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

[acbytesla]

Well, I shall provide a link to the Hicks material, because a) I think it's very relevant to the discussion on this point; b) Hicks' delivery brings a power to the argument that's impossible to convey through a second-hand discussion of it, and c) Hicks was an important voice of political/social satire, and would - I hope - be someone that worked within the spirit of JREF.

However, there ARE quite a few profanities*, so don't watch it if that might offend you! Also, if the provision of this link (even with the disclaimer/warning) is unacceptable from a mod point of view, then I apologise and of course this post must be removed.

Anyhow, here's the clip. The actual "Jesus/cross Vs Jackie/sniper-rifle-pendant" part is nearer the end of the clip, starting at around 2:45. Again, I'd argue that it very succinctly and satirically illustrates the concept of an innocent Knox reacting in a extreme manner to being shown a drawer full of knives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv49_YZUt3k


* ETA: there are actually only three profanities (all versions on the same word) in the whole clip, one of which is included near the start of the relevant part of the clip.

You had to do that to me didn't you LJ? That was funny..but I can see how that might offend a few people. But not me. It reminds of Sam Kinison talking about Jesus getting nailed to the cross. Quite good as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re2udaSZBiU

 

[LondonJohn]

You had to do that to me didn't you LJ? That was funny..but I can see how that might offend a few people. But not me. It reminds of Sam Kinison talking about Jesus getting nailed to the cross. Quite good as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re2udaSZBiU

Kinison and Hicks were close friends. Both are now dead. I don't see anyone exactly filling their shoes at the moment* - and I think that a healthy society needs these sorts of comedians and satirists. I don't actually agree ideologically with all of what Hicks said (although I subscribe to much of it), and I think he went too far on occasion in his quest for satire-at-all-costs. But I'd far, far rather that than have only "safe" comedians.

Anyhow, we're now definitely starting to veer off-piste, so prob time to return to regular programming......


* A Scottish shock-comedian named Frankie Boyle appeared to have ventured into this territory (though not as well as Hicks or Kinison), but he's since faded away.

 

[Methos]

What's pretty interesting is that if you click one stop to the South when looking at this reader board sign it says 16:24 or 10:24 and I can't make it out.

Two things are weird about that. I can barely read the sign from across the street. So there is NO WAY that Curatolo can see that clock from his bench.

The second is totally unrelated to the case. But that means that the Google car took those pictures at least an hour or 8 hours apart and my bet is the 8 hours because the lighting is dramatically different. But it could still be an hour. The University for Foreigners goes from being totally in shade to sunlight.
I know..irrelevant

The pictures were taken in Nov 2011 (the lighter one) and Sep 2008 (the darker one)

 

[Machiavelli]

Nonsense. Cooking requires chopping, cutting, slicing. There was almost a dozen similar knives to Raff's knife at the cottage. She lived in the cottage for 42 days, She knew there were knives at the cottage. The knife from Raff's had starch on it. So it was undoubtedly used to cut bread.

And so what if Amanda started crying? Her friend was murdered.... with a knife. And it sure wasn't that knife. See blood stain on sheet.

What you say is nonsense. The knife "had stardch on it so it was undoubtedly used to cut bread" is nonsense, like your deduction that negative TMB test and positive luminol means a substance different from blood.
Moreover, even the hypothetical fact that the knife was used to cut bread, is utterly devoid of implications on its being pr not the murder weapon.

 

[acbytesla]

The pictures were taken in Nov 2011 (the lighter one) and Sep 2008 (the darker one)

So a little more than 8 hours apart....

 

[Machiavelli]

Well then...that excuses the police and prosecutor from doing a proper investigation concerning the "murder weapon" then doesn't it? I cant blame them for failing to secure anything at Lumumbas or even checking all sharp items at the cottage...and taking just the one knife from RS now makes perfect sense... sigh.

Really Yummi...you have stopped trying to make a good argument. I understand why... but, sometimes saying nothing is better than saying just anything.

Thank you for finally admitting that my arguments are usually better then yours.

 

[acbytesla]

What you say is nonsense. The knife "had stardch on it so it was undoubtedly used to cut bread" is nonsense, like your deduction that negative TMB test and positive luminol means a substance different from blood.

Moreover, even the hypothetical fact that the knife was used to cut bread, is utterly devoid of implications on its being pr not the murder weapon.

Negative test results mean Negative....sort of self explanatory..

Puhhhhlease....... you have to be a monster moron to think that knife was used to kill Meredith.

Remember the bloody knife stain on the sheet?

The knife that killed Meredith matched that stain. The cooking knife didn't.

 

[Antony]

What you say is nonsense. The knife "had stardch on it so it was undoubtedly used to cut bread" is nonsense, like your deduction that negative TMB test and positive luminol means a substance different from blood.

You would like them to be "nonsense" of course, but they make perfect sense to me - certainly more sense than your excuses for Stephanoni allowing the bra clasp to rust.

Moreover, even the hypothetical fact that the knife was used to cut bread, is utterly devoid of implications on its being pr not the murder weapon.

In itself yes, but in the context of this case it contradicts the police claim that they spotted the knife because it was "suspiciously clean". Also it begs the question as to why Stephanoni did not report the presence of starch, and how she identified a trace that allegedly turned out to be the only essence of the murder victim on the whole knife.

 

[Strozzi]

I have amended my post to the following:

Does anyone in Italy have an knowledge of the company, Nventa Id, and know what they do in addition to animations and database development?

 

[Strozzi]

Nonsense. Cooking requires chopping, cutting, slicing. There was almost a dozen similar knives to Raff's knife at the cottage. She lived in the cottage for 42 days, She knew there were knives at the cottage. The knife from Raff's had starch on it. So it was undoubtedly used to cut bread.

And so what if Amanda started crying? Her friend was murdered.... with a knife. And it sure wasn't that knife. See blood stain on sheet.

Why would the police's investigation be selective? Finzi took a big knife from Sollecito's kitchen and two other knives that belonged to Sollecito, but no police are known to have collected knives from Kerscher's flat or from Lumumba's bar or home?

It seems so imcompetent, you would think a heroin addict was running the investigation.

 

[acbytesla]

Why would the police's investigation be selective? Finzi took a big knife from Sollecito's kitchen and two other knives that belonged to Sollecito, but no police are known to have collected knives from Kerscher's flat or from Lumumba's bar or home?

This little factoid demonstrates that their investigation looked for evidence to prove the scenario they created in their mind ignoring all other possibilities.

 

[Grinder]

If he could read the clock across the street from the corner of the plazza to the west he wouldn't be needing any glasses. Most people would have difficulty reading that clock with a pair of field glasses.

If he could read a clock at distance, even more reason he would be wearing reading glasses as he sat reading the newspaper.

 

[Dan O.]

Thank you for finally admitting that my arguments are usually better then yours.

Are you talking about that argument where you don't know the difference between a butter knife, a table knife and a steak knife?

 

[Skind]

What you say is nonsense. The knife "had stardch on it so it was undoubtedly used to cut bread" is nonsense, like your deduction that negative TMB test and positive luminol means a substance different from blood.
Moreover, even the hypothetical fact that the knife was used to cut bread, is utterly devoid of implications on its being pr not the murder weapon.

Scenario A is that the knife had startch on it as it was used to cut bread.

What is your evidence for Scenario B - how did it become contaminated with startch?

Remember - "from gloves" doesn't cut it - you have to show the exact route of contamination, under your own rules and the SCC rules.

 

[Grinder]

I don't know about Guede's flat. But I know from the transcripts there were several knifes in Kercher's apartment, which I don't know if they were examined. However they were not "in use", Filomena says they had put them "below" the coutlery desk, out of sight, because nobody used them. I don't know if Knox even knew about their existence. I don't know if they were suitable for killing.
What I know is that Knox was called in the house when the police examined them, to aks her if she thought something was missing or so, and when she saw the knifes she reportedly started crying hysterically.

Doesn't that seem odd on all accounts? Who puts away a few knives because they weren't being used when there are four roommates that might have different cooking habits?

And the police would not check them because one of the potential "stagers" said they weren't used? Odd. No, very odd.

 

[Grinder]

This little factoid demonstrates that their investigation looked for evidence to prove the scenario they created in their mind ignoring all other possibilities.

No, it proves they are incompetent or perhaps we don't know about other knives.

You really believe that they were framing Amanda and Raf by the 6th of November?

 

[Grinder]

Scenario A is that the knife had startch on it as it was used to cut bread.

What is your evidence for Scenario B - how did it become contaminated with startch?

Remember - "from gloves" doesn't cut it - you have to show the exact route of contamination, under your own rules and the SCC rules.

Simple. They killed Meredith with it. They cleaned it. They then used it to cut bread or pasta.

For me the oddest thing is that Raf's DNA isn't on it.

 

[Antony]

This little factoid demonstrates that their investigation looked for evidence to prove the scenario they created in their mind ignoring all other possibilities.

... or set out to create the evidence to "prove" their scenario.

 

[acbytesla]

No, it proves they are incompetent or perhaps we don't know about other knives.

You really believe that they were framing Amanda and Raf by the 6th of November?

Not frame but investigating with tunnel vision.

 

[Strozzi]

The walls have ears

I found some interesting information about the animation company, Nventa, and it appears they may be involved in the business of installing or maintaining technical systems to secretly record conversations in police station hallways.

Here is an English translation of a 2011 Italian newspaper report about a dispute involving Nventa and the Prosecutor of Perugia's office. Nventa protested the unfairness of a bidding competition run the the Prosecutor of Perugia office for the installaton of "hallway wiretaps".

You may see the English translation of the Italian newspaper article at the following link:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://www.giornaledellumbria.it/article/intercettazioni-bocciate-gara-illecita&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522nventa%2522%2Bgps%2Bitaly%26start%3D30%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1T4GGLL_enUS378US379%26biw%3D1024%26bih%3D667