Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[acbytesla]

Yes the civil parties that were in the case tied to the murder case did not win. But as usual you missed the point. You stated that a not guilty verdict is equal to exoneration yet O.J. was found not guilty and then was found responsible for the murders in another trial.

We don't know if new suits can be filed as Mach maintains. We know other related cases have proceeded. Could the Kerchers sue for their loss in England? If UK allows it the para 2 verdict would not a finding of exoneration.

Now you're just screwing with me. We do know that. It's over.

 

[Planigale]

Wrong. It is a hard scientific fact that Mez' blood was trailed into Filomena's room by Amanda from (a) the luminol and (b) the mixed Amanda/Mez DNA.

We can assume that for Amanda to trail blood, she must have been there whilst Mez was dead or dying and her blood had not yet dried. There is no DNA trace of Rudy in the room.

If Rudy was in there earlier, as he claims, looking out of Filomena's window, then it's clear he wasn't leaking any DNA in order to do so. Fingerprints fade after about 24 hours. Those that have been in contact with the greasy sebacious layers of the skin will "stick" longer. Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids.

Amanda left a LOT of DNA on that specific night (this we know, for Mez' prolific DNA shedding from her fatal injuries, was not a normal every day domestic condition and it mixed with Amanda's bloodshed).

Oh dear! First Mach now Vixen. If you do not know what DNA is why should we pay any attention to yours views on it? Actually DNA is very sticky, this is what make phlegm (the green stuff you cough up when you have a chest infection) thick and sticky.

How many false statements can be crammed into a short post? There is no way that the time of DNA deposition can be known. The only spot of Knox's blood was on the bathroom tap. If you think a history of cleaning a bathroom means students will have cleaned every last spot in a bathroom you have never lived in a shared flat. The spot of Knox's blood was not mixed with Kercher's DNA.

 

[whoanellie]

DNA, being a protein

More self-parody?

 

[Grinder]

Once again, you're picking at the wrong issue. Acquittals are not designed to give, "clear verdict(s) of innocence."

Well Bill actually the Italians do give that option. Perhaps you haven't bothered to read 530 - you should give it a whirl.

Cheli's point is one that is (apparently) well known in Italy and it is very different from the way you're trying to spin it - .... but it has nothing to do with anything which can be derived legally; it has to do with semi-official chatter/speculation about what judges are trying to signal. There's even dispute in Italy whether or not that is a legitimate pasttime!

How could I possibly dispute your knowledge of the Italian culture. I guess I just will. The court has the tool to say definitely innocent or not guilty cause the evidence isn't strong enough BARD and that's what M&B.

It has to do with how some in Italy, including judges themselves apparently, go to some dietrological level of what is appeared to be "signalled" in a judgement.

No it has to do with their choice of levels of not guilty. You clearly would prefer that para 1 didn't exist but it does.

The conversation around the Knox/Sollecito exonerations about this is that Marasca/Bruno were "signalling" that they were departing from the "dice-roll" method of judicial rendering. They were going to rule on the evidence, not on the reputations of previous courts or on previous judicial truths.

Look squirrel!

Indeed, with that other case where the ISC overturned acquittals to convict, some commentators cited that as a return to the dice-roll of Italian jurisprudence, and specifically cited that it reversed the Marasca/Bruno panel's signalling of ruling solely on the evidence and the law.

Look another squirrel.

Dude - I believe you are misreading Cheli. But then again, this whole thing is rather moot - you still have not stated what the difference is in any "what's next" process between the two.

Well for one thing people around the world point to the verdict and say "well they didn't find them innocent, just lucky the Italians are so dumb." Cheli is easy to understand - because it was a two the report would not be a clear cut one of innocence.

Vixen is clear - the "what's next" for a #2 is that the charges remain open, they've just been dropped. What then IS the difference in remedy? Unless you can come up with one, for me it's picking gnat-pooh from pepper.

The last refuge of a scoundrel apparently is gnat-pooh. Just because the future legal prospects may well be the same at least on the criminal side it is specious to say there is no difference. It's like saying a 90% and a 100% on a test is the same thing because they are both A's. I can tell you getting a test perfect is not the same as 9/10 perfect.

Here we had a case in which a college student stabbed another and was charged with assault. He was found not guilty because it was in self defense which made a difference in two regards. He was compensated for legal costs and the public has come out strongly in his favor.

No one here on the PIP side knows if the 2 will reduce Italian compensation but it is clear to me that it has left open for doubt what happened.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen,
OK, this makes sense. Yeah I myself was wondering why Dr. Gill did not randomly show up in court one day, walk up to the stand, and begin testifying. Strange that he did not fly out to Italy for such a thing. I wonder if the other professors and experts with Ph.D.'s who testified on behalf of the defense played a role. Do you think every expert in the world should have showed up in court to support the defense (whether invited or not) or else that completely discredits the defense? I can see your rationale here Vixen. May be perplexing to some, but those people don't truly understand what lies beneath the surface of this conspiracy. Although I wonder how every genetics expert on the planet could fit into a single courtroom.... Ah, irrelevant details though.

I agree Gill should feel ashamed to be one of the founding fathers of the field of forensic genetics. And now he has to resort to publishing a paper in the top journal in the world in his field. What a buffoon! If only he would see the obv truth of Amanda's witchcraft his career would be saved. The only way to get ahead professionally is to support conspiracy theories these days.

Oh yes, got a cite on Maori's possible corruption charges? Not that I believe you just made it up... it's just that with a lot of these accusations some seriously mentally ill people like to trot out "possible charges" against professionals on the pro-innocence side (Peter Quennell comes to mind. Maybe some people who post here as well) when the stories are entirely in their heads. The reason they do this is called psychological projection -- a number of people on the prosecution's side have been formally silenced and reprimanded for corruption proving it is their side who is corrupt. So some less mentally healthy people on the pro-guilt side have to compensate by making up "formal charges of corruption" to maintain their veneer of sanity. Their mind can't handle the fact they are the bad guys in all this, and perhaps they aren't intelligent enough to rationally analyze evidence that clearly points to the innocence of Amanda and Raffaele.

Again, not saying you just entirely made up this accusation against Maori. Someone with your pedigree in chess (beating national champions) and professional level understanding of advanced topics in accounting, law, game theory, and probability certainly is smart enough to tell good sources from bad.

So anyway, got that cite? I would just like to glance it over.

Here you go. I look forward to your apology and retraction of your stream of invective, if you have any grace.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...ini-against-Lagana-Maori-translation-TJMK.pdf

 

[acbytesla]

Here you go. I look forward to your apology and retraction of your stream of invective, if you have any grace.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...ini-against-Lagana-Maori-translation-TJMK.pdf

You can't be serious using a guilter website as a source.

 

[Vixen]

Oh dear! First Mach now Vixen. If you do not know what DNA is why should we pay any attention to yours views on it? Actually DNA is very sticky, this is what make phlegm (the green stuff you cough up when you have a chest infection) thick and sticky.

How many false statements can be crammed into a short post? There is no way that the time of DNA deposition can be known. The only spot of Knox's blood was on the bathroom tap. If you think a history of cleaning a bathroom means students will have cleaned every last spot in a bathroom you have never lived in a shared flat. The spot of Knox's blood was not mixed with Kercher's DNA.

Nicely sidestepped.

For the umpty-ninth time:

A mixture of the two women's DNA (probably mixed blood) was found in three places: on the cotton bud box, the side of basin, and the bidet.

The mixed traces are probably mixed blood because of the similar heights of the DNA peaks attributable to Meredith and Knox. White blood cells are rich in DNA and a large amount usually indicates ample blood, especially as we can see the blood with our naked eye.

Some of Amanda's DNA was more copious than Mez' indicating Amanda bled quite a lot. The same time as Mez.

 

[bagels]

Nicely sidestepped.

For the umpty-ninth time:

A mixture of the two women's DNA (probably mixed blood) was found in three places: on the cotton bud box, the side of basin, and the bidet.

The mixed traces are probably mixed blood because of the similar heights of the DNA peaks attributable to Meredith and Knox. White blood cells are rich in DNA and a large amount usually indicates ample blood, especially as we can see the blood with our naked eye.

Some of Amanda's DNA was more copious than Mez' indicating Amanda bled quite a lot. The same time as Mez.

Vixen, the issue is unless Amanda had sudden onset stigmata, she had no wounds from which to bleed. She was surrounded and in the presence of cops for practically every hour after the murder. None of them noticed any wounds. She was stripped searched upon entering prison and examined by the medical examiner. He saw nothing to indicate a physical altercation.

These are just the hard facts. The junior college technician, when she wasn't suppressing results or destroying evidence, couldn't do anything to change that.

 

[Vixen]

Reference please.

The reference is myself. I can't help being better informed than you.

 

[LondonJohn]

While I have great respect for your science comments you seem unable to understand this law. I've posted the law before and told you para 1 includes no crime (i.e. there was no rape) or the defendants did not commit the crime, which would be an exoneration. Para 2 says the evidence wasn't sufficient or had conflicts.

Art . 530. Judgment of acquittal .
1. If the crime does not exist , if the accused does not have it
committed , if the offense is not or is not
required by law as a crime or if the offense is
He has been committed by a person not due or not
punishable for another reason , the judge ruling
acquittal containing the reason
device.
2. The court ruling of acquittal also
when there is insufficient or contradictory
proof that the thing certain , that the defendant has
It committed , that the action constitutes a criminal offense or the offense
He was committed by the person responsible.
3. If there is evidence that the act was committed in
presence of a justification or a cause
staff of non-punishment or there is doubt
the existence of the same, the judge ruling
acquittal pursuant to paragraph 1 .​

http://www.legislationline.org/documents/section/criminal-codes

Do you have a different version of 530?

I certainly have a proper translation of 530 which is not cut-and-paste Google Translate.....

1) You are simply wrong in your interpretation of 530.1 and 530.2 (specifically you are wrong in your interpretation of 530.2)

2) Do you know who Luca Cheli is, and what he does for a living?

3) Do you think that any American automatically has the ability to parse and interpret US codes of criminal procedure?

4) Oh and you were - and remain - wrong on Miranda only ever applying to persons who've been arrested (you seem unable or unwilling to understand the concept of being interviewed under caution in a police station....).


But it's simply not worth arguing with you at this point. Have a nice day

 

[NotEvenWrong]

It's such a shame Dr Gill didn't pop up during the trial so he could put his expertise forward personally. What a waste of an illustrious career that it should end in the ignominy of writing a paper based on the legally discredited fraudulent report written by Vecchiotti and Conti, of whom the attorney they consorted with, Maori, is now facing possible corruption charges for having done so.

It's a shocking faux pas.

Here you go. I look forward to your apology and retraction of your stream of invective, if you have any grace.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...ini-against-Lagana-Maori-translation-TJMK.pdf

Just so we are clear, Vixen, your claim was that Maori is facing possible corruption charges for consorting with Vecchiotti and Conti. I searched the document you linked to from your guilter website and neither of the names Vecchiotti nor Conti appear.

But it is interesting to note that the document you linked does show how corrupt Mignini and his cohorts are -- they bully anyone who stands in their way by suing them. Even defense attorneys who are defending their innocent clients. Class act, that Mignini. You can't make this stuff up.

By the way, what does this have to do with Peter Gill and Forensic Science International? You aren't trying to misdirect again with complete nonsense, are you? Did you have any actual evidence that the top Forensic Science Journal in the world has fallen victim to the Amanda Knox PR campaign?

 

[LondonJohn]

Assuming the scientist has all the samples well organized and documented and isn't trying to pass off different samples from different sources.

And assuming that the samples were collected in the first place in a proper manner, with no chance of cross-contamination, smearing of samples from different places, grossly poor working practices.....

OOOOOPS!!!! Chalk another abject incompetent failure up for not-a-real-doctor Stefanoni!

 

[acbytesla]

Nicely sidestepped.

For the umpty-ninth time:

A mixture of the two women's DNA (probably mixed blood) was found in three places: on the cotton bud box, the side of basin, and the bidet.

The mixed traces are probably mixed blood because of the similar heights of the DNA peaks attributable to Meredith and Knox. White blood cells are rich in DNA and a large amount usually indicates ample blood, especially as we can see the blood with our naked eye.

Some of Amanda's DNA was more copious than Mez' indicating Amanda bled quite a lot. The same time as Mez.

Again, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Your suggestion that it is blood is of course wild nonsense as is pretty much every single scientific claim you make. The ONLY thing you can claim with any degree of accuracy is that both Amanda's and Meredith's DNA was found in the home where both of them lived.

That is all.

SO QUIT LYING!

 

[NotEvenWrong]

I've honestly never seen someone so incapable of understanding documents they read. Particularly when they link to them (on their own biased websites) themselves to support whatever nonsense they are trying to pass as an argument.

Then she has the nerve to ask for an apology. As if asking for a source from someone who has never told the truth in her entire life is some huge insult. It tickles me that someone like this actually exists.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, the issue is unless Amanda had sudden onset stigmata, she had no wounds from which to bleed. She was surrounded and in the presence of cops for practically every hour after the murder. None of them noticed any wounds. She was stripped searched upon entering prison and examined by the medical examiner. He saw nothing to indicate a physical altercation.

These are just the hard facts. The junior college technician, when she wasn't suppressing results or destroying evidence, couldn't do anything to change that.

Amanda herself said her earlobe was bleeding and indeed one of her eight (???) earrings looked like it had been ripped off. It could have been a nose bleed from a well-placed blow. Most likely it was from the scratch in the neck.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Vixen,
The way they doctored the contrast on that picture that mark on her neck is probably a very old scar. Look at how far they altered the brightness. Not that this won't stop you from posting that exact same picture in the future for your campaign of lies, but there you go.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Deleted

 

[LondonJohn]

Just so we are clear, Vixen, your claim was that Maori is facing possible corruption charges for consorting with Vecchiotti and Conti. I searched the document you linked to from your guilter website and neither of the names Vecchiotti nor Conti appear.

But it is interesting to note that the document you linked does show how corrupt Mignini and his cohorts are -- they bully anyone who stands in their way by suing them. Even defense attorneys who are defending their innocent clients. Class act, that Mignini. You can't make this stuff up.

By the way, what does this have to do with Peter Gill and Forensic Science International? You aren't trying to misdirect again with complete nonsense, are you? Did you have any actual evidence that the top Forensic Science Journal in the world has fallen victim to the Amanda Knox PR campaign?

And by extension, the other dreadful thing it exposes is that way that egotistical bullies such as Mignini are protected by the system, in that their accountability is far below acceptable standards and their power is wholly disproportionate and improper. Which is exactly the environment in which egotistical bullies such as Mignini are formed and developed. So I suppose there's possibly a heavy "chicken and egg" element at play here.

I wonder if a strongly-worded ECHR verdict would have any significant effect upon Mignini (and upon certain Perugia State Police officers)? Obviously in a properly-functioning system, there would be major repercussions. But Italy is so broken, corrupt and self-serving that one can be far from confident that anything significant would happen.

Weirdly, I happened to flick the TV past National Geographic Channel the other day and it was coming to the end of an episode of Air Crash Investigations (known as "Mayday" in the US and Canada I believe). The episode in question (which I'd seen before a long time previously) dealt with the Italy air accident which was almost certainly (with international expert analysis) caused by an explosive device aboard the aircraft, but which the Italian state investigators and Italian courts - up to and including the Supreme Court - ruled was caused by a missile strike. A renowned aircraft industry journalist speaking on the programme stated that the whole Italian air accident investigation system was broken and unfit for purpose, and that the Italian courts were useless and counterproductive in terms of trying to get to the truth, apportion proper blame, and take remedial steps. The resonance with the way Italian law enforcement agencies and courts acted in respect of the Knox/Sollecito case was marked. Italy's basic apparatus of state investigation and state justice is simply broken. The country's a joke.

(As a coda, I also worked alongside a major US venture capital outfit several years ago, and an MD told me that his firm had instituted a blanket block on doing business in Italy (and a limited block on business in Spain) on account of the inability to get honest data and the inability of Italian courts to resolve business/contract disputes on a fair, level playing field. So many aspects of Italy are a disgraceful joke.)

 

[Vixen]

Just so we are clear, Vixen, your claim was that Maori is facing possible corruption charges for consorting with Vecchiotti and Conti. I searched the document you linked to from your guilter website and neither of the names Vecchiotti nor Conti appear.

But it is interesting to note that the document you linked does show how corrupt Mignini and his cohorts are -- they bully anyone who stands in their way by suing them. Even defense attorneys who are defending their innocent clients. Class act, that Mignini. You can't make this stuff up.

By the way, what does this have to do with Peter Gill and Forensic Science International? You aren't trying to misdirect again with complete nonsense, are you? Did you have any actual evidence that the top Forensic Science Journal in the world has fallen victim to the Amanda Knox PR campaign?

You are determined to be obtuse. What does the following para say?

In the course
of the proceedings there had been two experts nominated [by
the Court] who, amongst other things, had submitted their
report ignoring the documents attesting to the negative result
of controls on the presumed contamination of the knife and of
the bra-clasp, documents adduced instead by the Public
Prosecutor. This would have entailed the sweeping away of
[=the complete rejection of] the same expert report but the
Court, presided by Pratillo Hellmann, with Advisor-Recorder
Dr Massimo Zanetti, had ignored the grave error committed by
the experts, an error which had been severely censured by the
Court of Cassation, First Criminal Chamber, in the decision
handed down on 26 March 2013 no. 26455/13



Hello? The "experts" refer to Vecchiotti and Conti, whose very "gravely erroneous report" which had been "severely censured" by the Chieffi Supreme court, formed the basis of Dr Gill's latest paper.

Do try to keep track!

 

[Vixen]

Vixen,
The way they doctored the contrast on that picture that mark on her neck is probably a very old scar. Look at how far they altered the brightness. Not that this won't stop you from posting that exact same picture in the future for your campaign of lies, but there you go.

Amanda herself said it was a recent hickey given her by lover boy Raff. It is a police picture. It is entirely bonkers to claim "the police doctored the contrast".

Sheesh.