• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
You have abundant proof. If sicientists didn't love caution, doctors would deliver diagnoses randomly without any chacks and non-experimented medicaments would be prescribed as a play. You would have buildings built without mathematical calculations and free-hand-designed aircrafts. You would have scientific literature written as a science-fiction guess drawing conclusions without any data to back it.

This is completely off-topic and nothing but a distraction. I was commenting on your semantics, not the content of your criticism.

Your understanding of sociology and culture is such that next I expect you to tell me that Italians are born speaking Italian and Americans are born speaking English. I have never been less interested in continuing a conversation with you than I am right now. Ugh.

But do let's get back to that HIV-test discussion one of these days, eh? :rolleyes:
 
The judges I mentioned are not "part" women.
There are maybe women who are mysoginistic, jews who are anti-semitic,blacks who are white supremacists, etc. But there are few of them, this is why I would be cautious, unless I have proof I would start from the presumption that women are not mysoginistic, that jews are not anti-semitic, that non-whites are not white supremacists.



.

Actually Mach, I don't think that people who have internalised (either on a cultural or an individual level) centuries or even millenia of hatred, dehumanisation and oppression are as uncommon as you think.
You only have to look at the data on how many victims of rape don't identify as such- don't feel that they have a real right not to be coerced into sex. The results of several recent studies have shown this disparity very clearly.
Female judges are not immune to the attitudes of misogyny in their communities or ( statistically speaking) their own families. Victim blaming and othr such judgments incompatible with feminist principles are common among women, and speak to the entrencged nature of misogyny in our cultures.
The Scazzi case and the Kercher case are attempts to decontextualise violence against women- a choice for evil made by women, rather than a deeply embedded, difficult to solve problem in our attitudes to women.
 
You mean there could have been four pairs of feet tramping into Filomena's room? For 15 minutes? Did they hover over the contents of the room? Gee I read somewhere that Harry Rag is still saying that mixed blood was found in Filomena's room, and one of the reasons that Massei convicted was because of factoid "forensics" found in Filomena's room.

First I'm not sure you and others here are using 'factoid' correctly or in the same way.

A factoid is a questionable or spurious (unverified, false, or fabricated) statement presented as a fact, but without supporting evidence.

an invented fact believed to be true because it appears in print.

Usage Problem A brief, somewhat interesting fact.


Most burglaries have police and victims entering the room and looking around. The idea that you have put forward repeatedly, that all evidence in Filomena's room is worthless, is in itself worthless and a factoid.

You're now putting four people in that room for 15 minutes? Tramping the contents of the hall (and maybe even the bathroom!) into Filomena's room? Whose side are you on!?

Actually it had them in the room for that time not going in and out and it isn't me, it's one of the PP as reported over at PMF.

I think the trouble is, that your contrary nature does not consider much as credible..... so I'll leave it by saying that Filomena had essentially the same alibi as Amanda, and if the police had thought about getting Marco and Filomena into the Questura on the evening of the 5th, that the two of them would have folded like bedcots, and spent the next year in prison complaining of their innocence.

Hmmmm, I'm contrary and don't consider much as credible but you are the one that is pretending not to believe Filomena's alibi. Raf was and may still be a confused, spaced out dude. He confused the days with Mansey (who is a FB friend with Antioco Fois and that's no factoid but a fact) and claims himself that he was confused with the cops and asked for a calendar when asked about the happenings of 4 days before.

I doubt that Marco would have had the same issue.

If nothing else, I'm looking at the "case against Filomena" osmotically. That seems to be the standard in Italy these days. Even using Machiavelli's standard of "compatibility", then this is at least compatible with the facts....

I have provided Filomena's court testimony about what they did that afternoon and night. As I had speculated she was not just with her boyfriend and she did stay out until after midnight (at least that's how I read it).

Saying Filomena is the same as Amanda is as stupid as saying the bloody outline fits the kitchen knife.
 
Last edited:
For Sale:
A cute house in Perugia, overlooking a lush valley:
http://www.tecnocasa.it/schedaimmob...te/it/immobiliare/proposte/in-vendita&lang=it

There are a few good pix of the driveway, the house exterior and that Echoin' Valley...

RWVBWL, you never cease to amaze me with your research skill! You often come up with interesting documentation. You say you are a surfer/photographer. I think that is just your macho cover story and that you are really a nerdy librarian wearing bifocals sitting in a cubicle with high speed Internet and an Italian-English dictionary. You probably don't even know how to swim. :p
 
Hi Strozzi,
No credit to me, I'm just editing surfpix right now, so am reading around abit as I await for some images to head to my online gallery before I bail back to the beach.:)

Found that link, and this 1 too, which shows a buncha cute pix of Amanda around Europe and in Perugia before Meredith's horrible death:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/amanda-knox/foxy-knoxy-photos-098536

Just click on the colored wording in the article,
the pix show a fun-luvin, carefree young gal and her sis, enjoyin' life...
See ya, RW
 
First I'm not sure you and others here are using 'factoid' correctly or in the same way.

A factoid is a questionable or spurious (unverified, false, or fabricated) statement presented as a fact, but without supporting evidence.

an invented fact believed to be true because it appears in print.

Usage Problem A brief, somewhat interesting fact.


Most burglaries have police and victims entering the room and looking around. The idea that you have put forward repeatedly, that all evidence in Filomena's room is worthless, is in itself worthless and a factoid.
You may have me on that one. If the term that bothers you is "factoid forensics" esp. what was eventually found in Filomena's room, you are perhaps correct. Please at least give me points for not relating this in Latin!

Perhaps then it is better to say that anyone who draws ANY conclusions from the forensics in the cottage is completely neglecting that the whole thing upstairs was compromised. From Knox's shower when she was alone, to the postal police (quite rightly given the context) allowing everyone to tramp around including themselves, to four people in Filomena's room at one point, including two of them for 15 minutes....

Here's another term you can parse, Grinder....

It begs the question as to what counts as forensics in Italy? They did not take control DNA samples from Laura or Filomena, yet the basis of the quashing of acquittals is that there was multiple attackers, and they had no means of eliminating unknown DNA as belonging to the other housemates.

"Factoid forensics" is probably a stretch, but how much of this stuff do we have to hear before everything learned about the upper floor is worthless? From the Scientific Police's own video which shows their collection methods (!!!!) which led to laughter....

.... to Stephanonie herself admitting she did not double test things - mainly because of its small sample size, a problem the RIS Carabinieri indirectly addressed to the Nencini court...

I mean what does it take?
Hmmmm, I'm contrary and don't consider much as credible but you are the one that is pretending not to believe Filomena's alibi. Raf was and may still be a confused, spaced out dude. He confused the days with Mansey (who is a FB friend with Antioco Fois and that's no factoid but a fact) and claims himself that he was confused with the cops and asked for a calendar when asked about the happenings of 4 days before.

I doubt that Marco would have had the same issue.
If you noted that the suggestion that Filomena was involved in this is absurd then I am not as bad a communicator as you suggest... geez, I didn't use Latin, so perhaps that's why you "got it"! Raf, at the time, WAS a spaced-out-dude, and why the interrogators against him believed ANYTHING he said about Oct 30, Oct 31, or Nov 1 is beyond me... heck, if you read his book, it's even beyond him!

Yet the police used Raf's confusion over dates without allowing him even the attempt to clear it up, to rush in and take Amanda into her own interrogation room (note: his timeline). They then used Amanda's confusions to rush out and arrest Lumumba. Case closed.

Then because they'd built a case on confusion, they had to release Luimumba, and if, as you pointed out upthread, they'd had the trial within 6 months then there'd have been no Quintavalle, no Nara, and no Curatolo.

The real equivalency between Knox and Romanelli is that there was no case. It's not really a matter that the PLE was somehow "justified" in suspecting Knox over Romanelli... and yes, they probably would have let Filomena go in that alternate universe...

... but would they have? Marco would have been more sober, but if the argument was Marco's Y-Haplotype on Meredith's clasp; then they would have had more reason to think of Filomena/Marco as cunning murders a little more advanced in years... and Filomena could have possibly used her law-experience to pull the wool over the eyes of seasoned investigators, more so than Amanda.

Then we'd have Machiavelli arguing that it was Fiolmena who could choose not to sleep, and thus be refreshed to accomplish this deception.... at least that alternate universe would not need to have a perp who was at one time a doped-out newbie, and yet at another a world-class DNA scrubber....
 
Last edited:
Agreed in general. When did they take the reference samples for Amanda and Raf?

Did the defense ever request the reference samples be taken or make an issue out of the unidentified DNA and prints outside of the bra clasp?

I guess the defense could request reference samples (DNA) of people not charged with any particular crime but would it be granted and is it legal?

Fingerprints were taken of those other than Amanda and Raffaele before anyone was charged but I guess that practice is more acceptable?

Also, how complete were the other profiles on the bra clasp (excluding Raffaele's and Meredith's profiles)?
 
The last time I had this conversation with Machiavelli it ended here...

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=107150#p107150

I have never seen anyone twist themselves into knots like this trying to explain away this testimony and then have the nerve to actually say the testimony says something that it does not.

People claiming that Quintavalle + Chiriboga say things they do not say, and who deny Quintavalle says the things he actually says, those people are actually BW (in the post above) and all innocentisti who believe like him.

It's pretty clear in that post I linked to who is making things up about the testimony and what the testimony actually says. I encourage people to read it.
 
460,000 Euro (or about $630,200) for that dump...someone's joking, location can't mean that much.

Maybe the owner believes that a wealthy buyer will pay the price and buy the place for its notoriety. Perhaps good Dr. Mulls will raise the funds and turn it into a museum and shrine.
 
Machiavelli said:
People claiming that Quintavalle + Chiriboga say things they do not say, and who deny Quintavalle says the things he actually says, those people are actually BW (in the post above) and all innocentisti who believe like him.

It's pretty clear in that post I linked to who is making things up about the testimony and what the testimony actually says. I encourage people to read it.

Machiavelli's tendency to simply make up things as time goes by is a lot like the PLE's ability to make up things when they find they have no evidence. (This should be in past tense, because it took from Nov 2007 to Oct 2008 for the PLE to round up Quintavalle, Nara, and Curatolo when they realized that otherwise they had no evidence to take to trial.)

To accomplish this, Machiavelli uses his legendary dietrology... parsing Quintavalle's testimony until no one is really sure what Quintavalle was supposed to have testified to, but it leaves us completely dependent on Machiavelli's dietrology to understand it. That's the whole purpose of dietrology.

The Nixonesque question is: what did Quintavalle know and when did he know it? At one time Quintavalle seemed to know that Raffaele and Amanda came in the store at various times. Yet about a year later, suddenly he has a revelation: My God, that's the girl who came into my store to buy bleach.

What Machiavelli tries to parse is what question was Quintavalle responding to when shown Knox's photo in the immediate days following the horrible murder. Here's what Machiavelli parses to try to "remythologize" Quintavalle's statement (the "he" is the person who asked Q. if he could recognize K.):

Machiavelli said:
He said, he testified, he did not ask Quintavalle (nor Chiriboga or the other employee) whether Knox entered the shop in the recent days. He only used the pictures to ask if they could recognize them as customers. (Actually, he wanted to know if they bought something and what they bought, not when they came).

To this RoseM reminds M. that the issue was this:

RoseM said:
So V was specifically looking and asking if they had entered the shop in the recent days proceeding or after the murder. That is the testimony.

And that Quintavalle's actual testimony was.....

In questo negozio chiedemmo anche se per caso avessero notato nei giorni immediatamente precedenti all’omicidio o subito dopo se ricordavano che queste persone avessero acquistato questo prodotto, però non ricordavano.

In this store asked if by chance they had noticed in the days immediately prior to or immediately after the murder if they remembered that these people who have bought this product, but did not remember.

It is clear that Quintavalle did not remember them being in the store the morning after the murder. This is, of course, what every other employee said.

And Machiavelli's contribution is dietrology.... once again the plain meaning of things goes out the window for the sake of some "hidden knowledge" that can magically amend texts.

No one, Machiavelli, is denying that Quintavalle says what he says. The issue is: what did he say and when did he say it?

Once again, to remind folks of Grinder's observation: if this had gone to trial within 6 months of their arrest, there'd have been no Quintavalle, no Nara, and no Curatolo.... that we are, 6 years later, still arguing about.

The RIS Carabinieri for the Nencini court has debunked the DNA evidence... so all that is left is this:

If the Nencini court convicts (and the ISC eventually upholds it) - and convicts on the basis of Quintavalle, Curatolo, Nara, and the DNA evidence.... then the Italian judiciary has signalled that no one in the country is safe from unjust prosecution.

This is why the eyes of the world are on Italy... and Machiavelli is giving us an important view into that world.
 
Last edited:
You have abundant proof. If sicientists didn't love caution, doctors would deliver diagnoses randomly without any chacks and non-experimented medicaments would be prescribed as a play. You would have buildings built without mathematical calculations and free-hand-designed aircrafts. You would have scientific literature written as a science-fiction guess drawing conclusions without any data to back it.

... and maybe you would have police arresting people without any evidence and announcing "She told us what we knew to be correct. Caso chuiso!" the next day.
 
It's been a long time. Can someone please refresh my memory? Why were the police looking to determine if Amanda specifically bought bleach? The police had the mop. They could test it for blood, DNA, bleach, whatever. Did they have any indication from inside the cottage that bleach had been used?

The police later found several bottles of bleach under Raffaele's kitchen sink. If I recall correctly, both bottles were unopened (seals still intact). Raffaele later wrote in his book, Honor Bound, that when Finzi and other police took Raffaele to his apartment late at night on Nov 5/6 2007 Finzi remarked several times that he smelled bleach. Raffaele described it as Finzi making a deliberate point of pointing out a bleach odor.

Quintavalle's register did not show any bleach sales early morning on Nov 2. Why would Amanda allegedly come in early morning to buy bleach or a similar cleaning-aisle product and leave empty-handed? That doesn't make sense, especially as she had already been up half the night wiping up her and Raff's DNA. (Doesn't this girl ever sleep?) Is it Magnini's contention that Amanda went to Q's store and in fact was waiting by the shop's door when it opened that morning to buy a cleaning-aisle product and she left empty-handed?

Maybe Amanda, like Machiavelli, is a member of the Green Party and was looking for an environmentally-responsible bio-degradable product to clean up the murder scene that won't harm the environment. So she left empty-handed when all she saw was bleach. :p
 
Last edited:
It's been a long time. Can someone please refresh my memory? Why were the police looking to determine if Amanda specifically bought bleach? The police had the mop. They could test it for blood, DNA, bleach, whatever. Did they have any indication from inside the cottage that bleach had been used?

One cop thought he smelled bleach at Raf's flat, but you knew that...

The police later found several bottles of bleach under Raffaele's kitchen sink. If I recall correctly, both bottles were unopened (seals still intact). Raffaele later wrote in his book, Honor Bound, that when Finzi and other police took Raffaele to his apartment late at night on Nov 5/6 2007 Finzi remarked several times that he smelled bleach. Raffaele described it as Finzi making a deliberate point of pointing out a bleach odor.

One bottle was open IIRC.

Quintavalle's register did not show any bleach sales early morning on Nov 2. Why would Amanda allegedly come in early morning to buy bleach or a similar cleaning-aisle product and leave empty-handed? That doesn't make sense, especially as she had already been up half the night wiping up her and Raff's DNA. (Doesn't this girl ever sleep?) Is it Magnini's contention that Amanda went to Q's store and in fact was waiting by the shop's door when it opened that morning to buy a cleaning-aisle product and she left empty-handed?

She stole a mop head that they used and then discarded so the old mop head could be tested. This plan was formed just after thinking of the fake knife print. It doesn't matter what she did only that she was there instead of sleeping

Maybe Amanda, like Machiavelli, is a member of the Green Party and was looking for an environmentally-responsible bio-degradable product to clean up the murder scene that won't harm the environment. So she left empty-handed when all she saw was bleach. :p

She was looking for a bag for the Hoover DNA-Dial-O-Matic vacuum.
 
It's been a long time. Can someone please refresh my memory? Why were the police looking to determine if Amanda specifically bought bleach? The police had the mop. They could test it for blood, DNA, bleach, whatever. Did they have any indication from inside the cottage that bleach had been used?

The interestingly new thing that has come out is that Filomena testified they used normal cleaning products to clean, including bleach. I am just wondering with all this bleach around, including two bottles at Raffaele's place, why would Amanda be at the store buying bleach. The whole thing makes no sense to me, even osmoticaly.
 
The interestingly new thing that has come out is that Filomena testified they used normal cleaning products to clean, including bleach. I am just wondering with all this bleach around, including two bottles at Raffaele's place, why would Amanda be at the store buying bleach. The whole thing makes no sense to me, even osmoticaly.

So, Amanda had no reason - no motive - to buy bleach that morning? To paraphrase Judge Massei, maybe it was just a "choice for clean."
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom