had met Rudy once a month before Meredith's murder. Then you waved away the fact that it was more like two weeks. You doubled the time for effect and then made it seem it was nothing.

There is a difference Grinder between making a mistake or having a faulty memory and making things up. I said it was "about a month", when I was corrected, I admitted my error and moved on. There was no intention to obfuscate the facts, but you can believe whatever you want.

You accuse me of saying what C&V are alleged to have said about anything is possible when I NEVER said that. Now you add to your lies by saying that I am unwilling to filter out the absurd and ridiculous. You will demur from producing those examples with some excuse.

If you are still on the idea that Amanda and Raf couldn't possibly have transported the knife because you think they are innocent and therefore they DIDN'T transport the knife it just shows your inability to separate yourself from your bias.

Your prejudice against Rudy also stands out. RW's capture from FB or wherever that mugging shot came from or his actual mug shots hardly are the best pics of him but I still think of him as a perfectly fine looking man and can imagine Amanda thinking that.

What I can't imagine is Amanda not letting everybody know that Rudy was that guy when she met him the first time with the boys downstairs. That's where Mach's idea falls flat. She wasn't with Raf at the time (unless you want to change when they met for your convenience) and would have taken advantage of the meeting to get to know him better as she has made clear in

[/QUOTE]
I didn't accuse you of saying "anything is possible" I said with you "anything is possible" There is of course a difference.

You of course believe that the magical knife "could have been transported" back and from the cottage. You also think "Rudy could have staged" the break in. From my perspective that is in the "anything is possible realm".

You can call it bias, I call it honesty. As for Rudy, I'm honest about him. Is he an ugly guy with facial deformities? No. Is he the most beautiful black man? I laugh when you mention it. Now it has been said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. so there is a minuscule chance that Amanda somehow sees this cretin as beautiful. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it. And herein lies the truth. Neither would you. You wouldn't, but you refuse to be honest about it. That somehow saying that Rudy was an average looking guy somehow is beneath you. BTW, I'm an average looking guy and I was an average looking guy when I was 20. There is no shame in it.

 

[Machiavelli]

And there goes another lie by Machiavelli which he has repeated several times recently. Hasn't anyone else caught it? We should make a game out of this to see who is first to catch and document each new lie.

Machiavelli is claiming that Rudy wrote that letter to a newspaper. Evidence that this is false is given in Rudy's own testimony:

CPH:
He acknowledged that he wrote this letter himself.
RG:
If may I be allow to speak please.
DCS:
Excuse me, did you read it…
RG:
If may I be allow to speak.
GB:
The defence also asked to speak, sooner or later.
RG:
No in the sense that I did write that letter and I sent it to my lawyers, I was asked if I had send it to TGCOM, I have never sent it to TGCOM directly.
CPH:
I’ve not understood anything please repeat.
RG:
I said that the letter I wrote, when I wrote it I sent it direct to my lawyers but I personally did not send it, as I was asked, to TGCOM. This is it, as to whether the letter was written by me yes it was.
CPH:
You admit of having written that letter but not addressing…
RG:
… directly to TGCOM.
DCS:
President excuse me, Rudy Hermann Guede has acknowledged that it is a letter addressed to his legal defence, I request that the letter does not get admitted into the case file, to reject it.
CPH:
Okay, we will hold back on the outcome, till after we review what is written in this letter.
GM:
Or else I read it to you. “Viterbo, March 7, 2010.
...
-- Guede Rudy”.​

ETA: if that's not clear enough, previous in his testimony Guede says:

RG:
Look, as I said before I decided to write to my lawyers then soon after I do not know how my letter came to arrive at News Mediaset.
​

Actually this only shows how specious and twisted your arguments are.
I recalled the letter was sent to a newspaper (or maybe a TV broadcast) but I was not sure about whether he had sent that trough his lawyers or directly, therefore I omitted any specification. The letter was sent to TGCOM, it's obvious that Guede sent them the letter, and this is no confidential letter to his lawyers. Now, he claims that he sent it to his lawyers which is technically correct, but we all know that the letter was wrote for publicity; the lawyers certainly did not forward the letter to the media on their own initiative, they act solely on behalf of their client and for his interest, so if they sent his letter to TGCOM to have it published, it's obvious the letter was meant to be published.
He points out he didn't write to TGCOM "directly"; he says he doesn't know by what channel the letter came to a broadcast, or why specifically to that broadcast. This is a legal expedient but it doesn't change anything, it's not serious to claim that the letter was not sent to the media. This is an open letter to be read in the media, and it's not the only letter Rudy wrote for this purpose.

 

[kwill]

I mean that Knox and Sollecito lied in their books, if they reported the episode as you quoted it.

Well, let's not get carried away with liar accusations based on my vague memory. What I said was: I think it's mentioned in both Amanda and Raffaele's books but as I have those books in audible and not written form, I couldn't easily tell you if they reported it as I quoted it. I definitely remember how angry both of them were that Guede was given an opportunity to accuse them in open court without having to be questioned.

Does this seem fair to you?

While we're on the subject of high-quality elocution, you ought to listen to Amanda reading her book. She's extremely well-spoken.

 

[Machiavelli]

Could you please explain to me why this letter was allowed in the AK and RS trial?

Why should it not?
It's the consequence of the fact that the defences called the convicted murderer Alessi to testify about alleged Guede's statements.
Therefore, what Guede stated about the object of Alessi's allegations was a topic brought into the trial.

 

[Poppy1016]

Why should it not?
It's the consequence of the fact that the defences called the convicted murderer Alessi to testify about alleged Guede's statements.
Therefore, what Guede stated about the object of Alessi's allegations was a topic brought into the trial.

So his accusation of RK and RS is admissible without the possibility of cross examination?