Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[js202]

Beautiful.

After weathering so much partisan bloviating, it was a pleasure to read something so succinct. Perfect summary.

Agonal respiration, indeed. A brutally beautiful term, that.

The great Yale critic Harold Bloom has a near fetishistic fascination with the term agon, as he utilizes it as the foundation stone of his theory of creative influence. Bloom purposes it powerfully as a struggle or contest in which the ephebe, or young poet, must either over-go his predecessor, or merely imitate and thus drift into obscurity.

The jury is still out on this figure as it pertains to my professional life, but, at least in terms of the struggle to see true justice done in the case of Meredith Kercher, when our own time to emit agonal respiration comes, I and every other sentient being who saw through the audacious stupidity emitted by the likes of Mignini, Maresca, and Machiavelli, can also emit a sigh of relief.

 

[Kauffer]

Fact remains, Mez snubbed Amanda on halloween, and Amanda's self-described, "Nazi within" kicked in.

No dear, there was no snub. Remember, the text messages which revealed the snub do not exist. It was aaaalll in your imagination.

 

[bagels]

FIFY

I've addressed this before. If they're guilty they inadvertently pulled off the perfect murder without trying, while engaging in non sequitur behavior seemingly at random, and having the results pile up into compounding improbabilities, like hitting a hole in one over and over again. If such is the case, there's really nothing to be done. It's kind of like if 911 really was magically an inside job, they got away with it and the world is going to continue on as if it were a series of Islamic extremists attacks, so there's no point in getting all wrapped up in conspiracy theories.

 

[Vixen]

You are ALWAYS WRONG
And yet you insist upon making predictions.
Failure to understand the motivation for you is coupled with failed predictions,
ALWAYS
It will become worse for you when the ECHR throws everything out: As these judges would have if they could, but they could not: To many idiots blundered before them.
But they got it right.

Analemma you are fast becoming my favourite poster. There is a naive charm about your posts, matched only by the graffiti in the Ladies toilets in Camden Town. ("This is where **** happens.")

It might have escaped you but the issue of calunnia is res judicata, which means legally decided and can be decided no more. Bruno-Marasca did throw out the aggravated part of calunnia "because of guilt in the murder".

In addition, your heroine is now currently undergoing a repeat offence of calunnia. How will that look to the ECHR?

As Oscar Wilde said, or was it Karl Marx, "Once in history is a tragedy, twice is a farce" and "to lose your wife once is unfortunate, but twice is carelessness".

So don't stock up on the ECHR popcorn just yet.

Will it be an open court? If so, I might hop on a train to Brussels (?) to watch that.

 

[Mr Fied]

Didn't we have a virtual bet that the pair would not be declared, "innocent"? Or was that your US doppfelganger?

They were charged with murder, they have been found not guilty, they are therefore innocent.

So says your translation, which is about as reliable as a Tricky Dicky categorical denial.

According to you, the translation you have read basically says they are guilty.

The translation we have read says they are not.

The pair are not in prison and are free to carry on with their lives.

Guess which translation I believe is true.

Only a guilty person would consider it a great victory they are free, even though they were condemned in perpetuity as probably guilty. Suppose you were genuinely wrongfully convicted. Would you feel "grateful" to have that hovering over your head?

No, you would not rest.

Did you see the footage when the Birmingham 6 were released?

I think they considered the overturning of their wrongful conviction a great victory.

 

[Mike1711]

We can now read in English what has been available to Italians since Sept 7 - the reasons why the Marasca-Bruno court annuled the Nencini convictions.

This is diametrically opposed to what you have been saying - in content - for five years. Agreed, this is not about you, it is about your opinions. Opinions which you are propagating on an English service which will do no good - that I can see - to the result you wish to achieve - unless the result is the slander you post.

It was obvious that Machiavelli was distorting the truth. His commentary, were it true, would reflect an astoundingly stupid court. ...and by this I don't mean within the realms of even the lowest of human illtelligence. It would mean the Marasca court would place literal truth to the the anecdotal saying that the law is an ass.

 

[Kauffer]

Analemma you are fast becoming my favourite poster. There is a naive charm about your posts, matched only by the graffiti in the Ladies toilets in Camden Town. ("This is where **** happens.")

It might have escaped you but the issue of calunnia is res judicata, which means legally decided and can be decided no more. Bruno-Marasca did throw out the aggravated part of calunnia "because of guilt in the murder".

In addition, your heroine is now currently undergoing a repeat offence of calunnia. How will that look to the ECHR?

As Oscar Wilde said, or was it Karl Marx, "Once in history is a tragedy, twice is a farce" and "to lose your wife once is unfortunate, but twice is carelessness".

So don't stock up on the ECHR popcorn just yet.

Will it be an open court? If so, I might hop on a train to Brussels (?) to watch that.

The issue of res judicata in Italy in relation to ECHR findings of Art 6 human rights violations was adjudicated some years ago. As a result and constitutionally at that, an ECHR finding trumps an Italian court decision. Res judicata is set aside. The current callunia trial, which will never be completed, is simply more grist to Amanda's mill. Where else in the world can a defendant be indicted for offering a defence on the witness stand alleging an assault, such an allegation, of course, which was never investigated?

The matter is not complex, though seemingly not understood by the Italian Supreme court - lawyerless statements cannot be used to convict. This includes verbal and written statements and takes in Mignini's interview with Amanda and the 1st memoriale. This is Italian law!

 

[Vixen]

I've addressed this before. If they're guilty they inadvertently pulled off the perfect murder without trying, while engaging in non sequitur behavior seemingly at random, and having the results pile up into compounding improbabilities, like hitting a hole in one over and over again. If such is the case, there's really nothing to be done. It's kind of like if 911 really was magically an inside job, they got away with it and the world is going to continue on as if it were a series of Islamic extremists attacks, so there's no point in getting all wrapped up in conspiracy theories.

You're Dave Spart of PRIVATE EYE and I claim my £5.

 

[Mr Fied]

Fact remains, Mez snubbed Amanda on halloween, and Amanda's self-described, "Nazi within" kicked in.

The Texts on Halloween

Amanda: 19:59:39 Che fai stasera? Vuoi incontrare? Hai un costume?
Hardly begging is it?

Amanda asking Meredith if she would like to come out with her if she has nothing planned.

Meredith: 20:04:53 Si ho un ma devo andare a casa di una amica per cena.che cosa e tuo programma? x She already has plans for dinner. Not really a snub is it?

Amanda: 20:06:51 Vado alle chic per un po e dopo. chi sa? Forse ci vediamo? Mi chlama.
Plus, as you have now admitted, Amanda didn't bombard Meredith with texts pestering her to go out with her.

 

[Mike1711]

You are probably right. But it doesn't really matter.

Machiavelli suggests that the present ruling opens the door for civil litigation. But even if that were so it is highly unlikely there will be any.

The only people with standing are the Kerchers. Their own scumbag lawyer has said it is over. I'm guessing that he took this case on a contingency basis. If there was really a chance to still make money on this case do we really think he would abandon it? I don't.

Imagine if he has been billing the Kerchers all this time. Does anyone think that the Kerchers would want to throw good money after bad?

I'm convinced that these absurd objections and bizarre and twisted translations of the motivation is much much more about the nut jobs justifying and rationalizing their own disgusting behavior over the last 8 years.

They simply cannot accept the fact that they were wrong. Terribly wrong.

Imagine that you had just spent years villifying and writing horrible things about 2 good kids. Some of the things these people wrote are beyond disgusting. There have been in fact many veiled death threats.

No one thinks that they themselves are horrible people. Believe it or not, even many serial killers refuse to believe that about themselves.

If Amanda and Raffaele were truly innocent, what does that say about the guilters behavior?

For this sake, to them Amanda and Raffaele must be guilty. Otherwise they would have to take a long look in the mirror and they might not like what they see,

The doors of the courts are always open for civil litigation. Only a fool would enter through the door with a case so shaky as to be non-existent.

There will be no civil case, because I don't believe such a total fool exists on this planet to attempt a case that is utterly dead in the water.

 

[Grinder]

The Texts on Halloween

Amanda: 19:59:39 Che fai stasera? Vuoi incontrare? Hai un costume?
Hardly begging is it?

Amanda asking Meredith if she would like to come out with her if she has nothing planned.

Meredith: 20:04:53 Si ho un ma devo andare a casa di una amica per cena.che cosa e tuo programma? x She already has plans for dinner. Not really a snub is it?

Amanda: 20:06:51 Vado alle chic per un po e dopo. chi sa? Forse ci vediamo? Mi chlama.
Plus, as you have now admitted, Amanda didn't bombard Meredith with texts pestering her to go out with her.

Just out of pure curiosity, where did the content of the texts come from? Did Amanda leave both outgoing and incoming on her phone or did Meredith leave Amanda's incoming on her phone?

 

[Mr Fied]

Just out of pure curiosity, where did the content of the texts come from? Did Amanda leave both outgoing and incoming on her phone or did Meredith leave Amanda's incoming on her phone?

I don't know if the content was from the phones or the service provider.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Amanda-Knox-Text-Messages.pdf

 

[Grinder]

I don't know if the content was from the phones or the service provider.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Amanda-Knox-Text-Messages.pdf

Way back there was an extensive discussion about text messages and IIRC it was concluded that the carriers at that time in Italy didn't archive messages at all. If they did archive them, even for a few days, the PLE would have had both ends of the Patrick messages immediately.

Perhaps one of the text message mavens will chime in, Anglo?

 

[Mike1711]

One could equally note that it is diametrically opposed to what the pro-Knoxes have been saying for years.
But all this is not interesting. My first post today was a fact about the law. The rest is the result of an immediate diversion by the pro-Knoxes, who react by steering and directing the discussion on the poster immediately. My responses to comments against me will be shooting aimed at your object of worship, by pointing out facts, this ruffs your feathers and you begin with this hysterical stuff.

Would it not be more appropriate for you to point out the legal contravention of the Judges in the BM case to the relevant Italian authority, have the verdict declared invalid and the appeal reheard?

Why whinge about it on this forum, where you obviously experience accusations of being a spoilt brat loser when in fact you may well have the ace up your sleeve.

Personally, I think you are talking through your hat, but then I don't speak Italian so what do I know?

 

[Mr Fied]

Way back there was an extensive discussion about text messages and IIRC it was concluded that the carriers at that time in Italy didn't archive messages at all. If they did archive them, even for a few days, the PLE would have had both ends of the Patrick messages immediately.

Perhaps one of the text message mavens will chime in, Anglo?

If you look at page 2 of the pdf, it says from the memory of the phone. So I assume this was Amanda's phone.

 

[Grinder]

If you look at page 2 of the pdf, it says from the memory of the phone. So I assume this was Amanda's phone.

This should get Anglo going as he always theorized that the police deleted the incoming text from Patrick.

 

[Mike1711]

The calunnia verdict cannot be annulled and will never be neither annulled nor reversed.

Your record in this case is astoundingly bad. what makes me think you are wrong once more?

 

[Grinder]

Has the ECHR ever reversed a calunnia conviction from Italy?

Are there examples of other ISC reports reversing a guilty verdict or upholding a not guilty verdict using paragraph 2.

No one has explained why this SC section used paragraph 2 instead of 1 if they wanted to send a pure innocent verdict.

Obviously the not guilty verdict troubles the PGP and the loose ends should trouble the PIP. Not surprisingly this verdict will not satisfy either side completely.

 

[Mr Fied]

This should get Anglo going as he always theorized that the police deleted the incoming text from Patrick.

Oh no. I don't want to start another argument

 

[acbytesla]

Marasca also seemed to take a swipe at Nencini, that perhaps was not all together deserved.

He said something akin to Nencini being mistaken that the ISC in 2013 had, in effect, ordered him to convicte at he Florence, second 2nd-grade trial. However, even if the ISC had ordered this, Nencini had no right to invent and/or skew evidence to manufacture a guilt-narrative.

Many offered the opinion that the ISC in 2013 had, in fact, ordered a conviction and that the fix was in. The very best advice people could, then, offer Raffaele was to get out of Italy.

So which was it? That the ISC had, in fact, ordered a conviction..... or did Nencini invent and/or skew evidence by his onsey?

It's not one or the other it was both. Still Nencini had no moral or intellectual business doing it.