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

[Caper]

PS, what has Lionking ever done to try to find the Truth of what happened that night and through the ensuing prosecutions?

The answer is absolutely nothing. For some people... I won't say who.... The case is about wanting what you hate to be the villian... evidence does not matter. For many non-Americans... That's what the case comes down to. It's the exact same mentality that convicted sooo many blacks in the south years ago.

They are small minded people, not particularly bright. Best to ignore them.... Though I don't take my own advice.

 

[Grinder]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9832297&postcount=8738

Not a joke about Meredith. An unnecessary and lame comment for sure.

 

[Mary_H]

You know Mary, as ever I am content for the largest constituent group to make their own minds up reading these posts.

For me as a father with daughters such comments are beyond the pale, it’s like joking about a women wearing a short skirt and asking to be raped or brutally murdered, poor taste, but hey that’s me.

Is this how you spell “misogyny”? Never sure what with American English and English spelling.

Hearts and minds.

Personally, I wish we never had to talk about women's bodies at all, but unfortunately, that is what the crime was about.

I still think that for the most part, PIP are much more respectful of other people in general than PGP are. It's like lionking lies in wait until he finds something to pounce on. If we tried to do that on one of the pro-guilt sites, we wouldn't last long.

 

[RoseMontague]

The Kerchers have three different lawyers working hard to make sure Amanda and Raffaele are convicted. They have gone beyond accepting the prosecution's case. They are actively assisting in it. Their comments and opinions are fair game as far as I am concerned.

There is an active campaign now to take Amanda's tweet with her holding a sign saying we are innocent, changing it to say other things and tweeting it anywhere and everywhere. This has been picked up on a Facebook page where citizens of Perugia are encouraged to do the same. That is an example of hate, that goes beyond making fun of somebody, in my opinion.

 

[Kaosium]

You know Mary, as ever I am content for the largest constituent group to make their own minds up reading these posts.

For me as a father with daughters such comments are beyond the pale, it’s like joking about a women wearing a short skirt and asking to be raped or brutally murdered, poor taste, but hey that’s me.

Is this how you spell “misogyny”? Never sure what with American English and English spelling.

Hearts and minds.

Coulsdon, what on earth are you talking about? Dan-O's comment?

If it's that, remember Rudy's story is that he had a date with Meredith and had nothing to do with the killing. He received a mitigation for 'remorse' (for not doing more to save her) that was not appealed (Amanda and Raffaele's were) thus Maresca on the behalf of the Kercher family must have accepted Rudy Guede's story hook line and sinker. What other explanation could there be for them going to the media and demanding Amanda's extradition yet not saying or apparently caring in the slightest that Rudy Guede is now eligible to walk the streets?

So yes, apparently they do believe Meredith invited Rudy in for a date and wanted to be his lover, otherwise how do you explain the lack of appeal of the mitigation for remorse?

 

[Diocletus]

This has been picked up on a Facebook page where citizens of Perugia are encouraged to do the same. That is an example of hate, that goes beyond making fun of somebody, in my opinion.

Honestly, Perugians seem like a bunch of rubes.

 

[Bill Williams]

Andrea Vogt, as well as the author of the trashy, "Darkness Descending" are producing a documentary on this case, to be aired on BBC Channel 3 next Monday.

Although not addressing the documentary, Mark Olshaker (co-author with John Douglas) wrote this piece three weeks ago, to put some of Andrea's obvious venom and disinformation against Knox into perspective:

Pandering to existing beliefs.
http://mindhuntersinc.com/pandering-to-existing-beliefs/#more-4639

Andrea Vogt is a virtual one woman PR firm for Giuliano Mignini, and there's no lurid tale that goes untouched by her. For instance, how in the world does Vogt know things that are essentially lawyer-client privilege?

The article is entitled Amanda Knox’s fugitive fears: she’s right to be worried, and the entire tone suggests a condescending contempt for Amanda and her situation and an implication that even though she’s gotten away with murder, she might not this time. Even the term “fugitive fears” in the headline implies wrongdoing and guilt.

Consider the following:

It didn’t help that Knox ignored her lawyers’ pleas to travel from Seattle and attend court in Florence – she sent an email instead – nor that she repeatedly requested to meet the Kerchers, only to be sternly rebutted by their lawyer, who suggested she act more like a defendant.​

First of all, her lawyers did not plea for her to attend court in Florence. It was a reasonable discussion point that Amanda and her family and advisors decided against for an obvious reason: She was convicted of a crime in Perugia that there was absolutely no evidence she committed and overwhelming evidence that she did not.

Or this....

Vogt goes on to say that:

First, her co-defendant Raffaele Sollecito’s lawyers have distanced his defense from Knox’s. “He may have brushed her hair and cleaned her ears, but he would not have killed for the love of Amanda,” his lawyer Giulia Bongiorno told jurors in closing arguments earlier this month. “Turn off Amanda,” she said. “Raffaele is not Amanda’s other half.”​

Now, this may sound convincing in the story until you stop to think about it. Is Vogt trying to suggest that Raffaele’s lawyers think he’s innocent but Amanda’s not? This makes no sense. His entire defense is accurately founded on the fact that neither of them was at the crime scene and that they can vouch for each other. All Vogt is actually showing is that there is a tremendous animus in Italy and the UK against Amanda, and even Raffaele’s lawyers acknowledge this.

Read on, and all you Brits enjoy the documentary. It is the case which Mignini brought... Andrea has not changed tune since.

 

[Kaosium]

Knox has been convicted of callunnia (application pending before ECHR), almost certainly illegally. And of course, we all know that they will be convicted in the case in chief.

I am not as certain, remember the quashing was delayed, suggesting a close vote by Cassation. They could also quash this verdict if they feel the defense appeal is strong and one or two members change their minds on the legality of what they did. They ruled on the evidence and handed the second court a recipe for conviction, if that motivations is of dubious legality they may quash that as well, as that is their purview.

Mind you I'm not holding out a lot of hope for it, but I don't think it's certain. They will know that others will be looking closely at it, and unlike the last time this will be a final verdict if they accept it...

 

[Welshman]

Welshman,

That is a good question. And if Amanda and Raffaele should suffer reduced credibility for their false statements (which are quite small in number, as Bill Williams pointed out), shouldn't the police and prosecution suffer reduced credibility for their many documented false statements and half-truths. Has Professor Dershowitz never defended someone who was the victim of police coercion, police lies, or prosecution stonewalling on discovery?

When I ask the haters why the prosecution had to resort to supressing evidence and lying if they had a slam dunk case, I have been meet with a wall of silence. The haters ignore the question or pretend misconduct did not happen. If the police and prosecution have a mountain of solid evidence and a watertight case, they should no problem in presenting all the evidence in their possession and simply present the evidence truthfully. Lying should never be necessary if the prosecution have a strong case. I will use an example to illustrate my point:-

The police arrest a man whom they suspect has broken into a woman's house and raped, stabbed and murdered her. The have the following evidence against the suspect -

His DNA is all over the crime scene.
The victim's blood is on the suspect's clothes.
The victim's blood is in the home of the suspect.
The suspect's DNA is in the victim's vagina
The DNA of the suspect is found under the victim's fingernails.
There is clear CCTV footage of the suspect leaving the victim's home covered in blood.
The suspect leaves bloody fingerprints and palm prints in the victim's home.

The evidence of guilt is clear and overwhelming. Despite having all this evidence, the police lie. They say the suspect used the victim's credit card when he did not and he had stolen the victim's possessions which was untrue. Would it not be odd that the police would lie when they have so much genuine solid evidence they could use against the suspect?

The police told lies to the press and in court. The haters often spread lies in the comments sections of articles about the case and in Amazon reviews eg female thumbprints on Meredith's neck, Amanda's DNA on the bra clasp, Amanda showered in a very bloody bathroom. The recent pro-guilt wiki was riddled with falsehoods and a wiki had to be created to counter these falsehoods. If there was a mountain of genuine solid evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, why did the prosecution have to resort to lying and the haters can not make the case for guilt without having to resort to lying?

The haters constantly accuse Amanda of lying but slavisly defend corrupt prosecutors who told numerous lies and spread lies themselves on the internet. The hypocrisy of the haters knows no bounds.

 

[Samson]

I didn't see the comment because I mostly just skim this forum. I still don't know what was said.....

The figure of speech was irony, and it was perfect in form. But controversial.

 

[Strozzi]

Stefanoni framed the defendants

Yep. I think so too. But to them, it might not seem wrong. They might even think it's a bit noble in an end-justifies-the-means kind of way.

When Stafanoni lies to the court about a minescule amount of DNA being a significant/meaningful/condemnatory amount, she knows what she is doing. Describing 8 picograms as 200 pictograms is not an accidental mistake; it is a deliberate lie. That lie was told by Stefanoni in the initial detention hearing to justify holding Amanda for the year in prison before she was charged with the crime of murder.

Telling the court a substance tested positive for luminal and implying it is blood and withholding/concealing that she also tested it with TMB and it proved iNOT to be blood is deliberate deception. It was not an oversight. It is the framing of the defendant.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Coulsdon, what on earth are you talking about? Dan-O's comment?

If it's that, remember Rudy's story is that he had a date with Meredith and had nothing to do with the killing. He received a mitigation for 'remorse' (for not doing more to save her) that was not appealed (Amanda and Raffaele's were) thus Maresca on the behalf of the Kercher family must have accepted Rudy Guede's story hook line and sinker. What other explanation could there be for them going to the media and demanding Amanda's extradition yet not saying or apparently caring in the slightest that Rudy Guede is now eligible to walk the streets?

So yes, apparently they do believe Meredith invited Rudy in for a date and wanted to be his lover, otherwise how do you explain the lack of appeal of the mitigation for remorse?

Kaosium

I am sadden and disappointed by your post, but I am sure you’ll struggle on.

 

[anglolawyer]

Does anyone have any information on whether judge Crini has been suspended pending further investigations or is he still working on the motivations?

Is the 90 day clock for publication of motivations still ticking?

You mean judge Nencini. Horsehair was prosecuting.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

You mean judge Nencini. Horsehair was prosecuting.

Anglo

My thanks to you and Bill correcting my error, either way, have you heard anything about any pending investigation?

 

[Caper]

Kaosium

I am sadden and disappointed by your post, but I am sure you’ll struggle on.

That's the kind of answer one gives when they can't give a real answer.

 

[Diocletus]

Anglo

My thanks to you and Bill correcting my error, either way, have you heard anything about any pending investigation?

No, but I think we can predict that the investigation will take years and will result in a finding that the Italian judiciary is the best in the world.

 

[anglolawyer]

You know Mary, as ever I am content for the largest constituent group to make their own minds up reading these posts.

For me as a father with daughters such comments are beyond the pale, it’s like joking about a women wearing a short skirt and asking to be raped or brutally murdered, poor taste, but hey that’s me.

Is this how you spell “misogyny”? Never sure what with American English and English spelling.

Hearts and minds.

Reading your posts is like drinking weak tea. WTF are you talking about?

 

[anglolawyer]

Anglo

My thanks to you and Bill correcting my error, either way, have you heard anything about any pending investigation?

I read somewhere today there are three (!) investigations. I would tell you more but you are in debt to the thread.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

No, but I think we can predict that the investigation will take years and will result in a finding that the Italian judiciary is the best in the world.

There you go, irony.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Reading your posts is like drinking weak tea. WTF are you talking about?

K WFT? Equals “Why The Face”? Phil Dunphy Modern Family!