• 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 Seven: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chris_Halkides said:
One obvious problem for such a request is that the Court of Cassation used Guede's legal process (where both prosecution and defense had a reason to argue for multiple attackers) as a reason to throw out Hellmann's verdict. What opportunity to defend themselves did Amanda or Raffaele have to defend themselves in Guede's legal proceedings? I would say essentially none. Italy would have to answer for this nonsense and much more if it wants Amanda to be extradited. I am more worried about Raffaele at this point.
Click to expand...

Yes. Poor Raffaele. What a horrible situation for him.

They were detained for a long time prior to even being charged. Would this be a barrier to extradition, or a factor in a submission to the ECHR?
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Wow, I'm surprised it took this look for someone to make that comparison. Do you know for a fact that Kenneth Bae wasn't trying to overthrow the government of North Korea? If so, how do you know this? Because someone told you?
Click to expand...

Hmm. Individual, sickly man from Seattle versus torture-happy, paranoid, insane dictator who routinely accuses other detainees of the same improbable crime. You're right, that is one we should definitely be skeptical about.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
I've had CNN on all day. I was watching when they broke the news. I figured Amanda Knox would dominate for the rest of the day. Then.....nothing. They went back to interviewing some guy about the ice storm in Atlanta. I don't think they've mentioned it since (although I have left the room a few times). I know the CTers will find this hard to accept, but the vast majority of people just don't care.
Click to expand...

That's all right; they don't have to care. Not that many people care about women being stoned in Muslim countries, either, but those who do just keep working to bring attention to it.
 
anglolawyer said:
What's 'skeptical' about harping on about how many times a court of law has decided something?
We here know the facts as well, if not better, than the courts in question and are of a different mind.
Click to expand...

Yeah, unlike the Knox CTers, the courts probably didn't spend tens of thousands of hours obsessing over the excruciating minutia of the case, like where the prosecutor went to school and what he ate for breakfast.

anglolawyer said:
Today's verdict makes no difference at all. Their opinion certainly takes precedence in the sense of having the force of law. We understand that trite point, thanks. The question is whether their opinion is correct. I don't see you trying to defend it by reference to the facts and suspect that you don't have sufficient knowledge of them to form your own opinion - which doesn't make you much of a skeptic in mine.
Click to expand...

Of course today's verdict makes no difference. JFK nutters, 9/11 nutters, Pan-Am 103 nutters, Moon landing nutters, etc all still believe they are right. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise.
 
I have been reading here that the judicial decision is by majority. If the decision is not unanimous, then there must be reasonable doubt.

Will we ever know the details of the vote?
 
I am more convinced than ever that the break in evidence can turn this case around in a timely fashion.
1. A staged break in is needed for the prosecution, after 11 30 pm.
2. It can be demonstrated with certainty the rock was thrown from the car park near the street with the crime scene photographs.

What fools would do that with a dead body inside?

The defence need to focus on the facts that can be rendered beyond dispute in a logical fashion over the next few months.

And frankly I would be delighted if one of the pro guilt posters who have returned since the verdict can tell me what I am not understanding here, I just don't see the wiggle room.
 
Kaosium said:
Rudy Guede murdered Meredith Kercher, they've already caught him. They just tried to pretend the two kids they took into the backroom in the middle of the night and abused were still involved despite the fact everything they arrested them on was bogus or mistaken.
Click to expand...

If only Amanda hadn't turned those damn cartwheels.

(We've now come full circle) :cheerleader1
 
Last edited:
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Of course today's verdict makes no difference. JFK nutters, 9/11 nutters, Pan-Am 103 nutters, Moon landing nutters, etc all still believe they are right. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is the case was constructed against Amanda and Raffaele using the same techniques those nutters of yours use. It's not that difficult to figure out.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Yeah, unlike the Knox CTers, the courts probably didn't spend tens of thousands of hours obsessing over the excruciating minutia of the case, like where the prosecutor went to school and what he ate for breakfast.



Of course today's verdict makes no difference. JFK nutters, 9/11 nutters, Pan-Am 103 nutters, Moon landing nutters, etc all still believe they are right. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...

I guess Hellman and Zanetti are nutters as well as countless scientists. The nutters were wearing the robes today.

I do like that you mention the 9-11 nutter. Kind of like the Justice on the Italian Supreme Court .
 
Last edited:
The Central Scrutinizer said:
I've had CNN on all day. I was watching when they broke the news. I figured Amanda Knox would dominate for the rest of the day. Then.....nothing. They went back to interviewing some guy about the ice storm in Atlanta. I don't think they've mentioned it since (although I have left the room a few times). I know the CTers will find this hard to accept, but the vast majority of people just don't care.
Click to expand...

One CT is that the Italian's system of justice is corrupt and in order to save face prosecutors refused to admit they made a mistake. There is plenty of evidence this kind of thing happens in Italy and in other countries including ours. There is also evidence the prosecutor is corrupt as well as some of the cops involved. There is also evidence the lady in charge of testing the evidence hid things that would help the defense and lied about results.

The prosecution CT involves Amanda and Raffaele hooking up with known knife carrying burglar and drug dealer Rudy Guede who Amanda had barely met and Raffaele had never met with no apparent motive other than originally a ritual murder, then sex game gone wrong, and now the latest one involving Rudy not flushing the toilet. There is not one shred of solid evidence to support any of these theories, nor is there one shred of solid evidence to support their presence in Meredith's room the night of the murder.
 
Last edited:
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Yeah, unlike the Knox CTers, the courts probably didn't spend tens of thousands of hours obsessing over the excruciating minutia of the case, like where the prosecutor went to school and what he ate for breakfast.



Of course today's verdict makes no difference. JFK nutters, 9/11 nutters, Pan-Am 103 nutters, Moon landing nutters, etc all still believe they are right. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise.
Click to expand...

Did I read that one of the judges was a 9/11 truther somewhere?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom