Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Desert Fox]

Madison Paxton was mentioned recently by Amanda Knox in one of her articles, which was about photography. The reference was to "my friend". I guess this must mean they are in each other's lives eh?

Paxton wrote an article for "The Stranger" in defence of her friend while Knox was in prison in 2009, containing photographs she had taken of her.

It's rather good!

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/she-didnt-do-it/Content?oid=2929730

Thanks for sharing that

 

[acbytesla]

They didn't express any surprise she had been arrested. To them it was logical.

How do you know that? The answer is you DON'T. This is not something you're going to get from the recordings. By that time, any surprise they might have had would have worn off and practical matters needed to be addressed. Matters like keeping their daughter's spirits up in a terrifying situation.

Curt refused to pay child support when she was born, but boy, has she made him pay up now...

How do you know this? What is your source for such a claim?

 

[Vixen]

How do you know that? The answer is you DON'T. This is not something you're going to get from the recordings. By that time, any surprise they might have had worn off and practical matters needed to be addressed. Matters like keeping their daughter's spirits up in a terrifying situation.


How do you know this? What is your source for such a claim?

You saw one of the (numerous) court orders Edda had to get.

 

[acbytesla]

06/06/2016

"My friend Madison often used to use me as a model in her photography projects."

http://www.westseattleherald.com/2016/06/06/opinion/amandas-view-photographing-women-part-one

Thanks Kauffer. You proved that Vixen's two posts were absurd and moronic. First, her claim that Madison was out of Amanda's life. You can't draw that conclusion from Amanda's use of the "used to" as clearly Amanda is referring to Amanda modeling and nothing about their friendship. The fact that Amanda begins the sentence with "my friend Madison" does not make it sound that Madison is out of Amanda's life.

Second, the fact that Madison previously wrote an article saying that Amanda modeled for her in The Stranger shows that this is no secret that required Madison's permission.

 

[acbytesla]

You saw one of the (numerous) court orders Edda had to get.

No, I didnt. I frankly don't care and it says nothing about Amanda.

The fact is there is no reason to believe Knox or Sollecito were involved in Meredith's murder and all your scummy remarks about everyone ancillary to Amanda and this case is not becoming.

 

[TruthCalls]

My bad , but I didn't try to list all of judge Massei's blunders
Nencini's report is worse because he just followed the orders he was given...

Obviously you didn't try to list all of judge Massei's blunders or we'd be in Continuation Part 22 by now!

I just mentioned the part about Curatolo because it has always fascinated me how tortured Massei's logic was to fit Amanda and Raffaele into the crime. You can't have it both ways. Curatolo's testimony makes it clear he is confused. His testimony of seeing the costumes and disco buses on the same evening he sees Amanda and Raffaele is more compelling than saying he sees the SP in their white outfits the next day. There is a direct correlation between sighting Amanda and Raffaele with the costumes and buses. The only correlation he has regarding seeing the SP is he says it was the next day, but that could easily be confused. But Massei disregards the testimony that should have far more credibility in order to enter into his reasoning the testimony with far less credibility. I mean it's at least as bad as ignoring scientific evidence and expert witness testimony from the lead forensic technician in order to claim the Luminol traces were made from Meredith's blood and justifying that by saying "what else could it be?".

 

[Samson]

Ground report essay on Amanda Knox and ECHR

Amanda Knox case moves to European Court over denial of human rights


3. Access to a lawyer should be provided as from the first interrogation of a suspect by the police, unless it is demonstrated in the light of the particular circumstances of each case that there are truly compelling reasons to restrict this right. The rights of the defence will in principle be irretrievably prejudiced when incriminating statements made during police interrogation without access to a lawyer are used for a conviction

Thus

These points combine to build a compelling case. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were suspects within a day of Meredith Kercher’s body being discovered, according to police testimony. Their phones were tapped immediately and by Saturday November 3rd, the media was being briefed that a woman close to Meredith was a suspect. This was reported in the London Sunday Times dated November 4th.

shows article 3 is violated

http://www.groundreport.com/amanda-knox-case-moves-to-european-court-over-denial-of-human-rights/

 

[NotEvenWrong]

David Balding is a statistical geneticist who showed, using a statistical algorithm, that Raffaele's DNA was almost certainly on the bra clasp.

This is not in dispute by anyone.

Vixen, if you had any reading comprehension skills at all, you would realize that my challenge to you wasn't to find someone who said Raf's DNA was on the bra clasp. My challenge to you was to find one forensic scientist who supports the prosecution's evidence and has stated Amanda and Raffaele were involved in the murder.

Care to try again?

 

[Agatha]

Once again, several posts have gone to AAH for various breaches of the rules, chiefly for rule 0 and rule 12. Some otherwise acceptable posts have also gone to AAH for either quoting or responding to rule breaches.

Several of you appear to be unable to debate without being uncivil, impolite and personal. This is unacceptable on ISF, and if you wish to avoid further moves, cards or even suspensions, you must alter your posting styles.

As a last resort, this thread may have to be returned to moderated status and I doubt that this is wanted by anyone, least of all the moderation team.

May I remind you that if you are talking TO each other, you MUST be polite. If your post talks ABOUT another member of the forum, you are almost certainly breaching rule 12, so don't do it. Concentrate on the arguments and not the arguers.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha

 

[Loss Leader]

This appears to be a good place to take a break. The continuation thread may be found here.

As always, the cut-off point is arbitrary. You may freely quote from this or any other prior thread in Part 22. Thank you.

Posted By: Loss Leader