• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 32

LondonJohn

Penultimate Amazing
L
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
20,779
Last edited by a moderator:
LondonJohn said:
The ballerina botherer and his vast, storied team of Italian lawyers & analysts were really on top of their game with that one, weren’t they?! :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, took me all of a few minutes to disprove that one. But some still cling to it like Jack Dawson clung to that floating board. Didn't work out too well for him, either.
 
Bill Williams said:
This mini-thread started when you claimed, "They (the police) don't waste their time on the innocent without any motive because at the end of the day they have to explain it all before a High Court judge."

You then filled this mini-thread with noise that culminated in saying that the cops had to use extreme, coercive measures because a mass-murderer could have been on the loose.

Responding to your scattergun imaginings is exhausting, which I think is the point of you making them.
Click to expand...

The police were simply doing their job. Come out of your fantasy world that they targetted Knox and Sollecito for nefarious reasons.
 
Stacyhs said:
I'd ask for a citation that "hundreds of people" left Perugia, but I know better.

.

I know this is a waste of time but....citation?




So did Amanda. But do you really think Sophie was questioned in the same manner as Amanda?
Click to expand...

You really have no familiarity with this case.
 
Stacyhs said:
Oh, good lord. Do you really think we don't recognize that you failed to address anything in my post and veered of into "Look! Squirrel!" territory?




LOL! RS's book wasn't "ghost written"; it was co-authored. Fail one.



Um....yes, it is.



So you're admitting that Guede's book and Mignini's book are "a pack of lies for the gullible"?




Ah, here we go again; only the overturned Massei court is valid. Uh-huh...right......you might want to consult the Marasca SC.

As I already presented, the phone logs do not support your opinion.

An impartial observer would note that I, and the other posters here, routinely and regularly quote and cite evidence to support our statements while...you do not despite repeated requests to do so.
Click to expand...

Do read Marasca-Bruno which clearly states the position re the telephone logs.
 
Vixen said:
Just because they can in theory does not mean they did in practice.



So give me a possible motivation for police forcibly making Sollecito lie instead of pursuing the 'real' murderers.
Click to expand...
So you now think innocent people *can* do these things. In theory.

Here's a possible motivation: the police followed your advice and trusted their special police instincts that tell them when they had their man, so then they just had to pressure him into admitting it. That's what you told us the police do, right? They just *know* when they have their guy. Right?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
So you now think innocent people *can* do these things. In theory.

Here's a possible motivation: the police followed your advice and trusted their special police instincts that tell them when they had their man, so then they just had to pressure him into admitting it. That's what you told us the police do, right? They just *know* when they have their guy. Right?
Click to expand...

I have not seen any convincing argument that the police treated Knox and Sollecito any differently from anybody else. The police are not perfect by any stretch of imagination. However, the idea that one person - Mignini - can fix it so that two specific individuals get singled out for one of the decades most publicised murdered hasn't really made its case as a convincing one.

I don't know how mcuh you know of the case, but the police did indeed interview literally dozens of people, some for hours on end. What possible motive did they have in singling out a 'couple of innocent kids'.


There is no way that would get past a court of randomly ascribed judges on a circuit rota, together with a panel of lay judges, likewise selected.
 
Vixen said:
How is it 'coercive interrogation' unless they believe a person is innocent. Why would they need to coerce someone into admission if they are guilty.
Click to expand...
"Remember: It's not coercion if you think they're guilty." Get that poster up outside every police interrogation room and watch the clearup rates skyrocket.

This is an absolutely staggering post. I can hardly believe I'm reading it.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
"Remember: It's not coercion if you think they're guilty." Get that poster up outside every police interrogation room and watch the clearup rates skyrocket.

This is an absolutely staggering post. I can hardly believe I'm reading it.
Click to expand...

Please have some perspective. A young woman was viciously stabbed in the throat three times with the knife inserted several times in a sawing motion upwards, breaking her hyoid bone. It took her ten to fifteen minutes to die alone, locked in a room with her phones removed, one of which she carried in her back pocket so that she could be in close contact with her sick mother. Are you seriously claiming that police are going to play a stupid game of scraping and bowing. They are not your mates. They are acting on behalf of the State for the victim.

Neither Knox' nor Sollecito's counsel put in a formal complaint about the police, as they are supposed to under Italy's bar standards.

I suggest that is just their way of trying to make money from a gullible public by claiming they were 'railroaded' and wrongly charged.
 



Darat said:
Membership Agreement
<Snip>

We want the Forum to be available to as wide an audience as possible therefore the Forum has been subdivided into "Welcome to ISF", "General Topics" and "Forum Members" categories, and these categories into more specific areas of interest.

The Forum is a discussion forum and we want it to be a friendly and lively (if challenging) forum for a mature audience and therefore will endeavour to ensure that civility will be the norm, but this does not mean that Members will be insulated from all insults and certainly not from challenges; the nature of the Forum inevitably involves strong emotions and opinions which can result in heated exchanges. Having your views challenged is not considered unfriendly nor uncivil.
Click to expand...

Concatenation of a member's name with (for example) "Bizarroworld" is not civil


Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob
 
Vixen said:
The police were simply doing their job. Come out of your fantasy world that they targetted Knox and Sollecito for nefarious reasons.
Click to expand...
The police were simply doing their job incompetently. Whether or not they had any nefarious reason to target these particular innocent parties is immaterial.
 
Vixen said:
Please have some perspective. A young woman was viciously stabbed in the throat three times with the knife inserted several times in a sawing motion upwards, breaking her hyoid bone. It took her ten to fifteen minutes to die alone, locked in a room with her phones removed, one of which she carried in her back pocket so that she could be in close contact with her sick mother. Are you seriously claiming that police are going to play a stupid game of scraping and bowing. They are not your mates. They are acting on behalf of the State for the victim.

Neither Knox' nor Sollecito's counsel put in a formal complaint about the police, as they are supposed to under Italy's bar standards.

I suggest that is just their way of trying to make money from a gullible public by claiming they were 'railroaded' and wrongly charged.
Click to expand...

The absolutely horrible nature of the crime does not in any way excuse the police for their incompetent investigation. On the contrary.

I absolutely don't care that you resent the thought that those innocent people might be able to make money out of their terrible experiences. The result of their wrongful conviction, that they got jailed and the real killer got lesser punishment, is what sickens me.
 
Vixen said:
I have not seen any convincing argument that the police treated Knox and Sollecito any differently from anybody else. The police are not perfect by any stretch of imagination. However, the idea that one person - Mignini - can fix it so that two specific individuals get singled out for one of the decades most publicised murdered hasn't really made its case as a convincing one.

I don't know how mcuh you know of the case, but the police did indeed interview literally dozens of people, some for hours on end. What possible motive did they have in singling out a 'couple of innocent kids'.


There is no way that would get past a court of randomly ascribed judges on a circuit rota, together with a panel of lay judges, likewise selected.
Click to expand...

How about the fact that the investigation almost immediately suspected Amanda based, according to Mignini, Giobbi and others, on her behavior, beginning with "the kiss". Because of this, virtually no one else was ever seriously considered. Mignini controlled how the investigation was run, and he almost from the beginning believed Amanda was involved, so why you think it not possible that Mignini couldn't "fix it so that two specific individuals get singled out" escapes me.

I'm curious, have you ever reviewed the fake wiki's "master list" of files? If you have - and I assume you have - then perhaps you could explain why there are dozens of taps, intercepts, etc., on Amanda and Raffaele's phones and conversations, as well as those of family and friends. It just doesn't make any sense to me why all those files exist for those two yet very few for anyone else if everyone was treated the same by the police. You'd think an open minded, honest person would review that list and conclude the police were almost exclusively focused on Amanda and Raffaele, but perhaps I'm looking at this all wrong.
 
TruthCalls said:
Here's the thing that makes Vixen's whole comment so ridiculous - if Amanda had been with Guede, the last thing Amanda would want would be for the police to figure out his involvement because surely his implicating her would be the next thing to happen. So to suggest she was trying to point the police towards Guede is in itself rather idiotic. That would be the last thing she'd want to do.
Click to expand...
Vixen said:
Not if she didn't realise his DNA would identify him.
Click to expand...

I am really having a hard time wrapping my head around this response.

So are you saying Amanda was trying to point the police towards Guede because she assumed they'd never be able to identify him? :confused:
 
Jack by the hedge said:
The absolutely horrible nature of the crime does not in any way excuse the police for their incompetent investigation. On the contrary.

I absolutely don't care that you resent the thought that those innocent people might be able to make money out of their terrible experiences. The result of their wrongful conviction, that they got jailed and the real killer got lesser punishment, is what sickens me.
Click to expand...

So what, in your view is the solution?

  • Abolish trial by jury/judges courts
  • Let the PR agencies slug it out amongst themselves for best press coverage of the case
  • Let all the academic scientists argue the case on paper amongs themselves
  • Have some kind of 'Pop Idol' voting system wherein the public can vote in the court of Public Opinion (remember the type of kack that gets voted through)

As for 'the real killer got lesser punishment', surely that is one for the politics section, as it is the Italian legislature that democratically decided that defendants in serious crime cases could get a fast track in exchange for an abbreviated trial. Likewise sentencing guidelines. The judge's hands were tied. It had to take into account Guede's age as of the time of the crime and his previous offences. That has nothing to do with Mignini or Guede. The 'kids' could have done the same.
 
TruthCalls said:
How about the fact that the investigation almost immediately suspected Amanda based, according to Mignini, Giobbi and others, on her behavior, beginning with "the kiss". Because of this, virtually no one else was ever seriously considered. Mignini controlled how the investigation was run, and he almost from the beginning believed Amanda was involved, so why you think it not possible that Mignini couldn't "fix it so that two specific individuals get singled out" escapes me.

I'm curious, have you ever reviewed the fake wiki's "master list" of files? If you have - and I assume you have - then perhaps you could explain why there are dozens of taps, intercepts, etc., on Amanda and Raffaele's phones and conversations, as well as those of family and friends. It just doesn't make any sense to me why all those files exist for those two yet very few for anyone else if everyone was treated the same by the police. You'd think an open minded, honest person would review that list and conclude the police were almost exclusively focused on Amanda and Raffaele, but perhaps I'm looking at this all wrong.
Click to expand...

The only things in the court files are those that are passed into evidence. The Italian police do have a habit of tapping people's phones. (Likewise in the UK communications can be intercepted by the national security agents and police need to obtain a special warrant to do so.) Italy is an EU country so there will also be data protection laws in place that protects the privacy of private persons. Criminal Courts of Law tend to be public places and thus transcripts, verdicts and motivational reports are of Public Record.

In addition, it is not at all unusual for police to have a clear idea ofprime suspects quite quickly. Around about a couple of years after the Kercher murder, there was a young American murdered in Siena. The police caught the killer within two days.

I am still not convinced there was anything personal about Knox or Sollecito coming under suspicion.
 
TruthCalls said:
I am really having a hard time wrapping my head around this response.

So are you saying Amanda was trying to point the police towards Guede because she assumed they'd never be able to identify him? :confused:
Click to expand...

Knox and Sollecito were anxious to point out to the police that there had been an intruder.
 
Vixen said:
So what, in your view is the solution?

...
Click to expand...

For a kickoff, oblige the police to follow the already-established rules while interviewing suspects so they don't coerce innocent people into signing false statements and leading their investigations into dead ends instead of pursuing the real perpetrators.

I presume you have no objection to this.
 
Vixen said:
The only things in the court files are those that are passed into evidence. The Italian police do have a habit of tapping people's phones. (Likewise in the UK communications can be intercepted by the national security agents and police need to obtain a special warrant to do so.) Italy is an EU country so there will also be data protection laws in place that protects the privacy of private persons. Criminal Courts of Law tend to be public places and thus transcripts, verdicts and motivational reports are of Public Record.

In addition, it is not at all unusual for police to have a clear idea ofprime suspects quite quickly. Around about a couple of years after the Kercher murder, there was a young American murdered in Siena. The police caught the killer within two days.

I am still not convinced there was anything personal about Knox or Sollecito coming under suspicion.
Click to expand...

I never said there was anything personal involved. You made the comment "I have not seen any convincing argument that the police treated Knox and Sollecito any differently from anybody else." The evidence clearly shows Amanda and Raffaele were the focus of the investigation from the very start and absolutely were treated very differently than anyone else. Nothing that you just posted changes that.
 
Vixen said:
Knox and Sollecito were anxious to point out to the police that there had been an intruder.
Click to expand...

There's a huge difference between what you just wrote and "gang up on Guede and point the finger at him.", which you previously wrote, and which is very different from "It didn't ever occur to her when she covered up for Guede.." which you also previously wrote.

It seems you can't quite get it straight exactly what you want to say. Why target Guede if they wanted to point to an unknown intruder, and why cover for Guede if they wanted to target him? As Stacy would say... pick a lane.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
For a kickoff, oblige the police to follow the already-established rules while interviewing suspects so they don't coerce innocent people into signing false statements and leading their investigations into dead ends instead of pursuing the real perpetrators.

I presume you have no objection to this.
Click to expand...

How about have the forensic investigation adhere to the standards and guidelines defined by ENFSI, for which Italy is a member state.
 
Stacyhs,

Sorry to interrupt, but I believe there is a typo in one of your previous posts that may cause confusion.

The text with the apparent typo:

Massei was censored by the CSC "with a serious and inexcusable violation of the law" for denying Sollecito his right to a lawyer as demanded by law. You forget that Massei illegally detained Mario Spezi in prison without a lawyer by misusing a law meant for the mafia.
Click to expand...

I believe the correct text would replace "Massei" with "Mignini" and "CSC" with "CSM".

The post is number 3915 in Continuation 31:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13952360#post13952360
 
Vixen said:
I have not seen any convincing argument that the police treated Knox and Sollecito any differently from anybody else. The police are not perfect by any stretch of imagination. However, the idea that one person - Mignini - can fix it so that two specific individuals get singled out for one of the decades most publicised murdered hasn't really made its case as a convincing one.

I don't know how mcuh you know of the case, but the police did indeed interview literally dozens of people, some for hours on end. What possible motive did they have in singling out a 'couple of innocent kids'.


There is no way that would get past a court of randomly ascribed judges on a circuit rota, together with a panel of lay judges, likewise selected.
Click to expand...


I’ve told you explicitly, including within the past 24 hours, that this wasn’t a scenario in which the police/PM were targeting two people whom they knew/suspected of being innocent.

I even took the trouble - though, clearly, god knows why - of explaining to you in patient detail that by 5th November the police/PM genuinely thought (albeit based on deeply erroneous “reasoning”, tunnel vision, and confirmation bias) that Knox was deeply involved in the murder, and that (at the very least) Sollecito was also committing a serious criminal offence by supporting Knox’s “lie” that the two of them had spent the entire evening/night of the murder together alone in Sollecito’s apartment.

Did you even actually read that post of mine (and, for that matter, several other related posts by me and others)? Why do you keep on with the nonsense that the only alternative narrative to yours is one where the police/PM set out to frame two people whom they knew/suspected to be innocent (then proceed to attack this straw man of yours)/
 
And, for the record, the police’s/PM’s pack of lies and cavalier disregard for the most fundamental tenets of Italian (and, for that matter, general) criminal law DID manage to “get past” the Perugia lower courts. Because those lower courts themselves also exhibited disgraceful, multiple, serious breaches of law.

If you care to read the Marasca MR, you’ll find all of this explained in careful detail. Fortunately in this instance, the SC corrected those lower courts’ shocking incompetence and their abdication of the most basic principles of fair trial under the law. Which ultimately manifested itself in Marasca ripping to shreds the verdicts and reasoning of those lower courts. Like Monty Python’s parrot, the verdicts and reasoning (well, “reasoning”) of those lower courts have now ceased to be. And correctly/justly so.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
"Remember: It's not coercion if you think they're guilty." Get that poster up outside every police interrogation room and watch the clearup rates skyrocket.

This is an absolutely staggering post. I can hardly believe I'm reading it.
Click to expand...


I know, right?
 
Vixen said:
So what, in your view is the solution?

  • Abolish trial by jury/judges courts
  • Let the PR agencies slug it out amongst themselves for best press coverage of the case
  • Let all the academic scientists argue the case on paper amongs themselves
  • Have some kind of 'Pop Idol' voting system wherein the public can vote in the court of Public Opinion (remember the type of kack that gets voted through)

As for 'the real killer got lesser punishment', surely that is one for the politics section, as it is the Italian legislature that democratically decided that defendants in serious crime cases could get a fast track in exchange for an abbreviated trial. Likewise sentencing guidelines. The judge's hands were tied. It had to take into account Guede's age as of the time of the crime and his previous offences. That has nothing to do with Mignini or Guede. The 'kids' could have done the same.
Click to expand...


The solution, Vixen, is that law enforcement do their investigative/prosecutorial jobs properly and according to law (including full compliance with all the required checks and balances), and that the courts also do their jobs properly and according to law. Your ridiculous straw man alternatives are duly noted though.

It’s really, REALLY, not at all difficult to figure this out. For most people.
 
Vixen said:
Knox and Sollecito were anxious to point out to the police that there had been an intruder.
Click to expand...


I believe if I discovered that a window pane in my house had been broken, that the window itself had been unlatched and opened, that the room in question had been ransacked, and that the front door of my house (which should have been locked shut) was hanging open….

….I’d be pretty keen to point out to the police that there had been an intruder in my house.

What is it about this situation that’s still too difficult for you to understand?
 
LondonJohn said:
AHAHAHAHAHAH!!

Quennell’s “reality” about this case is on such a wildly different plane from actual reality that it would be laughable if it wasn’t so disgustingly risible.

Anyone want to take bets on Quennell’s “100% certainty” actually coming to pass in 2023…? :D
Click to expand...

Well, he may have a point, but maybe not for the reasons he's hoping for. The ECHR judgement does offer a reopening of "unfair court proceedings" as "just satisfaction" for the injured party, namely Amanda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UybuIA5rSo&t=95s

So we might get a just resolution to the calunnia next year, who knows.

Hoots
 
Jack by the Hedge said:
The absolutely horrible nature of the crime does not in any way excuse the police for their incompetent investigation. On the contrary.

I absolutely don't care that you resent the thought that those innocent people might be able to make money out of their terrible experiences. The result of their wrongful conviction, that they got jailed and the real killer got lesser punishment, is what sickens me.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
So what, in your view is the solution?
Click to expand...
Solution to what? Solution to the reality of the incompetent investigation that JbtH reports on? What do your suggestions below have to do with anything JbtH wrote? I mean, did you mean the solution to people being wrongfully convicted, then selling books to pay for the 100s of thousands it cost to defend themselves from a prosecution, that on the other side had unlimited resources of a sovereign State?

Vixen said:
  • Abolish trial by jury/judges courts
  • Let the PR agencies slug it out amongst themselves for best press coverage of the case
  • Let all the academic scientists argue the case on paper amongs themselves
  • Have some kind of 'Pop Idol' voting system wherein the public can vote in the court of Public Opinion (remember the type of kack that gets voted through)
Click to expand...
How would abolishing trial by jury cure wrongful convictions? Or incompetent investigations? That would cure ALL convictions! Did you actually read JbtH's post for comprehension?

For the first few years of this case, the Perugian prosecution enjoyed unfettered access to the Tabloid Press, who printed unverified leaks from the prosecution, mostly to do with the 'Foxy Knoxy' defamation, the HIV scare which then resulted in someone leaking to the press the accused's sexual history, and so on and so on. As Tabloid Hack Nick Pisa said, he'd get access to what the prosecution was claiming, and would send a story based on it to the Tabloids in England, unverified and un fact-checked. He said that if he delayed filing the story to fact-check, he'd simply be scooped by some other tabloid hack. Mignini had unfettered access to the PR machine known as the Tabloid press!

"Let all the academic scientists argue the case on paper amongst themselves", ah, er, did you really think that that is a bad thing? That after a trial is over, scientists would try to discern the worth of the science behind the conviction/acquittal? Is that bad? I can't believe you would mock that as a solution to what JbtH said. It's a bit of a non sequitur to include it as a complaint.... but what's wrong with allowing science..... ah, er, to do science?

'Pop idol voting system'!? Talk about a non sequitur and strawman rolled into one.

Vixen said:
As for 'the real killer got lesser punishment', surely that is one for the politics section, as it is the Italian legislature that democratically decided that defendants in serious crime cases could get a fast track in exchange for an abbreviated trial. Likewise sentencing guidelines. The judge's hands were tied. It had to take into account Guede's age as of the time of the crime and his previous offences. That has nothing to do with Mignini or Guede. The 'kids' could have done the same.
Click to expand...
No they could not have, not if they were going to plead not guilty. It's just incredible to consider the world in which that comment about Guede and 'fast-track' would come from.
 
Last edited:
TomG said:
Well, he may have a point, but maybe not for the reasons he's hoping for. The ECHR judgement does offer a reopening of "unfair court proceedings" as "just satisfaction" for the injured party, namely Amanda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UybuIA5rSo&t=95s

So we might get a just resolution to the calunnia next year, who knows.

Hoots
Click to expand...


Well yep, I was assuming Quennell meant “…in a manner favourable to the prosecution” :p

But on the other matter of the ECHR remedy, my money would be on Italy failing to fulfil its Convention obligations in this respect any time in 2023. Or 2024 or 2025 for that matter.
 
Vixen said:
I'd ask for a citation that "hundreds of people" left Perugia, but I know better.

I know this is a waste of time but....citation?

So did Amanda. But do you really think Sophie was questioned in the same manner as Amanda?
Click to expand...

You really have no familiarity with this case.
Click to expand...

IOW: you have no evidence to support any of the above. Thought so.
 
Vixen said:
Do read Marasca-Bruno which clearly states the position re the telephone logs.
Click to expand...

I have: "...especially in the part where her story was contradicted by telephone records which proved a different SMS source"

I've already...more than once...showed that this was NOT proven as per the technical report testimony of the communications experts and as quoted in Massei's MR.

Phone log:

20:18 incoming SMS to Knox from Lumumba: Via dell'Aquila n.5 - Torre dell'Aquedotto, Sett.3
20:35 outgoing SMS from Knox to Lumumba: Via T. Berardi, Sett.7

From the Massei Report on cell tower coverage:

− 00:57:20: Amanda’s mobile phone sent an SMS, using the cell on Via dell’Aquila 5 Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 (which does not provide coverage to Sollecito’s house, since it pertains to Via Ulisse Rocchi, Piazza Cavallotti, etc. and therefore at the heart of Perugia’s historic center). This consisted of the SMS which the young woman exchanged with Raffaele at the end of the Halloween evening to arrange meeting up with her boyfriend and be accompanied home
Click to expand...

− 20:18:12: Amanda receives the SMS sent to her by Patrick Lumumba, which let her off from having to go to work at the ‚Le Chic‛ pub on the evening of 1 November. At the time of reception the phone connected to the cell on Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3, whose signal does not reach Raffaele Sollecito’s house. The young woman was therefore far [i.e. absent] from Corso Garibaldi 30 when the SMS reached her, as she was walking in an area which was shown to be served by the Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 cell.
Click to expand...

The highlighted is clearly wrong in stating that "Via Berardi sector 7" and "Via dell’Aquila 5 Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3" do NOT cover RS's house as Massei contradicts himself FOUR times saying that same cell tower DOES cover RS's apartment:

Massei Report page 318 –

1. The area around the defendant’s home was reached by a very strong signal radiated from the Via Berardi sector 7 cell, indicated as being the ‚best server cell‛ with regard to Sollecito’s house; furthermore the signals of other cells are also powerful, respectively that with a pylon in Piazza Lupattelli sector 8 and that with a pylon in Via dell’Acquilla-Torre dell’Acquedotto sectors 3 and 9.
Click to expand...


− 12.08.44 (lasted 68 seconds) Amanda calls Romanelli Filomena on number 3471073006; the mobile phone connects to the Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 cell (which covers Sollecito’s house)
-12:11:54 (4 seconds): another call is made towards Meredith’s English mobile phone number (the cell used is the one in Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3, thus compatible with Sollecito’s house)
− 12:12:35 (lasting 36 seconds) Romanelli Filomena calls Amanda Knox (No. 3484673590); Amanda receives the call connecting to the cell on Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 (still at Raffaele’s house)
Click to expand...

Latterio Latella, the Police communications technical expert states unequivocally that Via dell’Aquila 5-Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 DOES cover RS's apartment:

Letterio Latella – State Police page 84
RESPONSE: These are the cell [repeaters] that exist, through which he can connect, a telephone located on Corso Garibaldi 110, inside that residence, could have received telephone calls via these cell [repeaters], Piazza Lupatelli sector 8, Via dell’Aquila Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3, Via dell’Aquila Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 9 and Via Berardi sector 7
Click to expand...
.

Bruno Pellero – Sollecito communications consultant page 59:
The measurements were then repeated in the kitchen [window] … in this case we can see the signal intensity exceeds threshold for 3 cells … but only two cells can be used … cell 35763 and cell 11109.
Click to expand...
Note: cell 35763 and cell 11109 is Via dell’Aquila Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3, Via dell’Aquila Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 9.

Now, Vixen, please quote and cite testimony from the communications experts stating that Via dell’Aquila Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3 and Via Berardi sector 7 do NOT cover RS's apartment thereby putting Knox elsewhere during the incoming and outgoing SMS's with Lumumba. Or...will you fail to do so per usual?
 
Numbers said:
Stacyhs,

Sorry to interrupt, but I believe there is a typo in one of your previous posts that may cause confusion.

The text with the apparent typo:



I believe the correct text would replace "Massei" with "Mignini" and "CSC" with "CSM".

The post is number 3915 in Continuation 31:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13952360#post13952360
Click to expand...

You're being pedantic and apparently know little about this case. Massei and Mignini are virtually the same person and both are involved in the trial and both begin with "M" so that's just a technical loophole used for the Mafia...note that starts with "M", too. Read the merits court's findings and Vecchiotti is bent and Gill is a shill and Vinci quit when he found Knox's DNA on the bra and Ferraris are built in Maranello. :rolleyes:

(Thanks...a brain fart. Too late to correct.)
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
You're being pedantic and apparently know little about this case. Massei and Mignini are virtually the same person and both are involved in the trial and both begin with "M" so that's just a technical loophole used for the Mafia...note that starts with "M", too. Read the merits court's findings and Vecchiotti is bent and Gill is a shill and Vinci quit when he found Knox's DNA on the bra and Ferraris are built in Maranello.

(Thanks...a brain fart. Too late to correct.
Click to expand...

Stacyhs, thanks for setting me on the right track to understanding this case! ;)
 
Vixen said:
So what, in your view is the solution?
Click to expand...

I'd suggest they video interrogations and follow the law by not interviewing suspects with a lawyer present for starters. I'd suggest they not tell obvious lies about those who are clearly suspects being only "witnesses informed of the facts" in order to get around the law, especially when they publicly admit they already knew 'the truth' going into those interrogations.

snipped for irrelevancy

Vixen said:
As for 'the real killer got lesser punishment', surely that is one for the politics section, as it is the Italian legislature that democratically decided that defendants in serious crime cases could get a fast track in exchange for an abbreviated trial. Likewise sentencing guidelines. The judge's hands were tied. It had to take into account Guede's age as of the time of the crime and his previous offences. That has nothing to do with Mignini or Guede. The 'kids' could have done the same.
Click to expand...

Yes, they could have done what Guede,who had overwhelming evidence against him, did. They could have taken that lying, coward's way out but chose instead to fight to prove their innocence...which they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom