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

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

Notices


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 18th May 2018, 09:11 AM   #201
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Stop prevaricating. The Italian not guilty under article 530,1 does NOT mean actively 'innocent' ; as in the UK and the USA, it means the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

In Italy virtually 99.999% of 'not guilty' verdicts are under 530.1, with the relevant sub paragraph quoted.

Stop trying to fabricate that 530,2 is a run of the mill 'not guilty' as we understand it.

You've got reliable statistics to back up this "virtually 99.999% of not-guilty verdicts are under 530.1", I am assuming?

Wait a minute. What on Earth am I assuming?? You've got no such statistics, have you Vixen? You#re just making stuff up, aren't you?

(And your "...with the relevant sub paragraph quoted" is fatuous rubbish. Again, I implore you to actually do some research (you claimed to be exemplary at research HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA): look at the ACTUAL TEXT of Section 530 of the Italian Code of Criminal Practice (hell - it's been quoted to you enough within these threads already!!). Paragraph 530.1 - that's to say Section 530 Paragraph 1 - is one short paragraph of text. There are no "sub paragraphs". Arrant nonsense.)
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 18th May 2018, 09:13 AM   #202
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is exactly similar to the Scottish law 'not proven'.

As courts are supposed to come to a decision this rubric is being phased out.

In fact, it is astonishing that the Marasca court pulled it out of the hat. It was the only way it could get the pair out of jail. And it is as illegal and bent as a nine-bob note.

NO IT IS NOT EXACTLY SIMILAR TO THE SCOTTISH "NOT PROVEN".

Please try to get an education.

I and others have carefully explained within these threads time and time again what the true situation is.


(Oh and the Marasca panel verdict/reasoning was absolutely not "illegal" or "bent as a nine bob note". But if you and your little pro-guilt colleagues like to keep thinking that it was, well that's your (ill-educated, low-intellect, hopelessly partisan) prerogative of course....)

Last edited by LondonJohn; 18th May 2018 at 09:15 AM.
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 18th May 2018, 09:15 AM   #203
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
She was friends with Vanessa, who lived in Milan at the time.

Say no more.

Vanessa was sacked from the Carabinieri for tampering with the evidence.
I'd like to know where you got the idea that Mrs. Popovic was a friend of Vanessa's or had ever even met her. What evidence do you have of this? None. Just like you have no evidence of the jacket or the cap and a multitude of other false claims.

Vanessa was not fired from the carabinieri for "tampering with evidence". She was fired for daring to defend her brother over her fellow carabinieri.

Quote:
Rome, July 5 - Tonight, in the transmission Tabloid, broadcast on Italia1 at 21.00, we talk about the affair occurred to the Lieutenant of the Carabinieri Vanessa Sollecito. The officer, after six years of service in the Army and another 4 between the Navy and the Air Force, on April 20th 2009 was declared "unsuitable" by the Commission for the aptitude tests of the National Selection and Recruitment Center of the General Command of the Army of the Carabinieri as part of the "Special Procedures aimed at the stabilization of officers in fixed position, auxiliary to the special and technical-logistic roles of the Carabinieri". As a result, she was dismissed and placed outside the Carabinieri Army.
https://www.grnet.it/sicurezza/carab...vvocato-carta/

Vanessa had outstanding credentials and had been rated "above average" by the Carabinieri previously.

Stop making things up. Your penchant for doing so is well established. Just stop it.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 09:17 AM   #204
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,577
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Vixen has lied so many times we'd need a calculator to keep up.

Of course, Vixen avoids all the very credible reasons why she should accept the testimony as truthful, not least of which being the investigators who worked so hard to try to convict Amanda and Raffaele never disputed the testimony.

I notice Vixen has now moved up from being suspicious to certainty that "it never happened". Of course, had the investigators had any doubts about this testimony they could have tracked down the driver of the bus that evening and confirmed Popovic's mother tried to send the suitcase. And this, of course, renders this blathering comment from Vixen moot;

"They were not under any risk as nobody can prove that there never was any suitcase due to be placed on the bus, as it never happened."

Imagine if the investigators interviewed the bus driver and s/he stated no one ever tried to send a suitcase on the bus. That would certainly be a problem for someone who claimed they tried to do that and were told by the driver they couldn't. But Vixen just ignores this and claims there was no risk in lying to help cover for someone she didn't know.

But Curatolo, Quintavalle, Capezzali... yeah, they're all credible and beyond reproach.
Try and leave an unattended suitcase on any public transport in Europe and you'll get the bum's rush.


Hahaha 'Popovich says people do this in Serbia all the time'.


Talk about gilding the lily.


Of course they do, Janna.
__________________
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 18th May 2018, 09:18 AM   #205
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
This is an astonishingly, laughably incorrect assertion.

Or perhaps you can actually show me reliable, credible statistics on the relative proportions of acquittals in Italian criminal courts which are under 530.1 and 530.2. Oh, what's that? You don't HAVE any such statistics? And you've just pulled a bogus "fact" straight out of your backside to try to bolster your argument? Ah, thought so.
Wot? Vixen would just make up "facts" to suit her purpose? Noooooo… tell me it ain't so!
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 09:22 AM   #206
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
From the post-mortem, it was clear there were at least two knives involved. One, similar to the one Raff had on his person at the questura was deemed responsible for the relatively smaller stab wounds on the left side of the victim's neck and a large kitchen knife for the fatal wounds on the other side of the neck.

How this pair sleeps at night escapes me.

This is totally incorrect. Do you come to this errant belief on account of poor education of the facts, or an inability to conduct cogent analysis, or some other reason?

In fact, the true situation is this:

All of the knife wounds are actually consistent with one, narrow-bladed knife with about a 12-15cm blade length.

Perhaps you have confused yourself (!) owing to the prosecution's assertion that the Sollecito kitchen knife was wielded in the murder. Because if that knife truly WAS used (it was not, but for now let's fantasise eh?), then the wound analysis shows that this knife simply could not have inflicted all the wounds - and therefore if one accepts that the Sollecito kitchen knife was used, then one also has to accept that at least one other knife was also used (because Sollecito's kitchen knife was too big to have made at least one of the wounds).

But if you come to understand that the Sollecito kitchen knife was NOT used in the murder - and there is not one iota of credible, reliable evidence pointing to its use - then in fact the wounds are all entirely consistent with the use of just one, smaller knife. Which is what happened. And it was Guede's knife. With Guede wielding the knife. All by himself.
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 18th May 2018, 09:28 AM   #207
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
As Williams would say... round and round we go.

So let's try this one more time.

https://www.brocardi.it/codice-di-pr...v_art_prec_top

This is NOT wikipedia, this is straight from the Italian CPP. I copied Article 530 (all four paragraphs) here for your convenience but by all means, please use the link to go read for yourself. You'll notice there are these handy-dandy "<- ART.PREVIOUS" and "ART.NEXT ->" links on both the top and bottom of each page. That should assist you as you find your way to Article 530.2, where you can then copy/paste the content here.

OR.... you can just admit you are wrong and be done with it. You're choice. I'll just kick back with some popcorn and enjoy the action.

The combination of a) inept knowledge/understanding of the actual facts and b) extreme intellectual dishonesty embedded within this particular pro-guilt argument is verging on truly breathtaking. It's at once both pathetic and belief-beggaring. And it's increasingly a waste of time trying to counter with actual fact and coherent analysis - because the same old lies, misrepresentations and strawmen come back just the same, with even more chutzpah and rampant dishonesty, time and again.

Quite astonishing to observe. Shameful, but astonishing.
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 18th May 2018, 09:31 AM   #208
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Try and leave an unattended suitcase on any public transport in Europe and you'll get the bum's rush.


Hahaha 'Popovich Popovic says people do this in Serbia all the time'.


Talk about gilding the lily.


Of course they do, Janna Jovana.
Indeed, Jovana's mother did "get the bum's rush" when she tried to leave the suitcase on the bus in Milan. But are you now an expert on what is done in Serbia, too?

And, please, get her name right.

Talk about just making things up: you have provided no evidence whatsoever that Vanessa S even knew Jovana's mother or that she did not try and send Jovana a suitcase.
All you've proved, yet again, is your blind need to disbelieve anything and everything that supports innocence but believe anything and everything that does not. Can you say "extreme confirmation bias"?
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 09:38 AM   #209
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
From the post-mortem, it was clear there were at least two knives involved. One, similar to the one Raff had on his person at the questura was deemed responsible for the relatively smaller stab wounds on the left side of the victim's neck and a large kitchen knife for the fatal wounds on the other side of the neck.

How this pair sleeps at night escapes me.
Wrong again.

Quote:
Mignini was convinced that the positions of the injuries on the body showed without doubt there had been more than one attacker. He pointed to the wounds on the front, left and right of Meredith’s neck and asked Lalli: ‘Look here, surely these were caused by two different knives?’

Well, my guess is that they were caused by the same knife,’ Lalli replied, pointing with his index finger to show how he believed each of the three wounds had been inflicted.
Follain, John. A Death in Italy: The Definitive Account of the Amanda Knox Case (Kindle Locations 1660-1662). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.

Why you keep posting falsehoods escapes me. Hmmmm...no, not really.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 09:39 AM   #210
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Great tweet here. It is a reproduction of the court testimony in which Amanda Knox confesses that she offered Patrick Lumumba's name freely and voluntarily, without any pressure from the police.

https://twitter.com/Robyn__Duncan/st...49261300305921

Bang goes another PR lie.

Oh. Dear.

Are you (and that cast-iron nutter Duncan) incapable of objective research/analysis? Or is this a wilful attempt to misdirect/deceive? Because it has to be one or both of these things, Vixen.

This section of trial transcript is very specifically in respect of Knox's memorandum from the daytime on 6th November. The one in which she actually states explicitly that she has huge doubts over what she was told to "remember" in her earlier statements.

If you (or Duncan) actually go back earlier in Pacelli's courtroom exchange with Knox, you will clearly see that when he is questioning her over the build-up to her critical 1.45am "confession/accusation", she does indeed explicitly and specifically state on the stand that she was instructed by the police to "remember" that she'd met up with Lumumba, and that she was mistreated by the police as part of their "persuasion" tactics. Knox cannot make it clearer to Pacelli that she indeed was severely pressurised by the police in the build-up to her (as memorably put by Perugia Police Chief De Felice) "buckling" and "confirming what (the police) already knew to be correct".

Bang goes another pro-guilt lie eh, Vixen. Really quite some piece of work.

Last edited by LondonJohn; 18th May 2018 at 09:44 AM.
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 18th May 2018, 09:42 AM   #211
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Indeed, Jovana's mother did "get the bum's rush" when she tried to leave the suitcase on the bus in Milan. But are you now an expert on what is done in Serbia, too?

And, please, get her name right.

Talk about just making things up: you have provided no evidence whatsoever that Vanessa S even knew Jovana's mother or that she did not try and send Jovana a suitcase.
All you've proved, yet again, is your blind need to disbelieve anything and everything that supports innocence but believe anything and everything that does not. Can you say "extreme confirmation bias"?

You'd think, wouldn't you, that someone whose "arguments" got shot down in flames EVERY SINGLE TIME, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, would perhaps dial back the brazen chutzpah and, y'know, try to actually do some proper research and checking before trying again.

But not in the bizzaro-world of pro-guilt commentary, it would appear.........
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 18th May 2018, 09:51 AM   #212
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
You'd think, wouldn't you, that someone whose "arguments" got shot down in flames EVERY SINGLE TIME, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, would perhaps dial back the brazen chutzpah and, y'know, try to actually do some proper research and checking before trying again.

But not in the bizzaro-world of pro-guilt commentary, it would appear.........
But that's the problem, LJ. In that bizzaro world, facts don't matter. Evidence doesn't matter. Truth doesn't matter. If they don't like the facts or evidence, they just make up their own. The fact they can't support those "facts and evidence" with proof matters not; they just keep repeating them. Such dishonesty.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 11:42 AM   #213
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
I started to compile a list of all the provable falsehoods Vixen posted in the last six pages. After finding five or six on the first page alone, I decided it would take too much time. Besides, unlike the Washington Post that keeps tabs on the average of nine lies a day Trump tells, I don't have a staff.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 12:16 PM   #214
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,043
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Try and leave an unattended suitcase on any public transport in Europe and you'll get the bum's rush.


Hahaha 'Popovich says people do this in Serbia all the time'.


Talk about gilding the lily.


Of course they do, Janna.
It's Jovana Popovic. At least get that much correct.

So you've got nothing... no contradiction's in the account given by four different people; no explanation for how they got with Jovana and her mother to come up with this story within hours of the discovery of the murder; no evidence from the bus company to contradict Jovana's mother; no explanation for why Jovana and her mother would be willing to risk a conspiracy to conceal a murder charge for people they barely knew; no evidence that Michele contradicted Jovana about trying to contact him first. No surprise here.

Do you have any evidence to prove Jovana made the claim "people do this in Serbia all the time"? I've just read her court testimony, start to finish, and she never makes such a claim so I'm just wondering where you got this from? Surely you didn't just make that up... right? --RIGHT???

Leave an unattended suitcase? So now you're trying to couch this as if she tried to pull a typical terrorist tactic. Nice try (well, not really, but..) but that's NOT what she was trying to do. She asked the bus driver if she could put the suitcase on the bus for her daughter to receive in Perugia. For whatever reason she thought she might be able to do this and apparently she was told it was not allowed. Bum rush? More colorful hyperbole to make your point, I suppose. Much more likely she was politely advised that was not allowed. How does the phrase "gilding the lily" apply here?
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 18th May 2018, 01:46 PM   #215
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is exactly similar to the Scottish law 'not proven'.

As courts are supposed to come to a decision this rubric is being phased out.

In fact, it is astonishing that the Marasca court pulled it out of the hat. It was the only way it could get the pair out of jail. And it is as illegal and bent as a nine-bob note.
Vixen complains the supreme court acted illegally. The link below shows the numerous Italian laws which were broken by the police/proscution and PGP had no problem with police/prosecution acting illegally. How does Vixen explain the hypocrisy of attacking the supreme court for acting illegaly but slavishly supporting corrupt police/prosecutors who acted illegally and PGP feel it is perfectly acceptable for Italian laws to be broken when it works against Amanda and Raffaele.

http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.co...d2aad8f22e0415

Vixen complains the supreme court were bent. The links below show the numerous abuses committed by the police/prosecution. Can Vixen explain the hypocrisy of attacking the supreme court for being corrupt whilst slavishly defending corrupt police/prosecutors who didn't tape the interrogations of Amanda and Raffaele, denied access to lawyers, didn't explain Amanda and Raffaele their rights, abused Amanda, Raffaele and Lumumba during the interrogations, fed false information to the media, destroyed evidence, engaged in the massive of suppression of evidence and committed perjury and have no problems with corruption when it works against Amanda and Raffaele.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/raffaeles-kitchen-knife/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contam...bwork-coverup/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredi...ry-corruption/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/evidence-destroyed/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/blood-...irs-apartment/
https://knoxsollecito.wordpress.com/...ele-sollecito/
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/myths.html
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post11071314
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 02:58 PM   #216
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
It's Jovana Popovic. At least get that much correct.

So you've got nothing... no contradiction's in the account given by four different people; no explanation for how they got with Jovana and her mother to come up with this story within hours of the discovery of the murder; no evidence from the bus company to contradict Jovana's mother; no explanation for why Jovana and her mother would be willing to risk a conspiracy to conceal a murder charge for people they barely knew; no evidence that Michele contradicted Jovana about trying to contact him first. No surprise here.

Do you have any evidence to prove Jovana made the claim "people do this in Serbia all the time"? I've just read her court testimony, start to finish, and she never makes such a claim so I'm just wondering where you got this from? Surely you didn't just make that up... right? --RIGHT???

Leave an unattended suitcase? So now you're trying to couch this as if she tried to pull a typical terrorist tactic. Nice try (well, not really, but..) but that's NOT what she was trying to do. She asked the bus driver if she could put the suitcase on the bus for her daughter to receive in Perugia. For whatever reason she thought she might be able to do this and apparently she was told it was not allowed. Bum rush? More colorful hyperbole to make your point, I suppose. Much more likely she was politely advised that was not allowed. How does the phrase "gilding the lily" apply here?
There is no evidence Jovana's mother knew anyone in the Sollecito family. That Vanessa was a "friend" of hers is just another piece of fantasy pulled out of Vixen's repository of made up "facts" aka "her nether region".
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell ya!
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 06:11 PM   #217
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It was entirely illegal for the Supreme Court to annul the conviction. In a serious crime such as a murder, they do not have the jursidiction to dismiss charges, where a defendant has fairly been found guilty in a fair trail.
We're oddly getting somewhere.

The Italian Supreme Court in 2015 probably did think all the trials up until that point had been "fair".

But that's not the point is it? If you will quit posting tired talking points from Nick van der Leek and or the remaining online hate sites....

..... you'll see that what Cassation said, was that even if the evidence that Nencini cited to support his decision was true, that even then Nencini shouldn't have convicted.

A "fair" trial should have acquitted, and what had been unfair had been Nencini's faulty legal reasoning.

You always leave that part out. Stop reading Harry Rag, Peter Quennell and Nick van der Leek, because they are badly misinterpreting the final acquittal and exoneration.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 18th May 2018 at 06:55 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2018, 07:46 PM   #218
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,352
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
We're oddly getting somewhere.

The Italian Supreme Court in 2015 probably did think all the trials up until that point had been "fair".

But that's not the point is it? If you will quit posting tired talking points from Nick van der Leek and or the remaining online hate sites....

..... you'll see that what Cassation said, was that even if the evidence that Nencini cited to support his decision was true, that even then Nencini shouldn't have convicted.

A "fair" trial should have acquitted, and what had been unfair had been Nencini's faulty legal reasoning.

You always leave that part out. Stop reading Harry Rag, Peter Quennell and Nick van der Leek, because they are badly misinterpreting the final acquittal and exoneration.
A clarification. Not only did the Marasca CSC panel fault the Nencini appeal court's legal reasoning, they also found that the Nencini court judgment had violated Italian law and the Italian Constitution. Thus, it would be erroneous to state that they had even "probably" considered the Nencini judgment fair.

For example, in Section 4.1 and 4.2, without explicitly mentioning CPP Article 192 in that section, the Marasca CSC panel MR agrees with the appellants that the Nencini court violated that law by the improper use of DNA profile data, not obtained in accordance with international standards, and thus not properly usable to establish a fact. The MR attacks the DNA evidence as deficient in lacking reliability and repeatability, and thus not able to establish a fact. CPP Article 192.2 states: The existence of a fact cannot be inferred from circumstantial evidence unless such evidence is serious, precise, and consistent.

In Section 4.3 and 4.3.1, the MR criticizes the way that the results of Guede's trial was used in the Nencini judgment, as a violation of CPP Article 192.3, which requires corroborating evidence to confirm the reliability of such alleged evidence from an accused co-conspirator. The Marasca CSC panel MR goes on to point out, in Section 4.3.2, that this use of Guede's trial results or his unexamined statements also violates the Italian Constitution, Article 111, Clause 4, as well as several laws (CPP articles) elaborating on that constitutional provision.
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 18th May 2018, 11:21 PM   #219
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,007
Guys you're missing the bigger picture. Vixen is conceding that Popovic's testimony is damning to the prosecution's timeline and crime scenario. Since no court rejected Popovic she's practically conceding reasonable doubt.
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 18th May 2018, 11:37 PM   #220
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Guys you're missing the bigger picture. Vixen is conceding that Popovic's testimony is damning to the prosecution's timeline and crime scenario. Since no court rejected Popovic she's practically conceding reasonable doubt.
You're right, I did miss that. Walk us through that....
__________________
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 19th May 2018, 12:05 AM   #221
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,007
No PGP has ever wondered in the history of this case if it might be a little implausible that Amanda and Raffaele rushed out on 15 minutes notice to slaughter Meredith, and pick up a random burglar along the way.

Vixen arguing Popovic is a bent witness is one of the most pro-PIP arguments a guilter has ever made.
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 19th May 2018, 12:11 AM   #222
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,007
Although the most pro-PIP argument some guilters make are those that argue Guede is innocent and his date story is true. That's basically conceding Amanda Knox is innocent from the get go since it answers the main question posed on page 1 of thread 1: How can Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede both be guilty. They're agreeing with us PIP: they can't.
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 19th May 2018, 07:39 AM   #223
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Amanda Knox's reflection on being the target of abuse, as well as those who hurl it.

https://www.independent.ie/entertain...-36889161.html
__________________
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 19th May 2018, 08:13 AM   #224
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,043
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Amanda Knox's reflection on being the target of abuse, as well as those who hurl it.

https://www.independent.ie/entertain...-36889161.html
Hadn't seen this. Very nice article. Thanks for the link.

I notice Vixen hasn't said anything regarding Article 530 and what paragraphs 1 and 2 say. I suspect this is Vixen denial... she can't admit she's wrong so she'll just avoid it for a while, resurfacing some time later repeating her claim. She's nothing if not predictable.
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 19th May 2018, 09:00 AM   #225
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Hadn't seen this. Very nice article. Thanks for the link.

I notice Vixen hasn't said anything regarding Article 530 and what paragraphs 1 and 2 say. I suspect this is Vixen denial... she can't admit she's wrong so she'll just avoid it for a while, resurfacing some time later repeating her claim. She's nothing if not predictable.
Also note that this UK publication freely admits that RS and AK had been exonerated in 2015.

We call that a fact. Vixen calls it a typing error.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 19th May 2018 at 09:26 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2018, 10:53 AM   #226
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Amanda Knox's reflection on being the target of abuse, as well as those who hurl it.

https://www.independent.ie/entertain...-36889161.html
What an excellent article. My favorite line was "Trolls are small fry" to Amanda. And so they are. Small, nasty, ugly, hate-filled bullies.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 19th May 2018 at 11:27 AM.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2018, 10:54 AM   #227
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Also note that this UK publication freely admits that RS and AK had been exonerated in 2015.

We call that a fact. Vixen calls it a typing error.
I believe this is an Irish publication.
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2018, 11:29 AM   #228
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I believe this is an Irish publication.
Oooooooops!!!! My bad.

Or as our good friend would say, "typing error." <ducking, running>
__________________
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 19th May 2018, 01:28 PM   #229
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Oooooooops!!!! My bad.

Or as our good friend would say, "typing error." <ducking, running>
You do realize that the Independent was bought off by the massive, million dollar PR machine, don't you? Or maybe it was the ghost of Raffaele's dead "Uncle" Rocco, the Mafia Don, haunting the author. Speaking of which, has Vixen...or anyone else for that matter...provided evidence that they were closely related? Or the alleged photo showing Dr. Sollecito at the (cancelled) memorial?
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2018, 03:06 PM   #230
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,352
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Amanda Knox's reflection on being the target of abuse, as well as those who hurl it.

https://www.independent.ie/entertain...-36889161.html
Bill, thanks for posting this link to a very informative article in an Irish publication.

It does have one error regarding Guede's conviction:

"Now her {Amanda's} name has been cleared, and another man is serving a life sentence for the murder of Meredith, who was just 21 when her own life was taken from her."

Guede's original sentence was "life" but this was reduced to 30 years because he chose a "fast track" trial, and it was again reduced, on appeal, to 16 years. The appeal court considered that Guede's maximum sentence before mitigating circumstances was 24 years. The reasoning used by the Borsini appeal court to reduce Guede's sentence to 16 years included the following:

"Then, apart from the attempt to staunch the flow of blood from the wound and the proof that it was not he that held the knife that was compatible with the worst of the lesions, it should also be remembered that Guede was the only one, even if in a somewhat fanciful reconstruction of events, to indicate the perpetrators.

Taking into account the elements and the circumstances of the crime and, above all else, of the unspeakable suffering inflicted on the victim, the panel holds that it must deliver a judgment in which the mitigating and aggravating circumstances are considered of equal value.

As a result of the aforementioned judgment of equivalence, the sentence applicable becomes that covered in article 575 of the Penal Code.

In conclusion, the panel holds that the standard sentence on which to apply the reduction of one third for the process chosen, must still be in relation to the undeniable seriousness of the crime, being the maximum foreseen of 24 years."

The reasoning for the reduction of sentence shows that Guede was rewarded by a reduction in his sentence for naming Knox and Sollecito as perpetrators, without any corroborating evidence supporting his statements, and while always maintaining his legally permitted refusal to testify under questioning by the lawyers for Knox and Sollecito. It's an example of an unethical and unfair deception by the Italian prosecutors and judges.
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 19th May 2018, 03:43 PM   #231
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,352
To go on a bit about the issue of whether or not Knox and Sollecito received "fair trials", it's important to consider the definition of the term in the Italian and Council of Europe contexts.

The relevant articles of the Italian Constitution include:

Art. 10
The Italian legal system conforms to the generally recognised principles of international law. ....

Art. 13
Personal liberty is inviolable.
No one may be detained, inspected, or searched nor otherwise subjected to any restriction of personal liberty except by order of the Judiciary stating a reason and only in such cases and in such manner as provided by the law.
In exceptional circumstances and under such conditions of necessity and urgency as shall conclusively be defined by the law, the police may take provisional measures that shall be referred within 48 hours to the Judiciary for validation and which, in default of such validation in the following 48 hours, shall be revoked and considered null and void.
Any act of physical and moral violence against a person subjected to restriction of personal liberty shall be punished.
The law shall establish the maximum duration of preventive detention.

Art. 14
The home is inviolable.
Personal domicile shall be inviolable.
Home inspections, searches, or seizures shall not be admissible save in the cases and manners complying with measures to safeguard personal liberty.

Art. 15
Freedom and confidentiality of correspondence and of every other form of communication is inviolable.
Limitations may only be imposed by judicial decision stating the reasons and in accordance with the guarantees provided by the law.

Art. 24
Anyone may bring cases before a court of law in order to protect their rights under civil and administrative law.
Defense is an inviolable right at every stage and instance of legal proceedings.
The poor are entitled by law to proper means for action or defense in all courts.
The law shall define the conditions and forms of reparation in case of judicial errors.

Art. 27
Criminal responsibility is personal.
A defendant shall be considered not guilty until a final sentence has been passed. ....

Art. 28
Officials of the State or public agencies shall be directly responsible under criminal, civil, and administrative law for acts committed in violation of rights.
In such cases, civil liability shall extend to the State and to such public agency.

Art. 101
Justice is administered in the name of the people.
Judges are subject only to the law.

Art. 111
Jurisdiction is implemented through due process regulated by law.
All court trials are conducted with adversary proceedings and the parties are entitled to equal conditions before an impartial judge in third party position.
The law provides for the reasonable duration of trials.
In criminal law trials, the law provides that the alleged offender shall be promptly informed confidentially of the nature and reasons for the charges that are brought and shall have adequate time and conditions to prepare a defence.
The defendant shall have the right to cross-examine or to have cross-examined before a judge the persons making accusations and to summon and examine persons for the defence in the same conditions as the prosecution, as well as the right to produce all other evidence in favour of the defence.
The defendant is entitled to the assistance of an interpreter in the case that he or she does not speak or understand the language in which the court proceedings are conducted.

In criminal law proceedings, the formation of evidence is based on the principle of adversary hearings.
The guilt of the defendant cannot be established on the basis of statements by persons who, out of their own free choice, have always voluntarily avoided undergoing cross-examination by the defendant or the defence counsel.
The law regulates the cases in which the formation of evidence does not occur in an adversary proceeding with the consent of the defendant or owing to reasons of ascertained objective impossibility or proven illicit conduct.
All judicial decisions shall include a statement of reasons.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation in cases of violations of the law are always allowed against sentences and against measures affecting personal freedom pronounced by ordinary and special courts. This rule can only be waived in cases of sentences by military tribunals in time of war.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation against decisions of the Council of State
and the Court of Accounts are permitted only for reasons of jurisdiction.
______
European Convention on Human Rights {Italy is a signatory and is legally bound to it, in accordance with treaty and Italian Constitution Article 10}

1. In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly ....
2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

ECHR case-law has extended the above protections to include the questioning of a suspect by police and the detention of an accused person as stages of the criminal proceedings.
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 19th May 2018, 07:25 PM   #232
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,394
I'm not sure why you all bother. Vixen has proven over and over and over again, she doesn't care about the facts.

Last week she said that Amanda took a charter home and NEVER admitted she was wrong.

And I provided airline schedules and video of Amanda in the commercial airport in Rome getting her boarding pass checked with the BA flight 553 on the reader board above her. That is a daily flight from Rome to London Heathrow. As well as Associated Press vido titled Amanda Knox Plane arrives in Seattle which shows BA flight 49, a 747-400 landing at SeaTac. This proceeded the small press conference 15 minutes later. As a small footnote, Amanda is wearing the same clothes in the airport in Rome as she is in the press conference.

Now she says Popovic was lying for Amanda and Raffaele for no reason other than she Vixen doesn't believe Popovic's story about the suitcase. There was a time you could do that kind of thing in the United States.

I used Greyhound to get something to a customer overnight when they called after FedEx had picked up. I drove it to the Seattle bus terminal and paid a hefty sum to get it shipped to the bus terminal in Portland on the 10 pm bus to Portland. My customer had to pick it up at the terminal. I've also shipped packages from airport to airport.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 19th May 2018 at 09:19 PM.
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 20th May 2018, 07:13 AM   #233
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I'm not sure why you all bother. Vixen has proven over and over and over again, she doesn't care about the facts.
Me neither. But both of us are calling the kettle black.

At this point with Knox being taken in by the N.A. innocence community, with her speaking and media stuff.....

... all that the remaining slut-shamers accomplish is to make Knox's point for her. It's the problem with them posting off the same song-sheet, they very rarely bother these days dealing with evidence - and in my opinion there's a reason for that.

They have to see how many times they can say "lies, lies, lies...." without specifically listing what those lies had been. And the Achilles Heel of it all, what lies have Knox and/or Sollecito told outside this case - I mean, if you're going to make the case that they're pathological than it would be nice if when making that slur, you actually provided evidence of it.

The remaining nutters are stuck in that week in 2007 when Mignini controlled the narrative - controlled it mainly by incarcerating those he wanted to deprive of a voice. His lies got all the way around the world before the truth could get its pants on.

But since March 2015 - those prosecution/investigative lies and "amnesiac" efforts have been exposed for what they were. Empty vessels.

Vixen here on ISF is reduced to simply making a specious claim, then when the claim is disproved, waiting 6 months and making it again as if for the first time.

So tell me again, why do we bother? These days when Vixen does that, all Knox gets out of it is another episode of "Scarlett Letter Reports". Knox then kinds links to the many women her age who've been assaulted in social media like it.

They discover they have voices and are not afraid to use them. The remaining nutters need better strategy - they're letting their urge to slut-shame overwhelm the message they believe they're sending - that the facts are on their side. Aside from the fact that they're not on their side - maybe that's the reason why they yell, "lies, slut, lies, slut, lies, slut......" so loud and long.

I say - at this point they are simply proving what Knox (and other women) have been saying. So perhaps there is a use for them.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 20th May 2018 at 07:16 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2018, 11:13 AM   #234
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,394
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Me neither. But both of us are calling the kettle black.

At this point with Knox being taken in by the N.A. innocence community, with her speaking and media stuff.....

... all that the remaining slut-shamers accomplish is to make Knox's point for her. It's the problem with them posting off the same song-sheet, they very rarely bother these days dealing with evidence - and in my opinion there's a reason for that.

They have to see how many times they can say "lies, lies, lies...." without specifically listing what those lies had been. And the Achilles Heel of it all, what lies have Knox and/or Sollecito told outside this case - I mean, if you're going to make the case that they're pathological than it would be nice if when making that slur, you actually provided evidence of it.

The remaining nutters are stuck in that week in 2007 when Mignini controlled the narrative - controlled it mainly by incarcerating those he wanted to deprive of a voice. His lies got all the way around the world before the truth could get its pants on.

But since March 2015 - those prosecution/investigative lies and "amnesiac" efforts have been exposed for what they were. Empty vessels.

Vixen here on ISF is reduced to simply making a specious claim, then when the claim is disproved, waiting 6 months and making it again as if for the first time.

So tell me again, why do we bother? These days when Vixen does that, all Knox gets out of it is another episode of "Scarlett Letter Reports". Knox then kinds links to the many women her age who've been assaulted in social media like it.

They discover they have voices and are not afraid to use them. The remaining nutters need better strategy - they're letting their urge to slut-shame overwhelm the message they believe they're sending - that the facts are on their side. Aside from the fact that they're not on their side - maybe that's the reason why they yell, "lies, slut, lies, slut, lies, slut......" so loud and long.

I say - at this point they are simply proving what Knox (and other women) have been saying. So perhaps there is a use for them.
I must admit, this is is the first time I had heard the claim that Popovic was lying, so I can understand going over that nonsense claim. At least it was new. But the motivation has been argued non-stop since it was issued. I mean how many times can the meaning of the words 'even if' be argued? Or 'not guilty' vs 'innocent'?

As for what Knox is doing with Scarlett Letters, I think she is doing what is needed. So much of humanity has always revolved around sexuality and people's attitudes about women's sexuality has almost always been unfair and wrong. It permeated this case. I haven't seen any of the episodes yet. I hope they are good for Amanda's sake.

In some ways, Amanda is very much like a modern day Hester Prynne.
__________________
“ 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 20th May 2018, 11:44 AM   #235
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I must admit, this is is the first time I had heard the claim that Popovic was lying, so I can understand going over that nonsense claim. At least it was new. But the motivation has been argued non-stop since it was issued. I mean how many times can the meaning of the words 'even if' be argued? Or 'not guilty' vs 'innocent'?

As for what Knox is doing with Scarlett Letters, I think she is doing what is needed. So much of humanity has always revolved around sexuality and people's attitudes about women's sexuality has almost always been unfair and wrong. It permeated this case. I haven't seen any of the episodes yet. I hope they are good for Amanda's sake.

In some ways, Amanda is very much like a modern day Hester Prynne.
It was the first time I'd heard anyone claim Popovic was lying, too. I wonder how many PGP actually believe that nonsense? I'd say not too many as it's not come up before in anything I've read except here.

I agree that how women are treated regarding sex vs men was very obvious in this case. Not one word do I see from the PGP condemning the MEN who were having sex, just Amanda. I never saw a PGP criticize Silenzi for bragging to his friends about the kind of sex he had with Meredith. Go figure; Amanda gets skewered as having loose morals and Trump gets elected president!
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2018, 12:17 PM   #236
Mike1711
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 613
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is exactly similar to the Scottish law 'not proven'.

As courts are supposed to come to a decision this rubric is being phased out.

In fact, it is astonishing that the Marasca court pulled it out of the hat. It was the only way it could get the pair out of jail. And it is as illegal and bent as a nine-bob note.
Mike1711 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 20th May 2018, 12:34 PM   #237
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,394
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
It was the first time I'd heard anyone claim Popovic was lying, too. I wonder how many PGP actually believe that nonsense? I'd say not too many as it's not come up before in anything I've read except here.

I agree that how women are treated regarding sex vs men was very obvious in this case. Not one word do I see from the PGP condemning the MEN who were having sex, just Amanda. I never saw a PGP criticize Silenzi for bragging to his friends about the kind of sex he had with Meredith. Go figure; Amanda gets skewered as having loose morals and Trump gets elected president!
Exactly, the man is almost even celebrated as a 'stud', while the woman is demonized as a 'slut'. This historical double standard goes back since the beginning of humans.

Amanda the she-devil temptress that lured the two nice Italian boys into raping and killing her roommate of a month. That ANYONE believes that nonsense stuns me. That their orgy transformed into torture and murder is also unbelievable. But those are their narratives that we hear.

What makes people equate sexuality with violence? From what I can see, 90 plus percent are sexual. That some are also violent is more coincidence than ANYTHING. It is irrelevant how many sex partners any of them had have. Far more important in evaluating people for potential to this kind of crime is their history of violence and crime. Neither of which can be attributed to Amanda or Raffaele. I think it is quite telling that neither Amanda or Raffaele despite the paparazzi has shown even the slightest sign of violent behavior before the murder or since the murder.

If i was in theur shoes and given some people's actions toward them, I doubt I would be so docile.

Also, what is it about women's sexuality that frightens people? And what I really don't get is how women become allies in that misogyny? In many ways, some of them are far worse than other men. Vixen demonstrates this with her posts although she denies it.
__________________
“ 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 20th May 2018, 12:53 PM   #238
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It is exactly similar to the Scottish law 'not proven'.

As courts are supposed to come to a decision this rubric is being phased out.

In fact, it is astonishing that the Marasca court pulled it out of the hat. It was the only way it could get the pair out of jail. And it is as illegal and bent as a nine-bob note.
Maybe Jovana Popovic and her mother were behind it. Or was it the Mafia? The Masons? The Illuminati? Satanic sects? The US State Department? Judge Heavey? The Marriott PR juggernaut? Senator Cantwell? Vecchiotti and Conti? Vinci? The Grassy Knoll Shooter in Dallas? Or...could it have been a vast conspiracy of all of them? Hmmmmm….
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2018, 01:27 PM   #239
Stacyhs
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,743
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Exactly, the man is almost even celebrated as a 'stud', while the woman is demonized as a 'slut'. This historical double standard goes back since the beginning of humans.

Amanda the she-devil temptress that lured the two nice Italian boys into raping and killing her roommate of a month. That ANYONE believes that nonsense stuns me. That their orgy transformed into torture and murder is also unbelievable. But those are their narratives that we hear.

What makes people equate sexuality with violence? From what I can see, 90 plus percent are sexual. That some are also violent is more coincidence than ANYTHING. It is irrelevant how many sex partners any of them had have. Far more important in evaluating people for potential to this kind of crime is their history of violence and crime. Neither of which can be attributed to Amanda or Raffaele. I think it is quite telling that neither Amanda or Raffaele despite the paparazzi has shown even the slightest sign of violent behavior before the murder or since the murder.

If i was in theur shoes and given some people's actions toward them, I doubt I would be so docile.

Also, what is it about women's sexuality that frightens people? And what I really don't get is how women become allies in that misogyny? In many ways, some of them are far worse than other men. Vixen demonstrates this with her posts although she denies it.
I suspect it has to do with control. Once men realized that women did not just become pregnant, but that men impregnated them, it became about control. In order to be sure they were their children's fathers, men had to control women's sex lives. In order to control their sex lives, they had to control women's lives in general. Thus women lost virtually all legal rights to their fathers and then to their husbands. But besides controlling women legally, women also had to be controlled through society's view of them. Society had to tell women...and they had to believe...that good women did not like or have sex; it was something to be endured and endured only within the confines of marriage. Close your eyes and think of England! Bad women had sex outside these narrow confines and if a good woman violated the rules, she too became a bad woman.

Men could have as much sex outside marriage as they wanted because illegitimate children did not inherit. And, until recently, paternity could not be verified only sometimes ruled out. Men could literally walk away from all responsibility.

Why are women some of the worst when it comes to slut shaming other women? I think there are several reasons: resentment, jealousy, needing to feel superior and, especially, seeing other women as competition.
Another reason is the way women generally handle things vs men. When I was teaching, it was very interesting to watch the middle schoolers in the yard. The boys were far more physical when they had confrontations or arguments. The girls were not generally physical but vocal. They used their words to hurt. They were "catty".
Stacyhs 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2018, 02:31 PM   #240
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 17,394
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I suspect it has to do with control. Once men realized that women did not just become pregnant, but that men impregnated them, it became about control. In order to be sure they were their children's fathers, men had to control women's sex lives. In order to control their sex lives, they had to control women's lives in general. Thus women lost virtually all legal rights to their fathers and then to their husbands. But besides controlling women legally, women also had to be controlled through society's view of them. Society had to tell women...and they had to believe...that good women did not like or have sex; it was something to be endured and endured only within the confines of marriage. Close your eyes and think of England! Bad women had sex outside these narrow confines and if a good woman violated the rules, she too became a bad woman.

Men could have as much sex outside marriage as they wanted because illegitimate children did not inherit. And, until recently, paternity could not be verified only sometimes ruled out. Men could literally walk away from all responsibility.

Why are women some of the worst when it comes to slut shaming other women? I think there are several reasons: resentment, jealousy, needing to feel superior and, especially, seeing other women as competition.
Another reason is the way women generally handle things vs men. When I was teaching, it was very interesting to watch the middle schoolers in the yard. The boys were far more physical when they had confrontations or arguments. The girls were not generally physical but vocal. They used their words to hurt. They were "catty".
I think about the social dynamics of this case far more than I do about the evidence of this case since it cut and dried that Amanda or Raffaele were not involved.

Group think, misogyny, sexual dynamics between man and women, tribalism, cognitive bias, the media dynamics and how these things came into play which resulted in dramatically changing the lives of two innocent people. The lunacy of the PGP?

I wonder how many changed their minds an if some never will. If Amanda has not seen a whiff of trouble in her life when she's 50,60,70 will Vixen etc ever come around or will they think she just never got caught?
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 20th May 2018 at 02:33 PM.
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
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 11:22 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.