ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


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.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Closed Thread
Old 26th June 2019, 02:49 PM   #321
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
KrissyG was busy in yet another misinformation/misleading riddled rant again over on TJMK. For example:
<..... sinister deletia .....>
You have to feel bad for Krissy G who feels the need to lie and mislead rather than present a fair and honest account of the evidence. Could that be because doing so would reveal the fundamental weaknesses of her conclusion that Knox and Sollecito are guilt?
Note the way this KrissyG character slides in "mixed blood" through the back door, using rhetorical sleight-of-hand.

Heavens, even Harry Rag eventually dropped "mixed blood" from his cut-and-paste comment-bombing of every Knox-related online story.

Once the smoke clears from this latest ECHR-related exoneration, KrissyG and Peter Q will simply cycle-back to all those long-since debunked factoids.

Too bad KrissyG doesn't post here, we'd make it to the 50th continuation for sure!!!!
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 26th June 2019, 03:11 PM   #322
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Note the way this KrissyG character slides in "mixed blood" through the back door, using rhetorical sleight-of-hand.

Heavens, even Harry Rag eventually dropped "mixed blood" from his cut-and-paste comment-bombing of every Knox-related online story.

Once the smoke clears from this latest ECHR-related exoneration, KrissyG and Peter Q will simply cycle-back to all those long-since debunked factoids.

Too bad KrissyG doesn't post here, we'd make it to the 50th continuation for sure!!!!
Yes, I noticed the 'mixed blood' bit. I wasn't surprised.

Krissy G, Quennell, and the couple other remaining cult members who bother to comment will eventually fade away into the obscurity I think they fear. Their halcyon days of relevancy and importance are long gone. I'll be sad when they stop completely as...damn...they're entertaining!
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 09:02 AM   #323
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
There is no "there" there

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Yes, I noticed the 'mixed blood' bit. I wasn't surprised.

Krissy G, Quennell, and the couple other remaining cult members who bother to comment will eventually fade away into the obscurity I think they fear. Their halcyon days of relevancy and importance are long gone. I'll be sad when they stop completely as...damn...they're entertaining!
With the ECHR decision now final and binding on Italy, the last of any issue related to either Raffaele Sollecito or Amanda Knox is gone. For all practical purposes, they are exonerated, and there is now officially no reason to even suspect them of anything in relation to the horrid events of Nov 1/2, 2007 in Perugia.

It has always unofficially been this way, but now - officially - there is no "there" there, and there never was.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 10:58 AM   #324
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,003
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
With the ECHR decision now final and binding on Italy, the last of any issue related to either Raffaele Sollecito or Amanda Knox is gone. For all practical purposes, they are exonerated, and there is now officially no reason to even suspect them of anything in relation to the horrid events of Nov 1/2, 2007 in Perugia.

It has always unofficially been this way, but now - officially - there is no "there" there, and there never was.
And for all official purposes.

The ECHR GC Panel, by its decision, confirms that the Chamber judgment in Knox v. Italy is final. Thus, under international law, Italy is obligated to redress its violations of Knox's rights. According to the ECHR Chamber judgment, Italy's conviction of Knox for calunnia violated provisions of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights, Articles 6.1 with 6.3c and with 6.3e - and Italy is therefore obligated to dismiss, in a way compatible with the Convention and ECHR case-law, that conviction.
Numbers 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
Old 27th June 2019, 12:20 PM   #325
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,365
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
And for all official purposes.

The ECHR GC Panel, by its decision, confirms that the Chamber judgment in Knox v. Italy is final. Thus, under international law, Italy is obligated to redress its violations of Knox's rights. According to the ECHR Chamber judgment, Italy's conviction of Knox for calunnia violated provisions of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights, Articles 6.1 with 6.3c and with 6.3e - and Italy is therefore obligated to dismiss, in a way compatible with the Convention and ECHR case-law, that conviction.
OK, now I'm completely confused. This can't possibly be true... didn't Vixen say "The calunnia conviction is safe and remains firmly so." ??
TruthCalls 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
Old 27th June 2019, 01:04 PM   #326
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
OK, now I'm completely confused. This can't possibly be true... didn't Vixen say "The calunnia conviction is safe and remains firmly so." ??
Yes, she did. But remember that she is also the legal eagle who claimed that Amanda's appeal to the ECHR was inadmissible because she had not exhausted all legal avenues in Italy. She also claimed that the Marasca Court had gone beyond its legal remit and should have sent it back to an appeal court.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 01:15 PM   #327
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,179
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
OK, now I'm completely confused. This can't possibly be true... didn't Vixen say "The calunnia conviction is safe and remains firmly so." ??



I have to say that, as serious and sad as this whole horrible murder / investigation / wrongful-conviction saga has been, I still reserve the right to chuckle at the ever-more-desperate contortions of the mental midgets and vindictive saddos of the pro-guilt "community" as everything they allowed themselves to (wrongly) believe for so long has unravelled in front of their eyes.

In fact, I'm still waiting with bated breath for the latest (and probably last) attempt at rationalisation in respect of Italy's confirmed total defeat at the hands of the ECHR over the final outstanding aspect of this case. Actually, I realise now that it won't be the last: the pro-guilt nutters are already salivating over what Mignini apparently plans to say once he retires (not that his opinion carries the tiniest scintilla of weight or relevance at this point of course....); and they are also desperate for Guede to somehow implicate Knox and/or Sollecito once he's released (though again it won't make the slightest jot of difference, and additionally the nutters are too over-invested to realise that it would be entirely self-serving of Guede as sole assailant to continue to claim that it was Knox and/or Sollecito who actually did the deed).
LondonJohn 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
Old 27th June 2019, 01:29 PM   #328
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post


I have to say that, as serious and sad as this whole horrible murder / investigation / wrongful-conviction saga has been, I still reserve the right to chuckle at the ever-more-desperate contortions of the mental midgets and vindictive saddos of the pro-guilt "community" as everything they allowed themselves to (wrongly) believe for so long has unravelled in front of their eyes.

In fact, I'm still waiting with bated breath for the latest (and probably last) attempt at rationalisation in respect of Italy's confirmed total defeat at the hands of the ECHR over the final outstanding aspect of this case. Actually, I realise now that it won't be the last: the pro-guilt nutters are already salivating over what Mignini apparently plans to say once he retires (not that his opinion carries the tiniest scintilla of weight or relevance at this point of course....); and they are also desperate for Guede to somehow implicate Knox and/or Sollecito once he's released (though again it won't make the slightest jot of difference, and additionally the nutters are too over-invested to realise that it would be entirely self-serving of Guede as sole assailant to continue to claim that it was Knox and/or Sollecito who actually did the deed).
How could Guede implicate Knox and Sollecito any more than he already has?
He'll stick to his story of being victimized because he's black. And some fools will believe him.

As for Mignini, I doubt we'll see anything new from him.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 01:32 PM   #329
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by TruthCalls
OK, now I'm completely confused. This can't possibly be true... didn't Vixen say "The calunnia conviction is safe and remains firmly so." ??
Originally Posted by Stacyhs
Yes, she did. But remember that she is also the legal eagle who claimed that Amanda's appeal to the ECHR was inadmissible because she had not exhausted all legal avenues in Italy. She also claimed that the Marasca Court had gone beyond its legal remit and should have sent it back to an appeal court.
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post


I have to say that, as serious and sad as this whole horrible murder / investigation / wrongful-conviction saga has been, I still reserve the right to chuckle at the ever-more-desperate contortions of the mental midgets and vindictive saddos of the pro-guilt "community" as everything they allowed themselves to (wrongly) believe for so long has unravelled in front of their eyes.

In fact, I'm still waiting with bated breath for the latest (and probably last) attempt at rationalisation in respect of Italy's confirmed total defeat at the hands of the ECHR over the final outstanding aspect of this case. Actually, I realise now that it won't be the last: the pro-guilt nutters are already salivating over what Mignini apparently plans to say once he retires (not that his opinion carries the tiniest scintilla of weight or relevance at this point of course....); and they are also desperate for Guede to somehow implicate Knox and/or Sollecito once he's released (though again it won't make the slightest jot of difference, and additionally the nutters are too over-invested to realise that it would be entirely self-serving of Guede as sole assailant to continue to claim that it was Knox and/or Sollecito who actually did the deed).
I'm in the mood to remind the good denizens of this thread what another long-since-departed guilter-nutter had said about their perceived conspiracy, a conspiracy which (in their view) has tended to protect Sollecto and Knox.

Re: the charges which had been leveled against Mignini, the charges he was subject to while himself leading the initial prosecution of S & K in Perugia: Note: (I am not id'ing the author, but long time readers/posters here can readily guess.)
Quote:
The problem is that the Florence prosecution office managed to seize the Narducci investigation file, for seven years. This damaged irreversibly the Narducci investigation.

Someone also broke into Giuttari's GIDeS office and stole some key evidence documentation of the MoF case (in particular, the hand-written letters form the killer). This damaged irreversibly a branch of the MoF investigation as well.

Hellmann-Zanetti was a proven abomination. It was a racist, filthy and inconsistent verdict wrong on so many points of law that the PG even failed to list them all.
Re: the Hellmann/Zanetti ploy to give the defence's failed DNA criticisms from the first trial, some level of respectability by dihonestly appointing Vecchiotti to review Stefanoni's work:
Quote:
The defence only wanted a 'court-appointed expert' (to picture as an 'independant' expert) to 'validate' them so they could bring them back into court.

Stefanoni and the prosecution perfectly knew this and it would make no sense to expect that a dishonest expert could be 'forced' to write something different: any corrupt expert would just bring the defensive arguments back into play. Which is exactly what Vecchiotti did.

However, she also brought in some arguments that the defence had abandoned in the previous trial, because they were not arguable before an impartial court. But before the Hellmann court, even the junk could find its place and could be used for the show. This is what I think happened.

.....Comodi belied Vecchiotti but the problem is Vecchiotti is only a court's ploy. It's not Vecchiotti cheating alone, it looks like a team game lining up Vecchiotti and the judge.
That Vechiotti, Hellmann, and then-President of the Perugian Appeals Court, Wladimiro de Nunzio are criminals:
Quote:
Well I have the following evidence:
1) the number and gravity of obvious violation of law and factual falsehoods/absurdities in Hellmann-Zanetti verdict and running of the trial, is too much beyond what you can expect a judge to get wrong in good faith; I had spotted the abomination and absurdity of the Hellmann-Zanetti motivation from the beginning.

2) Hellmann had no experience as a criminal judge; he used to be a nullity, and a civil judge in a minuscle venue, and had no reputation of respect or transparency;

3) Hellmann he was put in that role in sudden replacement of the true judge, Sergio Matteini Chiari, who was pushed away and forced to give up the role through a Machiavellian move by Wladimiro De Nunzio

4) all indication point to the fact Hellmann is a Mason;

5) Hellmann is a very rich man who loves money, collects Ferraris and luxurious items, despite having the pay of a normal magistrate.

6) witnesses saw Vecchiotti and Conti in a chummy atitude with Dalla Vedova and Maori at at time before they issued their report

7) witnesses have spotted a number Knox-Solelcito of defence lawers in the ofices of Wladimiro De Nunzio before the beginning of the appeal trial

8) Rocco Girlanda published a book and spoke publicly as if he knew in advance that Knox and Sollecito would be freed on appeal; Girlanda is a Mason and a key person in a US-Italy lobby, and politically linked to a number of people including Hellmann

9) witnesses reported about contacts betwen Vecchiotti and Conti and American defence consultants, and there were public admissions of them

10) there is another number of public admissions by American people involved, evidence about which I will remain silent;

11) the reputation of Conti and Vecchiotti from their prior history (as well as the complete lack of expertise of Conti on the filed); the tight links between Vecchiotti and some defence experts (who are also now indicted for corruption on other cases); the personal war already existing between Vecchiotti and Stefanoni;

12) a number of other elements: overall, the picture of manipulation of the trial was glaring and obvious on any aspect of the trial conduction.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 01:48 PM   #330
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,179
Lovely stuff!

You know, Bill, in the white heat of the constant attritional posting frenzies during those times....

.... I think we on the correct side in this case actually neglected so often to see just how unhinged and bizarre so many of the "arguments" from the wrong side in this case truly were.

But by revisiting some of those choice posts above, and especially viewing them in hindsight and in somewhat quieter times, it's just so horribly obvious. Wow.
LondonJohn 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:10 PM   #331
TomG
Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
And for all official purposes.

The ECHR GC Panel, by its decision, confirms that the Chamber judgment in Knox v. Italy is final. Thus, under international law, Italy is obligated to redress its violations of Knox's rights. According to the ECHR Chamber judgment, Italy's conviction of Knox for calunnia violated provisions of international law - the European Convention of Human Rights, Articles 6.1 with 6.3c and with 6.3e - and Italy is therefore obligated to dismiss, in a way compatible with the Convention and ECHR case-law, that conviction.
So who are the parties involved? Italy and the ECtHR obviously, but it surely it requires the input of Amanda and her lawyer since the judgement is in their favour, they now call the shots. Also, how can we monitor the events as they unfold? Are any of the parties obliged to make things public? I get the feeling we might be going into some sort of media twilight zone with this.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:11 PM   #332
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
.... I think we on the correct side in this case actually neglected so often to see just how unhinged and bizarre so many of the "arguments" from the wrong side in this case truly were.

But by revisiting some of those choice posts above, and especially viewing them in hindsight and in somewhat quieter times, it's just so horribly obvious. Wow.
My favourite was #3:

Quote:
3) Hellmann he was put in that role in sudden replacement of the true judge, Sergio Matteini Chiari, who was pushed away and forced to give up the role through a Machiavellian move by Wladimiro De Nunzio*
This, despite it being reported in the Perugian press that Chiari himself said he'd requested a transfer to the juvenile division. But even that was a suspected Masonic lie, to cover the Machiavellian crime committed by De Nunzio and Hellmann.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:31 PM   #333
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,365
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
My favourite was #3:


This, despite it being reported in the Perugian press that Chiari himself said he'd requested a transfer to the juvenile division. But even that was a suspected Masonic lie, to cover the Machiavellian crime committed by De Nunzio and Hellmann.
Hellmann's corruption was exposed when he was spotted drinking a French Cabernet Sauvignon. So careless of him. I'm surprised the PG didn't get more mileage out of that obvious blunder.
TruthCalls 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:33 PM   #334
TomG
Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 174
Am I the only one to be in a sort of cognitive dizz over the ECHR judgement now being confirmed? For the past 12 years we have agonised over this case that owed more to Kafka than it did to justice, and now by the actions of Anna Donnino who acted improperly at the very start of the proceedings, the case against Amanda may possibly be vacated. Jeez! vacated to me, means that it didn't exist in the first place. Does that mean we are all vacated too? Does that mean that the stunningly awesome team that sprang like a lotus on the IA forum is now non-existent? A significant part of my soul has been invested in this case, I'm not too sure if I want it to be vacated just yet.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:46 PM   #335
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Number 3 was a good one but I'll go with #2:

Quote:
2) Hellmann had no experience as a criminal judge; he used to be a nullity, and a civil judge in a minuscle venue, and had no reputation of respect or transparency
Sometime, long ago, I posted links to 3 separate criminal cases that Hellmann presided over.

Got to love these:

Quote:
4) all indication point to the fact Hellmann is a Mason;
Oh, no! A MASON! Everyone knows Masons eat children in satanic rituals while dancing around a bonfire on Halloween! My level 32 Masonic father in-law used to do that all the time. We learned to keep the grandkids away from him near Halloween.

Quote:
5) Hellmann is a very rich man who loves money, collects Ferraris and luxurious items, despite having the pay of a normal magistrate.
Wait...I thought Hellmann was bribed with a Ferrari to acquit the pair.

Quote:
8) Rocco Girlanda published a book and spoke publicly as if he knew in advance that Knox and Sollecito would be freed on appeal; Girlanda is a Mason and a key person in a US-Italy lobby, and politically linked to a number of people including Hellmann
Darn! Those satanic, money loving, rich, corrupt Masons are everywhere!
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 02:49 PM   #336
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
Am I the only one to be in a sort of cognitive dizz over the ECHR judgement now being confirmed? For the past 12 years we have agonised over this case that owed more to Kafka than it did to justice, and now by the actions of Anna Donnino who acted improperly at the very start of the proceedings, the case against Amanda may possibly be vacated. Jeez! vacated to me, means that it didn't exist in the first place. Does that mean we are all vacated too? Does that mean that the stunningly awesome team that sprang like a lotus on the IA forum is now non-existent? A significant part of my soul has been invested in this case, I'm not too sure if I want it to be vacated just yet.

Hoots
Tom, if you're not already a Mason, join. You will then have all kinds of cases to illegally influence AND you'll become rich! Don't worry about the baby eating on All Hallow's Eve, you'll develop a taste for it.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 03:43 PM   #337
TomG
Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Tom, if you're not already a Mason, join. You will then have all kinds of cases to illegally influence AND you'll become rich! Don't worry about the baby eating on All Hallow's Eve, you'll develop a taste for it.
Funnily enough, my old man was a freemason. He asked me in my teenage years if I wanted to join in order to broaden my horizons, I could have done, but in the end I told him to fech off! I'd rather live my life according to my own principles rather than succumb to freaky handshakes. I haven't done too badly.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG 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
Old 27th June 2019, 04:02 PM   #338
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
Funnily enough, my old man was a freemason. He asked me in my teenage years if I wanted to join in order to broaden my horizons, I could have done, but in the end I told him to fech off! I'd rather live my life according to my own principles rather than succumb to freaky handshakes. I haven't done too badly.

Hoots
I concur...I'm not much of a joiner either. I did get my freak on once by joining a book club. That was enough for me.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:34 PM   #339
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
<snip>




Notice the difference between she thinks he's S. African and what KrissyG says. Knox never says she "knows" he is. As to how she might have thought he was S. African, it's quite possible one of the boys downstairs mentioned it to her. After all, Guede claims himself he told Meredith he was S. African so why couldn't he have lied to others about it? Knox had also served him later at Le Chic and it's possible he mentioned it to her then. Guede admitted he was attracted to Knox so he might have told her that in an attempt to flirt with her.
Once again the point completely bypasses you. Guede was only 'South African' within the context of supporting South Africa against England at the World Cup Rugby Final when bantering with Mez, who obviously supported England.

So no, Guede had zero reason to claim he was South African to either Knox or Silenzi (who, further, was a good friend of his, so he had no need to break-in on Filomena's side as he would have known the far easier balcony side).

When Knox referred to a 'short South African guy' in the basketball court she would have got the South African info from Mez and knew perfectly well who Guede was. She lied that he was 'short' because she was trying to incriminate Patrick who was relatively short and stocky.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:37 PM   #340
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Number 3 was a good one but I'll go with #2:



Sometime, long ago, I posted links to 3 separate criminal cases that Hellmann presided over.

Got to love these:



Oh, no! A MASON! Everyone knows Masons eat children in satanic rituals while dancing around a bonfire on Halloween! My level 32 Masonic father in-law used to do that all the time. We learned to keep the grandkids away from him near Halloween.



Wait...I thought Hellmann was bribed with a Ferrari to acquit the pair.



Darn! Those satanic, money loving, rich, corrupt Masons are everywhere!

Don't you mean 33rd degree?
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:44 PM   #341
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
.... I think we on the correct side in this case actually neglected so often to see just how unhinged and bizarre so many of the "arguments" from the wrong side in this case truly were.

But by revisiting some of those choice posts above, and especially viewing them in hindsight and in somewhat quieter times, it's just so horribly obvious. Wow.
Two last ones from the source which I refuse to name.

First is the theory this guy had which most directly relates to the recent ECHR finding that Italy had violated Knox's rights at interrogation. This (it seems) binds Italy to correct the miscarriage of the calunnia conviction.... but this is what (way back when) our friend had said was iron-clad:
Quote:
7. The unexplained false accusation of an innocent (for this, Knox was definitively found guilty). I say "unexplained" meaning unjustified, I mean that this is a further area on which Knox opened an additional chapter of changes and lies. Actually, the manifest inconsistency of all the claims of "coercion" or "false memory", the logical analysis of Knox's inconsistencies about the topic and the crossing with others' testimonies leave absolutely no reasonable doubt on this point.
He also said that part of his reason for blaming Knox for the Lumumba accusation, was that she had not been "worn down" by lack of sleep, exhaustion, or being kept awake in the middle of the night by being called (repeatedly) a liar.

He wrote this in 2013, when he said that Knox could choose not to sleep, which he deduced from analyzing her writings, and therefore was ready and fresh to face the challenge of an interrogation.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:46 PM   #342
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Once again the point completely bypasses you. Guede was only 'South African' within the context of supporting South Africa against England at the World Cup Rugby Final when bantering with Mez, who obviously supported England.

So no, Guede had zero reason to claim he was South African to either Knox or Silenzi (who, further, was a good friend of his, so he had no need to break-in on Filomena's side as he would have known the far easier balcony side).

When Knox referred to a 'short South African guy' in the basketball court she would have got the South African info from Mez and knew perfectly well who Guede was. She lied that he was 'short' because she was trying to incriminate Patrick who was relatively short and stocky.
1. Please stop using the familiar name for the victim.

2. You have missed that the effect of the ECHR decision is to petition Italy to reverse its conviction for calunnia.
You just keep on keeping on as if nothing transpired within the Council of Europe. Please stop it.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:46 PM   #343
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Number 3 was a good one but I'll go with #2:



Sometime, long ago, I posted links to 3 separate criminal cases that Hellmann presided over.

Got to love these:



Oh, no! A MASON! Everyone knows Masons eat children in satanic rituals while dancing around a bonfire on Halloween! My level 32 Masonic father in-law used to do that all the time. We learned to keep the grandkids away from him near Halloween.



Wait...I thought Hellmann was bribed with a Ferrari to acquit the pair.



Darn! Those satanic, money loving, rich, corrupt Masons are everywhere!
You can scoff but Perugia is riddled with freemasonry. Wink and a nod, fixed it for you.

If anyone cannot see that Knox and Sollecito's annulment was not a fix of the highest order they must be some kind of conspiracy theorist that holds Knox was picked on for being a promiscuous American. For all the hundreds of thousands of pounds Knox' family spent on PR (in her deposition to the ECHR she puts the figure she owes her parents at 2.4m) when most likely it was Raff's father's connections via Bongiorno that got the pair off.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:50 PM   #344
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
1. Please stop using the familiar name for the victim.

2. You have missed that the effect of the ECHR decision is to petition Italy to reverse its conviction for calunnia.
You just keep on keeping on as if nothing transpired within the Council of Europe. Please stop it.
It has no such effect.

For example, the terrorist preacher Al-Hamzi won his ECHR case. It didn't nullify his convictions nor did it stop the USA banging him up in jail for a very very long time.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:52 PM   #345
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
What is incredible is that you can write.....
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
If anyone cannot see that Knox and Sollecito's annulment was not a fix of the highest order
And follow it directly with.....
Quote:
..... they must be some kind of conspiracy theorist.
Takes nerve, real nerve.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:54 PM   #346
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It has no such effect.

For example, the terrorist preacher Al-Hamzi won his ECHR case. It didn't nullify his convictions nor did it stop the USA banging him up in jail for a very very long time.
It has effect if Italy honours the treaty. As far as Numbers has reported, the one thing that Italy does well is honour the Council of Europe treaty.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 05:59 PM   #347
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
It has effect if Italy honours the treaty. As far as Numbers has reported, the one thing that Italy does well is honour the Council of Europe treaty.
I am sure it will send her the 10,400 via Dalla Vedova who will then take his fees and send her the remainder.

It doesn't reverse the conviction.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
Vixen 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
Old 27th June 2019, 06:00 PM   #348
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,179
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You can scoff but Perugia is riddled with freemasonry. Wink and a nod, fixed it for you.

If anyone cannot see that Knox and Sollecito's annulment was not a fix of the highest order they must be some kind of conspiracy theorist that holds Knox was picked on for being a promiscuous American. For all the hundreds of thousands of pounds Knox' family spent on PR (in her deposition to the ECHR she puts the figure she owes her parents at 2.4m) when most likely it was Raff's father's connections via Bongiorno that got the pair off.


Ah, so it must have been Mignini's links to Opus Dei and other shadowy quasi-masonic Catholic secret brotherhoods which led to Knox's and Sollecito's "fix of the highest order" Massei-court convictions in the first place.....

See, Vixen, you and your fellow pro-guilt conspiracy theorists cannot have it both ways. When it suits you, you declare that the Italian judiciary is world-class. But when it doesn't suit you (i.e. in respect of every judicial decision which was not for guilt, up to and including the Marasca Supreme Court panel and the European Court of Human Rights), you are quick to throw around (entirely evidence-free, of course....) accusations of court-nobbling - which you appear to think can happen with consummate ease if desired.

Kind of reminds me of the good old "Captain Amanda / Hapless Amanda" dichotomy which once again saw pro-guilt commentators talking out of both sides of their mouths in a gloriously self-contradictory manner, in order to suit their pre-formed agenda.

So strange. And entirely out of line with the concept of "critical thinking". But we've long come to expect that. Still: flail away by all means!!
LondonJohn 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
Old 27th June 2019, 06:01 PM   #349
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,179
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I am sure it will send her the €10,400 via Dalla Vedova who will then take his fees and send her the remainder.

It doesn't reverse the conviction.


You really don't have any idea of what just happened in respect of the ECHR judgement (and its refusal to grant Italy any leave to appeal), do you?

LondonJohn 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
Old 27th June 2019, 06:15 PM   #350
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,179
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It has no such effect.

For example, the terrorist preacher Al-Hamzi won his ECHR case. It didn't nullify his convictions nor did it stop the USA banging him up in jail for a very very long time.

Uhhhhhhh

1) Do you know (or do you not know? You do not know) that the USA is neither a member of the Council of Europe, nor is it a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights?

2) Did you know (or did you not know? You did not know) that the ECHR's interventions wrt the preacher Abu Hamza (not "Al-Hamzi" - why do you appear to show a cavalier disregard for getting names so wrong so frequently, Vixen?) were solely to do with his extradition from the UK (where he was being held in custody) to the US (where he faced terrorism-related charges)? The ECHR delayed his extradition purely in order to receive assurances from the US authorities that he would not face the death penalty and that he would not be held in inhumane conditions or subjected to torture etc. The ECHR did not adjudicate that Abu Hamza's human rights had been violated in any way, let alone that they'd been violated in the course of an investigation or trial process.


So you see, Vixen, the Abu Hamza case and the Knox case are hugely, hugely different in terms of the role played by the ECHR and the judgements issued by the ECHR. If you'd bothered to do any proper research (and you never tire of claiming outstanding research rigour....) you'd have been able to see that. But no, let's not let the facts get in the way of a gross distortion to support a jaded "argument", eh....?

Last edited by LondonJohn; 27th June 2019 at 06:16 PM.
LondonJohn 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
Old 27th June 2019, 06:28 PM   #351
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I am sure it will send her the 10,400 via Dalla Vedova who will then take his fees and send her the remainder.

It doesn't reverse the conviction.
No it doesn't, you are correct. Sovereign states are sovereign states after all.

In this case, though, as a signatory to the Council of Europe, Italy seems to be treaty-bound to revise the conviction. As LondonJohn says, you have no idea what just transpired, do you?

No fear, though, if I had not read Numbers' stuff, I'd be in the dark, too. Indeed, I've read Numbers' stuff, and it still is a learning curve for me, so be patient, you'll eventually get it.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Old 27th June 2019, 07:10 PM   #352
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Once again the point completely bypasses you. Guede was only 'South African' within the context of supporting South Africa against England at the World Cup Rugby Final when bantering with Mez, who obviously supported England.
What has bypassed you is that I was referring to the article by KrissyG on TJMK which stated (and which I previously quoted):

Quote:
Guede himself claims he referred to himself as South African when chatting to Meredith during the England vs South Africa rugby cup final.
So perhaps you should have a word with KrissyG so you can get your stories straight.

Guede was a known liar who claimed to be American at times to girls and, according to Krissy G, claimed to be S.African to Meredith. Why do you find it impossible that he told the Italian boys or even Amanda that he was S.African? Guede says when he met up with the boys, Meredith and Amanda the night they went to the cottage, Amanda mentioned she was from Seattle. It would have been quite possible that Guede responded "I'm from S. Africa." However, Stefano Bonassi also told police that Guede was S. African according to Follain:
Quote:
While questioning Giacomo’s flatmate Stefano Bonassi together, Mignini and Napoleoni learnt that recent visitors to the cottage included a young man nicknamed ‘The Baron’, a ‘South African’ who had a gym-toned body and was strongly attracted to Amanda.
Follain, John. A Death in Italy: The Definitive Account of the Amanda Knox Case . St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.

[/quote]

Quote:
So no, Guede had zero reason to claim he was South African to either Knox or Silenzi (who, further, was a good friend of his,
"A good friend"? Not according to Silenzi's testimony:
Quote:
Q: I see. About this acquaintance with Rudy Guede was there a sort of friendship, I mean did you frequent each other every so often or did it happen casually on sporadical occasions?
A: No, it’s not that we were in touch to go out together like this, it would happen that we’d play some matches on the court above the house, we knew him already because he was a guy who played there together with us.
Q: So he came sometimes to your house?
A: He came once to our house, I don’t remember when exactly, however it was an evening when we bumped into him around town, we started to talk, we were going home and he also came together with us.
Q: So he only came to your house once?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you remember if you ever went dancing together with him, any of you?
A: Together with Rudy? No.
Q: It wasn’t the case?
A: No.
Stop making up things.

Quote:
... so he had no need to break-in on Filomena's side as he would have known the far easier balcony side).
Far easier? You mean the balcony that, as of last month when I was there, still had what looks like the very same heavy wooden door without bars? Every single window had bars on it including Filomena's window but that 'easier' entry still had no bars.

Quote:
When Knox referred to a 'short South African guy' in the basketball court she would have got the South African info from Mez and knew perfectly well who Guede was. She lied that he was 'short' because she was trying to incriminate Patrick who was relatively short and stocky.
LOL! If that were her Machiavellian plan then why did she already list Patrick separately from the 'S. African' when asked by the police to name men Meredith had known?

Quote:
Among the men she mentioned were Patrick, an Algerian called Yuve who sometimes worked at Le Chic, ‘Shaky’ who worked in a pizzeria, and a short, black ‘South African’ who played basketball on Piazza Grimana and who had once been to the semi-basement flat when Meredith was there too.
Follain, John. A Death in Italy: The Definitive Account of the Amanda Knox Case .

See what happens when you just make up crap? The facts tend to get in the way.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 27th June 2019 at 07:27 PM.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 07:11 PM   #353
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Don't you mean 33rd degree?
No, my FIL was a level 32 as I clearly said. Level 33 is the highest.
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 07:21 PM   #354
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You can scoff but Perugia is riddled with freemasonry. Wink and a nod, fixed it for you.
Would you care to provide evidence that Freemasons "fix things" by interfering in court cases?

Quote:
If anyone cannot see that Knox and Sollecito's annulment was not a fix of the highest order they must be some kind of conspiracy theorist that holds Knox was picked on for being a promiscuous American. For all the hundreds of thousands of pounds Knox' family spent on PR (in her deposition to the ECHR she puts the figure she owes her parents at 2.4m) when most likely it was Raff's father's connections via Bongiorno that got the pair off.
LOL! If we can't see that it was the Freemasons or the US government or Dr. Sollecito's 'connections' who forced the Court of Cassation to wrongfully acquit the pair then we are conspiracy theorists?
HOLY MOLY!
Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 07:34 PM   #355
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Vixen, I see you snipped the part about Guede's description of the attacker in your reply above regarding the lies told by Krissy G in her latest TJMK rant. Are you conceding that Guede never referred to the knife as a "stiletto" as Krissy G wrote? Or are you going to

Stacyhs 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
Old 27th June 2019, 08:00 PM   #356
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,003
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
So who are the parties involved? Italy and the ECtHR obviously, but it surely it requires the input of Amanda and her lawyer since the judgement is in their favour, they now call the shots. Also, how can we monitor the events as they unfold? Are any of the parties obliged to make things public? I get the feeling we might be going into some sort of media twilight zone with this.

Hoots
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
Am I the only one to be in a sort of cognitive dizz over the ECHR judgement now being confirmed? For the past 12 years we have agonised over this case that owed more to Kafka than it did to justice, and now by the actions of Anna Donnino who acted improperly at the very start of the proceedings, the case against Amanda may possibly be vacated. Jeez! vacated to me, means that it didn't exist in the first place. Does that mean we are all vacated too? Does that mean that the stunningly awesome team that sprang like a lotus on the IA forum is now non-existent? A significant part of my soul has been invested in this case, I'm not too sure if I want it to be vacated just yet.

Hoots
1. Regarding the ECHR judgment, final as of 24 June 2019, in Knox v. Italy, it is Italy which has the obligation under international law (the Convention and ECHR case-law) to redress its violations against Amanda Knox in unfairly convicting her of calunnia against Patrick Lumumba. The redress measures that Italy must take under international law to abide by the final judgment of the ECHR consist of three elements: 1) payment of the just satisfaction and costs as laid out by the ECHR judgment, 2) carrying out individual measures to restore, insofar as possible, Knox to her condition prior to Italy's violations of her rights, and 3) carrying out general measures, such as changing practices or laws, to prevent any future occurrence of such violations. Italy's performance of these redress measures will be carried out, according to the Convention, under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers, who meet quarterly, and more specifically and frequently, by the CoM Deputies in charge of the Council of Europe's Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The latter has a home website at:

https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution

The Department summarizes its function as follows: "The Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights advises and assists the Committee of Ministers in its function of supervision of the implementation of the Court’s judgments. It also provides support to the member States to achieve full, effective and prompt execution of judgments."

Source: https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution...the-department

The process followed by the CoM and the Department for Execution of Judgments is summarized as follows:

"Member states have undertaken to comply with final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) finding violations of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention), as well as with Court decisions taking note of friendly settlements (see Articles 46 and 39.4 of the Convention).

The adoption of the necessary execution measures is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, made up of representatives of the governments of the 47 Member States, assisted by the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the Court (Directorate General I of Human Rights and Rule of Law).

The states have a legal obligation to remedy the violations found but enjoy a margin of appreciation as regards the means to be used. The measures to be taken are, in principle, identified by the state concerned, under supervision of the Committee of Ministers. .... Measures to be taken may relate to the individual applicant or be of a general nature.

The Committee of Ministers ensures continuous supervision of the execution of judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Cases remain under supervision until the required measures have been taken. Supervision is then closed by a final resolution.

Once judgments and decisions become final, states indicate to the Committee of Ministers as soon as possible the measures planned and/ or taken in an "action plan". Once all the measures have been taken, an "action report" is submitted. During the supervision process, applicants, NGOs and National Institutions for the promotion and protection of Human Rights can submit communications, in writing.

The supervision of the adoption and implementation of action plans has followed a new twin-track procedure since January 2011. Most cases follow the standard procedure. An enhanced procedure is used for cases requiring urgent individual measures or revealing important structural problems (in particular pilot-judgments) and for inter-state cases.

Where necessary, the Committee of Ministers may assist execution in different ways, notably through recommendations set out in decisions and interim resolutions. ...."

Source: https://www.coe.int/en/web/execution...vision-process

The progress of a case before the CoM - Department of Execution of Judgments may be followed online at the following database:

https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng#{%22E...91;%22CEC%22]}

The procedure is that the respondent state files an Action Plan specifying its proposed (or completed) payment date, and its proposed individual measures and general measures. These are reviewed by the CoM - Department for Execution and the applicant, and changes may be suggested to the state. As the state works through its plan, it files Action Reports. Interim Resolutions may be filed by the CoM addressing the efforts of the state. When an Action Report indicates that the redress measures have been completed, and the CoM - Department for Execution and applicant agree, the CoM issues a Final Resolution.

2. As far as I know, the only legal avenues within Italy for a wrongful conviction to be reversed are the revision procedure and, possibly, the pardon procedure. These procedures are, according to Italian law, do not occur automatically after a final judgment of an unfair criminal trial by the ECHR. The revision procedure, which may be requested by either a prosecutor or a convicted person or both, may be requested after a final judgment of the ECHR finds that there has been a violation of the Convention by Italy of the convicted person's right to a fair trial (that is, a violation of Article 6.1). Acceptance by the Italian judicial system of a request for revision generally results in a legal proceeding which reviews only those elements of the case that are pertinent to the request. The result of revision proceedings that fairly evaluate the evidence and how it was obtained, in accordance with the ECHR final judgment, must either vacate (dismiss the charges) or acquit (find that the crime did not occur) in Amanda's case.

Last edited by Numbers; 27th June 2019 at 08:42 PM.
Numbers 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
Old 27th June 2019, 09:41 PM   #357
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,003
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Uhhhhhhh

1) Do you know (or do you not know? You do not know) that the USA is neither a member of the Council of Europe, nor is it a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights?

2) Did you know (or did you not know? You did not know) that the ECHR's interventions wrt the preacher Abu Hamza (not "Al-Hamzi" - why do you appear to show a cavalier disregard for getting names so wrong so frequently, Vixen?) were solely to do with his extradition from the UK (where he was being held in custody) to the US (where he faced terrorism-related charges)? The ECHR delayed his extradition purely in order to receive assurances from the US authorities that he would not face the death penalty and that he would not be held in inhumane conditions or subjected to torture etc. The ECHR did not adjudicate that Abu Hamza's human rights had been violated in any way, let alone that they'd been violated in the course of an investigation or trial process.


So you see, Vixen, the Abu Hamza case and the Knox case are hugely, hugely different in terms of the role played by the ECHR and the judgements issued by the ECHR. If you'd bothered to do any proper research (and you never tire of claiming outstanding research rigour....) you'd have been able to see that. But no, let's not let the facts get in the way of a gross distortion to support a jaded "argument", eh....?
It should also be pointed out that Abu Hamza prior to being extradited to the US was found guilty and imprisoned by the UK on charges including soliciting murder and other terrorism-related charges leveled by the UK itself.

A number of the UK terrorism charges were apparently based on his alleged public statements or sermons advocating violence.

"On 27 May 2004, Hamza was detained on remand by British authorities and appeared before magistrates at the start of a process to try to extradite him to the United States. Yemen also requested his extradition. The United States wanted Hamza to stand trial for eleven counts relating to the taking of sixteen hostages in Yemen in 1998, advocating jihad in Afghanistan in 2001, supporting James Ujaama in an alleged attempt to establish a "terrorist training camp" in late 1999 and early 2000 near Bly, Oregon, and of providing aid to al-Qaeda.
....
On 8 July 2010, the ECtHR temporarily blocked Hamza's extradition to the United States to face terrorism charges until the court was satisfied that he would not be treated inhumanely."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Hamza_al-Masri

As you state, the ECHR did not find that Abu Hamza's Convention rights had been violated or that they would be violated by extradition to the US. Thus, the ECHR did not, after assuring that all relevant assurances had been received from the US, bar the UK from extraditing Abu Hamza.

Some of the ECHR review of the case is contained in BABAR AHMAD AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM 24027/07 11949/08 36742/08 ...

As you state, the case of Abu Hamza is not at all comparable to that of Amanda Knox.

Last edited by Numbers; 27th June 2019 at 10:11 PM.
Numbers 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
Old 27th June 2019, 11:45 PM   #358
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,455
Whaaaaaaaa.....? Vixen was wrong regarding Abu Hamza? Well, color me shocked!
Stacyhs 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
Old 28th June 2019, 04:47 AM   #359
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 535
"European Court of Human Rights Sides With Amanda Knox—to a Point"
by Barbie

In other words, I've been wrong about this case for over a decade by I can't admit it.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/europe...int?ref=scroll
whoanellie is online now   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
Old 28th June 2019, 04:49 AM   #360
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,372
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Whaaaaaaaa.....? Vixen was wrong regarding Abu Hamza? Well, color me shocked!
Well.....

I was wrong, too. I'd at times expressed skepticism that the ECHR would decide in Knox's favour. I had thought that they'd simply take the easy route and sustain a member states wrongful conviction for calunnia by Knox against Lumumba.....

..... who to my knowledge has been strangely silent about it all.

But I'm with Vixen - egg on my face (and in my posts) for repeatedly suggesting that Numbers was being way, way, way, way too optimistic that the ECHR would right an obvious wrong.

Numbers is da man! Not just a collection of random digits, but a whole polynomial, if not a full-blown quadratic equation!
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams 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
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:53 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.