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

[Bill Williams]

Actually I have spoken about sexual encounter between Knox and Guede.
The concept of "trade of sex for drugs" is reported by the police as the activity that the drug dealer was used to do with female students.
This is reported. But it is totally secondary and irrelevant to the scenario. I was actually not interested in the reason why Knox and Guede had a sexual meeting.
You instead picked up the mention of "sex for drugs" deal and you reported it as if it was the core of my reasoning. While instead it is absolutely irrelevant, it is there just because it belongs to the record about this particular drug dealer that used to have contacts with Knox.
It is reasonable to infer that his contacts with Knox had to do with sex (because this is what the police found out), or with drug exchange, or with both. But actually, this is alos irrelevant, because the only thing that logically matters is that there is evidence that Knox had repeated phone contacts with people of the very same environment to which also Rudy Guede belongs.



No no, that's false, the truth is I vehemently denied it. I denied it actually even implicitly, before you attempted to make such interpretation; because even in the most extreme scenario, that is the biggest implication that you could draw out from a "sex trade in exchange of drugs" scenario is that Guede at best could have been Knox's client.
But a client cannot be the pimp.

But you just swept away what I actually said, and you jumped head down into your attribution of "pimp" scenario.
Which is just obviously incompatible with what I had just said.
You did that not just with me but also with Massei, when you claimed that he found "no psychopathlogy" or "no motive" or "no mixed blood".
You twist other's statement systematically.

I also vehemently specified that Knox was not a prostitute, because she did that for fun and not for money or utility; so it would be unlikely and improper to even think tha Guede was a client. He was likely just a sexual partner like Daniel, Juve, Federico, Sollecito.

For anyone doubting Machiavelli's argumentative methods here.... I commend this post of M.'s to you.

 

[Samson]

For anyone doubting Machiavelli's argumentative methods here.... I commend this post of M.'s to you.

Machiavelli should attend to attempting to debunk the specific evidence that precludes Amanda's involvement, not be composing this sordid fiction about her sex life.

 

[Grinder]

You instead picked up the mention of "sex for drugs" deal and you reported it as if it was the core of my reasoning. While instead it is absolutely irrelevant, it is there just because it belongs to the record about this particular drug dealer that used to have contacts with Knox.
It is reasonable to infer that his contacts with Knox had to do with sex (because this is what the police found out), or with drug exchange, or with both. But actually, this is alos irrelevant, because the only thing that logically matters is that there is evidence that Knox had repeated phone contacts with people of the very same environment to which also Rudy Guede belongs.

While clearly it doesn't matter if Amanda was hanging with a drug dealer, sleeping with him or anything else in terms of having anything to do with the murder I do have a question.

How do you or the courts know about these alleged contacts? Can you produce this list of phone contacts with "people of the very same environment to which also Rudy Guede belongs" ? Had she been talking with friends or associates of Rudy that would be hugely important. The fact that Amanda and Raf had no known contact with Rudy using a phone or email has been a core of the defense but your statement would undo that.

I followed this case from day 2 and never read anything about this drug dealer connection except the PGP promoted single news story from 2011 that claimed a man convicted of cocaine dealing 5 years after the murder had his phone number in Amanda's phone.

Massei mentions nothing about this. Mignini mentions nothing about this and he read the DM story on the noise ticket that was a fabrication.

 

[andreajo]

I agree with your posts on this one. Of course, Guede should be held responsible for what he did, but that doesn't mean there weren't factors outside his control which contributed to making him the person that he is and which, had they been different, might have prevented the murder happening at all. It's hard not to be shocked when you read about his childhood. And sure, there are some abused children who grow up to be wonderful people, but there are many others who don't, and for whom that abuse shapes the entire course of their lives. Abuse doesn't generally make people "nice". While it might make us feel better to dismiss Guede as simply evil - and perhaps more importantly, allows us to really emphasize Amanda and Raffaele's innocence - it's not particularly constructive, and it's not going to prevent the same set of circumstances happening again. I think that's another problem with innocent people being convicted here: it makes it so tempting to look at this very simplistically - good and evil - but in a way which achieves nothing.

I must have missed the course on relativistic flimflam aswell (in the sense of knowing what it is, though I'm sure some would see the above as a good example of said flimflam).

He can't undo the non premeditated murder, but he can undo the aftermath. His failure to do so, thus destroying so many people is the narrow aspect to which the notion of evil can be applied. This failure is abetted by Mignini and various lawyers and prosecutors of course.

Machiavelli revels in the form of Italian law that allows this, I find it incomprehensible.
He can't undo the non premeditated murder, but he can undo the aftermath. His failure to do so, thus destroying so many people is the narrow aspect to which the notion of evil can be applied. This failure is abetted by Mignini and various lawyers and prosecutors of course.

Machiavelli revels in the form of Italian law that allows this silence, this inability to ever put him on the stand, after explicitly placing two other people at the scene of his killing. I find it incomprehensible.

Evil acts can be seen and recognized by the harm they cause to others. It is more difficult to talk about a person as being evil. People are complex, and their lives and circumstances are complex. We can never truly know and understand another person. Or our own selves, really.

He is certainly doing wrong, as are others around him. Is he evil? I don't even know what that would mean.

 

[Bill Williams]

For anyone doubting Machiavelli's argumentative methods here.... I commend this post of M.'s to you.

Machiavelli should attend to attempting to debunk the specific evidence that precludes Amanda's involvement, not be composing this sordid fiction about her sex life.

It's all he has.... he allows, encourages, engages in the most outrageous of non-evidentiary speculation about these side issues, couching arguments in "it's not uncompatible that....." all the while vehemently protesting when someone connects the vapid dots he tries to put out there...

Read Grinder's response above. That is the sum total of it...

 

[Bill Williams]

Machiavelli - perhaps you can step back from the fray here for a second and do us a kindness....

What the heck is, "mafia fellow-traveling"?

A one time poster to JREF here was accused of this. This was in the context of that this person was, "already under examination for mafia fellow-traveling."

What does this mean?

 

[Samson]

Evil acts can be seen and recognized by the harm they cause to others. It is more difficult to talk about a person as being evil. People are complex, and their lives and circumstances are complex. We can never truly know and understand another person. Or our own selves, really.

He is certainly doing wrong, as are others around him. Is he evil? I don't even know what that would mean.

Maybe I regret introducing the word evil, as it distracts from the focus, the ease with which the system could unravel this disaster, by subjecting Guede to a searching interrogation on his written claim that Amanda and Raffaele were the killers. It is judicial sleight of hand that allows him to accuse and then forever be silent. This would not be requiring him to take the stand in his own trial at all, but to require him to face questioning would quickly expose his wicked pact with Mignini, even if he was unable to answer a single question.
I know this has all been said before, but to me it seems a high discussion priority.

 

[acbytesla]

It reminds me of Paolo Franceschetti, a lawyer who is used to make reasoning like this one:

The Red Brigdes had a pentacle as their simbol. The Italian Republic also has a pentacle as a symbol. The pentacle is an ancient exoteric and masonic symbol. So, to conclude, there is an implicit admission that the Red Brigades and the Italian State are the same entity and they act on behalf of the same organization inspired by masonic values....

I think this straight forward supposition is called dietrology, at least. Actually it can be called conspiracy theory paradigm.

My experience that this type of arguing is simply a fallacious causal link and the person making the argument a liar.

 

[Strozzi]

Machiavelli - perhaps you can step back from the fray here for a second and do us a kindness....

What the heck is, "mafia fellow-traveling"?

A one time poster to JREF here was accused of this. This was in the context of that this person was, "already under examination for mafia fellow-traveling."

What does this mean?

Bill, I see from your question that you never worked for Soviet or Cuban intelligence. A "fellow traveler" is the English translation of Russian communist political jargon for someone who sympathizes with the communist party but was not a member of the party. It was first used in Soviet political expression in the 1930's. Now I want to ask where Machiavelli learned the phrase.

Machiavelli, did you ever belong to the Italian Communist Party?

 

[Bill Williams]

It seems guilters elsewhere are now discussing - fairly rationally actually - the appropriateness of uttering threats against the people wrongly prosecuted here.

I used to have a tag-line at the bottom of my posts here on JREF which described some of the legal exposure guilters might be under. JREF mods asked that it be removed. Yet, finally, some guilters are actually discussing it, including to of the hater website moderators who are backing away from even calling the more fringe stuff "understandable".

This round started over a (tweet?) from a well known guilter who speculated what might need to happen if the pair were found innocent, again. I hesitate to repost it here, but I did take it as a threat - your mileage may vary.

Once again I encourage those who let those threats on to their services to at least contact a lawyer to find the lay of the land and their own legal exposure. Curiously the last time I called for that, they accused me of being intimidating. My response was, "Ok, DON'T consult a legal opinion.... that's fine with me too!"

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill, I see from your question that you never worked for Soviet or Cuban intelligence. A "fellow traveler" is the English translation of communist political jargon for someone who sympathizes with the communist party but was not a member of the party. It was first used in Soviet political expression in the 1930's. Now I want to ask where Machiavelli learned the phrase.

Machiavelli, did you ever belong to the Italian Communist Party?

To be clear - it was not Machiavelli who used the phrase. I just thought that because he'd accused Amanda and Edda of using "Mafia-like" communication to parse the "I was there" phrase, that he would know.

Thanks.

 

[andreajo]

Maybe I regret introducing the word evil, as it distracts from the focus, the ease with which the system could unravel this disaster, by subjecting Guede to a searching interrogation on his written claim that Amanda and Raffaele were the killers. It is judicial sleight of hand that allows him to accuse and then forever be silent. This would not be requiring him to take the stand in his own trial at all, but to require him to face questioning would quickly expose his wicked pact with Mignini, even if he was unable to answer a single question.
I know this has all been said before, but to me it seems a high discussion priority.

I am glad that this whole conversational ball was set rolling. I have read and reflected on the nature of good and evil and individual and shared responsibility.

At this point, I wonder how much RG is his own master and how much he is a puppet in the hands of others. I do agree that there is no way that anything RG may or may not have said or written about AK and RS should be allowed to weigh in their trial unless their lawyers have the opportunity to cross-examine him.

I also think that it is quite silly that AK and RS have been in some sense condemned by the outcome of RG's trial since he was convicted of conspiring with others in MK's murder. The Supreme Court and some others in the system seem to be more interested in elaborate explanations that look good on paper than in finding out what actually happened in real life.

 

[Dan O.]

Once again I encourage those who let those threats on to their services to at least contact a lawyer to find the lay of the land and their own legal exposure. Curiously the last time I called for that, they accused me of being intimidating. My response was, "Ok, DON'T consult a legal opinion.... that's fine with me too!"

Bill, you are a young chap here and perhaps you haven't heard tails of the corn dog wars. Many survivors are still here including the goddess herself who has assended to the upper echelon. You should understand that history before treading on those waters.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill, you are a young chap here and perhaps you haven't heard tails of the corn dog wars. Many survivors are still here including the goddess herself who has assended to the upper echelon. You should understand that history before treading on those waters.

Ah, er, ok. I haven't a clue what you're talking about which was perhaps your point!

 

[JREF2010]

At this point, I wonder how much RG is his own master and how much he is a puppet in the hands of others. .

Great question.
The fact John Kercher publically asked for Rudy to tell the truth once and for all, and the contradiction of Maresca preventing Rudy from speaking up in Hellmans courtroom was nothing but a show of manipulating the system from finding the truth. There seems some disconnect between Maresca and Mr. Kercher on this topic.

I would have liked to seen the full report of Migninni and Matteini questioning Rudy Guede, and also the full translation of Rudys change of story preceding his trial with only the prosecution present. Where are those reports or translated recordings?

Yes, somehow Mignini and his Gestapo loyalist like team, seem to have kept "poor Rudy" hidden and protected from the media and talking to the public, or in the courtroom.

 

[Machiavelli]

Bill, I see from your question that you never worked for Soviet or Cuban intelligence. A "fellow traveler" is the English translation of Russian communist political jargon for someone who sympathizes with the communist party but was not a member of the party. It was first used in Soviet political expression in the 1930's. Now I want to ask where Machiavelli learned the phrase.

Machiavelli, did you ever belong to the Italian Communist Party?

No, my political experience has always been in the European Greens. But I point out two things: 1. I did not use such expression; 2. anyway the Italian Communist Party was having nothing to do with Soviets and Cuba for many decades (there is mor than one Italian Communist party by the way); 3. I have always been living in cities and regions ruled by Italian Communists and I always worked with Italian Communists.

 

[acbytesla]

No, my political experience has always been in the European Greens. But I point out two things: 1. I did not use such expression; 2. anyway the Italian Communist Party was having nothing to do with Soviets and Cuba for many decades (there is mor than one Italian Communist party by the way); 3. I have always been living in cities and regions ruled by Italian Communists and I always worked with Italian Communists.

Well, in all fairness, Communism has never been monolithic as some of it's detractors have tried to paint it. There is a marked difference between the way it was practiced in the former Soviet Union and China or Cuba or say the kibbutzes of Israel.

 

[Strozzi]

Great question.
The fact John Kercher publically asked for Rudy to tell the truth once and for all, and the contradiction of Maresca preventing Rudy from speaking up in Hellmans courtroom was nothing but a show of manipulating the system from finding the truth. There seems some disconnect between Maresca and Mr. Kercher on this topic.

I would have liked to seen the full report of Migninni and Matteini questioning Rudy Guede, and also the full translation of Rudys change of story preceding his trial with only the prosecution present. Where are those reports or translated recordings?

Yes, somehow Mignini and his Gestapo loyalist like team, seem to have kept "poor Rudy" hidden and protected from the media and talking to the public, or in the courtroom.

Machiavelli, I have several questions and ask for you insight how the Italian justice system works.

1. If Guede stated in priviliged discussions with his attorney that he alone committed the crime or that he was accompanied by another and it was not Knox and Sollecito - and the discussions were overheard by microphones in the room where they met - what could prison officials, police or Mignini do with the information?
2. If Guede stated to Mignini or the police that he alone committed the crime or that he was accompanied by another and it was not Knox or Sollecito, would Mignini or the police be obligated to disclose this a) to the court trying Guede? b) to the courts trying Knox and Sollecito?

 

[Mary_H]

Could someone be kind enough to explain what this word means? I can't find it on any online dictionary and Wikipedia redirects to "conspiracy theory" without any further reference or explanation. I would be interested if any website can be linked to which discusses uses of the word. Thanks!

You will have better luck if you look up dietrologia, as it is distinctly Italian. For example:

Dietrologia

Mar 15th 2011, 14:25 by R.L.G. | NEW YORK

SPEAKING with a veteran foreign correspondent last week I learned an Italian term I hadn't known: dietrologia. The idea is that many Italians believe that the surface or official explanation for something can rarely be the real one. There's always something behind, or dietro, that surface. It's a great word.

Another one is here.

Dietrologia is the opposite of Occam's Razor. The "sex game gone wrong" theory is an example of dietrologia.

Once again, this thread has become quite lengthy so another continuation thread (Part Seven) has been started here.

Posted By: LashL