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 Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 10th February 2020, 11:59 AM   #1201
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Yes, poor Rudy has suffered mightily for brutally murdering a young girl by getting a free college education, dining with friends at a restaurant, getting out of prison daily to go work in the Viterbo Criminology Center, and spending Christmas in Perugia. My heart goes out to him.
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Well, I'm all for rehabilitation of offenders as well (in addition to punishment and public protection reasons for incarceration). And I would put 12 years' imprisonment at the lower end of the acceptable scale for the crimes for which Guede was (correctly and justly) convicted. Of course, he will still need to be managed and supervised by the appropriate authorities upon his proper release from prison, and one would at least hope that he will become a law-abiding citizen from now on - though whether or not he will be deported from Italy might be a whole other issue....
At least the Italian courts had the honesty to deny Guede revision in 2018, with a final decision on his argument that there was a conflict in judgments.

While he can request revision again, as many times as he wishes, under Italian law the argument for revision cannot be one that had been previously finally rejected.

Here's an Italian news article (published 21 February 2018) on the CSC denying Guede's appeal of the denial of his request for revision:

Quote:
Rudy Guede: Cassation says no to the revision of the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher

The Fifth Criminal Section rejected the Ivorian's defense's appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal of Florence, which on January 10, 2017 had declared his request for revision inadmissible. According to the defense there is a "contrast between the judgments", between the {final} judgment against Guede and the one for Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of the English student.

The Cassation said no to the revision of the trial for Rudy Guede, sentenced definitively to 16 years for the murder in competition and sexual violence on the English student Meredith Kercher, killed in 2007 in Perugia.

The Fifth Criminal Section rejected the Ivorian's defense appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal of Florence, which on January 10, 2017 had declared the request for revision inadmissible. According to the defense, there is a "contrast between judgments", between the {final} judgment against Guede and the one for Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, definitively acquitted by the {Court of} Cassation in 2015.

"I take note of the decision, however, I am calm for Rudy because he has embarked on an important path of overcoming the fact, while respecting the poor girl," says lawyer Tommaso Pietrocarlo who assisted in the defense together with his colleague Monica Grossi. "Rudy", added the lawyer, "is rehabilitating himself, he graduated, and he is followed by fantastic people, he is building a new life".

The Ivorian, who has always denied killing the English student, has been imprisoned in the prison of Viterbo for {the past} ten years and in recent months has obtained the opportunity to carry out an internship outside on the basis of article 21 of the prison system.
Source: https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/201...rcher/4179217/

Translation by Google with my help.

Last edited by Numbers; 10th February 2020 at 12:01 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 12:07 PM   #1202
TomG
Critical Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 266
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You would think that Meredith would have discussed any problems concerning Amanda with her British friends. However, that didn't appear to be so.

Sophie Purton testimony:



Robyn Butterworth
recounted that Meredith “felt a bit uncomfortable” with Amanda's rabbit vibrator in her bag in the bathroom. I think that was more than a bit of a stretch. Why would a 22 year old non-virgin be uncomfortable with a pink bunnyshaped vibrator kept in a cosmetic bag? Meredith wasn't a nun, for chrissake.

Amy Frost
recounted that Meredith had said “Amanda arrived … and Meredith said that ‘she is nice and friendly.” Frost later tried to claim she'd never said that but it was in the records. She later claimed, "Perhaps I said that, I said that Meredith told us these things in the early days, but I think that later she would not have said anything of the kind." However, Frost never recounted Meredith saying anything negative about Amanda.

Helen Powell said she had never heard Meredith complain or say anything negative about Knox.

John Kercher claims that Meredith complained about Amanda "bringing strange men home" but at trial it was shown that she had brought only 2 men to the cottage, Juve and Spyros, who were platonic friends. The only other man Amanda had brought to the cottage was Daniel, who was the cousin of Meredith's 'boyfriend' from downstairs. Hardly a "strange man".

Nor did Meredith complain to her 'boyfriend', Giacomo, who lived downstairs about Amanda. He testified that they had a friendly relationship.

Neither Filomena nor Laura reported any problems between the girls.

The only person to claim that Meredith didn't get along with Amanda was Guede...and he's about as reliable as Curatolo.
John Kercher told Mignini in his November 7th statement " No, my daughter was always calm and cheerful and never told me of having a problem with anyone."? John Kercher DID later undermine Amanda in his book "Meredith" but where did it come from? It certainly didn't come from the court testimonies. Even if Meredith did harbour grudges there's no evidence that Amanda knew anything about them that would result in any kind of retaliation. In fact from all the implied resentment that Meredith allegedly held against Amanda it could be hypothesised that it was Meredith who was the aggressor in any confrontation, not Amanda.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 12:39 PM   #1203
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
There is one area in which your posts excel, Stacyhs. This observation of yours is a prime example that demonstrates the homily, 'sarcasm is the lowest form of wit'.

It conveys not even half a wit or a soupçon of wit but the lowest smidgeon of it, if that.

Impressive.
Sigh. And this coming from the woman who has claimed over and over and over again that almost every expert who has criticized the prosecution's experts are shills or corrupt.

Quote:
Vinci's testimony was not accepted by the court. He was so obviously a paid defence shill and he took it so far they struck him out.
Part 29, #2260

Quote:
Maraca-Bruno, Bongiorno and yourself are totally ignorant about the uniqueness of each individual's DNA (or alternatively, more likely just BENT).
Part 29, #3561

Quote:
Gill was about 74 retired and like John Douglas, decided to prostitute himself out as a 'gun for hire'. Hoping to cash in on his influential name.
Part 29, #3390

Quote:
What? It acted correctly in deferring it back to the lower court that erred. However, as the lower court concerned (Hellmann) had been so egregious and defective in a fatally devastating way, it was remitted to a completely new court (Nencini) in a completely different region, away from the corrupt influences of the offending court.
Part 29, #2535

You have claimed every expert, including Stefanoni, Conti, Gill, Vinci, John Douglans, Judge Hellman, Marasca/Bruno were all corrupt, bent, or shills. My sarcasm was well based.
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 10th February 2020, 12:40 PM   #1204
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
He hastily deleted it. Fortuitously, a sharp eyed viewer of said tweet kept a screen print of it.
Then present it. Let's see it. I'm sure someone over on TJMK could provide it for you if you asked nicely.

I'll hum the Jeopardy theme while waiting.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 10th February 2020 at 12:47 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 12:46 PM   #1205
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
John Kercher told Mignini in his November 7th statement " No, my daughter was always calm and cheerful and never told me of having a problem with anyone."? John Kercher DID later undermine Amanda in his book "Meredith" but where did it come from? It certainly didn't come from the court testimonies. Even if Meredith did harbour grudges there's no evidence that Amanda knew anything about them that would result in any kind of retaliation. In fact from all the implied resentment that Meredith allegedly held against Amanda it could be hypothesised that it was Meredith who was the aggressor in any confrontation, not Amanda.

Hoots
I find it rather odd that two girls who allegedly had problems between them would go to a concert together, just the two of them, a mere week before one became so enraged she stabbed the other to death. But such is the logic of PGPs.
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 10th February 2020, 01:17 PM   #1206
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
This shows that I am objective and rational, whilst you are guided by emotion and prejudice.


Good job I didn't replace my Irony-o-meter. Even the military-grade variant would have succumbed to this one.


(PS: Vixen, you are wrong about almost every facet of this case - most notably, of course, the identification of the guilty and not-guilty/innocent parties (whether legal or factual). Your "arguments" demonstrate a profound ignorance of both scientific and legal principles. And they appear to be motivated by things that have nothing whatsoever to do with objectivity or rationality. Other than that....)
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 10th February 2020, 01:18 PM   #1207
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,591
Originally Posted by Vixen
He hastily deleted it. Fortuitously, a sharp eyed viewer of said tweet kept a screen print of it.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Then present it. Let's see it. I'm sure someone over on TJMK could provide it for you if you asked nicely.

I'll hum the Jeopardy theme while waiting.
Chalk up to Vixen yet another nothing-burger.

Notice how Vixen structured that nothing-burger. Vixen not only invents a scenario where the guy allegedly deleted the tweet, Vixen spices it up - the guy now had "hastily" deleted the tweet.

That's why Vixen can claim that it was once seen, but is now unavailable for citation.

But wait! Some intrepid guilter-nutter had kept a screen print of it!!!!!!!! So here's the deal - why invent a reason why the tweet is unciteable, because of this alleged "haste" in deleting it, when it is further alleged that it has been citeable all along!!!!!!

The original guy is portrayed as hastily trying to delete evidence, but the guilter-nutter who saved it is "sharp-eyed"!

All smoke and mirrors as a way to avoid citing the proof that Vixen admits is available, but just won't cite!

That's how the guilter-nutter PR campaign has rolled for the last decade.

Or as Vixen puts it....

Originally Posted by Vixen
This shows that I am objective and rational, whilst you are guided by emotion and prejudice.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 10th February 2020 at 01:20 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 10th February 2020, 01:19 PM   #1208
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I find it rather odd that two girls who allegedly had problems between them would go to a concert together, just the two of them, a mere week before one became so enraged she stabbed the other to death. But such is the logic of PGPs.


Ahhh but the evil fox Knox was deviously putting on a fake show of friendship, while cleverly hiding her visceral and growing hatred of Kercher - so that the murder (which Knox, even then, knew was inevitable) would be less likely to be tied to her. DO KEEP UP.
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 10th February 2020, 01:23 PM   #1209
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Sometimes I catch myself wishing that at least there could be someone with intellectual honesty, objectivity, a proper understanding of the case, and a high intellect, who argued for Knox's/Sollecito's guilt (legal or factual), so that there could be an honest debate here.

But then I pinch myself, because of course it's axiomatic that there simply cannot exist - in 2020 (or any time after 2015 for that matter) - anyone who matches all of those criteria. QED.
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 10th February 2020, 02:39 PM   #1210
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Then present it. Let's see it. I'm sure someone over on TJMK could provide it for you if you asked nicely.

I'll hum the Jeopardy theme while waiting.
Why should I? As per usual it will be met with some flippant, facetious and discourteous dismissal so I shan't make any effort.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 02:40 PM   #1211
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I find it rather odd that two girls who allegedly had problems between them would go to a concert together, just the two of them, a mere week before one became so enraged she stabbed the other to death. But such is the logic of PGPs.
You do know that being flippant is a logical fallacy?
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 02:42 PM   #1212
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Good job I didn't replace my Irony-o-meter. Even the military-grade variant would have succumbed to this one.


(PS: Vixen, you are wrong about almost every facet of this case - most notably, of course, the identification of the guilty and not-guilty/innocent parties (whether legal or factual). Your "arguments" demonstrate a profound ignorance of both scientific and legal principles. And they appear to be motivated by things that have nothing whatsoever to do with objectivity or rationality. Other than that....)
Same to you with brass knobs on.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 02:44 PM   #1213
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Ahhh but the evil fox Knox was deviously putting on a fake show of friendship, while cleverly hiding her visceral and growing hatred of Kercher - so that the murder (which Knox, even then, knew was inevitable) would be less likely to be tied to her. DO KEEP UP.
Here we go, LoJo and Stacyhs double act. The Tennessee Two-Step: dancing for your entertainment, logical fallacy: the non sequitur.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 02:46 PM   #1214
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Sometimes I catch myself wishing that at least there could be someone with intellectual honesty, objectivity, a proper understanding of the case, and a high intellect, who argued for Knox's/Sollecito's guilt (legal or factual), so that there could be an honest debate here.

But then I pinch myself, because of course it's axiomatic that there simply cannot exist - in 2020 (or any time after 2015 for that matter) - anyone who matches all of those criteria. QED.
Don't do yourself down. Read the court documents for yourself, apply some critical faculties in your reading, think hard about the evidence and lucidity will come to you.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 03:30 PM   #1215
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You do know that being flippant is a logical fallacy?


No. No it isn't. I suggest some research into what a logical fallacy actually is before using the term incorrectly.
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 10th February 2020, 03:34 PM   #1216
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Here we go, LoJo and Stacyhs double act. The Tennessee Two-Step: dancing for your entertainment, logical fallacy: the non sequitur.


Well, technically logical fallacies are all forms of non sequitur - not the other way round. But at least you're in the right ballpark with your definitions this time.

However....... please explain how that post of mine (to which you responded here) qualifies as a non sequitur? (Because it doesn't, but it'll be interesting to see you try nevertheless......)
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 10th February 2020, 03:36 PM   #1217
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
No. No it isn't. I suggest some research into what a logical fallacy actually is before using the term incorrectly.
Yes, it is. Once again, I know better than you.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 03:37 PM   #1218
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Don't do yourself down. Read the court documents for yourself, apply some critical faculties in your reading, think hard about the evidence and lucidity will come to you.


Yeah, that's the thing. I did, and I have. And this is how - combined with sufficient understanding of medicine, general science, the law, and critical thinking - I know with extremely high confidence that I'm on the right side of reason and logic.

How was I "do(ing) myself down", anyhow? I was explicitly referring to someone arguing for the guilt of Knox and/or Sollecito. Which I am not. Obviously.
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 10th February 2020, 03:39 PM   #1219
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Well, technically logical fallacies are all forms of non sequitur - not the other way round. But at least you're in the right ballpark with your definitions this time.

However....... please explain how that post of mine (to which you responded here) qualifies as a non sequitur? (Because it doesn't, but it'll be interesting to see you try nevertheless......)
Because trolling is a non sequitur which in itself is a form of derailment. I
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10th February 2020, 03:39 PM   #1220
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, it is. Once again, I know better than you.


Once again, Vixen: flippancy is not a logical fallacy.

Are we back to more of the "black is white" nonsense from you again?
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 10th February 2020, 03:40 PM   #1221
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Because trolling is a non sequitur which in itself is a form of derailment. I


I love how you entirely invent these sorts of "facts"! Please can you teach me how it's done?
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 10th February 2020, 03:43 PM   #1222
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,747
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Why should I? As per usual it will be met with some flippant, facetious and discourteous dismissal so I shan't make any effort.


I mean, there's no reason why you should - other than some sort of (frankly antiquated) wish to engage in intellectually-honest discourse, within which the general principle is to provide evidence of any assertions one makes, if required.

Your choice though. Entirely.
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 10th February 2020, 04:30 PM   #1223
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,944
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, it is. Once again, I know better than you.
You say "flippancy" is a logical fallacy. I guess I missed that one in my philosophy course.

What type of fallacy is that? Is that a formal ,informal , propositional, quantitative or a formal syllogistical fallacy?
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
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 10th February 2020, 05:22 PM   #1224
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Why should I? As per usual it will be met with some flippant, facetious and discourteous dismissal so I shan't make any effort.
Of course you won't.



Donald says 'click on me'.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 10th February 2020 at 05:24 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 05:34 PM   #1225
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You do know that being flippant is a logical fallacy?
You do know that making claims, then refusing to support them with evidence while claiming you just can't be bothered is intellectual dishonesty?
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 10th February 2020, 05:35 PM   #1226
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,591
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Don't do yourself down. Read the court documents for yourself, apply some critical faculties in your reading, think hard about the evidence and lucidity will come to you.
Ok, I took your advice. The court documents conclude with this statement from the exonerating court. A court. Document. A court document.

The court, in a document, says "even if it is hypothesized that they were present in the house....." "it excludes their material participation in the murder."
Originally Posted by Marasca-Bruno in 2015
9.4. However, a matter of undoubted significance in favour of the appellants, in
the sense that it excludes their material participation in the murder, even if it is
hypothesised that they were present in the house
on via della Pergola, consists of the
absolute lack of biological traces attributable to them (except the clasp which will be
dealt with further on) in the murder room or on the victim’s body, where instead
numerous traces attributable to Guede were found.

It is indisputably impossible that traces attributable to the appellants would not
have been found at the crime scene had they taken part in Kercher’s murder (the
room was of small dimensions: 2.91 x 3.36m, as shown in the plan reproduced in f:
76).
I'm so glad you cleared that up for us. It's right there. In the court documents. The documents. Produced by the court.

So far all you are doing is citing Darkness Descending and Harry Rag/The Machine. Thank you for insisting that it be court documents which are cited. You know, documents produced by courts. Law courts. Italian law courts. Documents produced by them.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 10th February 2020 at 05:37 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 10th February 2020, 05:36 PM   #1227
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Ahhh but the evil fox Knox was deviously putting on a fake show of friendship, while cleverly hiding her visceral and growing hatred of Kercher - so that the murder (which Knox, even then, knew was inevitable) would be less likely to be tied to her. DO KEEP UP.
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Here we go, LoJo and Stacyhs double act. The Tennessee Two-Step: dancing for your entertainment, logical fallacy: the non sequitur.
Glad you enjoyed it! Our aim is to be as entertaining as you've been...only we do it on purpose!
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 10th February 2020, 05:57 PM   #1228
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Don't do yourself down. Read the court documents for yourself, apply some critical faculties in your reading, think hard about the evidence and lucidity will come to you.
I take it you haven't noticed that 'we', meaning most of us here but you, are the ones supplying evidence from court documents, books, and scientific articles? On the other hand, you regularly fail to supply any of the preceding to support your claims no matter how many times it's requested.

Tweet? I don't need to present no stinkin' tweet! An expert beside Garofano who supports that similar RFU peak heights indicate blood? I don't need to present no stinkin' expert! Quotes from John Kercher's book showing rancor between Meredith and Amanda? I don't need to present no stinkin' quotes! Evidence that Amanda "demanded to meet Meredith's parents? I don't need to present no stinkin' evidence!
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 06:50 PM   #1229
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,591
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Why should I? As per usual it will be met with some flippant, facetious and discourteous dismissal so I shan't make any effort.
Most replies to your posts are requests for citations, not just your opinion. On most things we're still waiting.

Some of us, out of exasperation, succumb to flippancy and discourteous dismissal. For my part in this I apologize. But it is tremendously irritating to have 6 years of posts from you that reflect opinions which are unfounded **on the evidence**.

I've lost count of the times you've simply asserted that your opinions are verifiable, in court documents. You assert it, and rarely actually **cite** your claimed verification in those documents. The people who cite the court record are almost exclusively PIP. The guilter-nutters cite Harry Rag or Darkness Descending.

There it sits.
__________________
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 10th February 2020, 08:03 PM   #1230
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are under a logical misapprehension here. Yes, as a source of DNA slaiva is as good as blood. This is what DNA testing company tell potential clients in order to reassure them they don't need to do anything but send in a saliva sample. However, once the kit arrives the customer discovers they are either:

1) expected to drool saliva into a small tube for two minutes - far beyond spitting out toothpaste quantities

or

2) they have to scrape the inside of their cheek via their mouth. This gives a very large percentage of blood DNA together with buccal and epithelial DNA.

However, what we are discussing here is RFU peaks, not the quality of the DNA.

And Amanda Knox' RFU's were almost as high as Mez' in the diluted blood samples.

=Almost certainly blood.

And we can actually see her blood on the tap.
Wow. Really? Is this your final answer? How horribly embarrassing for you.

Yes, we ARE talking about RFU peaks, and as has been shown here on multiple occasions - with corresponding cites to back it up - saliva will produce RFU peaks comparable to blood. Compared to diluted blood, it wouldn't even be close. And this, Vixen, is why there isn't a single expert that has sided with Garofano - not one. A couple of dullards over on TJMK don't an expert make.

Everyone on this board knows the truth... well, everyone but you. But that's OK, if it makes you feel better to cling to provably false claims, then cling away. You are, however, still wrong.

Putting that aside, I would like to point out there are still two remaining questions which you continue to avoid. Here's yet another reminder...

(1) What her parents did was no different than what Follain did yet they were charged and Follain wasn’t. Why?
(2) What is the irrefutable evidence of calunnia that exists following the ruling by the ECHR?

You're "irrefutable evidence" claim is similar to your unsubstantiated claims against Nigel Scott, except in this case we all know exactly what evidence does or does not exist. I can understand why some might have thought maybe Nigel did do what you claimed, but surely you know that everyone here knows there is no evidence of calunnia, irrefutable or otherwise.

Why do you insist on telling lies and then make lame excuses for why you can't cite any evidence? You know you're not fooling anyone, so what's the point?
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 10th February 2020, 08:12 PM   #1231
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 13,087
Regarding the Nigel Scott-tweet claim, that was invented by and perpetuated on TJMK. The alleged tweet was never presented. It's been repeated so often there that it's become accepted as fact proving the law of propaganda attributed to Joseph Goebbels: “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth."
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 10th February 2020, 08:13 PM   #1232
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,591
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
.Why do you insist on telling lies and then make lame excuses for why you can't cite any evidence? You know you're not fooling anyone, so what's the point?
Vixen DOES make citations. Almost universally Harry Rag/The Machine or Darkness Descending.
__________________
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 10th February 2020, 08:34 PM   #1233
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Wow. Really? Is this your final answer? How horribly embarrassing for you.

Yes, we ARE talking about RFU peaks, and as has been shown here on multiple occasions - with corresponding cites to back it up - saliva will produce RFU peaks comparable to blood. Compared to diluted blood, it wouldn't even be close. And this, Vixen, is why there isn't a single expert that has sided with Garofano - not one. A couple of dullards over on TJMK don't an expert make.

Everyone on this board knows the truth... well, everyone but you. But that's OK, if it makes you feel better to cling to provably false claims, then cling away. You are, however, still wrong.

Putting that aside, I would like to point out there are still two remaining questions which you continue to avoid. Here's yet another reminder...

(1) What her parents did was no different than what Follain did yet they were charged and Follain wasn’t. Why?
(2) What is the irrefutable evidence of calunnia that exists following the ruling by the ECHR?

You're "irrefutable evidence" claim is similar to your unsubstantiated claims against Nigel Scott, except in this case we all know exactly what evidence does or does not exist. I can understand why some might have thought maybe Nigel did do what you claimed, but surely you know that everyone here knows there is no evidence of calunnia, irrefutable or otherwise.

Why do you insist on telling lies and then make lame excuses for why you can't cite any evidence? You know you're not fooling anyone, so what's the point?
This 10 January 2020 preliminary communication from the Government of Italy to the Committee of Ministers - Department of Execution of Judgments of the ECHR may help with this.

Quote:
Rappresentanza permanente d'Italia presso il Consiglio d'Europa


Affaire KNOX c. Italie
(Requête n° 76577/13)
Arrêt du 24/01/2019
Définitif le 24/06/2019

Communication du Gouvernement

Résumé introductif de l'affaire

L'affaire concerne une procédure portant sur la condamnation d' Amanda Knox pour dénonciation calomnieuse. Lors d'un interrogatoire qui s'est déroulé le 6 novembre 2007, Mme Knox avait accusé le gérant d'un pub d' avoir tué sa colocataire. Ce dernier fut innocenté par la suite, et Mme Knox fut condamnée à trois ans de réclusion pour dénonciation calomnieuse.

Dans son arrêt du 24 janvier 2019, devenu définitif le 24 juin 2019, la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme a dit, à l'unanimité, qu' il y avait eu : Violation du volet procédural (enquête) de l'article 3 (interdiction des traitements inhumains ou dégradants) de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme.

La Cour juge en particulier que Mme Knox n'a pas bénéficié d'une enquête pouvant éclaircir les faits et les responsabilités éventuelles concernant son allégation selon laquelle elle aurait subi des traitements dégradants, le 6 novembre 2007, alors qu'elle se trouvait entièrement sous le contrôle des forces de l'ordre. En effet, malgré ses plaintes réitérées, les traitements dénoncés par Mme Knox n'ont fait l'objet d'aucune enquête.

Violation de l'article 6 §§ 1 et 3 c) de la Convention (droit à l'assistance d'un avocat).
La Cour juge que le Gouvernement italien n'est pas parvenu à démontrer que la restriction de l'accès de Mme Knox à un avocat, lors de l' audition du 6 novembre 2007 à 5 h 45 - alors qu'elle faisait l'objet d'une accusation en matière pénale - n'a pas porté une atteinte irrémédiable à l'équité du procès dans son ensemble.

Violation de l'article 6 §§ 1 et 3 e) de la Convention (droit à l'assistance d'un interprète).
La Cour juge que les autorités ont omis d' apprécier le comportement de l'interprète (qui s'était attribuée un rôle de médiatrice et qui avait acquis une attitude maternelle envers Mme Knox pendant que cette dernière formulait sa version des faits), d'évaluer si ses fonctions d'interprète avaient été exercées selon les garanties prévues par l'article 6 §§ l et 3 e) de la Convention, et de considérer si ce comportement avait eu un impact sur l'issue de la procédure pénale entamée à l'encontre de Mme Knox. Pour la Cour, ce défaut initial a eu des répercussions sur d'autres droits et a compromis l' équité de la procédure dans son ensemble.


Mesures individuelles

a. Satisfaction équitable

Pour cette affaire, les sommes allouées pour dommage moral (10.400 euros) et pour frais et dépens (8 .000 euros) ont été payées le 29 novembre 2019 avec un peu de retard, imputable non seulement à la documentation qui était incomplète pour procéder au paiement, mais également à la procédure de paiement par le biais de la Banque d'Italie s'agissant d'un paiement hors de l'U.M.E.


Mesures générales

Publication, diffusion, traduction

L'arrêt de la Cour a été traduit et a fait l'objet de larges mesures de publication et de diffusion le 11 février 2019, non seulement par l'envoi de ce dernier aux juridictions impliquées mais aussi par la publication sur la banque de données de la Cour de Cassation Italgiure WEB ainsi que sur le site web du Ministère de la Justice.


Permanent Mission of Italy to the Council of Europe

Case of Knox v. Italy
(Application No. 76577/13)
Judgment 24/01/2019
Final 24/06/2019

Communication from the Government

Introductory summary of the case

The case concerns proceedings relating to the conviction of Amanda Knox for malicious false denunciation {calunnia}. During an interrogation which took place on November 6, 2007, Ms Knox had accused the manager of a pub of killing her roommate. The manager was cleared subsequently, and Ms Knox was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for calunnia.

In its judgment of 24 January 2019, which became final on 24 June 2019, the European Court of Human Rights declared, unanimously, that there had been{that is, Italy had committed a}: Violation of the procedural aspect (investigation) of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention of Human Rights.

The Court held in particular that Ms Knox had not benefited from an investigation which could clarify the facts and possible responsibilities for her allegation that she allegedly suffered degrading treatment on 6 November 2007, when she was entirely under the control of the police. Indeed, despite her repeated complaints, the treatments complained of by Ms Knox were not investigated.

Violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 c) of the Convention (right to the assistance of a lawyer).

The Court found that the Italian Government had failed to demonstrate that the restriction of Ms Knox's access to a lawyer, at the hearing on November 6, 2007 at 5:45 am – when she was the subject of a criminal charge – had not irremediably infringed {prejudiced} the fairness of the trial as a whole.

Violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 e) of the Convention (right to the assistance of an interpreter).

The Court held that the authorities had failed to assess the conduct of the interpreter (who had assumed the role of mediator and who had acquired a maternal attitude towards Ms Knox while the latter was formulating her version of the facts), to assess whether her duties had been exercised in accordance with the guarantees provided for in Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 e) of the Convention, and to consider whether this behavior had an impact on the outcome of the criminal proceedings initiated against Ms Knox. For the Court, this initial defect had consequences that had repercussions on other rights and compromised the fairness of the proceedings as a whole.

Individual measures

a. Just satisfaction

For this case, the sums awarded for non-pecuniary damage (10,400 euros) and for costs and expenses (8,000 euros) were paid on November 29, 2019 with a little delay, attributable not only to incomplete documentation required to process the payment, but also to the procedure required by the Bank of Italy for a payment outside of the European Monetary Union.

General measures

Translation, Publication, and Dissemination

The judgment of the Court has been translated and has been the subject of wide-ranging publication and dissemination measures [as of] February 11, 2019, not only by sending the latter to the jurisdictions involved but also by the publication on the data bank of the Court of Cassation Italgiure WEB as well as on the website of the Ministry of Justice.
Source: http://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=DH-DD(2020)27F

Translation by Google with help from me and Collins Reverso.

Last edited by Numbers; 10th February 2020 at 08:52 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2020, 09:17 PM   #1234
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,425
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
This 10 January 2020 preliminary communication from the Government of Italy to the Committee of Ministers - Department of Execution of Judgments of the ECHR may help with this.



Source: http://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng?i=DH-DD(2020)27F

Translation by Google with help from me and Collins Reverso.
I hope you're not expecting Vixen to thank you for this assistance...
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 10th February 2020, 10:09 PM   #1235
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,222
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I hope you're not expecting Vixen to thank you for this assistance...
Just trying to be helpful. No thanks are necessary.

Here's the Italian Ministry of Justice site with the Italian translation of Knox v. Italy*, followed by the site of the Italian translation of that judgment**:

https://www.giustizia.it/giustizia/it/mg_1_20.page


https://www.giustizia.it/giustizia/i...usPage=mg_1_20

* Sentenza della Corte Europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo del 24 gennaio 2019 - Ricorso n. 76577/13 - Causa Knox contro Italia

** Sentenza della Corte Europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo del 24 gennaio 2019 - Ricorso n. 76577/13 - Causa Knox contro Italia

© Ministero della Giustizia, Direzione Generale degli Affari giuridici e legali, traduzione eseguita e rivista da Rita Carnevali, assistente linguistico e dalla dott.ssa Martina Scantamburlo, funzionario linguistico.
Permission to re-publish this translation has been granted by the Italian Ministry of Justice for the sole purpose of its inclusion in the Court's database HUDOC


CORTE EUROPEA DEI DIRITTI DELL’UOMO

PRIMA SEZIONE

CAUSA KNOX c. ITALIA

(Ricorso n. 76577/13)

SENTENZA

STRASBURGO

24 gennaio 2019

For educational purposes, here is an excerpt with paragraphs 98 - 102, stating how a court in Perugia criticized the failure of Knox's complaints of mistreatment by the police and prosecutor to be recorded by the authorities as a report of a possible crime, followed by the acquittal of Knox on the charges of calunnia against the police and prosecutor:

Quote:
3. Il procedimento per calunnia riguardante le dichiarazioni fatte nei confronti degli agenti di polizia e del Procuratore della Repubblica

98. Nel frattempo, la ricorrente fu oggetto di un altro procedimento penale per calunnia, riguardante le dichiarazioni che aveva fatto il 13 marzo e il 12 e 13 giugno 2009 (si veda il paragrafo 46 supra). Era accusata di avere, «pur sapendoli innocenti», accusato gli agenti di polizia che avevano proceduto alla sua audizione il 6 novembre 2007 di falsa testimonianza, calunnia e favoreggiamento, falso ideologico, violenze (consistite in scappellotti sulla testa) e minacce.

99. Questo procedimento fu assegnato in un primo tempo a G.M., il Pubblico Ministero che aveva chiesto la trasmissione degli atti alla procura. In seguito a una domanda presentata dalla difesa della ricorrente, con sentenza del tribunale di Perugia depositata il 22 marzo 2013 il procedimento fu assegnato ad un altro magistrato, tenuto conto del conflitto di interessi esistente.

100. L’oggetto della controversia fu poi esteso alle accuse che la ricorrente aveva mosso nei confronti di G.M.

101. Le parti di tale sentenza pertinenti al caso di specie sono così formulate:

«(...) dagli atti non risulta alcuna iscrizione di appartenenti alla polizia giudiziaria per abuso d’ufficio, percosse o altro tipo di reato in danno della cittadina americana.
(...) [In ogni caso], dalla lettura dei verbali emerge una notizia di reato (…) contenente la descrizione di possibili illeciti penali: è accaduto, infatti, che una persona, davanti ad una Corte e a rappresentanti dell’Ufficio del P.M., ha espressamente dichiarato e ribadito di avere subito pressioni, percosse e minacce da parte di appartenenti alla polizia giudiziaria e tale notizia, falsa o vera che sia, impone, all’evidenza, un serio accertamento istruttorio. (...)
Non è certamente questa la fase processuale (né la sede) per valutare come andarono veramente le cose.
(...) La notizia di reato che coinvolgeva potenzialmente un Magistrato della Procura di Perugia (…) sarebbe stato doverosamente prudente trasmetterla immediatamente alla Procura di Firenze (...)»

102. Con sentenza in data 14 gennaio 2016 il tribunale di Firenze assolse la ricorrente.
Google translation with help from me and Collins Reverso:

3. The calunnia proceeding concerning the declarations made against the police officers and the Public Prosecutor


98. In the meantime, the applicant was the subject of another criminal case for calunnia, concerning the statements she made on 13 March and 12 and 13 June 2009 (see paragraph 46 above). She was accused of having accused, "knowing they were innocent", the police officers who had carried out her hearing on November 6, 2007 of false testimony, calunnia and complicity in a crime, falsification of official documents, violence (consisting of slaps on the head) and threats.

99. This procedure was initially assigned to G.M., the Public Prosecutor who had requested the transmission of the documents to the public prosecutor's office. Following a request lodged by the applicant's defense, with a judgment of the court of Perugia filed on 22 March 2013, the procedure was assigned to another magistrate, taking into account the existing conflict of interest.

100. The subject of the case was then extended to the accusations that the applicant had made against G.M.

101. The parts of that judgment relevant to the present case are worded as follows:

"(...) the records do not indicate any official notice {of a criminal report against} the members of the judicial police for abuse of office, beatings or other type of crime harming the American citizen.

(...) [In any case], reading the minutes {of the alleged calunnia} reveals a report of a crime (...) containing the description of possible criminal offenses: it happened, in fact, that a person, before a Court and representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor, expressly stated and reiterated that she had been subjected to pressure, beatings and threats by members of the judicial police and this statement, whether true or false, requires, based on the evidence {of her statement}, assessment by a serious investigation. (...)

This is certainly not the procedural phase (nor the venue) to evaluate the true course of the events {of the interrogation}.

(...) The crime report {accusing Knox of calunnia against the police and prosecutor} potentially involving a Prosecutor of the Office of the Prosecutor of Perugia (...) according to prudent duty, will be immediately forwarded to the Prosecutor of Florence (...) »

102. By judgment dated 14 January 2016, the Florence court acquitted the applicant.

Last edited by Numbers; 10th February 2020 at 10:17 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2020, 12:35 AM   #1236
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
You say "flippancy" is a logical fallacy. I guess I missed that one in my philosophy course.

What type of fallacy is that? Is that a formal ,informal , propositional, quantitative or a formal syllogistical fallacy?
I like it.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 11th February 2020, 12:37 AM   #1237
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Of course you won't.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1f3cca5a27.gif

Donald says 'click on me'.
I grew up on Donald Duck ('Aku Ankka') so please do not misuse his image.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 11th February 2020, 12:42 AM   #1238
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Ok, I took your advice. The court documents conclude with this statement from the exonerating court. A court. Document. A court document.

The court, in a document, says "even if it is hypothesized that they were present in the house....." "it excludes their material participation in the murder."
I'm so glad you cleared that up for us. It's right there. In the court documents. The documents. Produced by the court.

So far all you are doing is citing Darkness Descending and Harry Rag/The Machine. Thank you for insisting that it be court documents which are cited. You know, documents produced by courts. Law courts. Italian law courts. Documents produced by them.
All that is saying is 'although they were present at the murder and Knox washed off blood from the victim as well as Knox accusing Lumumba to cover up for Guede' it doesn't prove they did it (translated: we have received a backhander from Donald Trump and the State Department to lose the case on the grounds that Donny is a kraut just like Knox and you have the Black guy so just do it. 'America First, America First').

Despite the blatant abuse of office and backchanneling in the affairs of another country by Trump, you'll note Marasca-Bruno do not absolve the pair in any shape or form except to annul their convictions.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 11th February 2020, 12:44 AM   #1239
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Glad you enjoyed it! Our aim is to be as entertaining as you've been...only we do it on purpose!
Boom boom.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 11th February 2020, 12:46 AM   #1240
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,467
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Regarding the Nigel Scott-tweet claim, that was invented by and perpetuated on TJMK. The alleged tweet was never presented. It's been repeated so often there that it's become accepted as fact proving the law of propaganda attributed to Joseph Goebbels: “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth."
The tweet has been supplied on this very forum before so do pay attention.
__________________
Fight the good fight with all thy might!
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 10:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.