|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
18th June 2019, 08:25 AM | #201 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Per the Amanda Knox Case website;
"All of the samples in plate 357 were quantified via Qubit Flourometer (at the very end of the Batch). The ID and Plate numbers indicate that the corresponding plate was pushed ahead of other plates in the cue for capillary electrophoresis, indicating extreme urgency to process the included reference samples for Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba;" Plate 357 was part of Batch One, which was completed between 5-6 Nov. |
18th June 2019, 08:46 AM | #202 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
The fluorometer only quantifies the amount of DNA in the samples.
The DNA profiling is a separate step that follows the quantification step. I went back to amandaknoxcase.com and I agree that the DNA profiling of the reference samples for Knox, Sollecito, and Lumumba was most likely completed on Nov. 6. It would surely have been completed and analyzed by the next day and the results - no matches to the rape kit - communicated to the prosecutor and probably to the ranking police. (Under Italian law, the prosecutor is in charge of the police investigation during an active case.) Here are some of the important points from the analysis in that section of amandaknoxcase.com: The prosecution hid the results of early and decisive DNA tests excluding Raffaele Sollecito as the sexual assailant, securing on improper grounds the pre-trial incarceration of Sollecito and Knox (and Lumumba) to the severe prejudice of the defense; The prosecution concealed the initial results for tests performed on the two key items of evidence, i.e., the kitchen knife (Rep. 36b) and the bra clasp (Rep. 165b), and instead, produced only the results of suspicious “do over” tests (re-runs), without disclosing the data from the initial tests or even the fact that the subsequent tests were “do overs”; The prosecution concealed that the kitchen knife profile was generated within a set of tests for which 90% of the results have been suppressed, strongly suggesting the occurrence of a severe contamination event that the prosecution continues to hide; The prosecution claimed that contamination of the bra clasp was impossible, even though the bra clasp profile was produced during a set of tests for which there is documented proof of contamination; The prosecution falsely portrayed the DNA laboratory as pristine and perfectly maintained, even though the lab’s own documents demonstrate that it was plagued with repeated contamination events and machine malfunctions that were known to the lab; The prosecution has withheld the results from a massive number of DNA tests (well over 100), including probably exculpatory profiles relating to the sexual assault and a secondary crime scene downstairs; The prosecution has hidden all of the records of the DNA amplification process—the most likely place for laboratory contamination to have occurred—including all of the contamination-control tests for this process There are three major plates, Nos. 354, 355, and 357, which contain a total of 48 profiles, 14 of which are suppressed, for a suppression rate of 29%; The missing profiles correspond to: 5 traces attributed to “cat’s blood” (which nevertheless quantified positive for human DNA and were subjected to STR amplification), 2 traces representing the male fraction of the semen samples, 2 traces from the lightswitch downstairs, 2 negative controls, 1 sample of Guede’s feces, and 2 traces for which there is no record; Samples of Guede’s DNA were detected in the vaginal swab and feces samples on 6 November 2007. At this time, Sollecito and Lumumba were ruled out as suspects in the sexual assault; All of the samples in plate 357 were quantified via Qubit Flourometer (at the very end of the Batch). The ID and Plate numbers indicate that the corresponding plate was pushed ahead of other plates in the cue for capillary electrophoresis, indicating extreme urgency to process the included reference samples for Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba; Rep. 14 (Sample hair formations taken from the external part of the vagina of the victim) and Rep. 29 (Lumumba Reference Swab) are missing and not in the SAL. Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/lab-data-suppression/ |
18th June 2019, 09:33 AM | #203 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
Remember all the talk about a second knife, as in the bloody outline of a presumed knife on the victim's bedsheets didn't match the knife plucked from Raffaele's kitchen drawer?
Except that all of a sudden at the 2013 re-trial at the Appeals Court level in Florence, then-prosecutor Crini simply announced that that knife plucked from Raffaele's suddenly was a match - 6 years later. Crini offered no forensics to back this up, simply announced it. Which also brings back memories of why Frank Sfarzo, in his English-language blog "Perugia Shock", switched his views on guilt. He'd gone down to the cottage, and asked a cop why they were not searching the vast tree'd area below and to the ENE. The answer which surprised Sfarzo was, "We already have a knife." Then it became apparent that that knife matched nothing at the crime scene, not the wounds and not the bloody outline on the sheet. (If nothing else, this belongs to the long list of things which the 2015 exonerating court cited as "investigative amnesia".) Sfarzo's trademark snark in Perugia Shock shifted from the two accused to the prosecution and police. To Sfarzo, the lazy incompetent police weren't even investigating the case. Michael Winterbottom portrayed this in his 2014 feature film, "Face of an Angel". In the film, W. even had Barbie Nadeau's character confess that all the journalists had had to read Sfarzo's blog each day just to keep up. All of this was typical of the way the various prosecutors and convicting courts had had to move things around as factoids fell apart, to still justify convicting. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
18th June 2019, 09:52 AM | #204 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 338
|
|
18th June 2019, 10:33 AM | #205 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
I'm not one for conspiracy theories so I don't believe the results were rigged. But I do believe Stefanoni was essentially told to keep testing until they came up with something. I'm all but certain the egram for 36B is nothing more than lab contamination, and I suspect the suppressed results would have proven this. This also would confirm this was a deliberate effort to implicate Amanda and Raffaele.
I have no doubt that had the knife been tested by a neutral lab the results would have indicated a typical kitchen knife, used by Amanda to prepare food. It would not have been linked to the crime. The prosecution was desperate to link Amanda to the crime and you can see that in the evidence they presented; the knife, Amanda's DNA in her own bathroom, Luminol positive prints proven not to be made with Meredith's blood, her infamous kiss and the 'tada', eating pizza. Everything is a massive stretch, that can only appear to be connected to the crime if you start out believing as much and go from there. |
18th June 2019, 11:05 AM | #206 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Quote:
As Lumumba was arrested on Nov. 6, was it even possible that a DNA test could be analyzed that quickly? From what I can find, currently it takes 24-72 hours to obtain test results. Was that quick of a return even possible in 2007? According to Burleigh,
Quote:
|
18th June 2019, 11:11 AM | #207 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
Agreed! to a certain extent, but I believe that "good old fashioned human fallibility" was the basis for the "sophisticated conspiracy" against K&S. This case was a no-brainer to solve but Mignini, Comodi et.al. introduced Kafka, and here we are 12 years later still trying to work it out.
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
18th June 2019, 11:12 AM | #208 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
I agree with this. However, I also cannot help but suspect that the Italian macho cultural need to 'save face', especially in such a highly publicized case, played into their refusal to admit error and to dig their heels in. It may not have even been a conscious decision, but a subconscious one.
|
18th June 2019, 11:32 AM | #209 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
The way I see it is that Mignini and the cops made a decision on the discovery of break-in that the act had been staged, they therefore didn't treat Filomena's room as a bona-fide crime scene. We've all seen Ron Hendry's analysis and evaluated it for ourselves, and there's no reason whatsoever to conclude that the break-in was staged, it's so freaking obviously authentic. Why would Mignini come to such a bizarre conclusion if it wasn't to protect Rudy?
On that day the theory of the staged break-in gave birth to the factoid that someone was being protected, otherwise there is no use for the theory; however, in reality, there is only evidence of an actual break-in and no reason at all to conclude that anyone was being protected. For me this is a case of simple Freudian projection. Rudy had been useful to the cops, now he was a liability, he had to be foisted on to others with K&S being the most vulnerable candidates. If Mignini hadn't been so compromised he'd have went with an actual break-in and then waited for all the lab results to come in. There would have been no reason to railroad K&S. Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
18th June 2019, 11:59 AM | #210 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
The very first pair of investigative blunders, made early afternoon, Nov 2, 2007. These were real boners:
1. Thinking the break-in had to have been staged because they couldn't imagine anyone climbing up to Filomena's window. They didn't even test their hypothesis. (Years' later an Italian TV program duplicated the climb.)The "investigative amnesia" started right from the beginning. Then Mignini ordered body temperature NOT be taken, thus clouding investigation of time-of-death. Then - video shows Stefanoni at the scene being suspicious of the presumed semen stain under the victim's hips; then somewhere down the line did not test it to either verify or ID the man who'd left it. As an aside, the stupidest on-line comment was one from a nutter who blamed "the defence" for all these failures. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
18th June 2019, 12:04 PM | #211 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Because they immediately made incorrect assumptions and judgments. Follain wrote:
Quote:
Mignini, with Holmes-like observation skills noted that Amanda would
Quote:
And don't forget that he also became suspicious of Knox because she was 'canoodling' with Raff. |
18th June 2019, 12:27 PM | #212 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
Remember, Lumumba was arrested and presumably swabbed for DNA relatively early in the morning of Nov. 6. Samples from Knox and Sollecito would already be available. The samples would have been rushed to Rome, and Stefanoni's records show that the DNA quantification step was completed on Nov. 6. As I understand, it may not be clear from the data she made available to the defense exactly when the DNA profile test itself was run on these reference samples, but it would have been done after the quantification either on Nov. 6 or, at the latest, early on Nov. 7. The results would then have been communicated to Prosecutor Mignini and possibly the relevant police officers: No matches to the rape kit "unknown" (rape/murder suspect) DNA profile.
The reason it may take more than 24 hours for forensic DNA testing is because, in the situation you describe, the lab has a backlog of testing to clear and/or the tests do not involve simple cheek swabs. |
18th June 2019, 12:38 PM | #213 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Bill, don't believe your lyin' eyes or ears! That man didn't scale that wall and he didn't say anyone could have done it with no problem.
Quote:
|
18th June 2019, 12:50 PM | #214 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
But I didn't describe any situation or backlogs for that timeline nor did the article:
Quote:
|
18th June 2019, 12:52 PM | #215 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
Of course, we should distinguish a "conspiracy theory" from an actual "conspiracy" which may be viewed by the participants as everyday professional "teamwork". For example, during Amanda's interrogation, did the "interpreter" Donnino need to be told that she should discuss her own temporary amnesia, and suggest that maybe Amanda was suffering from that, or did she offer this suggestion as a member in good standing of the police? Also, Donnino admitted in her testimony before the Boninsegna court that she realized during the interrogation that Amanda's phone message could be merely an English-speaker's attempt to write "see you later, good evening" as a good-bye greeting in Italian, but she did not offer that information to the other police during the interrogation.
So, no conspiracy, for those fearing they may be adopting a conspiracy theory, it's only excellent teamwork by the police and prosecutor. Isn't rerunning a test in order apparently to get a result with contamination which may be considered incriminating, when the first test is exculpatory or inconclusive, and neither the first test nor the contamination are disclosed to the defense, "rigging" a test? |
18th June 2019, 01:13 PM | #216 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
Mignini (who believes he is a real-life Sherlock Holmes) and the police wanted to solve the case quickly. While I can't prove that they didn't want to protect Guede, it's just as likely that they didn't want to chase all over Italy or Europe to find some random guy who had broken the window by throwing a rock at it and then climbed through the broken window (removing some of the glass to prevent injury).
Therefore, assume that the break-in was staged and therefore narrow the focus of the investigation to the persons at hand, primarily the residents of the cottage. Who has a weak alibi? That obviously naive American girl, Amanda; only her new Italian boyfriend can vouch for her location at the relevant time. So he must be a suspect in order to make her a suspect. Now, because those two don't seem that murderous, there needs to be a heavy, someone who Amanda can be coerced into naming. Case closed. No need to search for an unknown burglar/rapist/murderer. |
18th June 2019, 10:48 PM | #217 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 6,753
|
I would add given a murder had happened, allowing the occupant of the room where the broken window was, to enter and remove items before the forensic team had been in.
Secondly the assumption that because clothes are strewn around including on the floor of a young woman's room this means it was ransacked and that glass being on top of clothes on the floor was evidence thati the window was broken post ransacking. (Personally it looked like my bedroom on most days except just before my mother visits.) |
18th June 2019, 10:58 PM | #218 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 6,753
|
It is interesting many people who are posting anti-Knox hate comments are clearly influenced by early lurid newspaper reports. They report things said in newspapers as if they were facts and are ignorant of the facts presented in the case. E.g.saying the body was moved and posed post mortem something the forensic experts never claimed.Or that forensic experts said more than one person was involved in the murder.
Uninformed sociopathic posters such as KrissyG and HarryRag are effective because they constantly post the same lies to bolster their irrational bullying obsession with this poor young woman. |
19th June 2019, 12:39 AM | #219 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
If you hypothesise that Mignini and the cops quite legitimately didn't know that Rudy was involved on Nov. 2nd, then you head into the interrogations of 5th-6th Nov with the same hypothesis, you then end up with a scenario that negates the argument that the calunnia was contrived by Mignini, since it implies that the cops didn't really know who the killer was, and were actually misled when Amanda implicated Lumumba. My argument has always been that Mignini and the cops knew that Rudy was involved by the night of the interrogations and they ushered in Lumumba on the strength of the text messages in order to protect Rudy. If you take the protection of Rudy out of the equation during the interrogation then the did she or didn't she argument becomes much more evenly contested.
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
19th June 2019, 12:40 AM | #220 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
|
19th June 2019, 03:34 AM | #221 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 884
|
If you read Monster of Perugia the Rudy was being protected theory was presented in this book. The theory was Rudy was allowed to get away with crimes as he was working as an informer which explains why no action was taken over the burglary in Milan. If Rudy had been arrested for the Milan incident he would not have been free to kill Meredith. When Meredith's body was discovered, Mignini may have known straight away Rudy had killed and were responsible for a killer being free. Amanda, Raffaele and Lumumba were arrested to take the blame for Guede. It is ironic Vixen constantly bangs on about Amanda covering for Guede when the evidence suggests it was Mignini covering for Guede. When the evidence came back showing Guede as the killer, Mignini had no choice but to arrest Guede.However, if Amanda and Raffaele were prosecuted Guede's role in Meredith's murder could be minimized. This theory explains a lot of things; why were Amanda and Raffaele not released when the evidence showed Guede as the killer, why were Amanda and Raffaele so viciously railroaded, why Mignini has minimized Guede's role in Meredith's murder and Guede has been treated so leniently. Mignini had no objection to the reduction in Guede's sentence. The TJMK and PMF sites go to great lengths to defend the police/prosecution which makes me suspect these sites are connected to the police/prosecution which explains why these sites defend Guede and minimize his role in Meredith's murder.
|
19th June 2019, 06:20 AM | #222 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
The police were coercing Amanda to name someone whom she "knew" (in their opinion) had committed the rape/murder. Maybe they wanted or expected to coerce her to name Raffaele, or maybe they didn't care as long as it was a male. They may have had Lumumba picked out before the interrogation since they knew she worked with him and she had met him, If I recall correctly, for a few minutes (after her class, not at the pub) on Nov. 4 or 5. They did intentionally misrepresent what the text message meant, based on Donnino's testimony to the Boninsegna court. I don't see these events as compelling one to conclude that all this was done by the police to protect Guede. Nor does it compel one to conclude that the police were not protecting Guede. This same kind of missing the (real and sometimes obvious) suspect in pursuit of a police or prosecution theory that one or more (actually innocent) persons had committed the crime is an element in a number of wrongful convictions and exonerations in the US.
|
19th June 2019, 06:33 AM | #223 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
I disagree. Completely.
Those sites swallowed whole the tabloid coverage, which pretty much ran unopposed until the defence were finally able to present their case at the end of the 2009 trial. Up until then, Mignini's views held away. Those sites' main problem was accepting all of that uncritically. My view is that Andrea Vogt had been the main, often same day source for Peggy Ganong's site. Vogt wrote mainstream articles for the Seattle press claiming that it had been the Seattle-based haters who were being harrassed!!! It was quite the partnership. Swallowing whole what the prosecution wildly claimed, is a different phenomenon than being directly manipulated by them. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
19th June 2019, 06:47 AM | #224 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
Examples from the US include the Central Park 5, Martin Tankleff, Jeffrey Deskovic, and many more. See, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States The police/prosecution behavior in these situations is sometimes called "confirmation bias" although in more behavioral terms it might be called "cheating by authorities motivated by the perceived need to seek a result ("case closed") quickly and with minimal effort". The police and prosecution may not perceive that coercing confessions, for example by conducting long interrogations with threats and lies, especially for young or vulnerable persons, with no defense lawyer present, is a form of cheating. |
19th June 2019, 06:48 AM | #225 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
That one points to a complete breakdown in the chain of command in the securing of the crime-scene.
But regardless, things like that pretty well negate the value of any of the forensics in the cottage. It's bad enough that perhaps 3/4 of a dozen people had access to the upstairs before they knew it was a murder crime scene..... ..... but there was also Filomena being allowed unescorted access after it was known. Add to this, that postal police Battistelli more than likely DID go into the murder room without forensics countermeasures, to check to see if the victim had actually expired. Add further that Napoleoni testified that the 4-person medical team also had been allowed into the murder room without countermeasures. Add to this that the cornerstone of convicting Sollecito had been the bra clasp on that floor, collected 46 days later (!), and it was hardly an uncontaminated crime scene. Add to all that the manner in which Stefanoni's team collected the clasp 46 days later! Aside from all that, I'm sure all was as per forensics protocols. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
19th June 2019, 07:45 AM | #226 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
I was with you right up to the highlighted. I doubt these sites have any specific connection to anything. They merely represent a collection of people duped by early reports and who developed an obsessive hatred of Amanda. I've often said this has long since NOT been about Meredith or seeing justice for her. If it was, there would have been outrage over the leniency afforded Guede. After all, not even the prosecution ever claimed Guede didn't have a hand in Meredith's murder. You can hate more than one person for having committed a crime.
I'm also not convinced Guede was a protected 'informant'. Guede had no specific ties to anything of importance - at least none that have ever been disclosed. What possible information could Guede have been providing the police? This is all just speculation and conjecture, but I still believe the most likely scenario is incompetence and the rush to solve the crime quickly. It was a botched investigation that led them to believe Amanda was involved. They jumped the gun, made a spectacle of themselves and then went about covering their own asses after they realized Guede committed the crime. I've mentioned the case of Julie Rae Harper a few times when discussing this case. Julie was convicted of murdering her son but was later acquitted. It's a classic case of an inept investigation and of a prosecutor who got a theory in his head and refused to change his mind as evidence evolved. I found the following comments from one of the jurors who acquitted her especially interesting as it parallels this case to a t!
Quote:
|
19th June 2019, 07:59 AM | #227 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
I believe this is a big part of the truth. But what it leaves out is that the "rush" to solve the crime quickly, in this Knox-Sollecito-Lumumba case involved violating Italian procedural and criminal laws by the police and prosecutor.
As proof of the violation of Italian criminal laws, Mignini and another prosecutor charged Amanda with calunnia against the police and Mignini for her statements in court, and in her appeal documents, for reciting her account of what had occurred during the interrogation. The Boninsegna court motivation report lists the specific crimes that the authorities believe Amanda was implicitly charging against the police and Mignini. |
19th June 2019, 08:31 AM | #228 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Likewise, in the Julie Rae Harper case there was documented criminal misconduct. Here's one example;
Quote:
|
19th June 2019, 09:35 AM | #229 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
To me this is just complete baloney. I mean "traitor" WTF is he on about? The shutters were made of wood both the internal and external ones they're not going to just shatter. The glass sprayed inwards for about 9 feet into an 11 foot long room, you're not going to get that with a rock thrown in the other direction. There was impacted glass in the outward facing inner shutter and glass was removed for ease of entry. There is no photographs that I've seen that show glass on top of clothing. I think this is the time when Mignini knew it was Rudy, now he had to "cover it up" by transferring his or the cops protection for Rudy onto Amanda. Sorry! I think it's freaking obvious. "Traitor" indeed, what rubbish!
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
19th June 2019, 10:16 AM | #230 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
|
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
19th June 2019, 10:59 AM | #231 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
I think that there is ample evidence, as I've already posted that Rudy was being protected before the murder as well as after it. If there was no protection why not try all 3 together? Instead, Rudy was granted a fast-track trial when he should have been tried with K&S allowing their defence lawyers to cross-examine him. It was also concluded in Micheli that he didn't strike the fatal blow. A conclusion that is utterly impossible to arrive at from the evidence at the time. Even more so with M/B's conclusion that there was no evidence of anyone in Meredith's room at the time of the murder other than Rudy. There's no doubt in my mind that Rudy was being protected at the expense of K&S.
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
19th June 2019, 11:00 AM | #232 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Agreed. I don't think the two sites were directly connected to the police/prosecution but I do think they were looked upon favorably by them and may have provided info through a third party, perhaps Vogt or even Nadeau.
Neither TJMK nor PMF ever attempted to look at evidence from a fair and/or open-mind perspective. Everything for them had to be interpreted through heavily guilt colored glasses. As time passed, the sites became even more ridiculous and hateful. Today, TJMK is the last refuge of a small handful of extremists who feed off each other in their echo chamber. I'd feel rather sorry for them if they weren't just so hateful. |
19th June 2019, 11:24 AM | #233 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
I'm wracking my brain to remember what Peggy Ganong, chief moderator of .ORG had said about why she banned pro-innocence posters to her site.
I probably am not terribly accurate (so buyer beware), but it was something like, "because they take away from what is important, and get us to lose focus." Otherwise their expressed focus was to honour the victim, but never otherwise explained why the vitriol mainly against Knox, but often against people like Bruce Fischer, Candace Dempsey or Frank Sfarzo was so strident. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
19th June 2019, 11:24 AM | #234 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
Do you know, I've got an inkling that the appeal will be referred. The reason is that this is a massive case that's had the public and the media spellbound for the last decade and more. They may arrive at the same conclusion again but I think this case is just too significant to be concluded in one judgement, even for the ECtHR. Tell me I'm wrong!
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
19th June 2019, 11:43 AM | #235 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
I remember Michael at dot net once said exactly that when explaining/justifying "FOAKer Tuesday". I don't recall Peggy making any such declaration, but I can tell you I got banned after just seven posts. All posts were on topic and not directed at anyone, but I'm sure I came across as leaning PIP. The impression I got was they didn't want anyone who doubted the guilt of Amanda, or who might ask questions or point things out that put their various guilt theories in doubt.
|
19th June 2019, 12:26 PM | #236 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
|
19th June 2019, 12:46 PM | #237 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
I absolutely agree that Rudy Guede was protected and coddled by the police and prosecutor Mignini after Guede was returned to Italy arrested.
Every measure you describe that protected or coddled Guede was meant to set him up as a potential witness against Amanda and Raffaele or to set up the results of his trial to be used against Amanda and Raffaele. The fast-track trial not only resulted in Guede getting a reduced sentence, it allowed for the conclusion of the proceedings against him to be concluded in time to be used, although improperly and illegally according to Italian law and Constitution as stated in the Marasca CSC panel motivation report, against Amanda and Raffaele in the proceedings against them. |
19th June 2019, 02:38 PM | #238 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
I agree with the highlighted part. However, Guede was legally entitled to take the fast track option and, if I'd been his lawyer, I'd have pushed for him to take it. The evidence against him was overwhelming and if he'd gone for a full trial, he'd have been given a harsh sentence without the benefits the fast track provided. He'd have ended up serving a longer sentence. I can fault Guede and Maresca for a lot of things, but taking taking the fast track is not one of them.
|
19th June 2019, 03:28 PM | #239 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
|
True. But one consequence of the proceedings against Guede was that he was given additional time off his sentence because he was, according to the prosecution and as agreed by the courts, not the leader of the attack against Meredith. According to the judgment against Guede, another person led that attack, and was named as Amanda Knox. Raffaele Sollecito was also named as a participant in the proceedings against Guede. Yet neither Amanda Knox nor Raffaele Sollecito was on trial in the proceedings against Guede and thus could not have a defense during that trial. That was a legal trick, exploiting the dysfunctional Italian judicial system, to attempt to get a judgment against Guede that could then be used against Amanda and Raffaele in the proceedings against them.
|
19th June 2019, 03:30 PM | #240 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Speaking of TJMK, I just had a look. Quennell has another fallacy riddled 'article'. The nausea began rising after reading this at the beginning:
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|