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

[Desert Fox]

Curious, has this case had any effect on US students wanting to go to Italy to study?
I doubt it was positive.

 

[Bill Williams]

The Sollecito interview is very grave. How anyone can still think these two are innocent is beyond me.

Because of this.
View attachment 30331

If you think they're guilty, just tell me when the crime happened.

What is "grave" about the interview? Raffaele is no one's robot. His details - especially when microanalysed by guilters - vary from Amanda's. If they'd been the same they'd be accused of collusion.

The key thing is that Amanda says she was with Raffaele all night from 8:30 pm Nov 1 when she was last seen by a third party, to 10:30 am the next morning. He agrees, and he adds, "What does all this have to do with me?"

He had some concerns about her behaviour. He's always been open about it, and writes as such in his book. So what? He himself wasn't bothered by it, but as an Italian he knew how it would play at with authority figures. He was also trying to provide support to Amanda, who'd just had a friend and roommate brutally murdered. But otherwise this whole thing had nothing to do with him.

And he's mostly asked to explain Amanda's behaviour? What does Amanda's behaviour (good, bad, indifferent, culturally insensitive, gormless, or sophisticated) got to do with him?

Unless a guilter can put a T.O.D. to the graph Kwill has provided, why is ANYTHING grave about a Daily Mail interview 6 years+ later?

 

[Bill Williams]

Perhaps platonov can explain why he continues to repeat over and over and over this meme of Retrocausality.

What the heck is he even talking about?

I have an inkling, but I'm sure he/she would rather speak for him/herself.

Perhaps he/she would like to have a go at Kwill's graph, and state an opinion about T.O.D. based on the time-points on it.

 

[Dan O.]

What the heck is he even talking about?

As best as I can tell, this is where it starts:

[Post 3932]
Author : Dan O.
Date : 31st July 2010 09:35 AM

The prosecution seems to have gone to great lengths to set this up to appear incriminating.

At 12:47, in an 88 second phone call Amanda conveys the basic elements of the situation to her mom and her mom says call the police. Similarly, at 12:50, in a 39 second call to his sister, Raffaele is told to call 112. This is two independent sources appraising the situation and concluding that enough has happened to warrant calling the police.

By the evening of November 2nd, the investigators would have the phone records and enough witness statements to piece together a reasonably accurate timeline of this period.

On November 10th, Amanda's mother is recorded questioning Amanda in her prison cell about the phone call at Noon before anything happened. Since there was no call at Noon and the first call at 12:47 was after enough had happened to warrant calling the police, this questioning must have been prompted by someone questioning Amanda's mother about a factitious call at Noon. I doubt that the initiator could have been Amanda's lawyers since if they thought this was important they would have prepared Amanda to answer the question in court. That leaves only the investigators/prosecution.

A year and an half later, the prosecutor springs his trap. Manuela Comodi asks Amanda in court why she called her mother at Noon before anything happened. Amanda of course says she doesn't remember any such call. Then Comodi uses the recorded conversation from prison that he set up saying in court: "Even your mother was amazed that you called her at midday, which was three or four o'clock at night, to tell her that nothing had happened."

Notice how this lie was seeded and played leaving the impression in the minds of the jurors (and many of the guilters) that Amanda had called her mother to say that nothing had happened. The hard evidence tells us that Amanda called her mother AFTER there was enough concern to warrant calling the police. The Italian authorities knew this as early as the evening of November 2nd. Yet they played this intentionally setup lie to win a conviction.


I find it amazing that there are actually people that fall for this kind of crap even when they have the resources to find the facts themselves.

But I haven't got a clue where he's getting retrocausality from.

 

[Bill Williams]

This:

[Post 3932]
Author : Dan O.
Date : 31st July 2010 09:35 AM

The prosecution seems to have gone to great lengths to set this up to appear incriminating.

At 12:47, in an 88 second phone call Amanda conveys the basic elements of the situation to her mom and her mom says call the police. Similarly, at 12:50, in a 39 second call to his sister, Raffaele is told to call 112. This is two independent sources appraising the situation and concluding that enough has happened to warrant calling the police.

By the evening of November 2nd, the investigators would have the phone records and enough witness statements to piece together a reasonably accurate timeline of this period.

On November 10th, Amanda's mother is recorded questioning Amanda in her prison cell about the phone call at Noon before anything happened. Since there was no call at Noon and the first call at 12:47 was after enough had happened to warrant calling the police, this questioning must have been prompted by someone questioning Amanda's mother about a factitious call at Noon. I doubt that the initiator could have been Amanda's lawyers since if they thought this was important they would have prepared Amanda to answer the question in court. That leaves only the investigators/prosecution.

A year and an half later, the prosecutor springs his trap. Manuela Comodi asks Amanda in court why she called her mother at Noon before anything happened. Amanda of course says she doesn't remember any such call. Then Comodi uses the recorded conversation from prison that he set up saying in court: "Even your mother was amazed that you called her at midday, which was three or four o'clock at night, to tell her that nothing had happened."

Notice how this lie was seeded and played leaving the impression in the minds of the jurors (and many of the guilters) that Amanda had called her mother to say that nothing had happened. The hard evidence tells us that Amanda called her mother AFTER there was enough concern to warrant calling the police. The Italian authorities knew this as early as the evening of November 2nd. Yet they played this intentionally setup lie to win a conviction.


I find it amazing that there are actually people that fall for this kind of crap even when they have the resources to find the facts themselves.

Dan O., if I didn't know you so well, I'd accuse you of deliberately calling Manuela Comodi a liar!

Ok... the ball is in the court of whoever it was who used the term "retrocausality". I'm going to immediately use the Latin equivalent, "retro causalitatem", just to bug Grinder.

 

[Strozzi]

I thought it did say that the US would extradite but it doesn't say when. When Hell freezes over would be a good time. I will take another look (sometime).

I read that a person in the US who is to be extradited to a foreign country may be required by a US court to first complete any sentence he may be under in the US. So, my strategy would be for Knox to commit a minor crime - perhaps host a noisy going away party. She will be arrested for a noise violation, and Nara will verify that it was indeed loud. If found guilty of the crime - her second offence and proof that she is a noisy recidivist - she will be sentenced to 70 years probabion. When her US sentence is completed in 2084, Italy may send someone to help the 97 year old lady travel to Italy. Maybe she can then have Nara's room.

 

[Strozzi]

Of course if she got to the cottage at 11.00 as Massei indicated then that would cut down the time to be there.

Maybe she really headed out from Raffaele's on hour earlier than she claims, but was delayed at Quintavalle's shop trying to buy a 55 gallon drum of bleach. When she found out he was out of stock she left empty handed mumbling something about "a waste of time". Quintavalle just got the time wrong.

If Curatolo was still here he could vouch for that. "Yes, Prosecutor Commodi, I saw her roll a 55 gallon drum of bleach down the steps towards the cottage. It was at 9:57 am, just like you said. I remember it because rowdy foreigners in masks and costumes were just getting on the disco buses."

 

[Poppy1016]

Once again, please give a comprehensive theory of the crime which would indicate they are guilty. That would be a good starting point.

If I have missed it I apologize. Please let me know where it is, or key words on which I can search.

My bet there isn't one.

You sir, are a bully.

 

[Bill Williams]

Once again, please give a comprehensive theory of the crime which would indicate they are guilty. That would be a good starting point.

If I have missed it I apologize. Please let me know where it is, or key words on which I can search.

My bet there isn't one.

You sir, are a bully.

Huh? Really!?

 

[Strozzi]

Originally Posted by Bill Williams
Once again, please give a comprehensive theory of the crime which would indicate they are guilty. That would be a good starting point.

If I have missed it I apologize. Please let me know where it is, or key words on which I can search.My bet there isn't one.

Bill, it is right there in front of your face. Just google "pooh".

 

[Bill Williams]

Originally Posted by Bill Williams
Once again, please give a comprehensive theory of the crime which would indicate they are guilty. That would be a good starting point.

If I have missed it I apologize. Please let me know where it is, or key words on which I can search.My bet there isn't one.

Bill, it is right there in front of your face. Just google "pooh".

At least this is spelled right..... here's wondering if the pooh will play into Nencini's motivations; he seemed at first to be hinting that his conviction is based on a "boys' night out" theory, and to be honest I don't know what that means.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Perhaps platonov can explain why he continues to repeat over and over and over this meme of Retrocausality.

Continuation_-_Discussion_of_the_Amanda_Knox_case

[Post 15357]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th November 2010 03:39 PM
Where are you getting this knife talk - Also there is retrocausality in your theory again.
--
[Post 16040]
Author : platonov
Date : 18th November 2010 06:37 PM
Retrocausality issues again I'm afraid - leaving aside the fact that cops in a murder inquiry are often skeptical types (professional hazard) less inclined than some here to give suspects [even 'hotties'] the benefit of the doubt when they change their stories.
----
[Post 16962]
Author : platonov
Date : 24th November 2010 02:41 PM
So the 9.05 ToD , Wiki links to other cases, the bathroom hokey-cokey, Wiki links to other cases, rambling tales of false rape claims, Wiki links to other cases, she's not the type, Wiki links to other cases, statistical analysis showing more evidence = weaker case, Wiki links to other cases, it was the Sun wot' done it, Wiki links to other cases, Comodi's lies & retrocausality, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a hoax, Wiki links to other cases, Its all a conspiracy, Wiki links to other cases, It sounds to me like a false internalized confession, Wiki links to other cases, Leave Amanda alone, Wiki links to other cases, I don't like those people on PMF, Wiki links to other cases etc etc etc
----
[Post 17183]
Author : platonov
Date : 26th November 2010 09:58 AM
See how others deal with the their 'mistakes' [the p= 0.213 issue, retrocausality, Hutzlike statements , whatever - the list is endless] ....... simply ignore them & move on.
​

Continuation_Part_2_-_Discussion_of_the_Amanda_Knox_case

[Post 6720]
Author : platonov
Date : 13th April 2011 09:57 PM
I dish it out, I can take it. I plan on giving Platonov some grief over 'retrocausality' from time to time when the opportunity presents itself.
But mention of retrocausality is frowned upon in that thread - its upsetting to some posters
--
[Post 9797]
Author : platonov
Date : 25th May 2011 09:52 PM
Re my argument/retrocausality - its not postdiction unlike 'the temple/pumpkin being destroyed' in the 'Jesus/Santa' ? story if you make the prediction beforehand
--
[Post 11811]
Author : platonov
Date : 12th June 2011 08:01 PM
Cezanne predated Dempsey surely - are you implying she was his inspiration. Retrocausality issues again I'm afraid.
--
[Post 11944]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th June 2011 06:24 PM
Are you sure she didn't - leaving aside all the retrocausality arguments on this forum
--
[Post 12019]
Author : platonov
Date : 17th June 2011 01:32 PM
Pity, as that had some very exciting features - conspiracy, mind wipes, retrocausality other stuff.
--
[Post 12035]
Author : platonov
Date : 21st October 2010 11:43 AM
I wouldn't necessarily dispute the distinction but given the retrocausality claims & the broken window perplexity noted earlier, well ........???
--
[Post 12100]
Author : platonov
Date : 21st October 2010 06:46 PM
B Indeed ; You have already explained this due to 'the lies of Comodi ' - via retrocausality. Has your position also moved on this & To where ; Katodys police 'mind wipe' ?
--
[Post 15185]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th November 2010 02:58 AM
Good theory but it falls foul the retrocausality rule that came up earlier.
--
[Post 15260]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th November 2010 11:06 AM
How is retrocausality not 'beyond stupid' - had RS mentioned the Knife before the cops announced it had been tested & the result it would have been worse for him - in fact fatal.
--
[Post 15344]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th November 2010 03:18 PM
In my honest opinion its less reasonable than the earlier retrocausality idea.
--
[Post 15357]
Author : platonov
Date : 16th November 2010 03:39 PM
Where are you getting this knife talk - Also there is retrocausality in your theory again.
--
[Post 16040]
Author : platonov
Date : 18th November 2010 06:37 PM
Retrocausality issues again I'm afraid
--
[Post 16962]
Author : platonov
Date : 24th November 2010 02:41 PM
Comodi's lies & retrocausality,
--
[Post 17183]
Author : platonov
Date : 26th November 2010 09:58 AM
See how others deal with the their 'mistakes' [the p= 0.213 issue, retrocausality, Hutzlike statements , whatever - the list is endless]
I could give a simple example - a poster on this thread Dan O has claimed (in the past ~3 days) that a Q posed by a prosecutor* in 2009 somehow via retrocausality caused perplexity back in 2007. Despite repeated prompting he has failed to justify or withdraw this claim or even respond.
​

The_Massei-Mignini_Conspiracy_Theory

[Post 155]
Author : platonov
Date : 23rd October 2010 08:34 PM
And the retrocausality / mind wipe I mentioned earlier is a strong contender.
--
[Post 167]
Author : platonov
Date : 24th October 2010 01:04 AM
But surely claims of retrocausality (bad skepticism) and requests to defend this claim (good skepticism)would fall under the purview of this thread.
--
[Post 268]
Author : platonov
Date : 24th October 2010 10:53 AM
Any chance on a response on the retrocausality claims.
--
[Post 343]
Author : platonov
Date : 25th October 2010 08:17 AM
No one on either thread brought up retrocausality besides you. No one made claims that imply retrocausality. Therefore, it does not fall under the purview of the present thread.
--
[Post 451]
Author : platonov
Date : 26th October 2010 07:58 AM
To suggest that this memory failure has anything to do with how the Q about the 12.47 call was later posed by a prosecutor in court in 2009 is to invoke retrocausality.
--
[Post 464]
Author : platonov
Date : 26th October 2010 12:44 PM
In any case you should have enlightened Dan O, Katody Matrass & others and we wouldn't now be waiting for a response from them on retrocausality and mind wipe conspiracies.
--
[Post 472]
Author : platonov
Date : 26th October 2010 02:39 PM
But a friendly piece of advice, if you want to use that argument [ assuming all the non-'innocentsi' haven't been LOL'd away] ..........it appears to fall foul of the retrocausality problem.
--
[Post 376]
Author : platonov
Date : 4th March 2011 04:18 PM
Are you sure you have gone far enough back with this retrocausality?
Will you guys please stop mentioning time travel/retrocausality - I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it - its upsetting to some posters and in danger of becoming a thread meme like cartwheels or 'the death of Simon the Zealot'.
--
[Post 377]
Author : platonov
Date : 4th March 2011 05:25 PM
I try to ignore really stupid arguments that appear to be nothing but trolling for a fight. Nobody claimed retrocausality. It's all in your own inability to read. Now I shall contemplate if this behavior needs to be reported.
--
[Post 496]
Author : platonov
Date : 28th March 2011 06:09 PM
Danial Williams confessed first (http://www.norfolkfour.com/images/uploads/pdf_files/Chronology.pdf). If you are going to claim that Joseph Dick's confession is responsible for this, P platonov will be all over you about retrocausality.
I thought it had been agreed to drop references to retrocausality and time travel. If the Norwegian blue turns out to be a cat don't lay it on me, man
--
[Post 634]
Author : platonov
Date : 3rd April 2011 06:39 AM
In any case you are in no position to throw stones having brought up the issue of retrocausality again in the full knowledge that its upsetting to Dan O
--
[Post 704]
Author : platonov
Date : 4th April 2011 04:49 PM
But that would mean Plat would have to commit to an opinion, and last time he did that he fell into the retrocausality trap when he suggested super-psychic Amanda made up the 'bathmat shuffle' to explain the luminol footprints which were in fact discovered the day afterwards.
--
[Post 722]
Author : platonov
Date : 5th April 2011 03:34 PM
It not retrocausality, its reality, as it was on Nov 8 2007. The reality today (post-trial) for the lawyers is even more stark.
--
[Post 929]
Author : platonov
Date : 15th April 2011 06:16 PM
This is not retrocausality - this is time travel into the future and back again to frame AK & RS.
--
[Post 939]
Author : platonov
Date : 15th April 2011 07:10 PM
You have to place your bets before the window closes - otherwise retrocausality
​

You are wasting your time laying this all out for him. He is a drive-by fruiter and doesn't bother to answer any questions posed to him. His posts are best left ignored, so as to not encourage him. His posts are nonsensical and are designed to get a rise out of the other posters who wish to seriously discuss the case.

 

[Strozzi]

Dan O., if I didn't know you so well, I'd accuse you of deliberately calling Manuela Comodi a liar!

Ok... the ball is in the court of whoever it was who used the term "retrocausality". I'm going to immediately use the Latin equivalent, "retro causalitatem", just to bug Grinder.

The police and prosecutor have Knox's cell phone records and know the time of Knox's call to her mother was 12:47 pm. If they are deliberately trying to trick Knox and her mother to think and speak of it as noon, then they are deliberately tring to alter the evidence and frame Knox.

 

[Poppy1016]

Huh? Really!?

That's what I was called when I asked for a timeline.

 

[Bill Williams]

That's what I was called when I asked for a timeline.

Ahhhhhhhhh!

 

[kwill]

That's what I was called when I asked for a timeline.

I'd settle for just a time. A single sentence naming the probable time of Meredith's death.

Anybody?

Here's the chart with verifiable timepoints again.



Meredith was a healthy young woman who had just shared a normal meal with her friends. All of that meal was still in her stomach when she died.

As a point of reference, here's the definition of a serious digestive disorder called gastroparesis. It involves partial paralysis of the stomach muscles, and it has a variety of causes, including diabetes, MS, and Parkinson's.

If more than 10 percent of the meal is still in the stomach at 4 hours, the diagnosis of gastroparesis is confirmed.

source: National Institutes of Health

Meredith didn't have gastroparesis. She didn't suffer from any of the most common symptoms (The most common symptoms of gastroparesis are nausea, a feeling of fullness after eating only a small amount of food, and vomiting undigested food—sometimes several hours after a meal.)

So there it is. She started a meal around 6 pm. When she died, all of it was still in her stomach. She was murdered very soon after she let herself into the villa at about 9 pm. Convince me otherwise.

 

[Dan O.]

You are wasting your time laying this all out for him. He is a drive-by fruiter and doesn't bother to answer any questions posed to him. His posts are best left ignored, so as to not encourage him. His posts are nonsensical and are designed to get a rise out of the other posters who wish to seriously discuss the case.

Perhaps you hadn't noticed; I was replying to Bill who had quoted him. If it weren't for Bill I would not have known he was bringing this old meme up again.

 

[carlofab]

But we didn't hand over the cable car people (correct me if I am wrong.) Is that because they were military?

No we did not. They were tried by a U.S. military court and, I believe, acquitted.

These "status of forces" agreements are fairly standard.

One of the main reasons we left no significant force in Iraq or Afghanistan is that these governments will not grant such immunity. And we will not certainly leave troops in Iraq or Afghanistan where they are subject to arrest and trial by the local government.

Ironically, both Iraq and Afghanistan need and want a stronger U.S. presence. But the necessary immunity is very unpopular with the people.

 

[RandyN]

She has lawyers to do this for her. And they should have done it long ago. It does matter. I am not talking about the guilters. They are irrelevant. What on Earth has been going on?

ETA why was she so obviously taken aback by the Nencini verdict? What had she been led to expect and on what basis?

Well I heard they were all crossing their fingers really really hard! So there was disappointment.

Or maybe how about the defense still sucks.

And once more I don't mind being the lone holdout that this type of country wide judicial, scientific, police, Supreme Court error can be related to any case anywhere else in the world...perhaps N Korea. Added to a record of violations that places Italy in the top two tracked...a close second worst to Turkey???

Here we have Italians lining up to stone the witch. Come on...these guys are just a "little extra bad" Charlie and company. Consider the long line of judges and jurors who has looked at this case. If this is something just off with a few bad apples say...Mignini and Napolini for example then don't ya think one of these 896 judges, scientists, jurors, or police would have spoke up by now?

Meanwhile you can count on two hands quite easily those Italians having trouble convicting in this case.

Nuts that the Italians might be unfairly singled out. They are doing it to themselves and their violations are recorded by the ECOHR and they prove that conclusively! This is not a Nyfong ...sorry not even close. Not the same.

The list of things AK is busy with just may get her ass landed back in a jail cell. There is a time for family, boyfriend, and school. This IS NOT that time. She better start listening to someone who understands the issues she should understand about this case. And sure forget the PGP but honestly they have a rather small platform of issues anyway so why not cut them all down? Charlie, if you cant think of these then we know several who can do so.

Knox should have an answer about any banking questions. It is a simply matter that PGP have been making hay with almost since day one. Did she make a curious deposit or not? This is so simple. So easy. But remaining quiet or saying " I don't know" at this point is foolish! You know the answer and you have the records.

I recall this matter being a topic off and on for years. IIRC they blame you for releasing and then removing or editing or saying and changing some damn thing about this deposit or money issue. SO...answer it! Or remain silent and feed the doubt so that it remains a question for everyone still in 2014.

Knox is an idiot if she isn't reading here or IIP or any PGP site for that matter. For us it is a hobby mostly. But it is her life! And frankly both her and RS seems the least informed while also the most vocal.

AK stupid lawyer Gerghaoil or whatever, was too stupid to talk to the BBC Ch 4 radio reporter! How can he remain such an idiot? Del ole Doppa refuses to comment on Necenni blabbing in the courtroom hallways. These people are harming AK case...but why do anything different than they have since day one???

Sorry but if the girl is too stupid and or busy to become an expert on her own case...maybe the Italians will just come and get her. And never forget that this is a simple yet ludicrously prosecuted case.

Was there a deposit that has been unexplained? No? It is one plank in the weak PGP platform. Chip it up. The lamp? Perhaps she should read Anglos article? Whatever...she should be able to rattle off the rebuttal without thought. I bet DanO could. And probably 4 or 5 others here or use to be here could as well.

Someone should be looking ahead (not all that difficult in this case) and preparing for action...you know...smart lawyer type people informing themselves from and by the experts on the case details... OR perhaps it is best for Knox to sit up in a tree on the U DUB campus reading a book. What do you think?

The time for huh, what, I don't know, is long past. In fact it is inexcusably stupid. Meanwhile I bet the US has her at 50/50 and no better right now in 2014. Not all that good given the ridiculous case, corruption, and facts!

But sure...philosophy class is critical right now or her social life perhaps... better suck it in cuz she might just lose that freedom and so need the memory of it to sustain her in prison.

Me... Id be studying extradition and DNA and human rights violations...but what do I know? Nothing!

 

[Desert Fox]

A much better case is actually US Army Specialist Mario Lozano

In short, he was working a road block in Iraq. There was an Italian agent in Iraq who tried to run his road block (not completely unreasonably either) and Mario Lozano shot him in the line of duty. He was also doing his job.

Various arguments such as the US was trying to assassinate the reporter and that he fired hundreds of rounds at the vehicle.

They requested extradition for murder, which the US refused. The reason why the case was eventually dismissed was because Italy did not have jurisdiction but their supreme court disagreed.

Simple truth is bad things happen in war zones.

Since this incident caused problem, if I was Amanda's US lawyers, I would seriously consider bringing up this case in an argument that she is at least in part persecuted for political reasons.