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

Reply
Old 16th May 2018, 03:15 PM   #81
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,476
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Please read comments properly. You claimed most Italians had brown hair. Plenty have black hair and few blonde. Writing with your right hand does NOT prove hand dominance. Raff holds his knife in his left hand and also opens his lap top with his left hand. THAT is his dominant hand. It is his hand of unconscious natural preference. He will have been taught to write with his right.

Please take debating lessons. Then you won't waste so much bandwidth with inanities.
Inanities!? The post above makes specious claims about handedness, and you accuse others of inanities!?

Then again the post above probably contains typing errors, that's all.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 03:21 PM   #82
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
36 million American men own a pocket knife.
Logical fallacy #3: appeal to the crowd. As in, '13 million Iraqis liked Saddam'.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 03:27 PM   #83
whoanellie
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 319
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Logical fallacy #3: appeal to the crowd. As in, '13 million Iraqis liked Saddam'.
Logical fallacy #47: rely on the opinion of a couple of Italian judges.....
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 03:29 PM   #84
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Bless your heart. Why is that strange?




A question is not a fact, sad or otherwise.

Amtrak could not take me to court over my parking ticket. They would have no standing. My parking ticket does not represent any kind of tort against them or crime over which they have jurisdiction. (They could perhaps cooperate in a state or local prosecution of me for trespassing, disturbing the peace, etc. were I to behave in a criminal or tortious manner, but that's not what you've asked about so no need to address it.)

Similarly, the Italian judicial facts you cite and the lies you tell have no standing to enter or alter the narrative of history. History cares about historical facts, as determined by the best available research and analysis of the evidence. Consequently it has recorded and shall continue to clarify in this case a clear narrative of unjust prosecution of innocent suspects which ultimately failed when it was overturned by clearer-thinking and less corrupt jurists in higher offices.

Sorry to disabuse you, but a 'judicial fact' or legal fact does indeed become an historical fact.

Suppose a man's son is really the milkman's son. As far as the law is concerned the son is the issue of the man and he is entitled to inherit (at least in Europe). The history books will say whatever the law decrees. Assuming it never comes to light he was the son of the milkman, then the legal status has the upper hand.

Nowhere in the Supreme Court's written reason do the words 'innocent' or 'exonerated' come up, neither you, BiWi, Raff, Knox or Boninsegna (_sp?) can make it so, no matter how hard you wish it nor however many times you declare it to be so.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 03:37 PM   #85
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Please read comments properly. You claimed most Italians had brown hair. Plenty have black hair and few blonde.

Well......

1) The two statements "most Italians have brown hair" and "plenty (of Italians) have black hair and few blonde (sic)" aren't even mutually incompatible in any case. But....

2) ....available evidence seems to suggest that most Italians do indeed have brown hair. For example, plenty of Italians have commented here to state that brown hair is the most common colour in Italy, and that in fact black hair colour is rare:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...S&guccounter=1

This is, in fact, wholly unsurprising - especially in the northern part of Italy down to around Rome (including, of course, Perugia itself). That's because this more northerly element of Italian population is predominantly ethnically far closer to central and western European genomes than the coastal north-Mediterranean genome. Ironically in the context of this discussion, Sollecito (being from Bari in southern Mediterranean Italy) comes from the part of Italy that might be expected to have a higher proportion of black-haired inhabitants. Yet he himself has brown hair.




Quote:
Writing with your right hand does NOT prove hand dominance. Raff holds his knife in his left hand and also opens his lap top with his left hand. THAT is his dominant hand. It is his hand of unconscious natural preference. He will have been taught to write with his right.

Well......

1) Sollecito was holding his knife in his left hand for the purpose of that photograph. He was holding the knife in the tips of his fingers to display it to the camera, and was not holding it as one would hold a knife to use it. In addition, the position and orientation of the camera in that photo suggests that Sollecito himself may have taken the photo using his mobile phone attached to a selfie stick (the photo is taken from waist height pretty close to Sollecito: a very unusual position for another person to have taken the photo from, but an entirely feasible and logical position for Sollecito to have taken a selfie from, holding a selfie stick at waist level). And if that's the case, that's actually extremely strong evidence for Sollecito being dominant RIGHT-HANDED - the fine control and dexterity of the dominant hand would be much more important for the holding and operation of the phone camera than for the fingertip holding of the knife for the photograph.

2) Really????? Sollecito opening his laptop with his left hand is evidence of his left-hand dominance?????!!!!! Even by your standards, this is an astonishingly ridiculous "argument". In fact, I (for example) am strongly right-hand dominant and yet I open my laptop with my left hand - using the fingers of my dominant right hand to press and hold the catch to release the lid/screen. I suggest that most right-hand-dominant people do exactly the same thing themselves. Regardless, what I certainly know is that how one opens one's laptop is in no way a reliable indicator of hand dominance (though, as I said, I suggest that it tends to indicate a dominance entirely opposite to that of your claim....)

3) You obviously don't know many left-hand-dominant people, do you? Because it's incredibly difficult for a left-hand-dominant person to write with their right hand. The degree of hand-eye co-oordination and fine motor control required for neat, legible handwriting virtually requires that one writes with one's dominant hand. And because of that, schools across the modern industrialised world (including, yes, Italy) many decades ago stopped trying to force left-hand-dominant children to learn to write with their right hands. Every single left-hand-dominant person I know (and I think I know around 12) writes with his/her left hand. I am confident that if Sollecito were left-hand-dominant, he'd write with his left hand also. And I'm certain that if Sollecito were left-hand-dominant but had been forced to learn to write right-handed, he'd have only been able to write in a very slow, gauche, untidy style.



Quote:
Please take debating lessons. Then you won't waste so much bandwidth with inanities.

Are you aware of a little thing named "irony", Vixen.......?
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 03:57 PM   #86
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Nowhere in the Supreme Court's written reason do the words 'innocent' or 'exonerated' come up, neither you, BiWi, Raff, Knox or Boninsegna (_sp?) can make it so, no matter how hard you wish it nor however many times you declare it to be so.

And do you know why that is, Vixen? (That's a rhetorical question, obviously - because you clearly don't know why that is, probably on account of an ongoing ignorance of judicial remits, which I shall now attempt to explain to you once again)

So, here goes. Please try to listen carefully this time.

It was simply not the remit of the Marasca SC panel, in its acquittals of Knox and Sollecito, to declare them "innocent" or to state that they were "exonerated". The role and remit of the SC panel was explicit and specific: to determine whether Knox and/or Sollecito should lawfully be convicted or acquitted of the crimes with which each of them were charged, based on the totality of the evidence presented at trial and the (correct) application of Italian law (and to provide written reasoning for how it arrived at its judgements). Nothing more or less than that. So the ONLY thing that an entity such as the Marasca SC panel could/would come out with in respect of a case such as this (and with the same prior judicial rulings) would be: "uphold and confirm the conviction(s)", "annul the conviction(s) and remand the case to a lower court for retrial", or "annul the conviction(s) and acquit". That's all.

However..... when it comes to commentary and analysis about the SC panel's verdict and reasoning - THAT'S when terms such as "(presumed) innocent" and "exonerated" can (correctly, in this situation and context) be employed*. The definitive nature of the Marasca panel's annulments and acquittals, coupled with the severe criticism of the investigative process towards Knox/Sollecito and the unlawful "reasoning" of the convicting courts, can only lead any disinterested, intelligent commentator/analyst to conclude that the Marasca panel's verdicts were total exonerations** for Knox and Sollecito.


* Just as it is, for example, correct for commentary/analysis of the Marasca SC verdict to conclude that the Marasca panel excoriated the work of police, prosecutors and the convicting courts in this trial process - even though (obviously) the Marasca MR neither used the word "excoriate" nor even uses directly intemperate tones: however, the context and a proper understanding of what the Marasca MR actually DID write in this respect leads to the clear and correct conclusion that the Marasca panel was indeed severely critical of police, prosecutors and convicting courts.

** Incidentally, ANY time a prior guilty verdict is annulled and the person is acquitted on appeal, the person is by definition exonerated - there's either sufficient (credible/reliable) evidence, assessed lawfully, to prove guilt BARD, or the defendant is entitled to the full presumption of innocence and stands as judicially innocent as literally anyone else in the World at that point.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 04:06 PM   #87
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Logical fallacy #3: appeal to the crowd. As in, '13 million Iraqis liked Saddam'.

No - acbytesla's argument was not at all an example of argumentum ad populum (surprised you missed out on the chance to use the Latin in your own post, incidentally....). What actually happened was this: you were trying to argue that Sollecito owning or carrying round a pocket knife was somehow deviant/unusual behaviour (which, of course, in your own mind, fed in turn into supporting your belief that he participated in Kercher's murder). By way of attacking your argument, acbytesla was pointing out just how many American men own a pocket knife (with its obvious implication that this therefore cannot be viewed as unusual deviant behaviour).
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 04:08 PM   #88
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
By the way, for the record (and for any ongoing discussion on this issue), the apparel brand mentioned by Guede is spelled

Napapijri

Several posters have spelled it incorrectly (including, inevitably, Vixen....)

As you were
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 04:17 PM   #89
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,476
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sorry to disabuse you, but a 'judicial fact' or legal fact does indeed become an historical fact.
....... unless it's a typing error.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 04:21 PM   #90
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,476
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Nowhere in the Supreme Court's written reason do the words 'innocent' or 'exonerated' come up, neither you, BiWi, Raff, Knox or Boninsegna (_sp?) can make it so, no matter how hard you wish it nor however many times you declare it to be so.
Nowhere in the US Marine code of conduct is the term "mess hall" used. But US Marines mysteriously still get 3 meals a day.

Must be a typing error.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 05:07 PM   #91
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Out of context again. You must stop doing that, BiWi.

The context was, someone argued that Rudy made up his story about a strange man 'on the threshold of Meridith Kercher's room'. I remarked that he managed to describe Raff surprisingly accurately, i.e., a fluently Italian man (and thus, not a sundry Albanian as claimed by Knox and Raff's defences viz a viz their star witness,Aviello), shorter than himself, brown hair (as opposed to Italian black), held the blade in his left hand, was wearing a jacket with a Napapirje logo and wore on his head a white beanie with a red stripe. He said the figure was backlit, from the dim light in Mez' room and the hall light having been switched off whilst he was in the loo.

The PR-gang jumped in and claimed (falsely) that (a) Raff was taller (b) was right-handed, so therefor could not be the man in Rudy's description (c) did not own any such clothing and (d) all Italians have mousy hair.

So, it is nothing to do with 'belief in Rudy', but rather, 'how did Rudy manage to describe Raff so accurately'?

Do try to keep focussed.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Oh, DARN! And here I was planning to carry a foot long unprotected kitchen knife in my purse for protection.



It's sad, but unsurprising, that you resort once again to this nonsense. After failing to ever produce a single piece of evidence that RS ever owned or wore a Naparijini jacket or a cap with a red stripe, you trot this out again.

Guede not only said that the man held the knife in his left hand, but that he attacked him:


Leosini-Guede interview January 21, 2016

A person would not attack someone with a knife with his non-dominant hand. As I showed in the video, RS writes with his right hand.

You think that brown hair is uncommon in Italy? REALLY? All Italians have "Italian black" hair? LOL! Brown is the most common hair color in Italy, not black. Comodi, Maresca, Massei, Bongiorno, Romanelli and others were brunettes. So Guede describing a brunette who spoke Italian in Italy was really taking a chance with getting the odds right, heh? And no one claimed "all Italians have mousy hair". Stop fibbing.

By the way, that pic you love to show of RS holding the knife also shows his hair completely covered by the cap. Hmmmmm.
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Please read comments properly. You claimed most Italians had brown hair. Plenty have black hair and few blonde. Writing with your right hand does NOT prove hand dominance. Raff holds his knife in his left hand and also opens his lap top with his left hand. THAT is his dominant hand. It is his hand of unconscious natural preference. He will have been taught to write with his right.

Please take debating lessons. Then you won't waste so much bandwidth with inanities.
I read your comment properly and understood your implication completely. You were implying that most Italians have black hair which made Guede's claim of the man having brown hair important. Why else would you have written "brown hair (as opposed to Italian black)"?
Yes, plenty of Italians have black hair and some even blond hair...but I never said otherwise. So why you inferred otherwise indicates it is you who needs to read comments properly.

So Raffaele opened his laptop at least once with his left hand. So have I. And I'm right-handed. I've also been known to hold many things in my left hand, scratch an itch with my left hand, pet my dog with my left hand, etc. But I never, ever write with my left hand. And Raffaele writes with his right hand. For you to claim that "He will have been taught to write with his right," is based on absolutely zero evidence. It's just another baseless claim pulled out of your...well...we all know where.

Please learn the rules of debating: making "facts" up is not permitted.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 05:10 PM   #92
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
By the way, for the record (and for any ongoing discussion on this issue), the apparel brand mentioned by Guede is spelled

Napapijri

Several posters have spelled it incorrectly (including, inevitably, Vixen....)

As you were
Thanks for the correction. I had never heard of the brand before and just assumed Vixen was spelling it correctly. I should have known to double check 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 05:19 PM   #93
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sorry to disabuse you, but a 'judicial fact' or legal fact does indeed become an historical fact.

Suppose a man's son is really the milkman's son. As far as the law is concerned the son is the issue of the man and he is entitled to inherit (at least in Europe). The history books will say whatever the law decrees. Assuming it never comes to light he was the son of the milkman, then the legal status has the upper hand.

Nowhere in the Supreme Court's written reason do the words 'innocent' or 'exonerated' come up, neither you, BiWi, Raff, Knox or Boninsegna (_sp?) can make it so, no matter how hard you wish it nor however many times you declare it to be so.
Suppose the law says a man's legally adopted son is his son. As far as the law is concerned the son is the issue of the man and he is entitled to inherit (at least in Europe). The history books will say whatever the law decrees. Assuming it never comes to light that the son was actually adopted, it will still remain a historical fact that the boy was not the man's biological son.

A historical fact still must be true or it is not a fact, but a historical error.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 05:54 PM   #94
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Vixen is fond of showing the one photo of Raff holding the knife with his left hand. However, she does not show the photo (taken at the same time) of him holding the knife with both hands.
http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/quatt...aele-sollecito

Here's a photo of RS talking on the phone he's holding in his right hand. According to Vixen's reasoning, this is definitive proof he's right-handed. But I'm sure he was taught to hold his phone in his right hand against his natural left-handed dominance. I'm sure his teachers and parents must have slapped him silly every time he tried to use his left hand.

http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/quatt...aele-sollecito
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 07:20 PM   #95
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Hahahaha Papa Sollecito, like Raff's sister, Vanessa's friend in Milan who got Janne Popovich (_sp?) to supply an alibi Raff and Knox were together [hence a visit in person rather than a quick text], helpfully provided his boy with an alibi.

Alas, the scam came back to haunt Raff at the Florence Court who said the testimonies of the fine upright stalwart Dr F Sollecito MD and Miss Popovich meant Raff was lying in his alibi.

Isn't it marvellous, Popovich arranged with her Mom (friend of Vanessa) to send a suitcase down from Milan on a four hour journey to Perugia to arrive circa midnight, Raff arranged to be ordained as Pope next day, Amanda and Raff arranged to go to Gubbio and Amanda was to sign a record contract with Simon Cowell later that day. Unfortunately, at eight Popovic's mum changed her mind, s Popvich raced around to Raff's just in time to catch the pair together at 8:40, her medical class having finished at 8:30 to let Raff know the imaginary suitcase wasn't arriving after all, sadly Raff was excommunicated so the ordination didn't happen, the roommate was found murdered so the trip to Gubbio didn't transpire and sadly Simon Cowell reneged on the contract, but he did see the pair together on Skype between 8:45 and 00.30, so it can't have been them.
Let me get this straight (after wading through all the feces): you're now claiming that Popovic never asked Raffaele to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase? That it was all a lie? That Popovic colluded with Vanessa S. to provide an alibi? You get more and more ludicrous as time goes on. It's why I keep coming back for more of your comedy. It's better than anything on TV.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 07:46 PM   #96
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,452
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Logical fallacy #3: appeal to the crowd. As in, '13 million Iraqis liked Saddam'.
No, the fallacy is Raffaele had a knife, therefore he's a killer. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc.

That Raffaele owned a knife is not evidence of anything other than he owned a knife.
__________________
A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2018, 10:10 PM   #97
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,363
Important elements of the guilters' argument are that there are no wrongful convictions, and that police and prosecutors never commit misconduct. Here's a case from the US where a prosecutor, reviewing the evidence of a case, admits that there had indeed been a lack of integrity to the prosecution of person wrongfully convicted of murder. This contradicts the guilters' argument, thus falsifying it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/u...ladelphia.html

"A Philadelphia judge has dropped first-degree murder charges against a man [Dontia Patterson] who spent 11 years in prison for a shooting he did not commit. ....[H]e was charged with murder and after two trials, sentenced to life in prison without parole.
....
On Tuesday, the Philadelphia district attorney, Lawrence S. Krasner, filed a motion that said his office would not retry Mr. Patterson a third time, and that evidence had been withheld during his previous trials, one of which had ended with a hung jury. Mr. Krasner requested the charges be dropped, and on Wednesday, Judge Kathryn Streeter Lewis of the Court of Common Pleas agreed.
....
Mr. Krasner and Anthony Voci, who is in charge of the office’s homicide unit, said in their motion that there was no physical evidence linking Mr. Patterson to the crime. “The Commonwealth [of Pennsylvania] will not retry a case against a man who is probably innocent and whose case is so lacking in integrity,” they said.
....
Mr. Voci wrote in the motion that Mr. Patterson’s conviction was “an egregious example of police and prosecutorial misconduct in hiding evidence helpful to the defense.”

The case against Patterson was illogical,” he wrote.
...."

In this miscarriage of justice against Patterson, there are reminders of the miscarriage of justice against Knox and Sollecito. For example, the suppression of evidence in favor of the defendents, the use of unreliable and non-credible evidence against them, the lack of any credible forensic evidence connecting them to the crime of the murder/rape of Kercher, and the illogic of the provisional judgments of conviction by the Massei and Nencini courts.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 12:26 AM   #98
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,719
There is an interesting case from Missouri; David Robinson. He was convicted of murder. There were concerns about his conviction and after many years a judge was appointed to review the case. The judge ruled he was factually innocent in February. The problem was Missouri had no mechanism to void the conviction of someone who was factually innocent who has gone through the full appeal process. The judge was very clear that keeping someone in jail who is innocent because of the lack of a process to release an innocent person was both immoral and should be illegal. Eventually in May he is released, but on a 'technicality'. He has not been technically exonerated, in theory the prosecution could bring a case to retry him. The original trial was voided so it would not be double jeopardy. This may mean (and people with familiarity with Missouri law may know better) that he will not be eligible for compensation.

So the judicial fact is that he is not exonerated despite a judge ruling that he is factually innocent. However outside the narrow confines of the law (and no doubt Vixen) he is exonerated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-u...2/free-at-last
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 04:23 AM   #99
NotEvenWrong
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 814
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
There is an interesting case from Missouri; David Robinson. He was convicted of murder. There were concerns about his conviction and after many years a judge was appointed to review the case. The judge ruled he was factually innocent in February. The problem was Missouri had no mechanism to void the conviction of someone who was factually innocent who has gone through the full appeal process. The judge was very clear that keeping someone in jail who is innocent because of the lack of a process to release an innocent person was both immoral and should be illegal. Eventually in May he is released, but on a 'technicality'. He has not been technically exonerated, in theory the prosecution could bring a case to retry him. The original trial was voided so it would not be double jeopardy. This may mean (and people with familiarity with Missouri law may know better) that he will not be eligible for compensation.

So the judicial fact is that he is not exonerated despite a judge ruling that he is factually innocent. However outside the narrow confines of the law (and no doubt Vixen) he is exonerated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-u...2/free-at-last
Has anyone bothered to check to see if the Judge has ties with the mafia or Illuminati? Did Trump buy him a Ferrari?

Failing that I am sure there are some mentally ills that could harass his employers via email.
NotEvenWrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 08:02 AM   #100
AnimalFriendly
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 63
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Let me get this straight (after wading through all the feces): you're now claiming that Popovic never asked Raffaele to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase? That it was all a lie? That Popovic colluded with Vanessa S. to provide an alibi? You get more and more ludicrous as time goes on. It's why I keep coming back for more of your comedy. It's better than anything on TV.
Indeed it is! And apart from the major networks, there's some pretty good TV on these days with Netflix , AMC, etc. I come here strictly for the daily, sometimes hourly, laughs that Vix's inanities provide. Not accepting Popovic's testimony? Delusional....and that's being kind.
AnimalFriendly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 08:16 AM   #101
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,476
Originally Posted by AnimalFriendly View Post
Indeed it is! And apart from the major networks, there's some pretty good TV on these days with Netflix , AMC, etc. I come here strictly for the daily, sometimes hourly, laughs that Vix's inanities provide. Not accepting Popovic's testimony? Delusional....and that's being kind.
It's a well known fact that what's available, re: Popovic's testimony, is riddled with typing errors.

Praise Jesus we have Vixen to properly interpret for us.
__________________
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 08:35 AM   #102
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,044
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Let me get this straight (after wading through all the feces): you're now claiming that Popovic never asked Raffaele to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase? That it was all a lie? That Popovic colluded with Vanessa S. to provide an alibi? You get more and more ludicrous as time goes on. It's why I keep coming back for more of your comedy. It's better than anything on TV.
I was giving her the benefit of the doubt and assuming this was just a weak attempt at sarcasm/humor. If she was being serious with this post then it would suggest she's reached a level of desperation never before seen among the PGP rank and file.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 08:43 AM   #103
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,008
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Let me get this straight (after wading through all the feces): you're now claiming that Popovic never asked Raffaele to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase? That it was all a lie? That Popovic colluded with Vanessa S. to provide an alibi? You get more and more ludicrous as time goes on. It's why I keep coming back for more of your comedy. It's better than anything on TV.
It's actually progress of a sort, as it shows Vixen acknowledges Popovic provides logistical problems to a PGP theory, problems most just ignore.
bagels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 09:23 AM   #104
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,781
Vixen, please clarify your position on Popovic. Do you believe that her testimony was false and that there was never an actual plan for RS to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase sent by her mother?
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:21 AM   #105
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
There is an interesting case from Missouri; David Robinson. He was convicted of murder. There were concerns about his conviction and after many years a judge was appointed to review the case. The judge ruled he was factually innocent in February. The problem was Missouri had no mechanism to void the conviction of someone who was factually innocent who has gone through the full appeal process. The judge was very clear that keeping someone in jail who is innocent because of the lack of a process to release an innocent person was both immoral and should be illegal. Eventually in May he is released, but on a 'technicality'. He has not been technically exonerated, in theory the prosecution could bring a case to retry him. The original trial was voided so it would not be double jeopardy. This may mean (and people with familiarity with Missouri law may know better) that he will not be eligible for compensation.

So the judicial fact is that he is not exonerated despite a judge ruling that he is factually innocent. However outside the narrow confines of the law (and no doubt Vixen) he is exonerated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-u...2/free-at-last
Unfortunately for you, that scenario does not apply to Raff and Knox.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:23 AM   #106
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No, the fallacy is Raffaele had a knife, therefore he's a killer. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc.

That Raffaele owned a knife is not evidence of anything other than he owned a knife.
Wrong again and off context. The context was, a trait for sociopathy is 'an exaggerated sense of entitlement'. We see this in both Knox and Raff.

Raff swaggering into the Questura with a knife on his person exemplifies his arrogance.

Nothing at all to do with your false homily.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:25 AM   #107
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Vixen, please clarify your position on Popovic. Do you believe that her testimony was false and that there was never an actual plan for RS to take her to the station to pick up a suitcase sent by her mother?
I suspect it's contrived to help out Raff.

We have not seen or heard anything more of her since.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:28 AM   #108
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
No - acbytesla's argument was not at all an example of argumentum ad populum (surprised you missed out on the chance to use the Latin in your own post, incidentally....). What actually happened was this: you were trying to argue that Sollecito owning or carrying round a pocket knife was somehow deviant/unusual behaviour (which, of course, in your own mind, fed in turn into supporting your belief that he participated in Kercher's murder). By way of attacking your argument, acbytesla was pointing out just how many American men own a pocket knife (with its obvious implication that this therefore cannot be viewed as unusual deviant behaviour).

It is not illegal to be in the possession of an offensive weapon in America, so a false equivalence.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:28 AM   #109
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,008
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Wrong again and off context. The context was, a trait for sociopathy is 'an exaggerated sense of entitlement'. We see this in both Knox and Raff.

Raff swaggering into the Questura with a knife on his person exemplifies his arrogance.

Nothing at all to do with your false homily.
Another trait for sociopathy is stabbing a girl in cold blood, feeling no remorse about it, then going on TV smiling about your made up date with her.
bagels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:31 AM   #110
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,719
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Unfortunately for you, that scenario does not apply to Raff and Knox.
You are quite right under Italian law Sollecito and Knox are innocent of murder. Italian law is clear; until guilt is confirmed by the court of cassation a person is innocent. Since the guilt of Sollecito and Knox for murder was not confirmed they are (and always were) innocent. That is a simple fact of Italian law.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:31 AM   #111
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
By the way, for the record (and for any ongoing discussion on this issue), the apparel brand mentioned by Guede is spelled

Napapijri

Several posters have spelled it incorrectly (including, inevitably, Vixen....)

As you were
Napapijri is the Norwegian Laplander (Saami) for 'Arctic Circle', derived from the Finnish for the Artic Circle, napapiiri hence the term is correctly interchangeable by me.

I speak from a superior vantage to you.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:33 AM   #112
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
....... unless it's a typing error.
Many people, especially you, Bill, use the term 'exonerated' to mean something vernacular, along the lines of, 'released from prison'.

This is not the legal definition.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:39 AM   #113
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,008
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Many people, especially you, Bill, use the term 'exonerated' to mean something vernacular, along the lines of, 'released from prison'.

This is not the legal definition.
I would say they're using it more in the sense of "found not guilty with prejudice" which is a pretty strong finding, though perhaps not as strong as proving an invisible tea cup doesn't orbit the earth.
bagels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:44 AM   #114
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I read your comment properly and understood your implication completely. You were implying that most Italians have black hair which made Guede's claim of the man having brown hair important. Why else would you have written "brown hair (as opposed to Italian black)"?
Yes, plenty of Italians have black hair and some even blond hair...but I never said otherwise. So why you inferred otherwise indicates it is you who needs to read comments properly.

So Raffaele opened his laptop at least once with his left hand. So have I. And I'm right-handed. I've also been known to hold many things in my left hand, scratch an itch with my left hand, pet my dog with my left hand, etc. But I never, ever write with my left hand. And Raffaele writes with his right hand. For you to claim that "He will have been taught to write with his right," is based on absolutely zero evidence. It's just another baseless claim pulled out of your...well...we all know where.

Please learn the rules of debating: making "facts" up is not permitted.
Wrong again. Please read more carefully. You claimed that there was nothing remarkable about Rudy saying the supposed intruder he chanced upon 'had brown hair'. I pointed out that this was not a given. My Italian friend Luigi from Sicily has a head of curly black hair (and a lot of female interest). Another London Italian friend, Guiseppe, has fair hair, and another, Bernie, has long dark hair down his back.

So getting the 'brown hair' right (let's say odds of 1/3), plus a native-speaking Italian in a city that is choccabloc with foreigners (lets say odds of 50:50) plus 'he held a blade in his left hand (1/5 to reflect % 'sinister' population), plus Napapirje-style clothing (1/10) and a beanie (1/3), plus 'shorter than Rudy' (50:50) gives us a probability of :

(0.33333 x 0.5 x 0.2 x 0.10 x 0.33 x 0.5) = 0.000005499

Or, five in ten thousand.

So, a good description of Raff.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:45 AM   #115
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Nowhere in the US Marine code of conduct is the term "mess hall" used. But US Marines mysteriously still get 3 meals a day.

Must be a typing error.
Here in the British Army, we have the officers' mess.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:51 AM   #116
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Well......

1) The two statements "most Italians have brown hair" and "plenty (of Italians) have black hair and few blonde (sic)" aren't even mutually incompatible in any case. But....

2) ....available evidence seems to suggest that most Italians do indeed have brown hair. For example, plenty of Italians have commented here to state that brown hair is the most common colour in Italy, and that in fact black hair colour is rare:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...S&guccounter=1

This is, in fact, wholly unsurprising - especially in the northern part of Italy down to around Rome (including, of course, Perugia itself). That's because this more northerly element of Italian population is predominantly ethnically far closer to central and western European genomes than the coastal north-Mediterranean genome. Ironically in the context of this discussion, Sollecito (being from Bari in southern Mediterranean Italy) comes from the part of Italy that might be expected to have a higher proportion of black-haired inhabitants. Yet he himself has brown hair.







Well......

1) Sollecito was holding his knife in his left hand for the purpose of that photograph. He was holding the knife in the tips of his fingers to display it to the camera, and was not holding it as one would hold a knife to use it. In addition, the position and orientation of the camera in that photo suggests that Sollecito himself may have taken the photo using his mobile phone attached to a selfie stick (the photo is taken from waist height pretty close to Sollecito: a very unusual position for another person to have taken the photo from, but an entirely feasible and logical position for Sollecito to have taken a selfie from, holding a selfie stick at waist level). And if that's the case, that's actually extremely strong evidence for Sollecito being dominant RIGHT-HANDED - the fine control and dexterity of the dominant hand would be much more important for the holding and operation of the phone camera than for the fingertip holding of the knife for the photograph.

2) Really????? Sollecito opening his laptop with his left hand is evidence of his left-hand dominance?????!!!!! Even by your standards, this is an astonishingly ridiculous "argument". In fact, I (for example) am strongly right-hand dominant and yet I open my laptop with my left hand - using the fingers of my dominant right hand to press and hold the catch to release the lid/screen. I suggest that most right-hand-dominant people do exactly the same thing themselves. Regardless, what I certainly know is that how one opens one's laptop is in no way a reliable indicator of hand dominance (though, as I said, I suggest that it tends to indicate a dominance entirely opposite to that of your claim....)

3) You obviously don't know many left-hand-dominant people, do you? Because it's incredibly difficult for a left-hand-dominant person to write with their right hand. The degree of hand-eye co-oordination and fine motor control required for neat, legible handwriting virtually requires that one writes with one's dominant hand. And because of that, schools across the modern industrialised world (including, yes, Italy) many decades ago stopped trying to force left-hand-dominant children to learn to write with their right hands. Every single left-hand-dominant person I know (and I think I know around 12) writes with his/her left hand. I am confident that if Sollecito were left-hand-dominant, he'd write with his left hand also. And I'm certain that if Sollecito were left-hand-dominant but had been forced to learn to write right-handed, he'd have only been able to write in a very slow, gauche, untidy style.






Are you aware of a little thing named "irony", Vixen.......?
Wrong. It was not a 'selfie'. Raff took a mate to the questura with him; if you followed the news reports, you'd know this. It was his chum who took the pics.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:54 AM   #117
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
And do you know why that is, Vixen? (That's a rhetorical question, obviously - because you clearly don't know why that is, probably on account of an ongoing ignorance of judicial remits, which I shall now attempt to explain to you once again)

So, here goes. Please try to listen carefully this time.

It was simply not the remit of the Marasca SC panel, in its acquittals of Knox and Sollecito, to declare them "innocent" or to state that they were "exonerated". The role and remit of the SC panel was explicit and specific: to determine whether Knox and/or Sollecito should lawfully be convicted or acquitted of the crimes with which each of them were charged, based on the totality of the evidence presented at trial and the (correct) application of Italian law (and to provide written reasoning for how it arrived at its judgements). Nothing more or less than that. So the ONLY thing that an entity such as the Marasca SC panel could/would come out with in respect of a case such as this (and with the same prior judicial rulings) would be: "uphold and confirm the conviction(s)", "annul the conviction(s) and remand the case to a lower court for retrial", or "annul the conviction(s) and acquit". That's all.

However..... when it comes to commentary and analysis about the SC panel's verdict and reasoning - THAT'S when terms such as "(presumed) innocent" and "exonerated" can (correctly, in this situation and context) be employed*. The definitive nature of the Marasca panel's annulments and acquittals, coupled with the severe criticism of the investigative process towards Knox/Sollecito and the unlawful "reasoning" of the convicting courts, can only lead any disinterested, intelligent commentator/analyst to conclude that the Marasca panel's verdicts were total exonerations** for Knox and Sollecito.


* Just as it is, for example, correct for commentary/analysis of the Marasca SC verdict to conclude that the Marasca panel excoriated the work of police, prosecutors and the convicting courts in this trial process - even though (obviously) the Marasca MR neither used the word "excoriate" nor even uses directly intemperate tones: however, the context and a proper understanding of what the Marasca MR actually DID write in this respect leads to the clear and correct conclusion that the Marasca panel was indeed severely critical of police, prosecutors and convicting courts.

** Incidentally, ANY time a prior guilty verdict is annulled and the person is acquitted on appeal, the person is by definition exonerated - there's either sufficient (credible/reliable) evidence, assessed lawfully, to prove guilt BARD, or the defendant is entitled to the full presumption of innocence and stands as judicially innocent as literally anyone else in the World at that point.
Wrong. It could have given them a Paragraph 1 acquittal, but it did not. It gave them a 'not proven' one instead. ('The politicians loophole' [cf Berlusconi and the other chap].)
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 11:56 AM   #118
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
You are quite right under Italian law Sollecito and Knox are innocent of murder. Italian law is clear; until guilt is confirmed by the court of cassation a person is innocent. Since the guilt of Sollecito and Knox for murder was not confirmed they are (and always were) innocent. That is a simple fact of Italian law.
Good piece of sophistry. Very advanced.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 12:02 PM   #119
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Suppose the law says a man's legally adopted son is his son. As far as the law is concerned the son is the issue of the man and he is entitled to inherit (at least in Europe). The history books will say whatever the law decrees. Assuming it never comes to light that the son was actually adopted, it will still remain a historical fact that the boy was not the man's biological son.

A historical fact still must be true or it is not a fact, but a historical error.
An adopted child becomes a de facto legitimate child in law. There are many adopted people who never found out they were adopted.

What you are thinking about is in the days when a child borm out of wedlock was described in church records as a 'base child' or even 'bastard'.

Yes, in those cases, historians will ascribe the correct status, which in those days was Church (Cannon) Law.

In modern times, if a person decides to keep their adoption status a secret, then who is to know? They have the same rights as a birth child.

(Step children do not.)
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2018, 12:04 PM   #120
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,591
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Vixen is fond of showing the one photo of Raff holding the knife with his left hand. However, she does not show the photo (taken at the same time) of him holding the knife with both hands.
http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/quatt...aele-sollecito

Here's a photo of RS talking on the phone he's holding in his right hand. According to Vixen's reasoning, this is definitive proof he's right-handed. But I'm sure he was taught to hold his phone in his right hand against his natural left-handed dominance. I'm sure his teachers and parents must have slapped him silly every time he tried to use his left hand.

http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/quatt...aele-sollecito

Er, no. A knife is held by its handle. The handle is in Raff's left hand, even if he is touching the blade with the other.

He is spelling it out to you in plain sight.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 07:42 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.