View Single Post
Old 29th July 2017, 03:19 PM   #44
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 884
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The court is the establishment. It has no need to bring out 'peer reviewed papers'. It has the hegemony.

If a panel of judges (including laymen and moronic bimbos through to barristers and high court judges) can come to a verdict of guilty after having been presented with all the evidence, and as Massei states, with great reluctance and heavy heart, and open xenophobia towards Rudy (just like Knox' supporters) then we can be sure the evidence was overwhelming and the verdict unavoidable.
Misconduct by police and prosecution

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contam...bwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredi...ry-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-...irs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com/...ele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11071314

Falsehoods told by Vixen

Post dated 19.03.2016
Claim: The postal police claimed to hear the washing machine cycle come to a finish.
Truth: The washing machine was not running. The washing machine story was among the false claims fed to the police to the media. The washing machine running was never presented as evidence in court or used in motivation reports.

Post dated 19.03.2016
Claim: Police didn't think she'd had a shower.
Truth: The police never claimed Amanda had not showered. The testimony from an officer says the opposite from the link below. At trial it was not part of the prosecution’s case Amanda had not showered
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/freque...ked-questions/

Post dated 19.03.2016
Claim: Why would she buy bleach first thing in the morning?
Truth: Quintavelle in his testimony never said that Amanda purchased bleach. The till was checked and there was no record of any purchase of bleach receipts. No evidence has been presented that Amanda and Raffaele purchased bleach. The presence of bleach receipts was false story fed by the police to the media.

Post dated 20.03.2016
Claim: and even defense forensic expert 'Photoshop' Vinci discovered Amanda's DNA on the bra, together with Rudy's.
Truth: Amanda’s DNA was not on the clasp and this has never been part of the prosecution’s case. There is no record of the defence agreeing Amanda’s DNA was on the clasp and there is no evidence Vinci used Photoshop.

Post dated 22.03.2016
Claim: Blood was found on Raff’s underpants
Truth: No blood was every found on Raffaele’s clothing.
Post dated 22.03.2016
Claim: Stefanoni found 12 bits of tissue on the blade.
Truth: Stefanoni found no such tissue on the blade and the prosecution have never claimed there was any human biological material on the blade. When C&V tested the knife it was negative for the human species.

Post dated 24.03.2016
Claim: The bloody pulp incident happened (he claims) when Raff was already in jail.
Truth: Raffaele said in his book that the incident happened during the interrogation at the police station.
Post dated 10.05.2016
Claim: Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.
Truth: The prosecution never claimed there were 15 alleles on the knife.

Post dated 11.05.2016
The defence on all sides have agreed without challenge that the DNA on the knife did indeed yield a near perfect profile of Mez.
Truth: The defence teams have never accepted there was a full DNA profile of Meredith on the knife and there is no record of this.
Post dated 24.05.2016
Claim: Forensic police believed the blood in the bidet, sink and cotton bud were signs of the murderer rinsing the knife off.
Truth: There is no record of the prosecution saying the blood in the bathroom came from drippings from a knife.

Post dated 24.05.2016
Claim: a long convoluted story surrounding a mop found propped up by the front door of the cottage when postal police arrived was concocted by the pair, which any marine would be proud of in the scheme of tallest of tall stories about burst pipes and leaks as of the time of the murder.
Truth: There is no record of the postal police asking about the mop and there is no record of any conversation regarding the mop between Amanda, Raffaele and the postal police. There was an actual leak in Raffaele’s apartment as seen in the link below
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/freque...ked-questions/

Post dated 24.05.2016
Claim: She rang her mother for the first time since arriving in Europe ahead of the discovery of the body.
Truth: Vixen provides no evidence from phone records to back up her claim Amanda had never previously phoned her mother when she was in Europe.

Post dated 07.07.2016
Claim: What was Raff’s near full DNA profile doing on Mez’s bra clasp (whom he claimed he had never met)
Truth: Raffaele has never said he had not met Meredith.
Post dated: 07.06.2016
Claim: and having Mez - who shook a mean mojito - 'steal' her job was all too much for the poor reject.
Truth: Meredith was never offered a job at Le Chic.

Posted dated: 07.06.2016
Claim: She has never shown one iota of regret or remorse, nor ever shed one little bitty tear for her 'friend'.

Truth: The testimony from witnesses contradict this as seen in the link below :-
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/amanda...ehavior-myths/

Post dated: 07.06.2016
Claim: A ladies size 37 footprint in Mez' blood.
Truth: There was no size 37 female footprint in Meredith’s room. The defence clearly showed all the footprints belonged to Rudy as detailed below
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-04.html

Post dated 08.06.2016
Claim: Oh come off it. Raff's footprint on the bathmat, and the feint, smaller, female footprint nearby.
Truth: No evidence has been presented there was a female footprint by the bathmat.
Post dated: 12.06.2016
Claim: when all the courts, pathologists and forensic experts (aside from the defence flunkeys, paid to challenge) conclude and uphold, 'There was more than one perpetrator.'when all the courts, pathologists and forensic experts (aside from the defence flunkeys, paid to challenge) conclude and uphold, 'There was more than one perpetrator.'
Truth: This contradicts what the experts said. Experts who did not work for the defence could not rule out a single attacker. Dr Lali who carried out the autopsy could not say if there was more than one attacker. Dr Bacci who worked for the prosecution said the following :-
“the biological date cannot tell us if it was one or more persons who killed Meredith”
Dr Liviero, police doctor testifying for the prosecution said the following :-
“A single attacker could have done it”

Post dated: 13.06.2016
Claim: The defense experts came up with some of the most ridiculous 'expert opinion','Mez threw herself onto the one sliver of glass, and that caused the wounds found on her arms and hands'.
Truth: There is no record of the defence saying this.

Post dated: 04.12.2016
Claim: The court was satisfied that the prosecution forensic trajectory experts showed that the rock in all probability beyond reasonable doubt was thrown from inside the room, based on factors such as angle, resting place, distribution of glass and estimated velocity.

Truth: The prosecution never produced any experts on forensic trajectory. In fact the prosecution never had any expert witnesses to support a staged break in.

Post dated 05.06.2016

Claim: Amanda was getting through €300- cash daily - this certainly suggests a drug habit and it would appear Mez was ripped off her rent for dirty money.

Truth: Amanda’s bank statements are available in the link below and do not show 300 euros being taken out every day. The fact Amanda was willing to make her bank statements publicly available indicates Amanda was not taking huge sums from her bank account and was in such dire financial straits she would need to resort to stealing money.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-con...cords-2007.pdf

Post dated: 06.06.2017
Claim: There is also the case of the paper scattered under Filomena's window which had Amanda Knox' footprint on it.
Truth: No such footprint exists.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11598412

Vixen constantly bangs on about how the evidence against Amanda and Raffaele was overwhelming. If this was true, why did the prosecution have to resort to the tactics above? If the prosecution had a slam dunk case, why is that the tactics the prosecution had to resort to were clearly the tactics prosecutors would resort when they have no case or evidence? I have listed some of the numerous falsehoods Vixen has said in her posts. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk, why do PGP have to lie on an industrial scale to argue their case?
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top