Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Ken Dine]

Yes the whole idea about by the bleach to clean up that morning is ridiculous. Filomena as we know was only a few minutes away, it is not as if she had gone abroad, there was no guarantee that she would not pop into her flat to pick up something that morning.

It is a bit like the conflict in the concept between Knox / Sollecito carrying out a forensic clean that morning and being discovered unexpectedly by the postal police (Nobody expects the Italian postal police). Yet despite the 'unexpected' arrival of the police there is no smell of bleach, no cleaning cloths, no dirty clothes. Even if you try and follow through a pro guilt theory it falls apart as being nonsensical.

In addition to no one noticing any bleach smell in the cottage on Nov 2nd, several days after the murder (after Raffaele had been arrested) when the cops went to collect Raffaele's kitchen knife and claimed to have smelled bleach there, Raffaele's housekeeper testified she had just cleaned Raffaele's apartment the day before using strong smelling LYSOFORM cleaner, so it was Lysoform that the cops had smelled and NOT bleach.

Of course, Raffaele already had 2 jugs of bleach under his kitchen sink; nevertheless, if the cops could just prove that Amanda had bought bleach the morning after the murder, then it would be crucial evidence against her ...under such convoluted reasoning that it should boggle any sane mind!

Since Grinder appears to be a bleach advocate, maybe he can logically explain Mignini's insane bleach theory to us?
Seriously, I never did understand this big ado over bleach?

Also, as I recall from the video when the CSIs used gift-wrapping paper around the mop they had found at the cottage (the cops found ithe mop in a CLOSET AND NOT ON THE FRONT PORCH), the girls' mop looked bone dry as if it hadn't been used in many days.

As I recall, Amanda was supposed to have fetched a mop from the cottage to use on Raffaele's kitchen floor, but did she ever do that? Did Raffaele's housekeeper bring a mop with her to clean Raffaele's floors each week?

The mop fiasco could much more damning evidence for the 'Guilters' than their non-starter issue of bleach?

 

[Bill Williams]

In addition to no one noticing any bleach smell in the cottage on Nov 2nd, several days after the murder (after Raffaele had been arrested) when the cops went to collect Raffaele's kitchen knife and claimed to have smelled bleach there, Raffaele's housekeeper testified she had just cleaned Raffaele's apartment the day before using strong smelling LYSOFORM cleaner, so it was Lysoform that the cops had smelled and NOT bleach.

Of course, Raffaele already had 2 jugs of bleach under his kitchen sink; nevertheless, if the cops could just prove that Amanda had bought bleach the morning after the murder, then it would be crucial evidence against her ...under such convoluted reasoning that it should boggle any sane mind!

Since Grinder appears to be a bleach advocate, maybe he can logically explain Mignini's insane bleach theory to us?
Seriously, I never did understand this big ado over bleach?

When I asked what the bleach would have been for, I got a line of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's.

To be fair, Grinder is dealing in a hypothetical. He's also being a devil's advocate. If he does it enough, he might catch Mignini's attention and get rolled into Mignini's Satanic rite theory!

 

[Bill Williams]

Still - isn't it still up to the prosecution to demonstrate that this alleged inconsistency somehow is part of the murder? What would the bleach have been for, given carbonjam72's comments?

Once again, this issue of consistency of story is too big a deal. Consistency of account simply means they were engaged in a conspiracy! The prosecution should have their "damned if true, damned if false" theories exposed.

Yes the whole idea about by the bleach to clean up that morning is ridiculous. Filomena as we know was only a few minutes away, it is not as if she had gone abroad, there was no guarantee that she would not pop into her flat to pick up something that morning.

It is a bit like the conflict in the concept between Knox / Sollecito carrying out a forensic clean that morning and being discovered unexpectedly by the postal police (Nobody expects the Italian postal police). Yet despite the 'unexpected' arrival of the police there is no smell of bleach, no cleaning cloths, no dirty clothes. Even if you try and follow through a pro guilt theory it falls apart as being nonsensical.

Adjacent to this is the hypothetical that an **innocent** Knox actually did wake early and head out to Quintavalle's to be seen there, only to go back to Raffaele's, then head to the cottage for her shower, back to Raffaele's and then the two of them go investigate the mess back at the cottage.

Supposedly, without knowing why it would be seen to be suspicious to investigators who keyed early on the pair (because of pooh in the toilet or the unscalability of the wall below Filomena's window).....

Knox is now required to instinctively appreciate why this imagined trip to Quintavalle's which she fails to relate to the cops can be reasonably seen as suspicious. (And remember, this is only a what if, because it is not being advance by anyone who believes it happened, at this point it a mind-exercise - a what if - while we're all waiting for the motivations report!!)

Why would an innocent Knox even appreciate she needed an alibi? One of the subtexts of all this is that innocent people falsely believe that their actual innocence is a shield from malicious prosecution.

Consistency of story is way too big a deal in this context. Indeed, if Raffaele and Amanda had independently and spontaneously blurted out the same account of relative trivialities, they'd then be accused of conspiring and, "They know something they're not telling us."

 

[sept79]

Random thoughts after a fun surf session before dark, some pasta + drink:
That Free Rudy Guede dude posting at .Net is a friend of Rudy's,
he's starting to get some of the guilters really annoyed with his interesting theories, ya might say.

Elsewhere,
it seems from this story that Miss Knox has another trial starting soon.

Though hardcore Innocentisti can't stand the dude,
Peter Q. wrote an informative article, it looks like. http://truejustice.org/ee/index.phpAnd Machiavelli might be covering the trial abit,
you all know that it's always fun to read some Machiavelli...
L8, RW

Is one to infer that the 'Dr's referenced in "Two prosecutors have developed the case which was sparked by complaints from investigators in the Perugia central police station. They are Dr Leopoldo Di Girolamo and Dr Angela Pietroiusti" have the same pedigree as 'Dr' Stefanoni?

 

[anglolawyer]

I agree with Numbers, not as to what the focus should be, since it should be what anyone cares to discuss, but the interesting aspect to me about the bleach receipts thing is not 'what if' there had been any - who gives a darn, there weren't - rather what it says about the process that the story was circulated in the first place, not contradicted by anyone in authority and then buttressed by the production of Quintavalle. The meme was so strong that a witness even came forward to give it air. How very weird. Nobody knew about Quintavalle on 17th Nov (or whenever it was) that Owen's story ran.

 

[Bill Williams]

I agree with Numbers, not as to what the focus should be, since it should be what anyone cares to discuss, but the interesting aspect to me about the bleach receipts thing is not 'what if' there had been any - who gives a darn, there weren't - rather what it says about the process that the story was circulated in the first place, not contradicted by anyone in authority and then buttressed by the production of Quintavalle. The meme was so strong that a witness even came forward to give it air. How very weird. Nobody knew about Quintavalle on 17th Nov (or whenever it was) that Owen's story ran.

What with the release of the bathroom photo - the one that looked like a warzone - and everything else; it's hard to regard anything about that early "process" as anything other than a conscious attempt to pollute the case in the public mind.

It's in that context that the occasional comment, "The Knox people got PR help," should be put.

However, it's good we've moved beyond hypotheticals. The motivations report cannot come soon enough. My view is that once released it'll read on the side of the Bell curve of legitimacy which tends to play down the former courts' inanities.

 

[davefoc]

How did the bleach receipt issue come up again? I thought it was so thoroughly debunked that Vixen admitted that she had been wrong about the bleach receipts and that they didn't exist.

Regardless of what Vixen said about the bleach receipts even one of the guilter sites in a straightforward way just says they didn't exist.

As to what the bleach receipt issue says about the process: There are a lot of little sub mysteries in this case but I don't think this is one of them. The PLE were leaking damaging information, probably with a hope of forcing a confession from either Knox or Sollecito and probably with the hope of making the case and themselves famous. The press was lapping it up because it was helping them sell their newspapers. Eventually a lot of the information leaked early was shown to be false.

Where are the mysteries here? Maybe the specific people that leaked stuff would be interesting to know, but as far as I am concerned, an adequate answer is that the leaking was controlled by Mignini. I suppose details on the exact process would be interesting but this isn't one of the mysteries that interests me all that much. The top level details are known and an approximation of the low level details can be inferred.

Maybe there is something of interest here in the way the story persisted even after overwhelming evidence that it was false became public. But this isn't much of a surprise. A doctor in the UK faked some test results that provided evidence that autism was caused by inoculations and even after overwhelming evidence that he was wrong became public a large number of people think he was right. When a false story has widespread belief confirmation bias prevents a change in belief by a percentage of the population regardless of the evidence that becomes available that they are wrong.

 

[Ken Dine]

Since Grinder appears to be a bleach advocate, maybe he can logically explain Mignini's insane bleach theory to us?
Seriously, I never did understand this big ado over bleach?

When I asked what the bleach would have been for, I got a line of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's.

To be fair, Grinder is dealing in a hypothetical. He's also being a devil's advocate. If he does it enough, he might catch Mignini's attention and get rolled into Mignini's Satanic rite theory!

Are you sure that hasn't already happened?

 

[Bill Williams]

How did the bleach receipt issue come up again? I thought it was so thoroughly debunked that Vixen admitted that she had been wrong about the bleach receipts and that they didn't exist.

Regardless of what Vixen said about the bleach receipts even one of the guilter sites in a straightforward way just says they didn't exist.

As to what the bleach receipt issue says about the process: There are a lot of little sub mysteries in this case but I don't think this is one of them. The PLE were leaking damaging information, probably with a hope of forcing a confession from either Knox or Sollecito and probably with the hope of making the case and themselves famous. The press was lapping it up because it was helping them sell their newspapers. Eventually a lot of the information leaked early was shown to be false.

Where are the mysteries here?

It is probable that it was part of turning up the heat on Sollecito. When the Nike sole-ring-count took the Nikes out of evidence, they then went back 46 days later to miraculously find the bra-clasp.


All Stefanoni had to do about that was properly collect the thing, and let lab-contamination do the trick, but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, Stefanoni had to film herself with obviously dirty gloves handling the hasp!

All this means that the irresistible inference is that, what with his own legal troubles, Mignini was looking for his own courtroom triumph to take the heat off of him with the Narducci persecution. He rolled the dice and......

....... came out of it in a saw-off. He himself escaped prison, but was promoted to where he could do no more harm.

Still in those early hours they were trying to break Sollecito. Breaking him was a way of getting at Knox.

 

[Bill Williams]

He's also being a devil's advocate. If he does it enough, he might catch Mignini's attention and get rolled into Mignini's Satanic rite theory!

Are you sure that hasn't already happened?

Well, for one thing he's too nice a guy, really, and too sane a guy to get caught up in Mignini's madness - I mean, Grinder being Grinder has limits!

Out of all the motives - pooh in the toilet, Satanic rites, arguments over rent money, no motive at all, inexplicable choice for evil, jealousy between roommates, sex-game gone wrong - none of these can be applied to Grinder. Then again, do we really know how comfortable the young lad is with European-style plumbing!

 

[Ken Dine]

Well, for one thing he's too nice a guy, really, and too sane a guy to get caught up in Mignini's madness - I mean, Grinder being Grinder has limits!

Out of all the motives - pooh in the toilet, Satanic rites, arguments over rent money, no motive at all, inexplicable choice for evil, jealousy between roommates, sex-game gone wrong - none of these can be applied to Grinder.

Then again, do we really know how comfortable the young lad is with European-style plumbing!

Which young lad would that be?

By "European-style plumbing" I suppose you mean, as Meredith had to explain to Amanda, that in Italy they need to use a toilet brush after every #2?

While toilets work pretty well here (despite California's 1.5 gal low-flush restrictions), in California there's a problem with cultural differences between Mexican plumbing and USA plumbing.

Toilet plumbing in Mexico is apparently so lousy that they're taught down there to not flush used toilet paper down the drain, so when they first come here they instead put their dirty TP in the trash receptacles in public restrooms.

What is cultural common courtesy in Mexico doesn't translate so well when imported into America.

 

[acbytesla]

Wow!! I can't believe we are arguing over a hypothetical. The motivation can't come fast enough.

There ARE no records for bleach purchase for early November 2nd 2007 at Quintavalle's store. There also is no evidence of a bleach cleanup. So none of this matters.

 

[Ken Dine]

Wow!! I can't believe we are arguing over a hypothetical. The motivation can't come fast enough.

There ARE no records for bleach purchase for early November 2nd 2007 at Quintavalle's store. There also is no evidence of a bleach cleanup. So none of this matters.

TRUE!

At this point, another meaningless topic would be who moved Amanda's lamp into Meredith's bedroom?

*Meredith may have borrowed it for some reason?

*One of the early-responder cops may have brought it in for better lighting?

*Guede may have brought it in?

*Martians?

Whatever the reason, Amanda obviously didn't use the lamp to clean Meredith's bedroom, since that would be impossible to do, so who cares?

Since so many regulars here have pushed back so hard concerning THE FACT that Italian CSI had found African hairs in Meredith's bedroom, I feel that's an interesting topic to still discuss.

TESLA, you at first claimed the African hairs found in Meredith's bedroom was a meaningless topic since the hairs weren't mentioned in any court records, but now that I produced those court records, now what do you say?

Seriously, the Italian cops focused in on two African suspects within the first 8 days of the murder, so if not the found African hairs, then how else can that be explained?

It certainly wasn't because of anything Alessandra Formica may have witnessed since she didn't come forward until November 12th (and likely she wouldn't have even called the cops about it prior to Nov 10th), and by Nov 10th Mignini had already announced that they were looking for a 2nd African perp:

Death was slow and painful - judge

Press Association

November 10, 2007
[ ]
Giuliano Mignini, the investigating magistrate leading the murder inquiry, has confirmed police are hunting a fourth person.

http://s2.excoboard.com/Courthouse_Steps_Mavens/122767/1724692

The palm prints found on Meredith's pillow weren't matched to the prints in Guede's immigration papers until shortly before Nov 16th, so the cops had used his palm prints to only CONFIRM that Guede was their perp.

The way this entire case unfolded doesn't make any sense unless Italian CSI had found the African hairs on either Nov 2nd or Nov 3rd, and also immediately had recognized the importance of those hairs to the murder investigation.

Why are so many of the regulars here resistant to recognizing the obvious about those African hairs found at the crime scene?

I realize that we've all been bashing Italian CSI for years now, but that doesn't mean that there weren't a few experienced Italian CSI on the scene in those first few days.

Looking for hairs & fibers is one of the first few things that CSI are trained to do at a crime scene, and maybe, just maybe, a few Italian CSI had properly done their jobs that day?

Either way, Stefanoni still belongs in jail!

 

[davefoc]

see above

Isn't it possible that the cops zeroed in on the testimony of the couple that claimed they had seen a black man near the time of the murder? ETA: Sorry didn't read your post carefully enough. I think you addressed this.

There are two issues here
1. Did the PLE suspect Lumumba because they already suspected a black man and he was the only one they knew of with the slightest connection to the case?
2. If the PLE did suspect a black man early on what was the basis of their belief?

It seems more issues here that will remain in the uncertainty barrel unless somebody close to this case decides to address these kind of issues candidly. I think there is some chance that might happen but probably not for many years, because the personal risk of doing it now would be too great.

That is not to say that the publicly available facts can't lead to a better guess of what the truth is if they are understood.

 

[Numbers]

Planigale,

Thanks again for posting a very clear and accurate analysis.

There is a continual recycling on this thread of "what ifs" as though the facts were not clear. They are clear and the CSC has finalized the acquittal of these two innocent persons, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

I suggest that the the emphasis of this thread should be: "Official Misconduct and Bad Faith of Italian Authorities in the Arrests, Charges, & Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecitio". This would cover the violations of procedural laws: denial of lawyers during the interrogations and initial custody, denial of a fair translator for Knox, illegal method of interrogation (violations of CPP Articles 63, 64, and 188), falsified grounds for arrest, denial of discovery at arrest hearing, denial of discovery during trials, arbitrary judicial reasoning, and all the other violations of Italian law and the European Convention of Human Rights by the Italian authorities.

I agree with Numbers, not as to what the focus should be, since it should be what anyone cares to discuss, but the interesting aspect to me about the bleach receipts thing is not 'what if' there had been any - who gives a darn, there weren't - rather what it says about the process that the story was circulated in the first place, not contradicted by anyone in authority and then buttressed by the production of Quintavalle. The meme was so strong that a witness even came forward to give it air. How very weird. Nobody knew about Quintavalle on 17th Nov (or whenever it was) that Owen's story ran.

Wow!! I can't believe we are arguing over a hypothetical. The motivation can't come fast enough.

There ARE no records for bleach purchase for early November 2nd 2007 at Quintavalle's store. There also is no evidence of a bleach cleanup. So none of this matters.

Note that my suggestion on what the focus "should be" is in fact a suggestion. Just in case someone thought it was an order from the FOA High Command.

I also would recommend reiterative discussion of other points, not just the bleach - bleach receipts non-issue. For example, what about the "incriminating" evidence of AK and (IIRC) RS turning off their cells phones the evening of Nov. 1? (RS's phone may merely have been in a non-receiving part of his apartment, which some could consider even more "incriminating".)

Here's my point. According to Italian legal thinking, if one turns off one's cell phone, it indicates you are doing so in preparation to commit a crime, for example, murder. However, on the other hand, if one were to be preparing to commit a crime, I would suggest that one would leave the phone on at one's residence and then go elsewhere to commit the crime, thus, leaving one with the perfect Italian alibi. (In Italy, the presence of a cell phone that is on is absolute evidence that the owner of the cell phone is at the same cell phone location, if I understand correctly.) Thus, it could be argued that turning off the cell phones, or placing one where it couldn't receive a signal, was a evidence of innocence. However, anyone skilled in Italian legal thinking would then conclude, that since turning the cell phones off (or to not receive a signal) was evidence of innocence, it must really be evidence of guilt.

This viewpoint applies even more strongly to the evidence of a selective clean-up of the murder scene. The lack of any reliable evidence of AK and RS at the murder scene must, from an Italian legal perspective, be a certain indication of guilt, because such a selective clean-up of DNA and blood evidence would be physically impossible and thus evidence of innocence, and thus can only by done by someone who is, in the Italian legal sense, guilty.

I hope other posters here will critically analyze my statements above. Remember, that hope is merely a suggestion.

 

[Ken Dine]

Isn't it possible that the cops zeroed in on the testimony of the couple that claimed they had seen a black man near the time of the murder?

ETA: Sorry didn't read your post carefully enough. I think you addressed this.

Yes, we thoroughly discussed Alessandra Formica's testimony a few days ago. If you like, start with my posting and then read on:

Out of curiosity I read her testimony this morning:

Testimony of Alessandra Formica:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Alessandra_Formica's_Testimony

From the Massei Transcripts (Italian - view the above page with the Chrome browser to read it easily in English)

The first the police heard from her was when Alessandra voluntarily appeared and first gave her statement to deputy commissioner Napoleoni, on November 12, 2007.
[ ]

Alessandra Formica had nothing of any relevance to say, and she didn't even make her statement until Nov 12th, which is after Lumumba had already been arrested, and Nov 12th was also after police attention had already switched over to Guede.

I'm surprised they wasted any time on Alessandra Formica at trial.

There are two issues here

1. Did the PLE suspect Lumumba because they already suspected a black man and he was the only one they knew of with the slightest connection to the case?

2. If the PLE did suspect a black man early on what was the basis of their belief?

As to your #1, YES!

As for your #2, the only logical thing which could explain their early focus on TWO (2) African suspects would be the African hairs they had found in Meredith's bedroom.

It seems more issues here that will remain in the uncertainty barrel unless somebody close to this case decides to address these kind of issues candidly. I think there is some chance that might happen but probably not for many years, because the personal risk of doing it now would be too great.

That is not to say that the publicly available facts can't lead to a better guess of what the truth is if they are understood.

If you've never seen this before it's well worth reviewing:

(Dr. Stefanoni Genetic Test, SAL report, Dr. Stefanoni slide presentation):

1. Of the over 480 tests prepared on samples, 93 of these constituted hairs or fibers. 86 were human hairs of varying length, in varying colors. The most significant colors noted were black, blonde, chestnut, light chestnut and red chestnut.
[ ]
4. 7 hairs were black in color. 6 of these were 4 cm long or less, and so likely Guede’s hair. 4 of these were on the duvet and 1 was on the mattress cover, both in Ms. Kercher’s room. 1 was also on a sponge at Sollecito’s apartment.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Evidence_List#Hairs

Here's the link to Stefanoni's actual SAL slide presentation which she gave at the Massei trial –– it's in Italian, but it has many very interesting pictures if you've never seen it before:

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Technical_Report_of_Forensic_Genetics_Investigation

 

[Ken Dine]

Note that my suggestion on what the focus "should be" is in fact a suggestion. Just in case someone thought it was an order from the FOA High Command.
I also would recommend reiterative discussion of other points, not just the bleach - bleach receipts non-issue. For example, what about the "incriminating" evidence of AK and (IIRC) RS turning off their cells phones the evening of Nov. 1? (RS's phone may merely have been in a non-receiving part of his apartment, which some could consider even more "incriminating".)

Here's my point. According to Italian legal thinking, if one turns off one's cell phone, it indicates you are doing so in preparation to commit a crime, for example, murder. However, on the other hand, if one were to be preparing to commit a crime, I would suggest that one would leave the phone on at one's residence and then go elsewhere to commit the crime, thus, leaving one with the perfect Italian alibi. (In Italy, the presence of a cell phone that is on is absolute evidence that the owner of the cell phone is at the same cell phone location, if I understand correctly.) Thus, it could be argued that turning off the cell phones, or placing one where it couldn't receive a signal, was a evidence of innocence. However, anyone skilled in Italian legal thinking would then conclude, that since turning the cell phones off (or to not receive a signal) was evidence of innocence, it must really be evidence of guilt.

This viewpoint applies even more strongly to the evidence of a selective clean-up of the murder scene. The lack of any reliable evidence of AK and RS at the murder scene must, from an Italian legal perspective, be a certain indication of guilt, because such a selective clean-up of DNA and blood evidence would be physically impossible and thus evidence of innocence, and thus can only by done by someone who is, in the Italian legal sense, guilty.

I hope other posters here will critically analyze my statements above. Remember, that hope is merely a suggestion.

Aww, C'mon, everyone here knows YOU are the FOA High Command!

 

[Numbers]

Aww, C'mon, everyone here knows YOU are the FOA High Command!

Now that Ken has disclosed this top-secret information about the FOA, I must warn all the members of FOA that my "suggestions" really are "orders" after all. However, to maintain the FOA cover-story, FOA members are ordered to treat these "orders" as "suggestions".

 

[acbytesla]

TRUE!

At this point, another meaningless topic would be who moved Amanda's lamp into Meredith's bedroom?

*Meredith may have borrowed it for some reason?

*One of the early-responder cops may have brought it in for better lighting?

*Guede may have brought it in?

*Martians?

Whatever the reason, Amanda obviously didn't use the lamp to clean Meredith's bedroom, since that would be impossible to do, so who cares?

Since so many regulars here have pushed back so hard concerning THE FACT that Italian CSI had found African hairs in Meredith's bedroom, I feel that's an interesting topic to still discuss.
TESLA, you at first claimed the African hairs found in Meredith's bedroom was a meaningless topic since the hairs weren't mentioned in any court records, but now that I produced those court records, now what do you say? Seriously, the Italian cops focused in on two African suspects within the first 8 days of the murder, so if not the found African hairs, then how else can that be explained?

It certainly wasn't because of anything Alessandra Formica may have witnessed since she didn't come forward until November 12th (and likely she wouldn't have even called the cops about it prior to Nov 10th), and by Nov 10th Mignini had already announced that they were looking for a 2nd African perp:




The palm prints found on Meredith's pillow weren't matched to the prints in Guede's immigration papers until shortly before Nov 16th, so the cops had used his palm prints to only CONFIRM that Guede was their perp.

The way this entire case unfolded doesn't make any sense unless Italian CSI had found the African hairs on either Nov 2nd or Nov 3rd, and also immediately had recognized the importance of those hairs to the murder investigation.

Why are so many of the regulars here resistant to recognizing the obvious about those African hairs found at the crime scene?

I realize that we've all been bashing Italian CSI for years now, but that doesn't mean that there weren't a few experienced Italian CSI on the scene in those first few days.

Looking for hairs & fibers is one of the first few things that CSI are trained to do at a crime scene, and maybe, just maybe, a few Italian CSI had properly done their jobs that day?

Either way, Stefanoni still belongs in jail!

Ken,
Stop putting words in my mouth because that ISN'T what I said. I said, that we don't know for sure if it was hairs that made the police look for a suspect of African descent.

While I appreciate your passion and your interest, most of these points have been argued hundreeds of times already. You are certainly free to discuss them, but the fact is you are a little late for this party. For most of us, we are already trying to recover from the soiree. In fact, we are past the hangover stage.

 

[acbytesla]

Now that Ken has disclosed this top-secret information about the FOA, I must warn all the members of FOA that my "suggestions" really are "orders" after all. However, to maintain the FOA cover-story, FOA members are ordered to treat these "orders" as "suggestions".

Im still waiting for my damn check. Hell, I never ever got a ride on the PR yacht.