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

[Diocletus]

Shag n. an act of sex; vt. to perform an act of sex with someone.

No - "shaggy" just means "hairy".

Err . . . I think I have to say that you folks are a little off.

 

[Bill Williams]

Further to my last post ..

It appears AK has a couple of videos out ??
They don’t appear to be exciting much comment here.

Whats up with that.
There was a time her fans couldn’t get enough images of her and clamored to hear her speak.

Now she is being ignored in favour of issues that were debated to death and put to bed years ago.

Waiting to be heard indeed

This is a complete strawman argument. A clever one, but one nonetheless.

It's based on the ad hominem use of "her fans". What makes this a strawman argument is that this poster is noting that these "fans" are now, presumable, not doing something which he/she regards (assumedly) as fan-like.

The lack of videos being posted her is not negative-evidence proving something, in this case, it's supposed to prove that ..... what? That the fans are now former fans?

What is the point of this strawman post?

When I joined JREF in Nov 2011, there was a better class of guilter-like post. Now there only seem to be these strawman observations.

Rudy Guede did this crime. Fans or no fans, there is no evidence of Raffaele or Knox at the crime scene which indicates guilt.

 

[Diocletus]

On this point, the cops knew about the exchange early on, due to checking her phone records and they saw the exchange with a number that proved to be Patrick's and they also noticed she turned her phone off right after. 2+2=5!

Yup. And so they bugged Le Chic.

So, when was she a suspect?

 

[Desert Fox]

I have no idea of the correct figure but I was just wondering how you came by your guess?

Authors tend to only get a small percentage

 

[anglolawyer]

Speaking of police deleting messages this testimony seems to suggest just that possibility (don't get too excited Clive, not that message). I can just see Comodi in high pitched shrill "I exclude it!" It is just too funny not to share..

Yup. And so they bugged Le Chic.

So, when was she a suspect?

By 2.00 p.m. on 2nd November 2007.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's hard to believe that anyone gives Edward McCall's wiki the time of day. I just read through it's summary page and it makes ridiculous claims. It's not even really internally consistent.

One thing McCall gets right is that it is NOT mixed blood, it is Knox's DNA mixed in with Meredith's blood. But the conclusion that is drawn is woefully, and demonstrably incorrect - McCall says there is no innocent reason for this to be so, to have Knox's DNA found mixed in with Meredith's blood in five places, outside the murder room.

To be fair to McCall, this is Massei's reasoning also. However, how can any intelligent person say this? It is Amanda's home!!! It is Amanda's bathroom? And there's no innocent reason for her DNA to be in her home?

But McCall, thankfully, concedes it is not mixed blood in five places.

The other thing is that McCall also concedes that many experts looked at this crime scene and did not rule out a single attacker.

But McCall then parrots the same mistake Massei makes. After conceding that many experts in fact said what they said, there is no reason to conclude multiple attackers by necessity....

.... McCall then goes on to argue that by necessity one must assume multiple attackers and that this is the only reasonable conclusion to come to.

McCall is also honest, though, that this point by itself does not implicate Knox and Sollecito. So he's presenting a weird sort of back and forth... he presents what he calls "compelling evidence," then presents the very material that makes it a "so what?" and maybe even contradictory claim, then concludes that the claim is compelling. WTF!?

So I am finding McCall's wiki to be confusing, contradictory, and coming to wrong conclusions based even upon the "evidence" McCall himself discusses!

I got this sense when reading "A Death in Italy" by Follain. Follain tried to write a seemingly "guilt-like" narrative, based mainly on interviews with the PLE, with the British friends, and with the Kerchers.

But I came away from it thinking that Knox and Sollecito were probably innocent - and this, judging only by what Follain tells the reader!

The best thing about the McCall Wiki is its layout. It "feels" legitimate.

Then one starts reading.

 

[TomG]

Duodenum Evidence

To whom it may concern,

My argument about Meredith's digestive tract is about the emptiness of her duodenum and the fullness of her stomach. The state of digestion of the material in her stomach might be ancillary evidence.

The duodenum evidence IMO is where the defence failed miserably. This is even more critical than the knife or the bra-clasp evidence because it makes the prosecution T.O.D. impossible. Sometimes I thought that the SC motivation conclusion that the scream in the night as “surely” belonging to Meredith was an outright challenge for the defence to prove them wrong. Whatever, it never became the final nail in the coffin of the prosecution that it could have been. While all the experts came out the woodwork to debunk the DNA evidence the Duodenum evidence should have had the same professional analysis. I think the prosecution got off the hook with this.

 

[Grinder]

The duodenum evidence IMO is where the defence failed miserably. This is even more critical than the knife or the bra-clasp evidence because it makes the prosecution T.O.D. impossible. Sometimes I thought that the SC motivation conclusion that the scream in the night as “surely” belonging to Meredith was an outright challenge for the defence to prove them wrong. Whatever, it never became the final nail in the coffin of the prosecution that it could have been. While all the experts came out the woodwork to debunk the DNA evidence the Duodenum evidence should have had the same professional analysis. I think the prosecution got off the hook with this.

Have you read the Massei report to see the experts opinions on TOD, it's worth it.

I am one of the hardest on the defense but at the time and today everything points towards a TOD of no later than 10 pm. The digestive evidence only seals the deal. The other evidence is very strong and time specific.

Lalli at trial gave the basic 2 to 4 hour numbers.

But the TOD didn't get moved to 11:30 until late and even at that Massei had to move Curatolo's time from midnight to 11:30.

Anyway although it should be a part of the TOD discussion, it isn't needed to put TOD well before the trial one theorized TOD.

 

[Desert Fox]

But the TOD didn't get moved to 11:30 until late and even at that Massei had to move Curatolo's time from midnight to 11:30.

Anyway although it should be a part of the TOD discussion, it isn't needed to put TOD well before the trial one theorized TOD.

Do you think trial 3 will try to move it to around 2130 or 2200?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

these things cost money

The duodenum evidence IMO is where the defence failed miserably. This is even more critical than the knife or the bra-clasp evidence because it makes the prosecution T.O.D. impossible. Sometimes I thought that the SC motivation conclusion that the scream in the night as “surely” belonging to Meredith was an outright challenge for the defence to prove them wrong. Whatever, it never became the final nail in the coffin of the prosecution that it could have been. While all the experts came out the woodwork to debunk the DNA evidence the Duodenum evidence should have had the same professional analysis. I think the prosecution got off the hook with this.

I am sympathetic to your point of view. However, the Court of Supreme Cassation seems uninterested in science. The problem is expert opinions cost money, and I am guessing that the multiple trials have bled the defendants dry. This is a particular weakness in the Italian system, but one that plagues other systems as well.

I come back to the Duke lacrosse case. Somewhere I heard that each defendant spent between $1-2 million dollars (multiply by about 0.77 to convert into euros of the day). And that case didn't even go to trial. They would have spent several million each if it had. And the lawyers earned their money by poring over DNA records and cell phone triangulations, etc. The Frank Esposito case is one in which the majority of the lawyers' time was pro bono. But if we expect the defendants to be wealthy or the lawyers to work pro bono, we are being unreasonable.

 

[Desert Fox]

I am sympathetic to your point of view. However, the Court of Supreme Cassation seems uninterested in science. The problem is expert opinions cost money, and I am guessing that the multiple trials have bled the defendants dry. This is a particular weakness in the Italian system, but one that plagues other systems as well.

I come back to the Duke lacrosse case. Somewhere I heard that each defendant spent between $1-2 million dollars (multiply by about 0.77 to convert into euros of the day). And that case didn't even go to trial. They would have spent several million each if it had. And the lawyers earned their money by poring over DNA records and cell phone triangulations, etc. The Frank Esposito case is one in which the majority of the lawyers' time was pro bono. But if we expect the defendants to be wealthy or the lawyers to work pro bono, we are being unreasonable.

That is a large part of my problem as well. . . .The defendants in this case have now gone through three trials. Amanda likely has to keep what she has to fight extradition right now.

 

[Grinder]

Do you think trial 3 will try to move it to around 2130 or 2200?

My guess 2200.

 

[Dan O.]

And that is why they new to "Lawyer Up"
Couldn't they have warned Amanda?

On a side note, I was reading that the lab was not certified?
We have an uncertified lab doing difficult experimental procedures without the right equipment

In the early threads we had guilters insisting that they must have been certified. I searched for this certification and there was nothing to be found. Turns out that they decided after the fact that it would look good to be certified so they started the process. They hit a snag though because the certifications require that they have and follow written procedures. This is not possible when Stefi is making up procedures as they go. In testimony of 2009-04-23 they claimed that certification for ISO 9001 would be complete in June and 17025 by the end of the year.

QUESTION - So anyway at the time of the inspection and these laboratories were not accredited?
ANSWER - No, no, I've said.
QUESTION - Thank you.

Must be another Google-fish idiom, sounds like they are incapable of stating the truth. (sorry, i don't have the original).

 

[Strozzi]

Sorry but if you watch her most recent interview on Youtube, the one done by The Daily, she says that the door wasn't normally locked.

While it has always been puzzling how Filomena could know unless she tried doors when people weren't home, it is the case that the door being locked did cause Amanda concern.

I don't think what you wrote and what I highlighted above is quite right. There are more factors to it. Meredith's door being locked was not by itself concerning, as Amanda had seen or heard Meredith lock her door before. If Meredith was out and had locked her door because nobody else was around - well, no concern.

It really was a combination of factors occurring together that caused Amanfa to be concerned. The 3 other indicators - open front door, tiny isolated drops of (possibly Amanda's) ear blood on the sink, and then the souvenir in the Italian women's toilet. Those 3 points made Amanfa concerned and suspicious. Add to that Meredith's door being locked and Meredith not answering her phones - that made Amanda quite concerned.

 

[Desert Fox]

[/HILITE]
I don't think what you wrote and what I highlighted above is quite right. There are more factors to it. Meredith's door being locked was not by itself concerning, as Amanda had seen or heard Meredith lock her door before. If Meredith was out and had locked her door because nobody else was around - well, no concern.

It really was a combination of factors occurring together that caused Amanfa to be concerned. The 3 other indicators - open front door, tiny isolated drops of (possibly Amanda's) ear blood on the sink, and then the souvenir in the Italian women's toilet. Those 3 points made Amanfa concerned and suspicious. Add to that Meredith's door being locked and Meredith not answering her phones - that made Amanda quite concerned.

A lot of times you will also have one of two items of concern as well but not quite enough to react. It took her a while to kind of put everything together.

 

[Bill Williams]

[/HILITE]
I don't think what you wrote and what I highlighted above is quite right. There are more factors to it. Meredith's door being locked was not by itself concerning, as Amanda had seen or heard Meredith lock her door before. If Meredith was out and had locked her door because nobody else was around - well, no concern.

It really was a combination of factors occurring together that caused Amanfa to be concerned. The 3 other indicators - open front door, tiny isolated drops of (possibly Amanda's) ear blood on the sink, and then the souvenir in the Italian women's toilet. Those 3 points made Amanfa concerned and suspicious. Add to that Meredith's door being locked and Meredith not answering her phones - that made Amanda quite concerned.

By all accounts, it was only Filomena who put 2+2 together about the phones not being in Meredith's possession.

My opinion is that the alleged argument that Amanda and Filomena were supposed to have had was a false one, anyway - mediated mainly by Raffaele trying to make sure they understood one another.

But filomena's concern was not the frequency of Meredith locking her door.... it was that the door was locked "right now" and Meredith was without her phones.

Filomena, almost 30, took action on that and asked the postal police to kick down the door. The postal police refused... an indicator, really, that although the cottage at that time was a mystery, none of it added up to apparent murder.

The obviously guilty Rudy Guede had broken in, and whatever it was he intended was tragically interrupted when Meredith arrived home. The rest his history, and tragedy for the Kerchers, and wrongful conviction for S and K.

But although Amanda had a generalized, confused concern, she did not pick up on the phones the way Filomena did. And none of that situation screamed out murder, anyway. The reaction of the postal police prove that.

 

[Poppy1016]

I was asked not to promote it so I did not. Maybe it is the wrong call but hard to tell the right and wrong call. If it comes down to extradition, I will write a physical letter to the office of the president with my opposition to it.

I hope we don't wait until its too late to get the public involved.

 

[AmyStrange]

Is this feasible?

-

I hope we don't wait until its too late to get the public involved.

-

What's James Randi's opinion on this whole matter?

Is it feasible to try and get him to write up a press release expressing his opinion with a link to a new petition when the time would be calculated to do the most good?

d

PS Senator Marie Cantwell from Washington State has already gone on record with this so maybe that is another alternative method?
-

 

[Samson]

Amanda is asked and confirms on her blog the the ILE tested all their clothing for blood, and could find no missing clothes. This all stands to reason.
There is a long list of missing evidence, much of it to be deduced because it would have been produced.
1. Blood on their possessions.
2. Anything incriminatory in their tapped communications.
3. Evidence of communication with Guede.
4. Motive
5. Evasive behaviour after the crime.
6. Criminal history.
7. Financial stress.
8. CCTV footage at the time of the crime.
9. Witnesses presenting in a timely fashion.
10. Footprints in the bedroom.
11. Meaningful evidence the break in could have been simulated from inside.

I would suggest one or more of above to be necessary ingredients in a safe conviction.

 

[RandyN]

Further to my last post ..

It appears AK has a couple of videos out ?? They don’t appear to be exciting much comment here. Whats up with that.
There was a time her fans couldn’t get enough images of her and clamored to hear her speak.
Now she is being ignored in favour of issues that were debated to death and put to bed years ago.

Waiting to be heard indeed

Why are you asking us about what AK fans are up to? I would suggest that you go to one of her fan sites and blather your comment there.

Personally, I think your comments are intended to attack the members here rather than make an argument for or against the case or facts. Who are you calling "her fans"? Care to elaborate?

Frankly your comments are getting tiresome and boring. Why don't you tell us what you think about or something about a Knox video? I haven't seen any, but I have seen you dodge or fail to answer most direct questions asked you about the case we are discussing here.

I'm beginning to think you have no clue about the facts of this case. But also that you have no desire to add your opinion about the facts either for or against evidence but are only here to yap.

How about your time line that shows how and when AK and RS killed MK? Just answer that simple question. A time line proving guilt...any ignorant idiot should be able to make that argument easily. The facts for guilt must be so overwhelming??? Or no?

I have seen several convincing time lines that indicate that Rudy Guede alone robbed, murdered and then raped the dead or dying poor girl.

I have not seen one of your arguments that even begins to explain the case that includes AK and RS in the murder and that happens to fits the facts. There is a reason for that and it has nothing to do with fan status...its more about intelligence IMHO.

But please carry on...your points are good for a laugh at least.

I happen to think that AK is not the best person to have full details of her own case...she was locked away in jail and also had crap lawyers...so she missed tons of vital police and prosecutor corruptions.

So its cartwheels are good enough proof for you then? Or she is a goofy liar? Is that it? That's enough?

And we are to ignore the police and prosecutor lies? The witness lies? Tell us all how you ignore those?

Go away. I don't mind arguing with someone with a different point of view at all...but how about backing an argument with some facts for a change? Yummi at least tries to back up his stupid arguments which end up making him look even more foolish but whatever ....is that what you are afraid of?

You sound like Captain Coward who is returning to the Costa Concordia... that he drove into the rocks... so he could make the argument that the failed generators played a part in the deaths of 32 people...sure Captain Coward...the generators caused you to hit rocks just off shore of a island...and then you trip and fall into a lifeboat.

Your arguments sound about as reasonable as Captain Shet..tino...how about picking it up a bit.