Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

The 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments should come into consideration immediately upon a receipt at State of any extradition request. The Secretary of State and all executive officers (and all Senators and Representatives) take an oath to support the Constitution (required by US Constitution, Article VI). The President takes an oath explicitly defined in Article II, Section 1, "to ... faithfully execute the office of President and ... preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

No doubt Amanda and her lawyers have petitioned the Secretary to remind him of the violations of her rights, under Italian law and Constitution, and under ECHR case-law, by the Italian courts.

Futhermore, Senator Cantwell has stated that the trials were flawed. In the US, the government takes the statements of Senators quite seriously.

 

[Dougm]

No doubt Amanda and her lawyers have petitioned the Secretary to remind him of the violations of her rights, under Italian law and Constitution, and under ECHR case-law, by the Italian courts.

Futhermore, Senator Cantwell has stated that the trials were flawed. In the US, the government takes the statements of Senators quite seriously.

No! US Senators, State Department Representatives, the Inventor of DNA forensics, Robert Barnett, former FBI agents, John Douglas, many attorneys, scientists, other academics, they are all wrong!!!!

A small band of anonymous internet trolls are the ones to listen to!! They will tell you, if you only let them!!

 

[acbytesla]

I think it's very interesting that now that Machiavelli was caught telling a blatant lie counting on the fact that no one would check his citation and just accept his lie into the conversation. It is doubly interesting that he then extrapolates other information to back up his lie. This is why he disgusts me.

It would be one thing if he owned up to his mistake. But no, like the Perugian prosecutor that he so admires he doubles down on his error. FYI: Mach, you would be a much more admirable human being if you own up to your mistakes. I am convinced that you are smart guy...but I know you are not perfect, because nobody is. This is a sign of emotional immaturity.

 

[Desert Fox]

No! US Senators, State Department Representatives, the Inventor of DNA forensics, Robert Barnett, former FBI agents, John Douglas, many attorneys, scientists, other academics, they are all wrong!!!!

A small band of anonymous internet trolls are the ones to listen to!! They will tell you, if you only let them!!

I have not seen any in law enforcement or forensics outside of Italy who argue their guilt. There might be a few lawyers but that is about it.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)

You're working way too hard here. The question we're trying to answer is this:

Do we have any evidence that Amanda Knox resented Meredith? You claimed earlier that Amanda spent hours "sobbing" over being rejected by Meredith. If this were true, it would at least mean that she was hurt. But the fact is that the best you can do is invent feelings for Amanda because her eyeliner was smeared.

There was no sobbing over this rejection. Come on, admit it. You have nothing whatsoever to show that Meredith herself didn't like Amanda, and nothing to show that Amanda didn't like Meredith. They were friends.

Come on, any reasonalbe person can well understand. Really, I think the most revealing thing you could say is your judgement that Meredith's friends were "catty and vicious". You really don't need to say anything else, this view of yours is the alpha and the omega, what you have is your own axioms, it's pure crystal of complete prejudice. What I wonder is just how you think you could build arguments agaisnt my views based on them, from the inside of your system.

The fact that Amanda was rejected and felt hurt is obvious to any who wants to see. But your view of Meredith's friends as "catty and vicious", and at the same time claim that there is no evidence Meredith disliked Amanda, is really a master show.

Obviously Amanda liked Meredith. But the problem is that she liked her too much, also sexually, and she was hurt, both humiliated - opening multiple instances of jealousy - and rejected. This is what I believe but, without getting into details, I remind that this consideration goes together with my independent observation that Amanda Knox was not normal. She was a fragile person with a personality disturb, and also with some drug problem, who failed to handle narcissistic rage.

 

[Desert Fox]

Come on, any reasonalbe person can well understand. Really, I think the most revealing thing you could say is your judgement that Meredith's friends were "catty and vicious". You really don't need to say anything else, this view of yours is the alpha and the omega, what you have is your own axioms, it's pure crystal of complete prejudice. What I wonder is just how you think you could buld arguments agaisnt my views based on them, from the inside of your system.

The fact that Amanda was rejected and felt hurt is obvious to any who wants to see. But your view of Meredith's friends as "catty and vicious", and at the same time claim that there is no evidence Meredith disliked Amanda, is really a master show.

Obviously Amanda liked Meredith. But the problem is that she liked her too much, also sexually, and she was hurt, both humiliated - opening multiple instances of jealousy - and rejected. This is what I believe but, without getting into details, I remind that this consideration goes together with my independent observation that Amanda Knox was not normal. She was a fragile person with a personality disturb, and also with some drug problem, who failed to handle narcissistic rage.

To be honest, you simply have no evidence supporting your position. You should just drop it.

 

[Matthew Best]

What I wonder is just how you think you could buld arguments agaisnt my views based on them, from the inside of your system.

The thing is, nobody needs to build an argument against your view in this particular instance (Knox supposedly crying for two hours) because you haven't built an argument in favour of it yet that wasn't based on a fantasy you had in your head.

 

[RWVBWL]

<snip>
Obviously Amanda liked Meredith. But the problem is that she liked her too much, also sexually, and she was hurt, both humiliated - opening multiple instances of jealousy - and rejected.
<snip>

Amanda liked Meredith sexually?
Ok, if you say so.
But do you got proof?

 

[Machiavelli]

And this is your argument supporting your earlier contention that Ms Knox was sobbing over a snub by Ms Kercher?? You have produced no citation for thus whatsoever. What you cite has nothing to do with your claim. The rubbing off of eyeliner whiskers (not eyeliner) is not even slightly linked to a sobbing event. You do not understand what she wrote.

I'd drop this in a hurry if I were you. It's very silly indeed.

Unfortunately I don't have Nina Burleigh's book, I only have a quotation from another book so I can't look up the source myself.
I also don't have the police testimonies of Juve and Spyros so I can't quote them.
But I also had independent sources which told me about the event.

However, I also think that Sollecito's and Knox's book are sufficiently eloquent in their admissions and omissions.

Sollecito clearly said Amanda wanted to spend the night with Meredith, and says she was disliked and rejected. She wanted to party with Meredith and she found herself walking home alone. The sms exchange ending witn "call me" with no answer is eloquent, and it's a fact. Knox pulls a curtain saying "thankfully Halloween was over", how can you interpret this, no matter how much sobbing there was?
Robyn Butterworth expressed an opinion that she thought next day Meredith felt guilty for not having answered Amanda's invitation (it was only Robyn's opinion).
It's clear there was a rejection on the part of Meredith. It's clearly something petty as an event, but it's also clear that Amanda was suffering that night, and she was suffering because of Meredith - because of her own loneliness she felt when she was not there, and probably jealousy - not because of other factors like social life or other sillines.

 

[Dan O.]

...

The fact that Amanda was rejected and felt hurt is obvious to any who wants to see. But your view of Meredith's friends as "catty and vicious", and at the same time claim that there is no evidence Meredith disliked Amanda, is really a master show.

What is obvious to anyone that actually reads the words that she wrote and doesn't override them with their own projections is that what Amanda misses was the quiet parties where friends talked with a few drinks and not the loud get drunk bar hopping partying that was going on both in the bars that Amanda visited that night and at the disco where Meredith was busy getting drunk.

If there were any hurt feelings, Amanda had an opportunity to air them with Meredith at noon the next day when Meredith finally crawled out of her bedroom. And if Amanda had said anything to Meredith, Meredith would have gossiped it to her frinds and it would have come out at the trial. But we have heard of no such talk.

Instead, Amanda goes home with Raffaele and they have a quiet evening talking, watching movies and having sex. She doesn't even let a broken pipe in the kitchen spoil that evening.

 

[kwill]

Amanda liked Meredith sexually?
Ok, if you say so.
But do you got proof?

And finally I think with this post we're back to square one with this very troubling conversation.

Did Mignini say that Amanda's motive was to punish Meredith sexually? ("Now you will be forced to have sex!")

Yes, he did. And all the posts since then have been dancing around that disgusting, baseless, perverted accusation.

Mach has just admitted that he agrees with Mignini, after fruitless efforts to show why he believes -- bizarrely -- that a little catty gossip on the part of the English women is evidence that Amanda hated Meredith.

I'm just astonished by the sheer ugliness and perversity and dishonesty. I mean, clearly this is how some people think but they usually hide it better. Mignini and his supporters are proud of themselves. Unbelievable.

 

[Machiavelli]

Amanda liked Meredith sexually?
Ok, if you say so.
But do you got proof?

We are talking about circumstantial elements. In order to understand a develomnent of a scenario.
I point out that my scenario includes psychological elements and detalis which were not addressed by any other description of the crime (neither Mignini, Massei, Crini or Nencini). They make the crime understandable to me. But they are not required in a motivations report.
Yes I think there are many circumstantial elements, and there is also some inference from the factual evidence that Amanda Knox did take part in a sexual crime, at least a crime which had a sexual element in it. But anyway, independently from Knox's sexual likes and orientation, any consideration should be coupled with the independent assumption that Knox was not normal, meaning that she had a narcissistic personality disorder.

 

[acbytesla]

Come on, any reasonalbe person can well understand. Really, I think the most revealing thing you could say is your judgement that Meredith's friends were "catty and vicious". You really don't need to say anything else, this view of yours is the alpha and the omega, what you have is your own axioms, it's pure crystal of complete prejudice. What I wonder is just how you think you could buld arguments agaisnt my views based on them, from the inside of your system.

The fact that Amanda was rejected and felt hurt is obvious to any who wants to see. But your view of Meredith's friends as "catty and vicious", and at the same time claim that there is no evidence Meredith disliked Amanda, is really a master show.

Obviously Amanda liked Meredith. But the problem is that she liked her too much, also sexually, and she was hurt, both humiliated - opening multiple instances of jealousy - and rejected. This is what I believe but, without getting into details, I remind that this consideration goes together with my independent observation that Amanda Knox was not normal. She was a fragile person with a personality disturb, and also with some drug problem, who failed to handle narcissistic rage.

No in fact, anyone can see that you are seeing things that are just not there.. Why do you do this? Is it because you need her to be guilty? You are projecting her to be hurt and rejected and that Amanda liked Meredith sexually with out a shred of any credible info. I just don't understand why you would expect anyone to come to you conclusions based on absolutely nothing as you are doing right now.

I don't know Amanda and KNOW I don't have a clue about her personality. I am also confident that you don't either. I would never try and judge anyone based on the nonsense you are using.

 

[acbytesla]

We are talking about circumstantial elements. In order to understand a develomnent of a scenario.
I point out that my scenario includes psychological elements and detalis which were not addressed by any other description of the crime (neither Mignini, Massei, Crini or Nencini). They make the crime understandable to me. But they are not required in a motivations report.
Yes I think there are many circumstantial elements, and there is also some inference from the factual evidence that Amanda Knox did take part in a sexual crime, at least a crime which had a sexual element in it. But anyway, independently from Knox's sexual likes and orientation, any consideration should be coupled with the independent assumption that Knox was not normal, meaning that she had a narcissistic personality disorder.

TOTAL NONSENSE.

 

[Samson]

If there were any hurt feelings, Amanda had an opportunity to air them with Meredith at noon the next day when Meredith finally crawled out of her bedroom. And if Amanda had said anything to Meredith, Meredith would have gossiped it to her frinds and it would have come out at the trial. But we have heard of no such talk.

Flawless reasoning.

The last texts which have been posted many times tell the same story as Amanda recounts over and over. There was no animosity to be inferred, deduced, or recounted. The British friends will have time to reflect their part in this when the exoneration is complete.

 

[Bill Williams]

We are talking about circumstantial elements. In order to understand a develomnent of a scenario.
I point out that my scenario includes psychological elements and detalis which were not addressed by any other description of the crime (neither Mignini, Massei, Crini or Nencini). They make the crime understandable to me. But they are not required in a motivations report.
Yes I think there are many circumstantial elements, and there is also some inference from the factual evidence that Amanda Knox did take part in a sexual crime, at least a crime which had a sexual element in it. But anyway, independently from Knox's sexual likes and orientation, any consideration should be coupled with the independent assumption that Knox was not normal, meaning that she had a narcissistic personality disorder.

This is completely absurd. You gloss over that this is not required in a motivations report, when it would be a great asset for a judge to prove something against someone if it was even remotely true.

And if it not required in a motivations report, what is Mignini doing putting it TO the court in his closing? If Massei believed it at all, why didn't

a) Massei order a psychological evaluation, or
b) repeat what Mignini said, in closing, as a factor, circumstantial or otherwise, in his report?​

Take it out of this situation, and the whole process you outline is asinine. It's difficult to believe you'd even try to put it to print. This is a sick fantasy.

 

[Machiavelli]

(...)
Mach has just admitted that he agrees with Mignini, after fruitless efforts to show why he believes -- bizarrely -- that a little catty gossip on the part of the English women is evidence that Amanda hated Meredith.

Another aspect of your spectacular inconsistence that I have to note: why do you call it "little catty gossip on the part of the English women" - assuming that you mean to keep Meredith out from that number - when in fact those women did not have any gossip to tell about Knox: it's Meredith who told them about all things regarding Knox, otherwise they would never know anything about them, they basically just listened to what Meredith told them.
What they do as witnesses is to refer what Meredith said about Knox's behaviour.

You call those people who only listened "catty and vicious" and you accuse them of making bitchy gossip. I find that really spectacular. And on such logical basis, you dismiss the reliability of what they say. I am speechless.

Not contant of that, you intervene on the forum specifically to comment that I am judgemental, amateurish and prejudiced, because I say there is evidence that Knox was a narcissist. You determine that those women are bitchy, vicious, catty and immature and stat they should have thought in a different way. Then you determine that Knox was normal and the witnesses unreliable, and you criticize me calling me prejudiced. I watch in amazement.

 

[Numbers]

Come on, any reasonalbe person can well understand. Really, I think the most revealing thing you could say is your judgement that Meredith's friends were "catty and vicious". You really don't need to say anything else, this view of yours is the alpha and the omega, what you have is your own axioms, it's pure crystal of complete prejudice. What I wonder is just how you think you could buld arguments agaisnt my views based on them, from the inside of your system.

The fact that Amanda was rejected and felt hurt is obvious to any who wants to see. But your view of Meredith's friends as "catty and vicious", and at the same time claim that there is no evidence Meredith disliked Amanda, is really a master show.

Obviously Amanda liked Meredith. But the problem is that she liked her too much, also sexually, and she was hurt, both humiliated - opening multiple instances of jealousy - and rejected. This is what I believe but, without getting into details, I remind that this consideration goes together with my independent observation that Amanda Knox was not normal. She was a fragile person with a personality disturb, and also with some drug problem, who failed to handle narcissistic rage.

No in fact, anyone can see that you are seeing things that are just not there.. Why do you do this? Is it because you need her to be guilty? You are projecting her to be hurt and rejected and that Amanda liked Meredith sexually with out a shred of any credible info. I just don't understand why you would expect anyone to come to you conclusions based on absolutely nothing as you are doing right now.

I don't know Amanda and KNOW I don't have a clue about her personality. I am also confident that you don't either. I would never try and judge anyone based on the nonsense you are using.

Mach is using these arguments because Mach is a defender of Mignini's perverse and pathological behavior as a prosecutor. Perhaps Mach also believes these misogynistic contrafactual statements influence others. And of course, Mach may be right in that. No doubt guilters thrill to such fantasies, while reasonable persons see how this fraudulent case against Amanda Knox is based on the seriously disturbed thinking of a perverted prosecutor.

 

[kwill]

We are talking about circumstantial elements. In order to understand a develomnent of a scenario.

No, I'm very sorry. What you are doing is not "understanding the development of a scenario."

What you are doing is fantasizing about the psyche and sex life of a person you do not know, for reasons that pass all understanding.

They make the crime understandable to me. But they are not required in a motivations report.

They make the crime understandable to you. The crime is easily understood without all this effort to believe that a woman who never once expressed dislike for another woman must have wanted her dead.

 

[kwill]

Another aspect of your spectacular inconsistence that I have to note: why do you call it "little catty gossip on the part of the English women" - assuming thet you mean to keep Meredith out from that number - when in fact those women did not have any gossip to tell about Knox: it's Meredith who told them about all things regarding Knox, otherwise they would never know anything about them, they basically just listened to what Meredith told them.
What they do as witnesses is to refer what Meredith said about Knox's behaviour.

You call those people who only listened "catty and vicious" and you accuse them of making bitchy gossip. I find that really spectacular. And on such logical basis, you dismiss the reliability of what they say. I am speechless.

Not contant of that, you intervene on the forum specifically to comment that I am judgemental, amateurish and prejudiced, because I say there is evidence that Knox was a narcissist. You determine that those women are bitchy, vicious, catty and immature and should have thought differently. Then you determine that Knox was normal and you criticize me calling me prejudiced. I watch in amazement.

Gossip is catty. It's needlessly hurtful to spread stories about another person. It's immature to do so without confronting that person. You don't know what it was that Meredith actually said, only what the English women said.

Meredith is not here to defend herself. I give her the benefit of the doubt and point out that her friends were immature and vicious, because of their own testimony. Of course they should have behaved better, but that's on them.

Meredith herself left no record that says she didn't like Amanda; the fact that her friends didn't like Amanda is both obvious and irrelevant. Amanda herself has never had a single negative word to say about Meredith, not in her private diaries, emails, tapped phone conversations, overheard comments -- nothing.

That's the fact you'd rather not confront.