|
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. |
![]() |
#241 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
Logical fallacy, Vix. Yes, I did say the police relied on their "gut feelings" but it does not follow that it was because Amanda was giving off "criminal" vibes or that her demeanor was "dodgy". For Giobbi, her "dodgy behavior" and "criminal demeanor" was eating pizza a few days after the murder. because if his roommate had been murdered, he'd be in bed crying. It was at that moment he "knew she was guilty". As he said,
Quote:
For the cop who took the chef knife out of Raffaele's kitchen drawer, it was his "gut feeling" that that particular knife was "suspiciously clean" and looked like the murder weapon even though he had seen no pictures of the wounds and admitted he didn't even know how large or deep they were. Idiot didn't even bother to take any of the other knives out of the drawer. His "gut feelings" were enough. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#242 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#244 | ||
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
I have thought about it. And your post is a load of nonsense. Statement analysis has nothing to do with the art of persuasion/advertising. Irrelevant. This is the crux of your problem. Innocent people do tell the truth. The problem comes in when the police decide you aren't telling the truth. As in the cases of the rape victims in the article I provided. As in the cases of false confessions that are on record. As in the cases of proven false convictions. All the Italian roommates and witnesses did, indeed, get attorneys. That in itself tell you something about the Italian system when even completely innocent people who have strong alibis feel the need to get a lawyer before speaking to police. How easily you try and twist AK's and RS's not getting a lawyer immediately into a sign of guilt. Most people would say that is a sign of innocence. Once again, you are assigning yourself the ability to know what AK and RS were thinking. You don't. Knox only changed her story once during the Nov 5/6 interrogation which she recanted within hours. Sollecito's story also "changed" during that interrogation. As for the story by the reporter, who knows what was said during that? All we have is her word...no recordings and no witnesses. Knox was not "entirely laid back about the locked door". Stop making things up. As for Kercher locking her door or not, who would know better? The girl who shared a bathroom with Kercher, whose room was immediately next door to Kercher's and who spent more time with Kercher or Filomena who spent little time with Kercher beyond some meals? We see no such thing. What we see are what the police say was said during interrogations that were not recorded and when there were no lawyers present. Crini didn't explain this; he claimed it. Crini also "explained" how Curatolo being a drug addled addict and describing seeing the pair on Halloween night was not evidence of being unreliable. Hoots! Nice wrap up but it fails to address the fact that statement analysis is not, as you claimed, the same thing as the "art of persuasion" and "advertising". Which was my point. |
||
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#245 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,891
|
*In Vixen voice* advertising is very important for changing public opinion
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#246 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,891
|
I can't believe someone who is wrong about literally almost everything has failed to figure out this case. What a shock.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#247 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
You are starting off with a fallacy by stating that polygraphs "work". The fact is, they work sometimes.
Polygraphs measure three physiological responses: heart rate/blood pressure, respiration, and skin conductivity. The theory is that lying increases sweat. While this can be true, it is not always the case which is one reason why these tests are not considered reliable. There are many factors that can also affect their reliability. According to the American Psychological Association:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#248 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 599
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#249 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#250 |
Cythraul Enfys
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,091
|
I will here note that I have successfully misled a polygraph more than once. There are ways to do it physically and mentally. As republickers might wish to know those I won't disclose them here - but I got black (the able to go behind the security fence ) i.d. card while in the military at Detrick.......
|
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#251 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,209
|
Knox v. Italy remains a communicated case that is among the "noteworthy pending cases" against Italy.
The ECHR is working its way through the cases against Italy, but it must also devote its time to the many cases against certain other Council of Europe states. However, the ECHR is making progress at clearing the backlog of noteworthy cases against Italy. For example, it recently (22 Nov. 2017) held a Grand Chamber hearing of the case of Berlusconi v Italy, which may have been given some precedence because it involves an allegation of a violation of democratic election practices. The Chamber that received the Berlusconi case referred it to the Grand Chamber the day after it received it. Both cases were communicated to Italy in 2016 - Knox v. Italy in April, and Berlusconi v. Italy in July. The Berlusconi case is listed on page 12 and the Knox case on page 13 of the Country Profile for Italy. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#252 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#253 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#254 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,535
|
Why do you continually tell untruths?
Courtesy wikipedia, "Mexico's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in purchasing power parity (PPP) was estimated at US $2,143.499 billion in 2014, and $1,261.642 billion in nominal exchange rates." NY Times, "Profit for the year rose to $7.4 billion, a 3 percent gain over $7.1 billion in 2014." So ratio between Mexico GDP:Coca Cola profit is 2,000:7 |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#255 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,092
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#256 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 676
|
|
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#257 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,209
|
I think the PGP "syllogism" (silly-ism) is as follows:
A can or "tin" (330 ml) of Coca Cola costs more than 1 British pound, and The profit of the Coca Cola company is more than the GDP of Mexico, therefore Amanda Knox is a witch and guilty The PGP view becomes more understandable when thus organized. And the truth or falsity of the first two statements (the premises) of the "syllogism" is irrelevant to the PGP belief in the conclusion. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#258 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
The silly-isms continue.
That grand archivist, Methos, is able to link back to threads here, when Vixen (lacking anything new to post about) drops in a factoid long since discredited. But every so often some silliness is truly new. By itself this is remarkable given that it is more than a decade past the original, horrid crime and almost 3 years past RS and AK being definitively acquitted of it. Yet when Giuliano Mignini's defamation case against Sollecito and Gumbel is thrown out of court, and Mignini withdraws his private civil suit against the pair....... ...... we're told this is really a victory for Mignini. We're told this is to pave the way for an apology to Mignini from RS and AG. How's that going? The other recent silliness regards Nick van der Leek, whom Vixen (apparently) no longer posts about. Suddenly stopped. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#259 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#260 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#261 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#262 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 676
|
|
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#263 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
But there most certainly is evidence! Statement analysis of her last communications has revealed, without a doubt, that she was hiding the fact of her Japanese connections. If you watch the newsreels of her, she is acting quite dodgy and, as we know, was displaying criminal demeanor. As we can all see, she doesn't look the reporters in the eye when they ask her questions and her eyes are shifty. You can see the guilt in them!
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#264 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 599
|
There is one thing you are guaranteed to see on this forum and that is Vixen complaining about Amanda and Raffaele telling umpteen lies and Vixen will make vitriolic attacks on Amanda and Raffaele for lying. Recently Vixen said that Amanda must be a psychopath because lying is the sign of a psychopath. As can be seen from the links below Vixen uses falsehoods on an industrial scale in her posts and PGP have a lied and supported liars on an industrial scale.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11938562 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11942852 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11598412 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11427461 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11951893 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11982023 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11333243 http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11997763 Is Vixen’s accusation that Amanda and Raffaele have told umpteen lies justified? There are two things PGP use to support the notion Raffaele lied. Firstly, Raffaele said in his diary he might have pricked Meredith with his knife. This was a private thought in his diary which only came to light when Raffaele’s diary was stolen. A lie can only be classed as a lie when it is communicated. PGP use what Raffaele said in his interrogation as a lie which was not a deliberate lie as explained in my post below. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11944311 Below are instances when Vixen has falsely accused Amanda of lying. I recall a post where Vixen mentions an interview where Amanda mentions she underwent 53 hours interrogation over a period of three days. Vixen claims this was a lie when in fact Amanda was telling the truth. Vixen constantly repeats the falsehood the supreme said Amanda and Raffaele told numerous lies. If Amanda and Raffaele were such prolific liars as Vixen constantly claims, why do PGP have to resort to lying support this notion? In addition if Amanda and Raffaele have told so many lies, why do PGP have to resort to using instances when Amanda and Raffaele have not actually lied such as a private thought in a diary and difficulty recollecting events in an interrogation? The PGP falsely accuse Amanda and Raffaele of lying and then brand them as liars which is typical of the disgusting hypocrisy we see from PGP. Post dated 24.05.2016 Claim: a long convoluted story surrounding a mop found propped up by the front door of the cottage when postal police arrived was concocted by the pair, which any marine would be proud of in the scheme of tallest of tall stories about burst pipes and leaks as of the time of the murder. Truth: There is no record of the postal police asking about the mop and there is no record of any conversation regarding the mop between Amanda, Raffaele and the postal police. There was an actual leak in Raffaele’s apartment as seen in the link below http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/freque...ked-questions/ http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11849235 Why do PGP who lie in their posts and support liars on an industrial scale viciously attack Amanda and Raffaele for lying particularly when Amanda and Raffaele have not actually lied? I raised the question in a previous post what would psychiatrist make of people who viciously attack people for doing something whilst doing the same thing themselves. In response another poster said Freud would call this behaviour projection. I feel this theory makes sense and explains why the PGP constantly attack Amanda and Raffaele for lying because the PGP are projecting their lies onto Amanda and Raffaele. The below link is a good explanation of projection. http://changingminds.org/explanation...projection.htm |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#265 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,268
|
|
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#266 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,268
|
|
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#267 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
Just a question.... have you figured out yet that Bongiorno had had nothing to do with Mignini prosecuting this case in 2009 while he himself stood provisionally criminally convicted of abuse of office?
Ok one more. Are you willing to concede that it was not a victory for Mignini to have had (a few weeks ago) his defamation claim against RS and AG thrown out of court, or for him to withdraw his own civil suit? Will you concede that Mignini will get no apology, and that the claims in Sollecito's book stand as printed? Will you concede that Nick van der Leek has embarassed himself, being referred to by all sides as a plagiarist? |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#268 |
Cythraul Enfys
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,091
|
Is there any actual reason to give a care that CC has a big net profit. I don't personally. Also, the Knox thing is dead in the water due to the massive failings of the Italian police/forensics/courts - so nothing the persons(?) worried about it or theorizing and arguing about it will have the slightest importance or effect.
|
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#269 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,274
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#270 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,535
|
Why do you continually pile one lie on top of another? Do you not realise that if trivial easily verifiable statements that you make are demonstrably untrue it suggests that any statement of yours is likely to be untrue? Coca-cola is not even a top 50 earner.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ies-worldwide/ Sorry I forgot you are the accountant who does not understand the difference between VAT exempt and zero rating. As an insolvency practitioner the concept of profits is probably a bit novel. So the accountant says one lot of ill defined money is bigger than another. I'd hate to think that you were looking at the balance sheet of an company. Well this figure, it may be a loan, it may be turn over, or revenue, is bigger than that one because it starts with 7 whilst this figure with a 1 and lots of zeros must be smaller because those are all small numbers. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#271 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,268
|
Of course I know the difference. I have NVQ4 in both business tax and personal tax. Plus a VAT specific one. Not to mention financial strategy as part of my fully chartered qualification. I have submitted tax returns and filed accounts hundreds of times, including TOMS and EC sales lists You don't know the difference between Revenues and net profit. Fact is coca-cola remains near top http://www.coca-colacompany.com/coca...brands-ranking My source is Mark Thomas, who did a whole comedy tour of the UK about Coca-Cola and its practices. I have his book which gives the low down, which is how I know Coca-Cola's profits are greater than Mexico's debt to IMF. https://youtu.be/LH0r84W3LgU For the avoidance of doubt, how does this tie in with Amanda Knox? Her father knew the value of PR and advertising - coca-cola is branded by its tin! - and paid an advertising agency to promote her phony case even before he hired a lawyer. So Staceyhs claim that there is no such thing as manipulation of statements and that 'statement analysis' is a 'pseudo science' is pure bunkum. |
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#272 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 12,268
|
|
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#273 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,092
|
My source for this is a comedian.
Gold, I tell you. Gold! |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#274 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 931
|
No, the PGP discover "one lie after another". What everyone else finds is a remarkably consistent accounting of the evening with the lone exception being statements extracted during a coercive interrogation. Remove statements made during this "inadmissible" interrogation and the accounting of the evening is, for ten years, remarkably consistent. The PGP's claim that Raffaele changed his story five times is laughable. His story has ALWAYS been the same, sans the interrogation confusion (which clearly represents what happened on Halloween, but why let the obvious get in your way).
Do you care to explain what a "fake alibi" is? Amanda and Raffaele claim to have been at his place for the evening. There is substantial evidence that supports this alibi for portions of the evening, but not all of it. This is not unusual as most of us would have a hard time proving we spent an evening at home, alone or with our spouse. Conversely, the prosecution could never prove the alibi was not valid. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#275 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
This.
The PGP cannot explain why Raffaele did not turn on Amanda in all those years. Indeed, the reason for Mignini:s recent failed defamation claim against RS and AG is precisely that Raffaele claimed in his book is that he had been pressured by police-prosecutor to turn against her. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#276 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 931
|
Marriott is a Public Relations firm, not an "advertising agency". But I'm sure this was just an honest typo on your part.
I honestly believe the PGP made Marriott a major issue as a means of deflecting attention away from the fact that the true PR Supertanker in this case was the media, whose motivation was to sell stories no matter how false or who it hurt. Even to this day we have TJMK and the fake wiki that continues to spread lies, distortions and heavily biased opinion. If anyone is an advertising agency promoting a phony case it would be them. I recently concluded an exchange with a prominent True Crimes author who previously held Amanda and Raffaele were guilty. I won't speak for her and what her opinion now is regarding guilt or innocence, but will say she admits she developed an opinion of Amanda based on media coverage and that this had a dramatic influence on how she interpreted the overall case. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#277 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 931
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#278 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,235
|
Ah.... the separation strategy.
They were either both guilty or neither was guilty. There was no way one could be guilty without the other. To convict Knox they had to convict Raffaele, or get him to cop a plea. So after the Nencini conviction, Bongiorno says, "Òk. You say Amanda did 'X'. What does that have to do with Raffaele?" It's what was meant by Raffaele always being collateral damage, they actually probably did not want to prosecute him, except that to not have a case against him meant not having a case against Knox. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#279 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 931
|
If this is basic Italian law then it should be easy for you to provide a citation to support the law you say exists.
But I am curious; since Amanda didn't have a lawyer present when the abuse took place, and since the police claim they didn't record the interview, what evidence would an attorney cite when reporting the abuse? You really can't stop yourself from making things up, can you. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#280 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 931
|
Exactly, but the PGP (and the media, btw. Even seven years into the case the media was still pedaling lies and distortions) still claimed it was proof Raffaele was no longer providing Amanda an alibi - and, per the fake wiki, this was a further different 'story' Raffaele provided... one of the 'five' Vixen claimed earlier.
In all fairness, it has to be difficult to argue something for ten years when you are constantly being proven wrong, so I guess it's understandable that the PGP would resort to such obvious distortions... there are so few straws left to grasp at. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|