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

Closed Thread
Old 30th January 2017, 11:58 AM   #161
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I'm pretty sure that I have discussed in great detail that burglary in fact is the gateway crime for serial killers. That the FBI has a term for it. It is known as "sexual burglary". What are some of the common traits for sexual burglaries? Number 1 is that the perpetrators spend much more time in their victims homes or businesses than is needed. What seems to be common about the break-ins that Rudy is suspected of? He spent time there.

Hoisted on your own petard.
'Hoist by'.

Citation please about your claim.

Er, you do know how a petard works..?
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä

Last edited by Vixen; 30th January 2017 at 12:01 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 12:02 PM   #162
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,833
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You obtusely refuse to understand the difference between expressing an opinion, making a mistake, disagreeing with you or Welshman and lying.
I do? I trust you'll point it out with examples.

Still, a poster upthread posted for the umpteenth time the view that Knox simply walked into the Questura and spontaneously started blurting out accustions against Lumumba.

For the umpteenth time. Is that untruth a lie, an opinion, or simply a mistake?

I really don't care how it's classified. Other than in John Follain's book, no one else describes it that way. Numbers upthread has posted cites from the Boninsegna motivations report which is perhaps the closest to describing the interrogations....

..... which started with Ficarra coming out to get Knox into an interrogation room, to grille Knox about who was in her contacts list on her phone.

This was later described by the police as, "she then buckled and told us what we already knew."

So if someone else still clings to the spontaneous declaration nonsense, are they lying, mistaken, or simply entitled to an opinion when the evidence points elsewhere?
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 12:07 PM   #163
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12,858
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The PGP are not under suspicion of having committed rape, murder and theft.
And that is relative why? That the PGP is so willing to bend the truth should be clear evidence that someone lying is not evidence that they committed a murder. One doesn't follow the other.
__________________
“ 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 12:18 PM   #164
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,711
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
As Vixen again attacks Amand and Raffaele for lying, I thought I would give Vixen a reminder of the track record of the PGP when it comes to lying and supporting the lies of others detailed in my posts below. It should be made clear that PGP don’t have an issue with lying but how lies are used. Lying is only a problem for the PGP when they benefit Amanda and Raffaele but as can be seen from the posts PGP regard lying as acceptable when it is used against Amanda and Raffaele which means PGP display staggering hypocrisy when they attack Amanda, Raffaele and others for lying. In my posts I have given examples where PGP have lied on this forum. The fact that PGP posters on this forum can't argue their case without resorting to lying indicates there was no case against Amand and Raffaele. I have asked PGP to explain their hypocrisy in attacking Amanda and Raffaele for lying whilst lying themselves and supporting the lies of other. The silence has been deafening.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11430102

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11427461

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11333243

None of your links work.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 12:20 PM   #165
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12,858
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
'Hoist by'.

Citation please about your claim.

Er, you do know how a petard works..?
Sexual Burglaries and Sexual Homicide - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
http://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/27/2/227.full.pdf


Sexual burglaries and sexual homicide: clinical, forensic, and investigative considerations.
Schlesinger LB1, Revitch E.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10400431

Type in the words "sexual burglary" into Google and you will find plenty of articles about this subject.
__________________
“ 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 01:07 PM   #166
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
If you walk into a police station and report a crime, you will not be taped. No doubt police will ask you to sign your statement. Again, no need for a lawyer. As a free citizen it is your onus as to whether you wish to take legal advice first, or not.

What is this a nanny state...?

Man walks into police station, covered in blood and dishevelled.

MAN: I just want to report a serial murd-

DESK OFFICER: Stop, sir, stop!

MAN: But I want to give myself in -

DESK OFFICER <fx face palms> No, no, no, sir! You don't understand. Are you reporting a crime or are you confessing to one?

MAN: Both, you see, I just ki-

DESK OFFICER <fx grips head in hand> Wait, sir, wait - whatever you do do NOT tell me anything until I have got a top class lawyer for you.

MAN: Well, if you let me get away, I promise you I'll do it agai -

DESK OFFICER <sfx screams> I didn't hear you, sir. I would advise you to find a top class lawyer and don't come back until you do.


Several days and murders later, man returns with top barrister famous for getting the mafia off.

MAN: I didn't come in here t'other day and I didn't say anything or see anything. You can't prove it!

BONGIORNO (for it is she): My client wishes to say nothing. You have no recording so you have no case. Bye now.


Great. So now bagels is happy.

No, Vixen. It goes like this:

Man walks into police station

MAN: I want to report that I just murdered someone

POLICE OFFICER: I see, Sir. I'm now going to arrest you on suspicion of murder. You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand what I've just told you?

MAN: Yes

POLICE OFFICER: You have the right to a lawyer. Do you want one?

MAN: Yes

Man is placed into custody while awaiting arrival of lawyer

Lawyer arrives, man has consultation with lawyer.

Man and lawyer enter interview room for police interrogation.

POLICE OFFICER: Now, you made a confession when you walked into this police station this afternoon. Do you wish to repeat that confession now, under caution, after having taken legal counsel?

MAN: Yes

or

MAN: No comment


I hope that makes things clearer for you. If you need any further clarification or explanation, please don't hesitate to ask.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 01:20 PM   #167
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,833
A poster upthread wanted to know the definition of "investigative amnesia", a term used by the Italian Supreme Court in 2015 to describe one reason why they acquitted the pair.

I have no clue, really, if there is some judicial weight in Italy to this term. But in my view "investigative amnesia" describes well the way PGP here and elsewhere skate seamlessly between motives and scenarios seemingly oblivious that they've just trashed what their former theory was.

Starts with - Knox just waltzed voluntarily into the Questura to make damning spontaneous statements against Lumumba.

But all that is forgotten when skating seamlessly over to Knox lying her ass off, until Raffaele pulls her alibi, THEN she starts lying about Lumumba.

See how this works? The amnesia kicks in when they forget that their first sincerely held belief had once been true.

I'm sure if one put their mind to it, one could apply this to the fatally flawed investigation.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 01:30 PM   #168
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
As Vixen again attacks Amand and Raffaele for lying, I thought I would give Vixen a reminder of the track record of the PGP when it comes to lying and supporting the lies of others detailed in my posts below. It should be made clear that PGP don’t have an issue with lying but how lies are used. Lying is only a problem for the PGP when they benefit Amanda and Raffaele but as can be seen from the posts PGP regard lying as acceptable when it is used against Amanda and Raffaele which means PGP display staggering hypocrisy when they attack Amanda, Raffaele and others for lying. In my posts I have given examples where PGP have lied on this forum. The fact that PGP posters on this forum can't argue their case without resorting to lying indicates there was no case against Amand and Raffaele. I have asked PGP to explain their hypocrisy in attacking Amanda and Raffaele for lying whilst lying themselves and supporting the lies of other. The silence has been deafening.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...2#post11430102

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1#post11427461

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11333243
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
None of your links work.
The ones in the "Quote" above should be working now
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 01:33 PM   #169
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Sexual Burglaries and Sexual Homicide - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
http://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/27/2/227.full.pdf


Sexual burglaries and sexual homicide: clinical, forensic, and investigative considerations.
Schlesinger LB1, Revitch E.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10400431

Type in the words "sexual burglary" into Google and you will find plenty of articles about this subject.
The names of all the burglars are associated with serial killing in your first link. You can now see the threat to public safety...?

Mignini was right to treat the matter with utmost seriousness.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 02:10 PM   #170
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The names of all the burglars are associated with serial killing in your first link. You can now see the threat to public safety...?

Mignini was right to treat the matter with utmost seriousness.

Vixen: since you're around, please could you address my earlier question about exactly how/why "public safety" might have been compromised if Knox/Sollecito/Lumumba had been allowed access to legal counsel while being held in custody on 6th/7th/8th November 2007.

Many thanks in advance for your considered reply.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 02:12 PM   #171
toto
Muse
 
toto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 596
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
'Hoist by'.

Citation please about your claim.

Er, you do know how a petard works..?
"Blown up by your own bomb" is what the phrase means, from when I learnt Hamlet at school.
__________________
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. Samuel Beckett
toto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 02:29 PM   #172
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12,858
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The names of all the burglars are associated with serial killing in your first link. You can now see the threat to public safety...?

Mignini was right to treat the matter with utmost seriousness.
Nonsense. Mignini was and is a moron who caused a great many problems by violating proper procedures.
__________________
“ 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 02:29 PM   #173
toto
Muse
 
toto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 596
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
OK fair enough. I would say, that as this was a crime considered by the police of having been committed in concert with several, and owing to the barbaric and sadistic nature of the crime, there was every possibility that the perps might seek out other victims, on a serial murder spree, then I can see the rationale of putting them under observation, as it were, without being groomed by lawyers in how to feign innocence.

All of the Italian witnesses in the case all got legal advice in the first instance, and we have to ask why middle-class well-connected Raff did not bother.
RS was extremely naive. (And still is it appears).
__________________
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. Samuel Beckett
toto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 02:38 PM   #174
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,426
From Raff's perspective a girl he just met that week happened to live in the same house as another girl he didnt' know who was killed. It all would have been rather distant to him.

When the police continued to bring him in after that first day and started asking questions beyond a simple statement though, well, it's unfortunate for him he never saw this.

Of course, that's from a PIP perspective.

From a PGP perspective his actions are totally incomprehensible and I have no comment.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:33 PM   #175
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,833
Originally Posted by toto View Post
RS was extremely naive. (And still is it appears).
Agreed. But no one would have known who this guy was if the Perugian authorities had done their jobs in Nov 2007.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:42 PM   #176
TruthCalls
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 488
Originally Posted by Vixen
I have searched and searched in vain for any indication of the pair's innocence and have had no luck so far.
Exactly what did you think you might find with all this searching of yours if what Amanda and Raffaele said they did the evening of the murder were true? They were at Raffaele's and after 20:45 no one else was there to see them. So what were you looking for? Maybe computer activity might help. Didn't it trouble you to find out the "experts" at the Postal Police managed to fry three separate drives? Thankfully, the defense experts were finally able to recover data the other "experts" could not and prove activity at 21:26. I find it interesting that you, being unbias and objective, and working so hard to find evidence of their innocence, should worked so hard in trying to undermine this finding?

Originally Posted by Vixen
I am objectively neutral and not biased at all....
This could be the most dishonest comment you've ever made, Vixen. Your position on dozens of aspects of this crime prove this. For example;

o A Luminol trace that tests negative for blood using TMB and contains no DNA (or no DNA of Meredith) simply is NOT a trace made from Meredith's blood. Suggesting bizarre, implausible explanations for why it is, especially since there were no other tests performed that could have proven otherwise, is anything but an objective, unbiased opinion.

o A Luminol revealed footprint lacking any distinguishing features can not be positively identified. Estimated size can exclude people but that's it. Testimony from ALL expert witnesses confirmed the prints could not be used to identify who left them. You're either unaware that the witnesses all confirmed this or you're not objective and unbias as you continue to claim they were made by Amanda and Raffaele.

o Any item of evidence from a crime scene that is sealed in a collection bag should remain there until a lab technician, in a sterile lab environment removes it to begin analysis. If the item is removed by an unqualified person, in a non-sterile environment and placed into a non-sterile container, LCN analysis should be prohibitted. It is simply far to easy for it to become contaminated. To claim otherwise is not objective, it's dishonest and, in this case, very biased.

o Samples 36B and 36C are tested for blood and they come back negative, they are then tested for human species and they come back negative, they are then quantified for DNA and they come back negative. In any credible forensic lab those results would indicate the samples do not warrant further testing. To claim otherwise is not being objective. Further, Stefanoni correctly recorded 36C negative for DNA but records 36B positiv. That is falsifying a record (a LIE) and to support such action one must definitely be unobjective and very biased.

o Meredith suffered three primary knife wounds. Two of them are to small to be made from the kitchen knife. The third wound can not be eliminated as having been made from the kitchen knife, but the depth of the wound is less than half the length of the blade and there is bruising around the wound consistent with a knife hilt striking the skin. Numerous experts opine that during the commission of a violent assault it's nearly impossible to stop a knife from going all the way in without striking bone or cartilage, but that's what happened here. An objective and unbias conclusion would be a single, smaller knife was used, but that's not the conclusion you came to.

o The prosecution's expert witness, who incorrectly claimed prints left by Guede were left by Raffaele, and who examined the bathmat only by photograph, claims the print on the mat is consistent with Raffaele and excluds Guede. The defense expert, who corrected the prosecution expert about Guede's prints incorrectly attributed to Raffaele, examines the actual mat - not photographs - and he claims the print is consistent with Guede but excludes Raffaele. An objective, unbiased conclusion must be that there is no way to know who truly made the print yet you continue to insist Raffaele did.

There are dozens more examples I could cite, but why bother. It's clear "objectively neutral and not biased" are NOT words that apply to you.

Last edited by TruthCalls; 30th January 2017 at 03:45 PM.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:46 PM   #177
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Agreed. But no one would have known who this guy was if the Perugian authorities had done their jobs in Nov 2007.

I think the heart of the problem was that they THOUGHT they were doing their jobs.

And what's more, they thought they were doing their jobs extremely impressively and in "master sleuth" stylee. They thought they'd used all their skill, guile and intuition to "solve the crime" within mere days - and all in front of a clamorous global media and a fearful Perugia public and student population. They thought they were gen-yoo-wine HEROES!

The problem, of course, was that standards and oversight were so dreadfully lacking that their "method" of approaching the case was fundamentally improper, and - what's worse - it had the awful potential (a potential which was all too realised in this case) for escalating in a vicious circle of confirmation bias and tunnel vision. But Giobbi, Profazio, Mignini et all simply couldn't see that. They were neither professional enough nor intelligent enough to realise that their approach was so hugely wrong, and so hugely susceptible to really bad mistakes of judgement.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:49 PM   #178
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
No, Vixen. It goes like this:

Man walks into police station

MAN: I want to report that I just murdered someone

POLICE OFFICER: I see, Sir. I'm now going to arrest you on suspicion of murder. You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand what I've just told you?

MAN: Yes

POLICE OFFICER: You have the right to a lawyer. Do you want one?

MAN: Yes

Man is placed into custody while awaiting arrival of lawyer

Lawyer arrives, man has consultation with lawyer.

Man and lawyer enter interview room for police interrogation.

POLICE OFFICER: Now, you made a confession when you walked into this police station this afternoon. Do you wish to repeat that confession now, under caution, after having taken legal counsel?

MAN: Yes

or

MAN: No comment


I hope that makes things clearer for you. If you need any further clarification or explanation, please don't hesitate to ask.

And what would be your scenario for a woman reporting her boss for murder?

WOMAN: I've come into report my boss!

DESK SERGEANT: And may I have your name, Madam?

WOMAN: Amanda Knox.

DESK SERGEANT: And the name of your boss?

WOMAN: Patrick Lumumba.

DESK SERGEANT: Sorry Madam, no can do. I suggest you go away and come back with a lawyer.

WOMAN: No but I insist in reporting this man. It's my gift to you.

DESK SERGEANT: Madam, please leave.


WOMAN: But I saw him at the basketball court and I invited him around -

DESK SERGEANT: Madam I am afraid I am now going to arrest you -

WOMAN: Hah! But I haven't signed a statement - you can't prove I said any of this! Haha, I'm outta here! So long sucker!

<fx woman turns and exits police station turning round to make a rude gesture>
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä

Last edited by Vixen; 30th January 2017 at 04:08 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:51 PM   #179
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Vixen: since you're around, please could you address my earlier question about exactly how/why "public safety" might have been compromised if Knox/Sollecito/Lumumba had been allowed access to legal counsel while being held in custody on 6th/7th/8th November 2007.

Many thanks in advance for your considered reply.
Until such point they say or do something that gives police reason to formally make them into suspects, the prerogative remains with the kids and Patrick. No one stopped them getting a lawyer in.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:54 PM   #180
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Exactly what did you think you might find with all this searching of yours if what Amanda and Raffaele said they did the evening of the murder were true? They were at Raffaele's and after 20:45 no one else was there to see them. So what were you looking for?

Exactly. On top of that, the very fact that Vixen seemingly (at some level) equates "unable to find evidence of their innocence" with "able to conclude that they were guilty" is, well, rather astonishing - not to mention indicative of a deeply flawed intellectual process.

Here's a thing: I have searched (in vain), and I cannot find any indication of the innocence of Sig. and Sig.ra Bianchi - the late-middle-aged Italian couple who lived in the apartment block overlooking the girls' cottage in 2007, and who claimed to have been alone together in their apartment throughout the evening/night of the murder watching TV, talking, and going to bed.

The Bianchis cannot prove they were in their apartment at the time of the murder, and they clearly had the means and the opportunity to have committed the murder. I reckon they should have been tried and found guilty.......
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 03:56 PM   #181
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Until such point they say or do something that gives police reason to formally make them into suspects, the prerogative remains with the kids and Patrick. No one stopped them getting a lawyer in.

You must be kidding. Right? Because you cannot be writing this with serious sincerity. Right?
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:00 PM   #182
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Nonsense. Mignini was and is a moron who caused a great many problems by violating proper procedures.
He did no such thing. Yes, there was an administrative error with Profazio, which may or may not have been shrewd corner cutting, but in any case, he was merely censured, and I am willing to accept it was a clerical oversight by Profazio. If deliberate, sometimes discretion is the better part of valour if it becomes a case of nailing a heinous killer/rapist versus some mislaid paperwork.

Mignini is hardly a moron just because he brought the kids to justice. Whilst Amanda's theatrics might have fooled her parents when young, they had no truck with Mignini who saw Amanda as the astute, cunning manipulator he had in front of him, who tried everything from shimmying at Giobbi, turning on the tears, sobbing, shouting, smacking her own head with her hand, - he's a prosecutor, he's seen it all before. Like all good attorneys, he can smell a lie like a fart in a lift.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:04 PM   #183
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
You must be kidding. Right? Because you cannot be writing this with serious sincerity. Right?
Filomena, Luca, Kokomani, everybody, all turned up at the questura with their lawyer in tow.

You cannot be serious Raff pranced along to the questura waving his knife around.

On Victoria Derbyshire, bbc tv interview recently, Raff moaned about the cops not being impressed with his knife. "But I've been carrying a knife since I was thirteen!" he whined.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:04 PM   #184
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
And what would be your scenario for a woman reporting her boss for murder?

WOMAN: I've come into report my boss!

DESK SERGEANT: And may I have your name, Madam?

WOMAN: Amanda Knox.

DESK SERGEANT: And the name of your boss?

WOMAN: Patrick Lumumba.

DESK SERGEANT: Sorry Madam, no can do. I suggest you go away and come back with a lawyer.

WOMAN: No but I insist in reporting this man. It's my gift to you.

DESK SERGEANT: Madam, please leave.


WOMAN: But I saw him at the basketball court and I invited him around -

DESK SERGEANT: Madam I am afraid I am now going to arrest you -

WOMAN: Hah! But I haven't signed a statement - you can't prove I said any of this! Haha, I'm outta here! So long sucker!

<fx woman turns and exits poilce station turning round to make a rude gesture>

Oh dear. Can't help the hyperbole and histrionic "screenplays", huh?

Here's how it should have gone:


Knox walks into police station.

KNOX: I want to report that I know who killed Meredith Kercher.

POLICE OFFICER: OK. Come into an interview room and we can talk.

Knox goes into interview room.

POLICE OFFICER: Right, now you're Amanda Knox, that's correct? And we've previously interviewed you in relation to this murder. You've told us that you were alone with your boyfriend in his apartment throughout the whole evening/night of the murder, and that you know nothing about the murder. Is that correct?

KNOX: Yes, that's correct.

POLICE OFFICER: But now you say you know who committed the murder. Is that correct?

KNOX: Yes, that's correct.

POLICE OFFICER: OK, I'm now going to arrest you on suspicion of perverting the course of justice (side note: the suspicion of this crime immediately arises since Knox previously told police she knew nothing about the murder or who had committed it). You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand what I've just told you?

KNOX: Yes

POLICE OFFICER: You have the right to a lawyer. Do you want one?

KNOX: Yes

Knox is placed into custody while awaiting arrival of lawyer

Lawyer arrives, Knox has consultation with lawyer.

Knox and lawyer enter interview room for police interrogation.

POLICE OFFICER: Now, you stated that you knew who had murdered Meredith Kercher when you first entered the police station this afternoon. Do you wish to repeat that accusation now, under caution, after having taken legal counsel?

KNOX: Yes

or

KNOX: No


I hope that makes things clearer for you. If you need any further clarification or explanation, please don't hesitate to ask.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:10 PM   #185
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Exactly. On top of that, the very fact that Vixen seemingly (at some level) equates "unable to find evidence of their innocence" with "able to conclude that they were guilty" is, well, rather astonishing - not to mention indicative of a deeply flawed intellectual process.

Here's a thing: I have searched (in vain), and I cannot find any indication of the innocence of Sig. and Sig.ra Bianchi - the late-middle-aged Italian couple who lived in the apartment block overlooking the girls' cottage in 2007, and who claimed to have been alone together in their apartment throughout the evening/night of the murder watching TV, talking, and going to bed.

The Bianchis cannot prove they were in their apartment at the time of the murder, and they clearly had the means and the opportunity to have committed the murder. I reckon they should have been tried and found guilty.......
The Bianchis didn't go to trial, the prosecutor threw the case out as there were no grounds to prosecute.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:10 PM   #186
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Filomena, Luca, Kokomani, everybody, all turned up at the questura with their lawyer in tow.

You cannot be serious Raff pranced along to the questura waving his knife around.

On Victoria Derbyshire, bbc tv interview recently, Raff moaned about the cops not being impressed with his knife. "But I've been carrying a knife since I was thirteen!" he whined.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONCE THEY HAD BEEN ARRESTED AND PLACED IN CUSTODY IN THE EARLY HOURS OF 6TH NOVEMBER 2007.

Seriously. Please have the courtesy of reading back and understanding the "arguments" that you yourself made. In this instance, you "argued" that Mignini was correct to deny Knox/Sollecito/Lumumba access to lawyers once they'd been arrested, since he had an obligation to protect "public safety". I then responded to that farcical suggestion with the explicitly clear question:

Vixen: since you're around, please could you address my earlier question about exactly how/why "public safety" might have been compromised if Knox/Sollecito/Lumumba had been allowed access to legal counsel while being held in custody on 6th/7th/8th November 2007.

I even included the dates. If you really don't understand what it is you "argued", nor the questions that were asked of you in respect of your "argument", there's not much more I can do other than shake my head and draw certain conclusions.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:11 PM   #187
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The Bianchis didn't go to trial, the prosecutor threw the case out as there were no grounds to prosecute.

What, pray, were the (credible, reliable) grounds to prosecute Knox or Sollecito?

Again, this should be amusing.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:16 PM   #188
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
What, pray, were the (credible, reliable) grounds to prosecute Knox or Sollecito?

Again, this should be amusing.
Please read the court documents. I refer you to the Matteini remand hearing.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...aring_(English)

And in fact, there was no 'haste to solve the crime'. The kids were not charged until quite a few months later.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:20 PM   #189
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Please read the court documents. I refer you to the Matteini remand hearing.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...aring_(English)

No, no. You misunderstand me, Vixen.

I'm asking for the credible, reliable grounds upon which they were prosecuted.

(If you still find this hard to understand, I suggest that it's you who might benefit from reading the Matteini remand transcript, then jotting down which of the "evidence" presented by prosecutors in that hearing a) was exposed as outright falsehood many years ago, b) was exposed as fundamentally unreliable and/or inadmissible at various stages of the subsequent judicial process, up to and including the Marasca SC verdict, c) still stands as credible, reliable evidence. You'll find that the score count for (c) is a big fat ol' zero........)
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:21 PM   #190
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 12,858
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
He did no such thing. Yes, there was an administrative error with Profazio, which may or may not have been shrewd corner cutting, but in any case, he was merely censured, and I am willing to accept it was a clerical oversight by Profazio. If deliberate, sometimes discretion is the better part of valour if it becomes a case of nailing a heinous killer/rapist versus some mislaid paperwork.

Mignini is hardly a moron just because he brought the kids to justice. Whilst Amanda's theatrics might have fooled her parents when young, they had no truck with Mignini who saw Amanda as the astute, cunning manipulator he had in front of him, who tried everything from shimmying at Giobbi, turning on the tears, sobbing, shouting, smacking her own head with her hand, - he's a prosecutor, he's seen it all before. Like all good attorneys, he can smell a lie like a fart in a lift.
You can deny the facts until the cows came home but Mignini KNOWINGLY violated both Amanda and Raffaele's rights. This is why the memoriales were thrown out. He manipulated the system unjustly and he prosecuted 2 innocent people. The result is they were incarcerated and years of unnecessary and costly litigation took place.
__________________
“ 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:26 PM   #191
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
He did no such thing. Yes, there was an administrative error with Profazio, which may or may not have been shrewd corner cutting, but in any case, he was merely censured, and I am willing to accept it was a clerical oversight by Profazio. If deliberate, sometimes discretion is the better part of valour if it becomes a case of nailing a heinous killer/rapist versus some mislaid paperwork.

Mignini is hardly a moron just because he brought the kids to justice. Whilst Amanda's theatrics might have fooled her parents when young, they had no truck with Mignini who saw Amanda as the astute, cunning manipulator he had in front of him, who tried everything from shimmying at Giobbi, turning on the tears, sobbing, shouting, smacking her own head with her hand, - he's a prosecutor, he's seen it all before. Like all good attorneys, he can smell a lie like a fart in a lift.

Oh, Mignini's far, far worse than a moron. And, in reference to your unsavoury simile, Mignini must find it hard to breathe from forever being surrounded by the smell of his own farts........
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:30 PM   #192
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,839
Not to stir up old controversies, but here is some information on the concept of "actual innocence":

Quote:
In its most literal sense, "actual innocence"—more properly understood as a claim that the prosecution has failed to prove factual guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—is a very commonly raised defense to a crime.[1][2] Claims of actual innocence may involve disputing that any crime occurred at all, or that the accused was the perpetrator of the criminal act. Arguably, even affirmative defenses such as "self-defense", insanity, or "mistake of fact" qualify as "actual innocence" claims because while in those cases the accused admits to both his or her identity as the actor and to the existence of the act ("actus reus"), he or she is claiming that the State cannot prove that he or she had the requisite mental state ("mens rea") to constitute a crime.

However, the specific term "actual innocence" is most often used in the context of someone convicted for a crime he or she did not commit. Claims of "actual innocence" are, in that sense, usually raised in post-conviction challenges to a conviction.
Thus, "actual innocence" is associated* with the claim that a prosecution did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not that one can prove that one is absolutely innocent. It is, of course, in the US, often applied to describe the state of one who was convicted, but a thorough examination of the case, perhaps with new evidence, shows that the conviction did not satisfy the BARD requirement.

*By the people that often use this term in practice. Of course, anyone can use terminology however they wish, hopefully including the meaning intended if it is not the common one.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_innocence

Last edited by Numbers; 30th January 2017 at 04:32 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:32 PM   #193
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Until such point they say or do something that gives police reason to formally make them into suspects, the prerogative remains with the kids and Patrick. No one stopped them getting a lawyer in.
PM Mignini did:
Quote:
Il P.M. ha disposto regime di isolamento e di divieto di colloquio tra gli stessi ed i loro legali.
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:40 PM   #194
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Although I do not speak Italian, I can see he gives his reasons as 'VOLUNTARY HOMICIDE WITH AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT.


You don't consider that serious?
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:42 PM   #195
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Deleted.
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä

Last edited by Vixen; 30th January 2017 at 04:54 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:47 PM   #196
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,139
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
We have discussed this before. There were lots of superficial flick wounds on Mez hands and also on her face.

You can read about the cooking session here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-cooking.html

Or go direct to Raff's prison diary of 18 Nov 2007:



http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...ry_(Translated)

I am not sure why you felt the need to change the location to the cottage. Your trying to revise history and shoe-horn the facts into a 'police conspiracy' indicates to me that in your heart you know your position is based on blind faith rather than on anything rational.


As for the knife, when I said 'cellophane', I was using the colloquial form, not the exact chemical description. Clearly, it is a forensic bag and would meet the ENFSI standard for sample collection.

Just to save any confusion the image of the knife here is in packaging that it was put in after processing in the forensic lab. It does not represent the paper envelope it was placed in at Sollecito's flat.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:50 PM   #197
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,839
I am copying an excerpt from my earlier post to make a point about Knox's conviction for calunnia against Lumumba.

...{A}ffirmative defenses such as "self-defense", insanity, or "mistake of fact" qualify as "actual innocence" claims because while in those cases the accused admits to both his or her identity as the actor and to the existence of the act ("actus reus"), he or she is claiming that the State cannot prove that he or she had the requisite mental state ("mens rea") to constitute a crime.

Under Italian law, the crime of "calunnia" requires not only the act of accusing someone falsely, but doing so KNOWING that the accusation is FALSE.

Here's the definition of calunnia (Google translation with my assistance):

CP 368 - Calunnia

Anyone with denunciation, complaint, demand or request, even if anonymously or under a false name, directly to the court or other authority that has the obligation to report or the International Criminal Court, blames anybody of a crime that he knows innocent, that simulates borne him the traces [evidence] of a crime, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years (1).
The penalty is increased if es'incolpa [one incriminates] anybody of a crime through which the law prescribes a penalty of imprisonment for a maximum ten years, or another more serious penalty.
Imprisonment is from four to twelve years, if the act results in a prison sentence up to five years; is from six to twenty years, if the act results in a life sentence; and apply life imprisonment, if the act results in a condemnation to death (2).

(1) Paragraph amended by art. 10, paragraph 3, L. December 20, 2012, n. 237. The text previously in force was as follows: "Whoever, with the complaint, complaint, demand or request, even if anonymously or under a false name, directly to the court or other authority that has the obligation to report, blames anybody of a crime that he knows innocent, that simulates borne him the traces of a crime, shall be punished with imprisonment from two to six years. ".
(2) The death penalty for offenses under the Criminal Code was abolished by art. 1 of D.Lgs.Lgt. August 10, 1944, n. 224.
_______________

See. Court of Torre Annunziata, judgment of 30 October 2007 the Supreme Court criminal sect. VI, judgment of 24 January 2008, n. 3922, Criminal Cassation, sez. VI, judgment of 13 June 2008 n. 24114, Criminal Cassation, sez. VI, judgment of 26 January 2009, no. 3427 and Criminal Cassation, sez. VI, judgment of 8 September 2009, no. 34821 in Altalex in Massimario

Here is the definition in Italian:

CP Art. 368.
Calunnia.

Chiunque, con denunzia, querela, richiesta o istanza, anche se anonima o sotto falso nome, diretta all'autorità giudiziaria o ad un'altra autorità che a quella abbia obbligo di riferirne o alla Corte penale internazionale, incolpa di un reato taluno che egli sa innocente, ovvero simula a carico di lui le tracce di un reato, è punito con la reclusione da due a sei anni (1).
La pena è aumentata se s'incolpa taluno di un reato pel quale la legge stabilisce la pena della reclusione superiore nel massimo a dieci anni, o un'altra pena più grave.
La reclusione è da quattro a dodici anni, se dal fatto deriva una condanna alla reclusione superiore a cinque anni; è da sei a venti anni, se dal fatto deriva una condanna all'ergastolo; e si applica la pena dell'ergastolo, se dal fatto deriva una condanna alla pena di morte (2).

(1) Comma così modificato dall’art. 10, comma 3, L. 20 dicembre 2012, n. 237. Il testo precedentemente in vigore era il seguente: “Chiunque, con denunzia, querela, richiesta o istanza, anche se anonima o sotto falso nome, diretta all'autorità giudiziaria o ad un'altra autorità che a quella abbia obbligo di riferirne, incolpa di un reato taluno che egli sa innocente, ovvero simula a carico di lui le tracce di un reato, è punito con la reclusione da due a sei anni.”.
(2) La pena di morte per i delitti previsti dal codice penale è stata abolita dall'art. 1 del D.Lgs.Lgt. 10 agosto 1944, n. 224.
_______________

Cfr. Tribunale di Torre Annunziata, sentenza 30 ottobre 2007, Cassazione penale, sez. VI, sentenza 24 gennaio 2008, n. 3922, Cassazione penale, sez. VI, sentenza 13 giugno 2008, n. 24114, Cassazione penale, sez. VI, sentenza 26 gennaio 2009, n. 3427 e Cassazione penale, sez. VI, sentenza 8 settembre 2009, n. 34821 in in Altalex Massimario.
_____
Note: "incolpa di un reato taluno che egli sa innocente" translates to "blames anybody for a crime that he knows innocent"

So, how did the Hellmann court decide that Amanda Knox knew that Patrick Lumumba was innocent and thus she KNOWINGLY accused him of a crime? Did the Hellmann court's reason make sense (to a reasonable and objective person) or was it arbitrary?

I leave it to the interested readers of this post to research the answer to the first question and to form an opinion as to the second question.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:54 PM   #198
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,666
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Although I do not speak Italian, I can see he gives his reasons as 'VOLUNTARY HOMICIDE WITH AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT.


You don't consider that serious?

You still don't get it, do you?

If. You. Are. Arrested. And. Placed. Into. Custodial. Detention. You. Have. The. Right. To. Consult. A. Lawyer.

Do you understand the above words, in the order in which they are written?

In Italy, the ONLY exception to the above is if there are extraordinary circumstances where there are reasonable grounds to believe that allowing the arrested/detained person access to a lawyer might have either a material adverse effect upon justice, or danger to other people.

It's manifestly clear, both from the wording of this section in the code and from legal commentary on this section of the code (and, for that matter, from sheer common sense married with a threshold intellect.....), that this section of the code was specifically intended for possible use in cases where there were reasonable grounds to believe that the arrested/detained person was part of a far wider criminal conspiracy - which almost exclusively means either terrorism or organised crime - where a sizeable pre-organised conspiracy involving both lawyers and other criminals at large in the community might lead to things such as intimidation of witnesses, further criminal acts, or any sort of danger to the public.

It is, frankly, laughable to suppose that - even if one, for one moment, believed that Mignini had caught the "right" people in relation to the Kercher murder (and, remember, Mignini DID think he'd caught the right people) - this murder came anywhere even remotely close to being the type of crime that one might consider the work of the likes of terrorists or organised crime syndicates.

Which is, precisely, why Mignini did not have the right to invoke that section of the code, and in doing so deny Knox, Sollecito and Lumumba any access to a lawyer for over 48 hours after their arrests (and even then, only literally minutes before the Matteini hearing - leaving no reasonable amount of time to even discuss what was going on before they were brought before the courts). Mignini is a damn disgrace. I sincerely hope he gets his full and just comeuppance - nothing more and nothing less 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 Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 04:59 PM   #199
Vixen
Philosopher
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
Just to save any confusion the image of the knife here is in packaging that it was put in after processing in the forensic lab. It does not represent the paper envelope it was placed in at Sollecito's flat.
The forensics team were well aware of protocols and it would have been placed in suitable packaging, such as the rock under the chair was (pictured).

You yourself said cellophane type bags were a poor choice, so you should be glad it was a new cardboard (_?) envelope.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg rock in forensic bag.jpg (42.6 KB, 2 views)
__________________
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä,
Taivas on sininen ja valkoinen
ja tähtösiä täynnä
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th January 2017, 05:39 PM   #200
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,833
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Mignini is hardly a moron just because he brought the kids to justice. Whilst Amanda's theatrics might have fooled her parents when young, they had no truck with Mignini who saw Amanda as the astute, cunning manipulator he had in front of him, who tried everything from shimmying at Giobbi, turning on the tears, sobbing, shouting, smacking her own head with her hand, - he's a prosecutor, he's seen it all before. Like all good attorneys, he can smell a lie like a fart in a lift.
Wow.

This is another version of John Follain's nuttiness. One one page in his book he cites Mignini smelling out Knox as a liar.

Then the very next page (or is it two?) Mignini has to go out and arrest Lumumba **solely** on Knox's say-so.

I think this is what the 2015 ISC meant when it wrote that this whole debacle was marked by "investigative amnesia".

Mignini simply could not remember from moment to moment if Knox was a liar or not!
__________________
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 Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:28 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.