Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

You just need to learn a bit of the rules, Skind. This applies to all your "logical" argumentations, including the last one where you were attributing to me strange statements and drawing out some strange inference.
You just need to understand "accusation versus defence" is not the only principle of a trial. There is a set of principles, or rules and a procedure, the players know in advance, and their moves are in function of this pre-existing set; like in a sport game the meaning of each "move" (or "lack" of move) is to be read through the lenses of the principles and rules of what you are playing. The rules and techniques determine what a player is supposed to do, what needs to do if he aims to a certain goal or follow a certain strategy. You need to understand a little of the rules if you want to understand when a player is having a weak game or a strong one.

Machiavelli - Is Wladimiro De Nunzio a criminal? After all, he's the one you said manipulated the system in "Machiavellian fashion" to put Hellmann in as judge in the first place.

 

[platonov]

As the thread has become lengthy once again, this is a continuation from Part 9. For further reference, see also Part 8, Part 7, Part 6, Part 5, Part 4, Part 3, Part 2, and Part 1.

Posted By: LashL

Hey, LashL - whats with the distortion(omission) in all these new thread 'mod boxes'.

Now I know you guys are busy with weightier matters ( & I'm not not being sarcastic in saying that) but this is the 6th,7th or 8th time this has happened.
i.e. The wiping from the record of the original thread [& title] which spawned one of the longest running JREFF discussions namely Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel .

Given that this may be the last continuation mod box under the present arrangement would it be possible to remedy this omission.

Regardless of whats gone before - at least allow the signoff modbox to be accurate in this regard. I've no doubt the previous omissions were accidental – here's the chance to set the record straight.

While this may seem inconsequential to the mod team - & for some of us skeptics the original title was apposite to put it mildly - the obligation to furnish an accurate record of the forum for posterity must take precedence.

 

[LondonJohn]

As the thread has become lengthy once again, this is a continuation from Part 9. For further reference, see also Part 8, Part 7, Part 6, Part 5, Part 4, Part 3, Part 2, and Part 1.

Posted By: LashL

Hey, LashL - whats with the distortion(omission) in all these new thread 'mod boxes'.

Now I know you guys are busy with weightier matters ( & I'm not not being sarcastic in saying that) but this is the 6th,7th or 8th time this has happened.
i.e. The wiping from the record of the original thread [& title] which spawned one of the longest running JREFF discussions namely Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel .

Given that this may be the last continuation mod box under the present arrangement would it be possible to remedy this omission.

Regardless of whats gone before - at least allow the signoff modbox to be accurate in this regard. I've no doubt the previous omissions were accidental – here's the chance to set the record straight.

While this may seem inconsequential to the mod team - & for some of us skeptics the original title was apposite to put it mildly - the obligation to furnish an accurate record of the forum for posterity must take precedence.

What do you mean? If you're looking for the original thread, it's alive and well and here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161229


(btw: "us skeptics" hehehehehehe)


ETA: oh your issue is that the original thread is not linked in that mod box? Well firstly, why would that in itself be of such stellar importance. And secondly, the original "Cartwheel" thread is actually referenced at the start of the first continuation thread - so anyone wanting to look back to the genesis of the debate would clearly see that there was a preceding thread. What a strange thing to get worked up about.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)
Part of the surrounding information is that we have only the word of an incompetent liar that there ever was anything on the clasp in the first place. Stefanoni claimed to have conducted an unrepeatable test knowing that in due course all traces of her deceit would be erased. You yourself explained that, Mschiavelli, when you told us all data arising from such tests must be destroyed by law. The discussion of exhibits 36B and 165B is unreal IMO. There is no evidence that either bore any relevant forensic traces.

It seems your deduction that the items don't have any relevance stems directly from the (unsupported, imo) assumption that Stefanoni is an "incompetent liar".
If this is the case, we can be safe saying your conclusion derives from a conspiracy theory.

Now, the idea that Stefanoni is incompetent and a liar is "fact" only in the minds of the pro-Knox theorists. Actually, since I'm here I think it's worth rpeating nobody was ever able to show Stefanoni lied; the allegation is absurd to unbiased observers (and there is no trace of it in the trial). On the other hand it was quite evident that Vecchiotti lied and cheated, and those who support Knox on this forum covered their eyes before the most glaring evidence of this.
The "reason" that lies underneath, deep in the minds of these people, that produces such delusional belief by those accusing Stefanoni of "lying" or "hiding" things, is ina way a mystery to me. I observe it, with some kind of horrid fascination. It's hard sometimes to make sense of the degree of foolishness of certain claims (like Halkides & Zupancic). I keep some curiosity about what goes on in their minds.

 

[Samson]

As the thread has become lengthy once again, this is a continuation from Part 9. For further reference, see also Part 8, Part 7, Part 6, Part 5, Part 4, Part 3, Part 2, and Part 1.

Posted By: LashL

Hey, LashL - whats with the distortion(omission) in all these new thread 'mod boxes'.

Now I know you guys are busy with weightier matters ( & I'm not not being sarcastic in saying that) but this is the 6th,7th or 8th time this has happened.
i.e. The wiping from the record of the original thread [& title] which spawned one of the longest running JREFF discussions namely Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel .

Given that this may be the last continuation mod box under the present arrangement would it be possible to remedy this omission.

Regardless of whats gone before - at least allow the signoff modbox to be accurate in this regard. I've no doubt the previous omissions were accidental – here's the chance to set the record straight.

While this may seem inconsequential to the mod team - & for some of us skeptics the original title was apposite to put it mildly - the obligation to furnish an accurate record of the forum for posterity must take precedence.

I tend to agree Platonov
I am committing the thread to memory in case the cloud crashes, or turns out to be a bad joke by Fred Hoyle. I am up to ARubberChickenWithAPulley on page one of the cartwheel thread. I have memorised the title for you.

 

[Machiavelli]

We haven't been able to find the so called drug dealer. There are only a couple of unidentified calls and people have been trying to fill in the holes.

Btw, you should know Lorenzo was one of the three accused of associating for drug dealing (Federico, Lorenzo and Luciano).

 

[Bill Williams]

Btw, you should know Lorenzo was one of the three accused of associating for drug dealing (Federico, Lorenzo and Luciano).

Machiavelli - Is Wladimiro De Nunzio a criminal? After all, he's the one you said manipulated the system in "Machiavellian fashion" to put Hellmann in as judge in the first place.

 

[platonov]

Fast Finger or Fat Finger – sometimes the distinction is too subtle.

What do you mean? If you're looking for the original thread, it's alive and well and here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161229


(btw: "us skeptics" hehehehehehe)


ETA: oh your issue is that the original thread is not linked in that mod box? Well firstly, why would that in itself be of such stellar importance. And secondly, the original "Cartwheel" thread is actually referenced at the start of the first continuation thread - so anyone wanting to look back to the genesis of the debate would clearly see that there was a preceding thread. What a strange thing to get worked up about.

I'm not 'worked up' LJ – you may be confusing me with another poster

 

[acbytesla]

Btw, you should know Lorenzo was one of the three accused of associating for drug dealing (Federico, Lorenzo and Luciano).

You could hardly argue Machiavelli that Lorenzo is Amanda's friend selling her cocaine. I also don't see a single call or text to or from Lorenzo, Luciano or Federico.

So as far as I can see, the argument that Amanda had this relationship with a coke dealer who stabbed somebody is a bunch of bull.

 

[Kaosium]

Now, the idea that Stefanoni is incompetent and a liar is "fact" only in the minds of the pro-Knox theorists. Actually, since I'm here I think it's worth repeating nobody was ever able to show Stefanoni lied; the allegation is absurd to unbiased observers (and there is no trace of it in the trial).

Just more proof of the fact da Nile is not just a river in Egypt. Just because a liar or their lackeys deny something doesn't make it false.

Stefanoni was shown to have lied regarding the amount of material she 'quantified' on the knife blade sample, the number of alleles on the bra clasp, the TMB negatives, the likelihood of contamination and whether it happened in this case, whether they followed proper procedures and protocols as well as other instances that don't immediately come to mind.

A lie being defined as something that wasn't true that there's definite reason to think she knew wasn't true and relevant to the murder or her work.

Now, name some 'unbiased observers' who thinks it absurd that Stefanoni lied.

 

[carbonjam72]

I agree, but Raffaele has no reason to know about secondary transfer.

Also it has been entirely lost by some that when Raffaele was doing his speculating it was under the impression the knife couldn't have been used in the murder like Tiziano told him--as any rational being would realize from the fact it tested negative for blood and not only didn't match the wounds it couldn't have made one of them according to the prosecution foresnics expert himself, Professor Bacci, who also said he understood why others would eliminate the other puncture wound as a possibility as well but he still thought there was maybe some way if it was at the perfect angle or they were moving just right or somesuch:




However not ever finding the actual murder knife or any real physical evidence of Amanda and Raffaele being involved they took the knife into court anyway and pretended it was the murder weapon. These diary entries are from the very beginning of the case, the first month or so of his incarceration and the knife was just one more item in a string of false evidence the police were telling the press and courts about like the Harry Potter book being at the cottage (there was another one at Raffaele just like Amanda said--she had more than one), the 'clear cut CCTV camera shot' and Amanda's sweatshirt not being found (it was on her bed as could be seen in the crime scene videos) as well as all the nonsense about the washing machine, Argentinians etc ad absurdum.

And they put a red ribbon on the knife, only Commodi was allowed to hold it, as she promenaded it around the court to the gasps of the astounded jurists.

 

[Machiavelli]

Just more proof of the fact da Nile is not just a river in Egypt. Just because a liar or their lackeys deny something doesn't make it false.

Stefanoni was shown to have lied regarding the amount of material she 'quantified' on the knife blade sample, the number of alleles on the bra clasp, the TMB negatives, the likelihood of contamination and whether it happened in this case, whether they followed proper procedures and protocols as well as other instances that don't immediately come to mind.

A lie being defined as something that wasn't true that there's definite reason to think she knew wasn't true and relevant to the murder or her work.

Now, name some 'unbiased observers' who thinks it absurd that Stefanoni lied.

You are calling me a lackey, which you have no right to nor evidence for, I think resorting to this does not help your argument.
The true fact is Stefanoni has never been "shown having lied", not about the quantification nor anything else. Moreover, the hundreds of picograms - this is only incidental - despite your denial, happens to be an appropriate figure as a magnitude estimation. The truth is Stefanoni's work had the utmost transparency, while it must be bore in mind that transparency is carried on within the procedure, far more they were legally bound; think at the videos for example. It means you can't sweep under the carpet details like the fact that prof. Potenza was present as well as the experts and that test were established to be unrepeatable under the protocol of incidente probatorio. I'm on a cell phone so I won't spend too many long words: your claims are - ehm, obviously, to most Italians - false and ridiculous. Your claim about a TMB is ridiculous and even contradictory (it was Stefanoni who provided information herself, and was about something experts should know since they were supposed to attend tests and maybe even had videos). The claims are absurd, and the question why some people decide to have their minds cling to such unfounded ideas, remains as an open question to me.

 

[Bill Williams]

Just more proof of the fact da Nile is not just a river in Egypt. Just because a liar or their lackeys deny something doesn't make it false.

Stefanoni was shown to have lied regarding the amount of material she 'quantified' on the knife blade sample, the number of alleles on the bra clasp, the TMB negatives, the likelihood of contamination and whether it happened in this case, whether they followed proper procedures and protocols as well as other instances that don't immediately come to mind.

A lie being defined as something that wasn't true that there's definite reason to think she knew wasn't true and relevant to the murder or her work.

Now, name some 'unbiased observers' who thinks it absurd that Stefanoni lied.

Kaosium - would you ask Machiavelli about De Nunzio? He appears to have me blocked. (I have no idea why!)

 

[anglolawyer]

It seems your deduction that the items don't have any relevance stems directly from the (unsupported, imo) assumption that Stefanoni is an "incompetent liar".
If this is the case, we can be safe saying your conclusion derives from a conspiracy theory.

Now, the idea that Stefanoni is incompetent and a liar is "fact" only in the minds of the pro-Knox theorists. Actually, since I'm here I think it's worth rpeating nobody was ever able to show Stefanoni lied; the allegation is absurd to unbiased observers (and there is no trace of it in the trial). On the other hand it was quite evident that Vecchiotti lied and cheated, and those who support Knox on this forum covered their eyes before the most glaring evidence of this.
The "reason" that lies underneath, deep in the minds of these people, that produces such delusional belief by those accusing Stefanoni of "lying" or "hiding" things, is ina way a mystery to me. I observe it, with some kind of horrid fascination. It's hard sometimes to make sense of the degree of foolishness of certain claims (like Halkides & Zupancic). I keep some curiosity about what goes on in their minds.

Stefanoni's evidence on the clasp and knife (two mention those two only) is worthless whether she is a liar or not. I like it that you don't defend her competence and note your careful choice of words - no one was able to show she lied. Of course, accusations of lying would be met by law suits because Italian law hamstrings litigants and lawyers by denying them privilege. Not was her truthfulness directly at issue. The first appeal court was able to dismiss her evidence as worthless without making serious findings against her. She was lucky because she belongs in jail.

Stefanoni is an obvious liar whether anyone sought to establish that as a fact or not. Your defence of her relies too much on twisting the ordinary meaning of words and the accusation of lying against C-V does not obey your own rules - no one was able to prove they lied.

Anyway, let's just agree as to her incompetence (and the resulting impact on the value of her evidence) and leave it at that.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Everyone should congratulate Anglo for surviving the food and mean streets of Seattle.

It is a pity that Raf didn't write in his private diary that proper LCN DNA protocol wasn't followed and that the lab wasn't certified for that type of analysis. Of course, that would be interpreted as an admission of guilt because everyone knows that contamination is only used by guilty desperate people. Better yet he could have written in his private diary that Meredith needed help with her bra because the clasp was bent and when he had returned home he went straight for the knife and rubbed his finger on it. Novelli would cheer and accept the above as proof of contamination and ask for the next case.

Amanda's appeal has some interesting aspects. At the opening they ask for the case to be dismissed for the reason it has taken too long and yet at the end ask for a new trial.

They seem to accept that the footprints are Amanda's but just not in blood. I find it odd in that the pictures I've seen do not look like they could be matched to anyone.

In general it seems that the lawyers have been reading here and have become a little more direct. They actually mention the slaps to Amanda during the interrogation. They finally seem to realize the importance of the Calunnia conviction.

Does anyone know if the panel at the ISC has been chosen.?

Grinder!
Good to see you again.

 

[Kaosium]

You are calling me a lackey, which you have no right to nor evidence for, I think resorting to this does not help your argument.

My comment was not directed personally but globally, Stefanoni is not the only liar in this case, Napoleoni is too and has her own personal lackeys who (apparently) even help her in domestic disputes. Plus I just got done reading a thread where the Forum Liaison was posting and below his official title his own personally chosen one is displayed and it just happens to be 'lackey' and I thought it a funny word I wanted to use.

I also wonder if he's considering going for the Million (the challenge) having demonstrated clairvoyant powers by accurately predicting the regard JREF would show him despite the (official) title they gave him!

The true fact is Stefanoni has never been "shown having lied", not about the quantification nor anything else.

Yes, she did.

Moreover, the hundreds of picograms - this is only incidental - despite your denial,

It's not incidental, it just so happens her lie placed the amount outside the LT/LCN range which requires additional protocols and procedures for reliability purposes.

happens to be an appropriate figure as a magnitude estimation.

No, it's not. I forget just how Thoughtful (if those apologetics are what you're thinking of and I'm recalling correctly) constructed that argument, but I think it was that was the highest amount it could have been and gotten a 'too low' with the Quibit. However we have another indicator, the electropherograms themselves, and the knife blade RFU level (bottom one) corresponds best with the results from the 10 pg trials done by NIST when employing 28 cycles using the Identifiler kit. Here's what the ones done with 100 pgs of material looked like, as you can see they had no difficulty producing robust peaks with 100 pgs. Look for the peaks and then at the RFU scale on the left for each loci (e.g. D8S1179).

Now, let's hear the argument that a few hundred picograms (or however she put it) is an appropriate estimation. Not that it might have been that much, but actual evidence indicating that's a reasonable estimation.

The truth is Stefanoni's work had the utmost transparency,

Then she should have coughed up the edfs and all the rest of the data that the defense didn't receive until July 30, 2009 (for a trial which started ~8 mos previous!) and only because Comodi started referencing material the defense didn't have and didn't know they needed.

She especially should have provided the data behind the results she was referencing in court!

That's a biggie with LT/LCN work especially.

while it must be bore in mind that transparency is carried on within the procedure, far more they were legally bound; think at the videos for example.

Betcha when they took them they didn't realize they'd be spread all over perdition through the ether and get thousands upon thousands of views through Youtube!

It means you can't sweep under the carpet details like the fact that prof. Potenza was present as well as the experts and that test were established to be unrepeatable under the protocol of incidente probatorio.

I have no idea what you're getting at here, outside I do understand that Prof. Potenza was present for the tests, but that doesn't matter much compared to getting the results of those tests. A patient having tests done on them by a doctor is (of course) present for the tests but if they don't get the results that doesn't matter much! They can't take their 'being present' to another doctor for a second opinion--they need results!

What do you mean by the tests 'established to be unrepeatable under the protocol of incidente probatorio?' That sentence means almost nothing to me.

I'm on a cell phone so I won't spend too many long words: your claims are - ehm, obviously, to most Italians - false and ridiculous. Your claim about a TMB is ridiculous and even contradictory (it was Stefanoni who provided information herself, and was about something experts should know since they were supposed to attend tests and maybe even had videos).

Stefanoni omitted the results of the TMB negatives on the luminol hits done on the December trip from the RTIGF and lied about having done them in court. She did not provide the information until being ordered to by a judge and it was you yourself who told me those files aren't usually provided and thus she had no expectation they'd ever be revealed. As for videos, I've never seen the luminol laid and I have read they didn't tape that part. Do you know if there is video of the luminol being administered and then the TMB tests done?

The claims are absurd, and the question why some people decide to have their minds cling to such unfounded ideas, remains as an open question to me.

Because there's actual evidence of those lies and a pattern of deceit that does indeed boggle the mind of the uninitiated observer (remember my first posts on this subject on this board?) but given enough evidence it becomes clear that the lack of oversight and what amounts to impunity has allowed certain factions of ILE to get away with basically anything they want it appears. Remember that one case Maresca worked on (peripherally) where those pigs that beat that kid to death thought they could get away with saying a person beaten that badly (with their spine broken!) was a 'suicide?'

If you told those Italians it happened here (in the US) they'd probably have no problem believing it, right? As for Americans they can look to the Russ Faria case which in some respects is just as bad, but we'll see if it plays out differently because at least people are allowed to speak out against it without fear of calunnia charges. Incidentally, what happened to the twenty-some 'investigations' Mignini started against Telenorba, Bene, Cottonwood, Shea etc for daring to criticize the police and prosecution? Or for that matter the cases against Amanda's parents and the Sollecitos?

 

[acbytesla]

Stefanoni's evidence on the clasp and knife (two mention those two only) is worthless whether she is a liar or not. I like it that you don't defend her competence and note your careful choice of words - no one was able to show she lied. Of course, accusations of lying would be met by law suits because Italian law hamstrings litigants and lawyers by denying them privilege. Not was her truthfulness directly at issue. The first appeal court was able to dismiss her evidence as worthless without making serious findings against her. She was lucky because she belongs in jail.

Stefanoni is an obvious liar whether anyone sought to establish that as a fact or not. Your defence of her relies too much on twisting the ordinary meaning of words and the accusation of lying against C-V does not obey your own rules - no one was able to prove they lied.

Anyway, let's just agree as to her incompetence (and the resulting impact on the value of her evidence) and leave it at that.

There is little doubt that Stefanoni lied many times about this case. She said many things that were false which in itself is not a lie. A lie is a deliberate attempt to deceive, whether through the spoken or written word or through the omission of salient facts that would change the perception of the listener or reader.

For that matter, Machiavelli has been caught many times lying in this forum. For example, his declaration that Amanda had close ties with a drug dealer and that she was trading sex for drugs. This is just one of many positions that he has taken with absolutely no support.

 

[Desert Fox]

If you told those Italians it happened here (in the US) they'd probably have no problem believing it, right? As for Americans they can look to the Russ Faria case which in some respects is just as bad, but we'll see if it plays out differently because at least people are allowed to speak out against it without fear of calunnia charges. Incidentally, what happened to the twenty-some 'investigations' Mignini started against Telenorba, Bene, Cottonwood, Shea etc for daring to criticize the police and prosecution? Or for that matter the cases against Amanda's parents and the Sollecitos?

Let us say we have a case of guilt which is close to 100%.
I still would expect that the parents may very well say pretty unkind things about the cops, the prosecution, and even the judges. Punishing them for what they say unless actively threatening is simply wrong.

 

[Kaosium]

And they put a red ribbon on the knife, only Commodi was allowed to hold it, as she promenaded it around the court to the gasps of the astounded jurists.

LOL! I saw a tape of that, it was hilarious!

Kaosium - would you ask Machiavelli about De Nunzio? He appears to have me blocked. (I have no idea why!)

Is he your special friend?

I'm sure he knows it's been aired, if he wants to answer it he will. Remember things work differently in Italy, it's not impossible he could be prosecuted for making such a charge.

 

[Kaosium]

Let us say we have a case of guilt which is close to 100%.
I still would expect that the parents may very well say pretty unkind things about the cops, the prosecution, and even the judges. Punishing them for what they say unless actively threatening is simply wrong.

Have you heard about that case where that kid was beaten to death and the cops sued the mother when she called them a bad word? I forget what it translated best as, but it wasn't even all that naughty.

Maresca handled that case for the cops suing the poor mother of the boy they beat to death. He is the sleaziest lawyer in Italy, having cemented that status with his actions in this case which cannot help but destroy three families unless something unexpected happens sometime soon.