Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

You and Machiavelli say all this is what makes the Bruno-Marasca findings illegal and contradictory. Yet you don't say why claiming "washing Mez's blood off her hands" is part of that. Is M/B only contradictory on the points you wish it to be?

Truth is, M/B is only fuzzy on those points where Supreme Court Sections try not to conflict with one another.

Truth is - the "she washed Mez's blood from her hands," implies Knox's own blood was found mixed with Kercher's. There was no mixed blood. I posted upthread Stefanoni's own words wherr she told the Massei court that her forensic protocols, as sloppy as they were, do not discover mixed blood.

None of either Knox's or Kercher's blood were found on Knox nor was Knox's blood found on Kercher. Therefore the M/B court did the best they could do - they acquitted because the whole evidentiary framework used to covict the pair was bogus.

They did this a year ago. Right now it is only you, Machiavelli and Tudy Guede claiming otherwise. Has Rudy's claims on RAI3 blown the lid off this conspiracy? Are Hellmann and Bruno and Marasca and Vecchiotti now under arrest?

No. Mignini has been censured by his peers and Knox has been acquitted of defamation against those who hit her at interrogation. It is clear how this is playing out in Italy.

The blood on the tap/faucet is Amanda's. Amanda confirmed she was bleeding. Blood was found on Raff's underpants. All of this is prima facie evidence Amanda was bleeding. There are five samples of mixed DNA, some of which shows more Amanda DNA than Mez'. For this to happen, given how heavily Mez was bleeding, entails that at that point, Amanda's white blood cell DNA must have overridden Mez'. One was as a footprint, leaving a speck of blood on Filomena's floor. If the Amanda DNA was from saliva, it would have needed to be copious and for Amanda to have spat on exactly the same spot as Mez' blood, and at a similar level of moistness, for it to mix. Blood coagulates very quickly, thanks to the red blood cell platelets and plasma.

Chieffi court sent back very specific points for Nencini to reevaluate. All other points were upheld and final.

The Nencini court found that Amanda's DNA was near the knife hilt, to add to the DNA of Mez found on the blade. Stefanoni found twelve bits of tissue on the blade which were of human origin. It was a stroke of good detective work to be able to amplify one of them to get a full DNA profile of Mez, and as agreed by all parties.

However, the DNA and blood alone were not what proved the kids were guilty, it was the evidence as a whole.

No-one put forward any evidence of contamination. No evidence was heard that the press unduly influenced Massei or Nencini. There was no evidence the investigation was "fatally flawed".

Bruno-Marasca's verdict was totally egregious and they were forced to do an almost 180 degree turnaround in the MR as it simply did not add up, and could not be signed off.

 

[acbytesla]

Even one of your favorites here only says the prosecution didn't present evidence to convict BARD. You don't KNOW she wasn't involved.

That's their and your opinion. But yes I do KNOW they didn't do it. It goes far beyond reasonable doubt. I know it as I know anything that I'm 99.9 percent sure of.

There is NO physical evidence linking Amanda to the murder. None.
There is no trail of communications between Rudy and Amanda/Raffaele
The evidence points toward a 9 to 9:30 time of death.
There is evidence that they were at Raffaele's apartment at 9:23
There is no evidence of motive or violent pathology.
There are images of Rudy approaching the cottage that evening and none of Raffaele/Amanda.
Then there are Rudy's first Skype statements.

I'm sure.

Is there some 1 in 10,000 chance that I'm wrong? Maybe.
But if God himself allowed me to wager my life against a million dollars on right wrong prop bet I'd jump on it.

 

[Vixen]

Why does it make any difference if "Mez" (Kercher) was "funny, beautiful"? Is that somehow important in the whole vindictiveness narrative?

Amanda's own audacious description of Mez, in her email to the world.

 

[acbytesla]

Amanda's own audacious description of Mez, in her email to the world.

That didn't answer LJ's questiin.

 

[Vixen]

That didn't answer LJ's questiin.

Back at you. Why would Amanda describe the person whose blood she washed her hands of, and did nothing to help, in those glowing terms except sarcastically and vindictively? It betrays her envy of Mez.

 

[Desert Fox]

Even one of your favorites here only says the prosecution didn't present evidence to convict BARD. You don't KNOW she wasn't involved.

I am also not sure that I am not a brain in a vat however I am basically as certain as I humanly can be that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not involved in Meredith Kercher's murder.

 

[Bill Williams]

Why does it make any difference if "Mez" (Kercher) was "funny, beautiful"? Is that somehow important in the whole vindictiveness narrative?

Amanda's own audacious description of Mez, in her email to the world.

Nothing betrays your confirmation biased, "up" is "down" and "left" is "right" world as this response to LondonJohn.

 

[Grinder]

That's their and your opinion. But yes I do KNOW they didn't do it. It goes far beyond reasonable doubt. I know it as I know anything that I'm 99.9 percent sure of.

There is NO physical evidence linking Amanda to the murder. None.
There is no trail of communications between Rudy and Amanda/Raffaele
The evidence points toward a 9 to 9:30 time of death.
There is evidence that they were at Raffaele's apartment at 9:23
There is no evidence of motive or violent pathology.
There are images of Rudy approaching the cottage that evening and none of Raffaele/Amanda.
Then there are Rudy's first Skype statements.

There is no evidence "they" were at Raf's at 9:23. Motive and violent pathology do not enter into proving innocence. Rudi said in his Skype that a man (Raf) murdered Meredith which wouldn't have necessitated any contact before or after. There are pieces of evidence that could link Raf including the bra and the bath mat. I don't think the bath mat can be matched to him but it is possible it was his.

So you disagree with those that say a para 1 was impossible?

 

[acbytesla]

Back at you. Why would Amanda describe the person whose blood she washed her hands of, and did nothing to help, in those glowing terms except sarcastically and vindictively? It betrays her envy of Mez.

She didn't.

 

[Grinder]

Back at you. Why would Amanda describe the person whose blood she washed her hands of, and did nothing to help, in those glowing terms except sarcastically and vindictively? It betrays her envy of Mez.

It is so disgusting of a topic. `Amanda had done much more than Meredith. Amanda played musical instruments, rock climbed, played soccer, held several jobs, was never charged with public intoxication and didn't have a boy friend that looked like a thug with giant ear holes that grew pot in the basement putting all residents at risk. Meredith ran around with a bunch of unattractive british birds that got so drunk they couldn't walk.

Meredith and Amanda were more alike than different. Neither was exceptional just normal college students having fun in Italy. Why do you PGP insist on sanctifying Meredith and demonizing Amanda's life to date before the murder.

 

[Bill Williams]

The blood on the tap/faucet is Amanda's.

True

Amanda confirmed she was bleeding.

False. Knox wondered when she could have bled, if on spying it she was correct that it was her blood. At the time, she could not know it was her. She did not carry a portable blood/DNA analyzer with her.

Blood was found on Raff's underpants. All of this is prima facie evidence Amanda was bleeding.

On his underpants? Here we go again..... I hesitate to ask for a cite proving this, because you're just as likely to repost the pick of the window with the bars on it as proof!

There are five samples of mixed DNA, some of which shows more Amanda DNA than Mez'. For this to happen, given how heavily Mez was bleeding, entails that at that point, Amanda's white blood cell DNA must have overridden Mez'.

False. Even Stefanoni did not argue this at trial. What Massei (wrongly) concluded at the 2009 conviction was that Amanda's DNA must have come from sluffed-off skin cells. You are making all your claims up out of whole cloth.

One was as a footprint, leaving a speck of blood on Filomena's floor. If the Amanda DNA was from saliva, it would have needed to be copious and for Amanda to have spat on exactly the same spot as Mez' blood, and at a similar level of moistness, for it to mix.

False. None of this was argued at trial. You are making it up out of whole cloth.

Blood coagulates very quickly, thanks to the red blood cell platelets and plasma.

So then, why was not Knox's blood found in copious amounts on her own clothing or in the murder room? You are arguing against yourself here. Surely SOME of Knox's alleged blood fell where the victim's wasn't - rather than copious DNA being found in the very bathroom Knox had used for weeks.

Chieffi court sent back very specific points for Nencini to reevaluate.

The main ones of which Nencini did not evaluate. Chief among those was the motive - Chieffi said that the motive of "sex game gone wrong" was dismissed too easily by ALL the junior courts. Chieffi mentioned that as opne of the specific points to reevaluate.

Crini at the new appeals trial substituted his own "pooh in the toilet" motive with no reference at all to Chieffi's directive. After the verdict, Judge Nencini substituted his own "argument over rent money" motive - this was substituted by the convicting judge AFTER the trial was over, depriving the defendants opportunity to address it at trial.

All other points were upheld and final.

To which Marasca/Bruno ruled in March 2015, even if true Nencini should not have convicted.

The Nencini court found that Amanda's DNA was near the knife hilt, to add to the DNA of Mez found on the blade.

That tends to exonerate Knox. Imagine, a knife found at Raffaele's apartment, used for cooking, found with Knox's DNA on it, as she had cooked at his apartment. Also, of note is that none of Meredith's blood was found on the knife - even assuming the phantom striation in which it was allegedly found existed. No one else could even see the striation, and Stefanoni offered her, "the dog ate my homework" excuse by saying that one needed a special desk-lamp to see it.

Stefanoni found twelve bits of tissue on the blade which were of human origin. It was a stroke of good detective work to be able to amplify one of them to get a full DNA profile of Mez, and as agreed by all parties.

Bollocks.

However, the DNA and blood alone were not what proved the kids were guilty, it was the evidence as a whole.

No-one put forward any evidence of contamination.

No evidence of contamination is needed. What is needed is evidence that Stefanoni flowed anti-contamination protocols, none of which was forthcoming. Her lab was not equipped for LCN work, and she claimed that what should convict the two was LCN analysis.

No evidence was heard that the press unduly influenced Massei or Nencini. There was no evidence the investigation was "fatally flawed".

Except that this is exactly was Marasca-Bruno concluded.

Bruno-Marasca's verdict was totally egregious and they were forced to do an almost 180 degree turnaround in the MR as it simply did not add up, and could not be signed off.

Huh!? Oh, I see, this is your, "they wanted to convict but stubbornly refused to," theory.

Who "forced" them to do this? You ask for evidence of undue influence on Massei or Nencini, then trot out "forced" in relation to M/B as an accusation with not a shred of proof.

 

[Numbers]

The statements alleging that Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito are guilty of the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher fall into one or more of the following categories:

1. Outright falsehoods including distorted interpretations of allegedly incriminating evidence and misrepresentations of laws, court authority or court decisions.

2. Misleading statements, essentially, information that is true in some context but presented out of context so as to create a falsehood. Non-exhaustive examples include mistranslations of words using out-of-context alternative meanings and leaving out significant sections of a document such as a court decision in order to attribute a false meaning to the document.

These categories apply to the official statements of some of the Italian police and courts prior to and during the trials as well as to those who currently claim that Knox and Sollecito are guilty, even though they were definitively and finally acquitted March 27, 2015.

ETA: 3. The allegedly incriminating evidence itself upon objective examination is found in each case to be unreliable, based upon coercion, misrepresentation, and questionable methodology, including apparent failure to follow accepted protocols for collection and testing of DNA and other forensic evidence, and even apparent fraud in conducting tests that were not reported to the defense, followed by retests that were allegedly incriminating and were reported.

4. Claims, not supported by any evidence, by those supporting guilt, of misconduct by the acquitting courts or professional scientists who have questioned the validity or reliability of the allegedly incriminating evidence.

 

[Grinder]

I am also not sure that I am not a brain in a vat however I am basically as certain as I humanly can be that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not involved in Meredith Kercher's murder.

An illogical statement, as clearly you could be more certain if there was evidence of innocence versus lacking evidence of guilt. If a video surfaced today of Amanda and Raf in Raf's place from 9 to 12 pm would you be more sure?

 

[Bill Williams]

I am also not sure that I am not a brain in a vat however I am basically as certain as I humanly can be that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were not involved in Meredith Kercher's murder.

An illogical statement, as clearly you could be more certain if there was evidence of innocence versus lacking evidence of guilt. If a video surfaced today of Amanda and Raf in Raf's place from 9 to 12 pm would you be more sure?

That you folks have to redo the climate of 18th Century philosophy which led to Kant's, "I think therefore I am," says all us humble people way up in the bleachers need to hear.

Argue epistemology if you want. If a video surfaced of Amanda and Raf in Raf's place at that time, Vixen (or reasonable substitute) would argue it had been doctored. That's the issue.

For mercy's sake, Channel 5 did a demo of the climb in through Filomena's window, showing beyond doubt (in Euclidian space anyway) that the break-in was eminently doable. Does that mean the break-in actually happened? No it doesn't. Yet the whole "the break-in was staged" was predicated on some non-agile, senior detectives eyeballing the thing and dismissing the climb as undoable, rather than actually investigating that aspect of this.

The PGP response to Channel 5? The video was doctored. The producers were probably bribed, and will be sharing a cell with Vecchiotti, Hellman, De Nunzio, and Marasca. Don't forget Bruno. They were brided by a plot which involved the Masons, either directly or as money launderers from US media interests.

This is not rocket science. Nor is it a philosophy 101 class.

 

[acbytesla]

There is no evidence "they" were at Raf's at 9:23. Motive and violent pathology do not enter into proving innocence. Rudi said in his Skype that a man (Raf) murdered Meredith which wouldn't have necessitated any contact before or after. There are pieces of evidence that could link Raf including the bra and the bath mat. I don't think the bath mat can be matched to him but it is possible it was his.

So you disagree with those that say a para 1 was impossible?

I never said it was impossible. I said I was sure. Sure as I am about my mother's love.

The fact is no evidence of any merit points to Amanda/Raffaele.

While I agree with you that the bath mat print doesn't exclude Raffaele, I have no idea how many other men that would also not be excluded by the bath mat print. The only evidence presented that gives me pause is the alleged finding of Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp.

There are no links to Rudy and I'm sorry Amanda didn't know Raffaele well enough to ask him to help kill Meredith. And if this was a spur of the moment killing they all would have folded like a cheap towel.

The timing is as close to being impossible without quite being impossible as you can get.

The motive and pathology doesn't prove their innocence. But unlike the crazy violent guy who regularly beat and threatened his wife who was having an affair and mysteriously ended up murdered, there is no real reason to suspect Amanda or Raffaele.

It may not prove innocence but it sure as hell increases the probability.

 

[Numbers]

That you folks have to redo the climate of 18th Century philosophy which led to Kant's, "I think therefore I am," says all us humble people way up in the bleachers need to hear.

Argue epistemology if you want. If a video surfaced of Amanda and Raf in Raf's place at that time, Vixen (or reasonable substitute) would argue it had been doctored. That's the issue.

For mercy's sake, Channel 5 did a demo of the climb in through Filomena's window, showing beyond doubt (in Euclidian space anyway) that the break-in was eminently doable. Does that mean the break-in actually happened? No it doesn't. Yet the whole "the break-in was staged" was predicated on some non-agile, senior detectives eyeballing the thing and dismissing the climb as undoable, rather than actually investigating that aspect of this.

The PGP response to Channel 5? The video was doctored. The producers were probably bribed, and will be sharing a cell with Vecchiotti, Hellman, De Nunzio, and Marasca. Don't forget Bruno. They were brided by a plot which involved the Masons, either directly or as money launderers from US media interests.

This is not rocket science. Nor is it a philosophy 101 class.

Not only is the alleged evidence insufficient, contradictory and lack to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it is so lacking that the alleged evidence could not establish a probability of guilt.

That is a practical reason, beyond the CPP Articles 74, 75, 652, and 654 why there will not be a further civil action against Knox and Sollecito for the murder/rape of Kercher.

Another practical reason: in a new civil trial, the evidence, such as the raw data of the DNA testing, would again be subject to examination by the defense. The police and courts would never allow such an examination, nor would they want this topic to become public again, IMO.

Another issue regarding the probable resistance to a new civil trial by the Italian courts, beyond the CPP: any new civil trial would be subject to a claim against Italy before the ECHR following the final judgment. Some may be under the misapprehension that only criminal trials fall under Convention Article 6. In fact, civil trials also fall under Article 6, and a State that allows a civil trial that the ECHR rules violates Article 6 must, according to treaty, follow the ECHR judgment about that trial. For example, any damages awarded by an unfair civil trial may be required to be compensated by the State.

 

[Grinder]

That you folks have to redo the climate of 18th Century philosophy which led to Kant's, "I think therefore I am," says all us humble people way up in the bleachers need to hear.

Descartes

Argue epistemology if you want. If a video surfaced of Amanda and Raf in Raf's place at that time, Vixen (or reasonable substitute) would argue it had been doctored. That's the issue.

Fox said he couldn't be more sure and I demonstrated he could.

It is not just I that have stated innocence isn't known.

 

[Grinder]

I never said it was impossible. I said I was sure. Sure as I am about my mother's love.

The fact is no evidence of any merit points to Amanda/Raffaele.

While I agree with you that the bath mat print doesn't exclude Raffaele, I have no idea how many other men that would also not be excluded by the bath mat print. The only evidence presented that gives me pause is the alleged finding of Raffaele's DNA on the bra clasp.

There are no links to Rudy and I'm sorry Amanda didn't know Raffaele well enough to ask him to help kill Meredith. And if this was a spur of the moment killing they all would have folded like a cheap towel.

The timing is as close to being impossible without quite being impossible as you can get.

The motive and pathology doesn't prove their innocence. But unlike the crazy violent guy who regularly beat and threatened his wife who was having an affair and mysteriously ended up murdered, there is no real reason to suspect Amanda or Raffaele.

It may not prove innocence but it sure as hell increases the probability.

Raf could have done it without Amanda knowing. She could have gone to sleep which would explain her lack of memory of what happened. Drink, smoke and maybe an anxiety drug could have put her out. Since Curatolo, Quintavalle and Nara's testimony are worthless I need not fit them in.

Rudi had no history of violence.

 

[Numbers]

Descartes



Fox said he couldn't be more sure and I demonstrated he could.

It is not just I that have stated innocence isn't known.

But it would remain unknown even if a video alleging to prove innocence existed. The argument by those supporting guilt would be, for example, that the powerful Masonic conspiracy or the CIA may have produced or doctored the video. Can you prove otherwise? How can your proof be considered definitive, since your proof itself may be the fraudulent product of a conspiracy of the Seattle pro-Amanda clique, or similar group?

 

[Grinder]

Not only is the alleged evidence insufficient, contradictory and lack to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it is so lacking that the alleged evidence could not establish a probability of guilt.

Fine but the contention isn't that they are legally not guilty the contention is that they are innocent as in didn't do anything.