IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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 Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Closed Thread
Old 24th November 2022, 10:06 AM   #3881
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
See the post I was responding to, here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post13951700

Yes, I know very well the post you were responding to. The clue should have been in my direct reference to it.

My question stands exactly as before: please explain how you’re interpreting that post in that way. To give you a hint: nothing in that post makes direct or oblique reference to this being “like a USA vs Italy football match”, nor does that post in any way come anywhere remotely near to implying that sentiment on the part of the poster. Outside of your own imagination, that is….
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 24th November 2022, 10:07 AM   #3882
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
The highlighted part? The very definition of a suspect-centred investigation, rather than an evidence-based investigation. "She broke, and told us what we already knew."

Thanks for clearing that up, Vixen. Indeed, Mignini saw the crime-scene for himself. He proceeded to order that the victim's body temperature NOT be taken on site, thus denying investigators the opportunity to set time of death precisely.

So, seeing the crime-scene makes Mignini an expert?

But you did make eight posts in 23 minutes. That alone makes you an expert!
That is how police operate by having suspicions and suspects. The best detectives are the ones who can think exactly like a criminal and thus have well-built in ******** detectors. I've worked with ex-detectives. One guy from Australia who worked with me in insolvency was an ex-detective back home and he was red-hot in spotting the bankrupts and dodgy directors who lied about their assets. These guys are trained in 'examination'. There are even Examiners qualifications.


They don't waste their time on the innocent without any motive because at the end of the day they have to explain it all before a High Court judge.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 10:12 AM   #3883
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
To detract police attention away from herself.

She thought she could play the damsel in distress not realising she had just confessed to being at the crime scene. Hearing the thud and harrowing scream other witnesses also reported.

Even in her 'gift' follow up letter to the police she claimed she had seen Patrik in blurry shades of green at the basketball court.


She thought Italian police would automatically nail the Black guy on her say so.

You might have missed it (looks like you did, judging by this post), but the ECHR ripped apart Knox’s criminal slander conviction, with especially damning criticism reserved for the disgusting and unlawful way in which Knox was interrogated on 5th/6th November. You should probably look into that ECHR judgement, since I imagine you might not want to embarrass yourself again in this manner. (And it’s “distract”)
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 24th November 2022, 11:13 AM   #3884
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,477
Originally Posted by Bill Williams
The highlighted part? The very definition of a suspect-centred investigation, rather than an evidence-based investigation. "She broke, and told us what we already knew."

Thanks for clearing that up, Vixen. Indeed, Mignini saw the crime-scene for himself. He proceeded to order that the victim's body temperature NOT be taken on site, thus denying investigators the opportunity to set time of death precisely.

So, seeing the crime-scene makes Mignini an expert?
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That is how police operate by having suspicions and suspects. The best detectives are the ones who can think exactly like a criminal and thus have well-built in ******** detectors. I've worked with ex-detectives. One guy from Australia who worked with me in insolvency was an ex-detective back home and he was red-hot in spotting the bankrupts and dodgy directors who lied about their assets. These guys are trained in 'examination'. There are even Examiners qualifications.


They don't waste their time on the innocent without any motive because at the end of the day they have to explain it all before a High Court judge.
Instead of explaining away suspect-centred investigations, you simply double-down on the very definition of suspect-centred investigations.

"They don't waste their time on the innocent"!?!?!? Let those words sink in a bit. You seem to be the only one left in the thread who does not see it. Apparently there's a universe out there in the Knox-shaming crowd, where only the guilty are even investigated, even before any evidence is available.

Hey! That's exactly what had happened in Perugia in 2007!

Yet it is gratifying to see you double-down on it. This thread is now bringing some lurkers out, to become posters. Mostly, I'm sure the lurkers are saying about the likes of me, "why are you engaging this person?"

Good question.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 24th November 2022 at 11:15 AM.
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 24th November 2022, 11:36 AM   #3885
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
You might have missed it (looks like you did, judging by this post), but the ECHR ripped apart Knox’s criminal slander conviction, with especially damning criticism reserved for the disgusting and unlawful way in which Knox was interrogated on 5th/6th November. You should probably look into that ECHR judgement, since I imagine you might not want to embarrass yourself again in this manner. (And it’s “distract”)
The ECHR refers to Boninsegna case in which she was acquitted. It claimed the police were too nice to her, conforting her and patting her hand.

From Collins English Dictionary:

Detract:

2. (transitive)
to distract or divert
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 11:38 AM   #3886
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Instead of explaining away suspect-centred investigations, you simply double-down on the very definition of suspect-centred investigations.

"They don't waste their time on the innocent"!?!?!? Let those words sink in a bit. You seem to be the only one left in the thread who does not see it. Apparently there's a universe out there in the Knox-shaming crowd, where only the guilty are even investigated, even before any evidence is available.

Hey! That's exactly what had happened in Perugia in 2007!

Yet it is gratifying to see you double-down on it. This thread is now bringing some lurkers out, to become posters. Mostly, I'm sure the lurkers are saying about the likes of me, "why are you engaging this person?"

Good question.
How is it 'coercive interrogation' unless they believe a person is innocent. Why would they need to coerce someone into admission if they are guilty.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 12:01 PM   #3887
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How is it 'coercive interrogation' unless they believe a person is innocent. Why would they need to coerce someone into admission if they are guilty.

Wow. You really do know next to nothing about coerced false confessions*. And seeing as they are entirely central to the unlawful convictions of both Knox and Sollecito, that’s quite something. Even for you.


* As a quick primer for you though: the clear majority of unlawful coerced false confessions are extracted from those whom law enforcement believe - erroneously - to be either high on their list of suspects or the suspect. As you’d have learned if you’d bothered to do even a modicum of proper research into the subject. Ah well, plus ça change…..
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 24th November 2022, 12:12 PM   #3888
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The ECHR refers to Boninsegna case in which she was acquitted. It claimed the police were too nice to her, conforting her and patting her

As I said: you might want to examine* the ECHR communication regarding Knox’s criminal slander conviction (that is, the conviction that has now been entirely discredited by the ECHR), if you’d prefer to save yourself further embarrassment on this matter.


* That is to say: examine with a correct and full understanding of the context and the principles at stake, a full understanding of the ECHR and each signatory state’s obligations under the Convention, and a sufficiently good understanding of jurisprudence principles in general. Or you could wing it and/or just make **** up. Who’s to know which way the dice will fall!!
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 24th November 2022, 12:14 PM   #3889
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 860
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Welshman, all good points.

In your point number 3, you left out stating that the unreliable ("invalid") DNA profile was that of Kercher; I took the liberty of inserting that identifier in your quoted post above.

There was no dispute that the DNA profile on the handle was that of Knox. It was there because she had used the knife in Sollecito's apartment to prepare food, not because of any criminal act.

The fabrication of assumptions by Massei and other Italian judges, false inferences from unreliable or fraudulent evidence, is apparently a feature brought over from the inquisitorial Italian judicial system supposedly largely eliminated by the 1988 reforms of the Italian Constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure.

An interesting article authored by a professor and a research fellow from Yale Law School, relying on European legal experts for information, discusses the inquisitional system in Italy (and in France and Germany) as of 1977. One point of interest made in the discussion of the Italian inquisitional system is that the judges did not, in practice, pay attention to any procedural irregularities (violations of procedural law) committed by the police or prosecutor. The power of the police was increased by the failure of the prosecutor or judge to review the actions of the police. The prosecutor or judge did not inquire as to whether an arrest was the result of illegal conduct by the police or whether an interrogation was unlawful. The judge sometimes would ask for a procedure to be redone if the original procedure, such as an interrogation, was found to have been "defective".



Source:

https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstre...=2&isAllowed=y
p. 257 -259
In the 15 years since Meredith's murder, I am surprised PIP have not raised the question why the prosecution had to resort to using evidence with zero credibility and full of holes such as the knife if they had a solid case. Having to use evidence with no credibility is a sign the prosecution have such a weak case and lack of evidence, they are prepared to use evidence with no credibility.

Last edited by Welshman; 24th November 2022 at 01:16 PM.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 12:18 PM   #3890
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 860
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Read the court documents and the trial transcripts and you'll find out!
Vixen can't answer any of my questions and none of the courts addressed these questions.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 12:23 PM   #3891
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 860
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That is how police operate by having suspicions and suspects. The best detectives are the ones who can think exactly like a criminal and thus have well-built in ******** detectors. I've worked with ex-detectives. One guy from Australia who worked with me in insolvency was an ex-detective back home and he was red-hot in spotting the bankrupts and dodgy directors who lied about their assets. These guys are trained in 'examination'. There are even Examiners qualifications.


They don't waste their time on the innocent without any motive because at the end of the day they have to explain it all before a High Court judge.
Vixen talks about the best detectives which can't be applied to the corrupt and incompetent buffoons of the Perugia police. If police don't try and convict innocent people why were Amanda and Raffaele viciously railroaded by the police when they had no case.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 24th November 2022, 12:28 PM   #3892
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,477
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How is it 'coercive interrogation' unless they believe a person is innocent. Why would they need to coerce someone into admission if they are guilty.
Just look at that statement again and give it some thought.

So, what is at issue here are the investigators beliefs. The problem in Perugia in 2007 was that they believed the pair were guilty, when they weren't. The police and Mignini acted on that belief, well before any actual evidence was found or even before Rudy Guede was known - as he'd fled to Germany.

I'd hate to live in a country where the police's beliefs were the core of prosecution's. I mean, why even accord the accused rights when you 'know' they're guilty, you can just feel it! Who needs actual evidence?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 24th November 2022 at 12:29 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 12:40 PM   #3893
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,094
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
... the ECHR ripped apart Knox’s criminal slander [malicious accusation ("calunnia")] conviction, with especially damning criticism reserved for the disgusting and unlawful way in which Knox was interrogated on 5th/6th November. ....
LondonJohn, I took the liberty of clarifying the wording in your post idenifying the name of the Italian crime for which Knox was convicted.

LondonJohn, thanks for reminding us of the ECHR final judgment Knox v. Italy, which found that Italy had violated Knox's rights under three provisions of the European Convention: Articles 6.1 with 6.3c (unfair trial resulting from interrogation without a defense lawyer), Articles 6.1 with 6.3e (unfair trial resulting from failure to provide a fair interpreter), and Article 3 under its procedural limb (failure to conduct a fair and independent investigation of a credible claim of mistreatment by the police).

The final judgment Knox v. Italy is currently awaiting resolution under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers (CoM) of the Council of Europe.

It's of interest to compare Italy's performance in resolving final judgments of the ECHR to that of other countries, such as the UK, of roughly similar populations (Italy's population is about 60 million, that of the UK, about 67 million).

Knox v. Italy is one of 60 Leading cases against Italy pending before the CoM. Italy has 165 closed (finally resolved) Leading cases, so about 27% of the total leading cases against Italy are pending. Of the 60 pending leading cases, 50% have ECHR final judgment dates (FJD) no older than 2018, while the oldest FJD among the pending Leading cases is 1997.

In comparison, the UK has 10 Leading cases pending, with 204 closed leading cases, so about 10% of the total Leading cases against the UK remain pending. Of the 10 pending cases, 50% have FJD no older than 2021, while the oldest FJD among the pending Leading cases is 2001.

Comparing Italy to the other large-population western European democracies (Spain, 47 M; France, 65 M; Germany, 84 M) also shows that Italy has the highest proportion of pending Leading cases to total Leading cases and the slowest rate of reaching final resolution of the Leading cases (as a group) under CoM supervision.

Source:

https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng#{%22EXECDocumentTypeCollection%22:[%22CEC%22]}

(analysis conducted using the appropriate filters to isolate the relevant data)

Last edited by Numbers; 24th November 2022 at 12:44 PM.
Numbers 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 24th November 2022, 01:16 PM   #3894
MarkCorrigan
¡No pasarán!
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Слава Україні
Posts: 11,379
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How is it 'coercive interrogation' unless they believe a person is innocent. Why would they need to coerce someone into admission if they are guilty.
Seriously?

No, seriously? Are you claiming that the police cannot coerce people in an interrogation if they believe they are guilty?

You do know it's possible to coerce someone into a confession even if the confession is true, right?
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor, they call me a Saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist. - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan 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 24th November 2022, 01:20 PM   #3895
MarkCorrigan
¡No pasarán!
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Слава Україні
Posts: 11,379
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
This is supposed to be a serious discussion thread.
Yes, and I'm seriously pointing out your flagrant hypocrisy. You cry foul about people treating you shabbily and being insulting and yet lay about you with insults of your own. Not to mention you seem to have a severely distorted view of what constitutes an insult. Recently for example you accused Stacy of being sexist. I'd like very much if you could point out the exact post in which Stacy was sexist.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I understand that there are some individuals who are just here for the sport of trolling. I hope you are not one of them as I cannot think of anything more yawn-inducing.
Holding you to account for your posting history is not trolling, any more than pointing out you regularly lean on questionable sources is trolling, or pointing out that you falsely represent yourself is trolling.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor, they call me a Saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist. - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan 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 24th November 2022, 01:59 PM   #3896
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
There is a whole genre of 'senseless' teenage thrill killing.

Erin Caffey, who in prison shows off her beautiful singing voice, got her boyfriend to slaughter her entire family and then spent the rest of the day having sex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdGhc8IfviM

The 'Scream Murders'.

Kim Edwards got her boyfriend to kill her little sister and mother and they then spent the rest of the day eating ice-cream and watching Twilight.

The Memphis Three killings - one of them was the instigator.

I consider the murder of Meredith Kercher to be in the category of 'senseless thrill-seeking' by immature adults, although I would add the caveat that at age 23 and considerably older by about three four years than the others, Sollecito was surely old enough to distinguish between reality and fantasy and to have put a stop to it. Instead, he of all parties had zero motive other than as a totally anti-social cold evil game player. Even the cops described him as 'icy cold'.
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 24th November 2022, 02:13 PM   #3897
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post

It’s interesting (no, it’s really not) how Vixen totally fails to grasp the codependency dynamics of couples-murderers: without exception, both partners will have spent many months at a minimum (and often years) gradually testing each other’s boundaries and upping the ante step by step. As such, there’s almost invariably an escalating pattern of antisocial behaviour on the part of the couple, and frequently a committal of lower-grade criminal activity as the couple develops an ever more complex psychological bond of trust and validation.

Of course, Knox/Sollecito fit this profile with almost uncanny accuracy. Oh, hold on………
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 24th November 2022, 02:13 PM   #3898
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,157
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Knox had a belief that all she had to do was point to a Black guy. It didn't ever occur to her when she covered up for Guede, according to the final Marasca-Bruno, who state in their written reasons she named Lumumba just in case anyone saw the Black guy coming out of the cottage at the time, that in fervorously grabbing police chief Napoleoni by the arm and frogmarching her on arrival at the cottage to the toilet to point to the crap in the bog that (a) Guede's DNA was on the police database as he was an immigrant and (b) that fecal matter contains very little DNA as the bacteria degrades it rapidly.


Biology not her strongest subject at school.
Apparently it wasn't Vixen's either:

Vixen on biochemistry:

"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11175075

“I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands).”
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8#post12851828

"NB: In a DNA model the 'rungs' strictly speaking are four-cornered squares with a different sugar/amino-acid on each corner, but to keep it simple, we will not concern ourselves with that, here."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12880109

Vixen on cell biology:

"She extracted the cell from its nucleus"
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11418330

Vixen on genetics:
"Humans have two pairs of chomosomes either XY or YY. The former is female and you can extract mtDNA for the haplotype, the latter are male and you can perform Y-haplotype profiling on a male but not on a female."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post12872356

"Only female DNA can be identified from mtDNA (mitochodria) as only females have the X chromosome from which the mtDNA is extracted. Likewise only males can have Y-haplotypes identified as it carries down from the male line. If you want to know the mtDA background ask your mother or sister to be tested and that will tell you, likewise females can find out about the male line via their father or brother."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post12872223
whoanellie 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 24th November 2022, 02:35 PM   #3899
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Just look at that statement again and give it some thought.

So, what is at issue here are the investigators beliefs. The problem in Perugia in 2007 was that they believed the pair were guilty, when they weren't. The police and Mignini acted on that belief, well before any actual evidence was found or even before Rudy Guede was known - as he'd fled to Germany.

I'd hate to live in a country where the police's beliefs were the core of prosecution's. I mean, why even accord the accused rights when you 'know' they're guilty, you can just feel it! Who needs actual evidence?
How you see it:

There is a brutal murder in Perugia between 1st and 2nd Nov 2007 between Halloween and All Saints Day (a Bank Holiday over much of Europe dedicated to the deceased). The detectives homed in on Knox and Sollecito because Mignini had a grudge against Americans (cf Doug Preston) or had some kind of fixation. So, the detectives in wanting to please Mignini, concentrated on these two. Sollecito came in for heavy coercive interrogation because the police thought they could 'get Knox' via Sollecito pointing the finger at her. In so doing, Sollecito came out with three different police statements just to get the rogue cops off his bag, having been reduced to a trembling wreck, and when asking the cops for a calendar so that he could distinguish between Halloween and the day before, he was rudely and roughly refused.

How it worked in reality:

There is a brutal murder in Perugia between 1st and 2nd Nov 2007 between Halloween and All Saints Day (a Bank Holiday over much of Europe dedicated to the deceased). Literally tens of dozens of people were invited in for questioning, including Filomena and all of Meredith's friends. Sophie and her boyfriend 'Shaky' had their telephones tapped. Like Filomena they spent literally hours at the Questura, as did the boys downstairs, all of Knox' friends from the internet café. Police then checked the stories of each of the persons interviewed and followed up on discrepancies. Knox and Sollecito ended up as prime suspects because of (a) Knox' confession that she was present when Mez was murdered and (b) Sollecito telling the police he had lied in his first statement in order to provide Knox with an alibi, as she had asked him to.

Yes, Sollecito was very strongly suspected right from the start, when he sauntered into the police station with a knife. Having found shoeprints in the hallway, police immediately made him remove his trainers to test them. They then discovered he had had a flood on the night of the murder and had dismantled the U-Bend. It was reasonable for the police to suspect he had been cleaning up after the murder because who removes a U-Bend when you have a flood, as that is likely to flood the floor some more. He didn't have a blockage.

So you see, there is little that smacks of a Shawshank Redemption set up by the police.

In any case, the police are just the prosecution side, they still have to show 'probable cause' to the arraigning magistrate, or reasonable prospect of success in prosecuting. It is the court which decides guilt, not the police.

The Italian State for the victim would have little interest in prosecuting the wrong person knowingly as you keep suggesting.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 02:38 PM   #3900
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
Seriously?

No, seriously? Are you claiming that the police cannot coerce people in an interrogation if they believe they are guilty?

You do know it's possible to coerce someone into a confession even if the confession is true, right?
I did not say they cannot. If you believe Sollecito was fitted up you need to explain a reasonable motive for them to have done anything of the sort, given Sollecito was from the middle classes, bespectacled, a student, well-dressed and driving the latest Audi and using the latest Pro Mac Book. Plus a maid to come around and clean his flat, which his father paid for.

You claim the police 'coercively interrogated him'. I want to understand why they would, given there was a potential mass murderer on their hands, with hundreds of students fleeing Perugia overnight.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 02:45 PM   #3901
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
Yes, and I'm seriously pointing out your flagrant hypocrisy. You cry foul about people treating you shabbily and being insulting and yet lay about you with insults of your own. Not to mention you seem to have a severely distorted view of what constitutes an insult. Recently for example you accused Stacy of being sexist. I'd like very much if you could point out the exact post in which Stacy was sexist.



Holding you to account for your posting history is not trolling, any more than pointing out you regularly lean on questionable sources is trolling, or pointing out that you falsely represent yourself is trolling.
Don't lie. I asked her politely to not use sexist language aimed at me, the language in question being 'stupid woman'.

Please grow up and concentrate on discussing the title of the thread.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend


Last edited by Vixen; 24th November 2022 at 03:11 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 02:55 PM   #3902
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,477
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You claim the police 'coercively interrogated him'. I want to understand why they would, given there was a potential mass murderer on their hands, with hundreds of students fleeing Perugia overnight.
Do you not see the tortured logic in this? First off, there was no mass murderer on the loose, nor had anything in Perugia happened to suggest such. No one, not Mignini nor Napoleoni nor anyone suggested such.

Yet you've just outlined a reason *for* 'enhanced coercive interrogation'.

Do you ever read what you write?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 24th November 2022 at 02:56 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 03:04 PM   #3903
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 860
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Methos:

What's an 'ultra-serious' opus? (Someone else asked, but I still want to know.)

'All courts' did not rule that it was a three-person attack. Hellmann ruled in acquitting the pair that it was beyond to competence of his court to express an opinion on any other, potential suspects.

Pete has been promising dire consequences for years, 'Preston, Ciolino, Moore, Fischer, Heavey, Burleigh, Hampikian, and a dozen others might find diffamazione targets.' That's the biggest yawner of his claim. But it is a laugher that Pete still vacillates with the word 'might'. Use of that word means he's right either way!

Sollecito and his shadow writer Gumbel DID NOT LOSE THEIR DIFFAMAZIONE TRIAL! Pete has predicted that S & G would offer an apology within two weeks of the end of that trial! It's been more than two weeks! Thank you Methos for the link to a story about that, from the Italian press.

As usual, you beat me to a lot of this..... you really are the Library of Congress, Wikipedia, and a law library rolled into one.
Bill, I don't know why PQ thinks Mignini's book will be an "'ultra-serious' opus". As he wrote, "We have not seen it yet", but apparently he thinks that the book wil "closely mirrors and takes much further the general thrust of this page."

I doubt that. If you ask me, PQ has no idea about what Mignini might "reveal" in his Book. What's left are only PQ's wet dreams about the books of Guede and Mignini and of course about the targets he imagines on the backs of 'Preston, Ciolino, Moore, Fischer, Heavey, Burleigh, Hampikian, and a dozen others"...

When it comes to the prediction that "S & G would offer an apology within two weeks of the end of that trial!", let's go baack to this post. The post contains the link to PQ's original prediction.

Mainframe Computer at the basement of "Supertanker Central in Seattle" says "Danke Schön"
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."

Last edited by Methos; 24th November 2022 at 03:06 PM.
Methos 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 24th November 2022, 03:07 PM   #3904
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Do you not see the tortured logic in this? First off, there was no mass murderer on the loose, nor had anything in Perugia happened to suggest such. No one, not Mignini nor Napoleoni nor anyone suggested such.

Yet you've just outlined a reason *for* 'enhanced coercive interrogation'.

Do you ever read what you write?
Er, you do know hundreds of people, mostly young women - including the friends of Mez - left Perugia in a hurry.

Sophie was made to stay behind. For all of the hours of grilling, phone tapping and being made to stay for questioning, Sophie never once complained.

She understood the reason police wanted to interview her.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend


Last edited by Vixen; 24th November 2022 at 03:16 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 03:16 PM   #3905
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 860
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
True Crimes Podcasts? I wondered what Howling Lizzie was doing, thank you.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Prosecutor Mignini saw the crime scene himself personally. He interviewed Knox in the presence of her lawyers who tried to urge her to shut up. Detectives and seasoned police know when they have got their man. The problem is in building up a case. They can tell by body language - profuse sweating, avoidance behaviour, covering up, lying - that someone is a likely suspect.
... and, of course, they never ever make any mistakes, do they?
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos 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 24th November 2022, 03:18 PM   #3906
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
...
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend


Last edited by Vixen; 24th November 2022 at 03:20 PM. Reason: corr
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 24th November 2022, 03:38 PM   #3907
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I did not say they cannot. If you believe Sollecito was fitted up <snip>.

And herein lies the problem. You signally fail to grasp what happened here, and why it happened. It also speaks yet again to your wholesale ignorance on this whole subject area.

But yeah, I’ll indulge you. See if anything might finally sink in.

See: nobody - that is, neither anyone in this thread nor the Perugia police and PM in 2007 - believes/believed that Sollecito was “fitted up”*. This truly has already been explained dozens of times in this thread, including directly in your direction on several occasions, including very recently.

No: the police & PM had come to the sincere - though entirely erroneous - conclusion that Knox had been intimately involved in the murder. In fact, we can be almost certain that by the early evening of 5th November, thanks to their clumsy misinterpretation of Knox’s cellphone call logs, they believed Knox had met up with a male - whom they may or may not have identified as Lubumba by that point also - and gone with him to the cottage whereupon the male had sexually assaulted and murdered Kercher.

With me so far? Good.

Now, the police had a significant problem with this narrative of theirs: both Knox and Sollecito, in their statements to police between 2nd-5th November, had unwaveringly insisted that they’d spent the entire evening/night of the murder together alone in Sollecito’s apartment. The police/PM could obviously (they assumed) figure out why a factually-guilty Knox would “lie” in such a way. But - and here’s the kicker, Vixen (so pay attention) - they then rationalised that Sollecito was sharing/corroborating Knox’s “lie” out of some sort of misplaced infatuation.

Keeping up?

The police therefore devised a plan to bust apart the “lie” being told to them by both Knox and Sollecito, so that they’d end up with confessions and “solve the case” with stunning speed and guile. Now keep remembering, Vixen, that the police and PM really had convinced themselves by this point that Knox genuinely was heavily involved in the murder, and that Knox & Sollecito genuinely were lying about their whereabouts on the night of the murder.

Still following?

So………. The first plank in the police’s/PM’s strategy on the night of those 5th/6th Nov interrogations was to *ahem* “persuade” Sollecito that 1) they knew for sure that Knox was at the cottage at the time of the murder (and that consequently she was not together alone with Sollecito all that evening/night; 2) therefore they knew for sure that Sollecito was lying about the murder night in order to protect Knox; 3) now was the time for Sollecito to come clean and tell them the “truth” about his/Knox’s “true” whereabouts on the murder evening/night; and 4) if Sollecito continued with the lie, he would find himself in deep legal trouble.


And that, in a nutshell, was how it went down and why it went down. Remember, one more time, that the police/PM genuinely thought they’d solved the crime correctly. Remember also that clown de Felice crowing proudly about the ‘skill’ of the interrogators in making the two of them “buckle” and “tell (them) what they already knew to be the truth”.


Satan knows why I wasted so much of my time writing all this. Oh well: ya do what ya can to open up the eyes of the blind, right??


* And I’m going to assume that by “fitted up” you effectively mean the police were deliberately trying to frame someone whom they either knew or suspected to be innocent.
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 24th November 2022, 03:42 PM   #3908
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 19,925
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Er, you do know hundreds of people, mostly young women - including the friends of Mez - left Perugia in a hurry.

Sophie was made to stay behind. For all of the hours of grilling, phone tapping and being made to stay for questioning, Sophie never once complained.

She understood the reason police wanted to interview her.

Beatification cannot be following far behind her ultimate demise, I feel.

And I wonder if Sophie was, like Knox, being treated with increasing scepticism and hostility by the police in those days following the murder?


(Answer: No)
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 24th November 2022, 04:24 PM   #3909
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,477
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Er, you do know hundreds of people, mostly young women - including the friends of Mez - left Perugia in a hurry.

Sophie was made to stay behind. For all of the hours of grilling, phone tapping and being made to stay for questioning, Sophie never once complained.

She understood the reason police wanted to interview her.
Wow. Completely ignored the issues, the one you raised. That the police had to act quickly because, a serial killer could have been on the loose. Your claim. No one else, not Mignini nor anyone in Perugia ever claimed that.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 24th November 2022 at 04:27 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 04:32 PM   #3910
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

Sollecito lied to the police three times and not once has he retracted his testimony Knox was out without him until 1:00.
Now, that is a load of codswallop.
Quote:
...I had at last worked out why Amanda did not leave—could not have left—my house on the night of the murder. She didn’t have her own key, so if she’d gone out alone, she would have had to ring the doorbell and ask me to buzz her back in. Even if I’d been stoned or asleep when she rang, I would have remembered remembered that. And it didn’t happen.
(Honor Bound)

Quote:
I am obviously very happy for Amanda,[/url] since I knew from the start that she had nothing to with it and I believed in her innocence"
How would he know that if she had gone out for 4 hours the night of the murder?

If Knox were out alone for 4 hours on the night of the murder, then why did no one see her? Oh, yes...Curatolo saw her AND Sollecito between 9:30 and midnight. So which was it? Was she out alone or with Sollecito? Pick one because they both can't be true...but both can be false. If she went to the cottage that night, why did the parking garage camera catch Meredith coming home and Guede but not Knox?

The telephone records and Lumumba put Knox outside RS's apartment the night before, on Halloween, during the hours Sollecito said happened the night of Nov. 1:

Lumumba testified she was at le Chic Halloween night, sometime around or just after 10:00. He wasn't sure of the time, but he remembers she was dressed like a cat.

Phone records on Halloween night between 11:38 pm and 01:05 Nov. 1 put her outside Raff's apt. At 00:41:49 Amanda calls Spyros connecting with tower Via Marconi, 6, Sett.2
At 00:57 Amanda texts Raff.
At 1:05 Nov. 1, Sollecito's land line calls Amanda for 53 seconds through Piazza Danti, 26, Sett.2. Neither serves RS's apartment.

It's just a koinky-dink that the times were the same, right?


Quote:
Nor did he take the witness box to defend himself or explain why he told a pack of lies.

An innocent person simply does not behave like that.
No innocent person ever confesses to things they didn't do during an investigation, right?

Quote:
Why do people confess to crimes they did not commit? And, surely, those cases must be rare? In fact, it happens all the time—in police stations, workplaces, public schools, and the military. Psychologist Saul Kassin, the world’s leading expert on false confessions, explains how interrogators trick innocent people into confessing, and then how the criminal justice system deludes us into believing these confessions.
Oh, wait...according to you, Kassin is 'bent'.

No innocent person ever implicates innocent co-defendants during an interrogation, right?

Quote:
False confessions by co-defendants

In many cases, innocent suspects who confess implicate others who are also innocent. Some do it because that’s the story their interrogators want to hear. John Kogut, for example, not only falsely confessed to his own involvement in murder, he also said he did it with two friends Dennis Halsted and John Restivo, both of whom (like Kogut) spent 20 years in prison before they were exonerated in 2005.

And some innocent suspects who confess blame others to deflect responsibility and reduce their punishment. Richard Ochoa, for example, was facing the death penalty for the murder of Nancy DePriest in Austin, Texas in 1988. He confessed, named his roommate Richard Danziger as the actual killer and agreed to plead guilty and testify against Danziger. Both were convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Both were exonerated by DNA in 2002.

The Registry includes 195 exonerations with confessions by co-defendants who implicated the exonerees, 11 percent of all exonerations. The net result is that in 19 percent of all exonerations in the United States—and in 34 percent of homicide exonerations—the innocent defendant confessed or was implicated by a false confession of a co-defendant, or both.

An innocent person always testifies because s/he has nothing to hide, right?
That seems to be the way you think. But lawyers know that putting a defendant on the stand is risky because a) it shifts the burden of proof from the prosecution, b) a skilled prosecutor can make an innocent defendant look untruthful, often by making them angry, flustered, defensive, or unsure which jurors can interpret as signs of guilt, c) jurors might take a dislike to the defendant which has little to do with the case itself.
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 24th November 2022, 04:47 PM   #3911
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Pick a lane. Was (a) AK trying to cover for Guede or (b) to point the police towards him? Choose (a) or (b).
Er, obviously Knox didn't realise police had Guede's DNA on the police database as an immigrant. She thought she could just point to an outsider - one that did not live at the cottage - as the perpetrator, to detract police from herself.
Snort. They didn't have his DNA, they had his fingerprints.

What an illogical bit of nonsense. Is it your contention that she believed the police would be able to find forensic evidence of Lumumba at the cottage when she knew he'd never been there? And when they didn't find evidence of him there, it would not expose her lie? The only way it makes sense is if she wasn't there and believed the police who kept insisting Lumumba was involved.

Not only that, what makes you think she believed they couldn't identify Guede if they didn't have his *DNA* on file...or even his fingerprints?

This is why your explanations for guilt always fall apart; they don't make logical sense or even follow the evidence.
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 24th November 2022, 05:07 PM   #3912
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Now, that is a load of codswallop.
(Honor Bound)



How would he know that if she had gone out for 4 hours the night of the murder?

If Knox were out alone for 4 hours on the night of the murder, then why did no one see her? Oh, yes...Curatolo saw her AND Sollecito between 9:30 and midnight. So which was it? Was she out alone or with Sollecito? Pick one because they both can't be true...but both can be false. If she went to the cottage that night, why did the parking garage camera catch Meredith coming home and Guede but not Knox?

The telephone records and Lumumba put Knox outside RS's apartment the night before, on Halloween, during the hours Sollecito said happened the night of Nov. 1:

Lumumba testified she was at le Chic Halloween night, sometime around or just after 10:00. He wasn't sure of the time, but he remembers she was dressed like a cat.

Phone records on Halloween night between 11:38 pm and 01:05 Nov. 1 put her outside Raff's apt. At 00:41:49 Amanda calls Spyros connecting with tower Via Marconi, 6, Sett.2
At 00:57 Amanda texts Raff.
At 1:05 Nov. 1, Sollecito's land line calls Amanda for 53 seconds through Piazza Danti, 26, Sett.2. Neither serves RS's apartment.

It's just a koinky-dink that the times were the same, right?




No innocent person ever confesses to things they didn't do during an investigation, right?



Oh, wait...according to you, Kassin is 'bent'.

No innocent person ever implicates innocent co-defendants during an interrogation, right?




An innocent person always testifies because s/he has nothing to hide, right?
That seems to be the way you think. But lawyers know that putting a defendant on the stand is risky because a) it shifts the burden of proof from the prosecution, b) a skilled prosecutor can make an innocent defendant look untruthful, often by making them angry, flustered, defensive, or unsure which jurors can interpret as signs of guilt, c) jurors might take a dislike to the defendant which has little to do with the case itself.
Do look up what a witness statement is.

Quote:
By definition, a witness statement is a written record stating what a person saw and heard when a particular incident (often a crime) occurred. This document is then signed.

What is a witness statement?
A witness statement could be taken by a police office or a member of the legal justice system and can be used as evidence in criminal or civil court. Witnesses are encouraged to be as detailed and descriptive as possible in their statements. This includes stating times, describing surroundings, and conditions, for example, whether it was dark. Witnesses must also describe anyone they saw with as much detail as possible about their physical characteristics.

What does a witness statement include?
A witness statement is an official, legal document and therefore must always include:

A case number.
An incident or case name.
An official declaration, or statement of truth, which is signed and dated by the witness.

Witness statements should:
Be taken as soon as possible to make sure the events are fresh in the witness' memory and that they have not spoken to any other witnesses who may recall the events differently.
Be in the witness' own language - witnesses can be called into court and questioned about their statement.
https://www.twinkl.fi/teaching-wiki/witness-statement


A ghost written book long after the trial is not a retraction or a correction. It is a pack of lies for the gullible.

Curatalo and the objective scientific phone logs were all dealt with at the merits court.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 05:13 PM   #3913
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Snort. They didn't have his DNA, they had his fingerprints.

What an illogical bit of nonsense. Is it your contention that she believed the police would be able to find forensic evidence of Lumumba at the cottage when she knew he'd never been there? And when they didn't find evidence of him there, it would not expose her lie? The only way it makes sense is if she wasn't there and believed the police who kept insisting Lumumba was involved.

Not only that, what makes you think she believed they couldn't identify Guede if they didn't have his *DNA* on file...or even his fingerprints?

This is why your explanations for guilt always fall apart; they don't make logical sense or even follow the evidence.
Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I very clearly said that when she pointed to an outsider 'other' as being the culprit she was not aware police would be able to identify Guede from his biometric details in their immigration data base. They identified Guede by matching his biometric and then confirming it was him by comparing his DNA on a toothbrush at his apartment with DNA collected at the cottage, on the sleeve of the jumper. (Sorry, that was all contaminated according to yourself.)

She named Patrik and it worked didn't it? He was duly arrested in front of his little kids and thrown int he slammer. In fact Knox and her mother were more than willing for him to remain there.

Luckily, a passing tourist was able to provide Patrik with an alibi.

Now, that would have been a genuine wrongful conviction.

Incidentally, absence of DNA is not evidence of absence. You yourself said the other day there were only two samples of Guede (despite the frequent claim his DNA was all over the crime scene).
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend


Last edited by Vixen; 24th November 2022 at 05:17 PM.
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 24th November 2022, 05:22 PM   #3914
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Wow. Completely ignored the issues, the one you raised. That the police had to act quickly because, a serial killer could have been on the loose. Your claim. No one else, not Mignini nor anyone in Perugia ever claimed that.
No you're right. The brutal slaughter of a British student is little more serious than just another burglary, right? The cops should have sat back and let Sollecito come for an interview in his own time instead of rudely ordering him to turn up.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

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 24th November 2022, 05:30 PM   #3915
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
[quote=Vixen;13951945]Chiefi SC said was that Hellman failed to justify why he brought in Vecchiotti & Conti, Vecchiotti being well-known as dishonest and corrupt and lacking impartiality, with her belief she needed to protect murderers from conviction. She's another Peter Gill who thought she could bend justice.

Quote:
From Wikipedia (google translate) https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delitto_dell%27Olgiata
'The Civil Court of Rome on 21.04.2016 ruling at first instance sentenced the technical consultants of Pascali office Vicenzo Lorenzo, Arbarello Paul and Carla Vecchiotti for negligence in the performance of examinations of exhibits on the murder of the Countess, liquidating damages total of more than EUR 150,000 attributed, at the request of close relatives of the countess, the Foundation Alberica Filo della Torre in order to be used in charitable activities.'


Absolutely bent and as corrupt as hell.
It's amazing that you accuse some here of being conspiracy theorists when they question the police and prosecution's honesty when you constantly accuse any lawyer, judge, forensic expert or witness who does not support your beliefs as being corrupt, bent, incompetent, a shill, paid off, dishonest, lacking impartiality, etc.

How quickly you forget that Massei was censored by the CSC "with a serious and inexcusable violation of the law" for denying Sollecito his right to a lawyer as demanded by law. You forget that Massei illegally detained Mario Spezi in prison without a lawyer by misusing a law meant for the mafia. You forget that Monica Napoleoni, Lorena Zugarini, Stefania Squarta and several other Perugia police stand convicted of serious crimes themselves. But it's Gill, Hampikian, Vinci, Conti et al who are the bent and corrupt ones according to you! And Vecchiotti was found guilty of negligence in one case which you twist into something it wasn't.


Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
She even colluded with the defence in bringing out a CD when she was supposed to be independent. She only asked for Hellmann's required permission in retrospect, after being caught red-handed by the Carabinieri conspiring with the defence.
Seems to me you made this claim before which was thoroughly debunked then. But maybe you'd like to present some evidence of your claim? No?

Which reminds me:

Why do you find it necessary to make up/invent/lie about things that never happened? Why do you need to dishonestly twist things using hyperbolically negative language?
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 24th November 2022, 05:33 PM   #3916
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sitting in the armchairs. As dictated by mafia-lover Bongiorno and I believe Bruno had a bit of a reputation in that respect, too.
Why do you find it necessary to make up/invent/lie about things that never happened? Why do you need to dishonestly twist things using hyperbolically negative language?
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 24th November 2022, 05:40 PM   #3917
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Not if she didn't realise his DNA would identify him.
And you think she "didn't realize" this how? Knox wouldn't have known WHAT the police had or didn't have on Guede. She knew nothing about him or if his fingerprints were on record or not. Anyone arrested has their fingerprints taken and it becomes part of the police records. Knox, Sollecito and others had their fingerprints taken on Nov. 2.
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 24th November 2022, 05:43 PM   #3918
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Only to someone failing in logic.
Which in this case, is you since you think Knox believed they couldn't identify Guede without his DNA on record.
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 24th November 2022, 05:53 PM   #3919
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
So the pair turned off their phones just before their escapade into 'extreme sensations', with Sollecito the collector of fancy knives costing hundreds of Euros. Of course they went armed with knives. Witness Kokomani came across them and said so in his police witness statement.

All those knife flicks on Mez' body. Can't possibly have been done by Knife Boy, eh?
Anyone who puts any credence into Kokomani's story is delusional. Not even your beloved Massei believed him:

Quote:
The inconsistencies in Kokomani’s statements are even more obvious. It is enough to think of the black bag which then revealed itself to be two people and of the throwing of olives and of a mobile phone which had allegedly been used to make a video which was subsequently shown to others and, furthermore, the time he had seemingly seen Amanda, a time predating her arrival in Italy and the mention of an uncle of Amanda’s of whose existence no one was able to supply confirmation.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
All those knife flicks on Mez' body. Can't possibly have been done by Knife Boy, eh?
Not according to the forensics which detected no blood or DNA of Kercher on any of his knives....despite the lie still posted on TJMK.

"Knife Boy". This is the kind of thing one hears from the playground bully.
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 24th November 2022, 05:55 PM   #3920
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 28,607
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Read the court documents and the trial transcripts and you'll find out!
Translation: I can't rationally explain 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
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

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 08:44 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, 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.