|
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. |
28th June 2019, 04:59 AM | #361 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 07:22 AM | #362 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
Stop talking rubbish. As far as the 'boys downstairs' were concerned Rudi was an Italian. Had been there since age 5, grew up in an Italian family, was Italian educated. From his last name it is easy to discover he is Ivorian. Obviously he is African but Africa is a big continent so assuming he would be a 'South African' is unlikely as most black Africans in Europe are Kenyans, Nigerians, Ghanaians and Somalis.
Guede would have zero reason to tell the 'boys downstairs' he was Sotuh African. He supported South Africa during the S. Africa v England Rugby Final. It doesn't make him South African. I dare say Mez assumed he was from his cheering South Africa during the game they were both watching at the bar or maybe he did claim the nationality. It proves Knox did know 'the South African guy' who played basketball in the court yard and that he was Guede, so she lied when he claimed to police she didn't know him. She got the South African information from Mez and knew perfectly well who Guede was. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
28th June 2019, 07:33 AM | #363 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,312
|
Barbie's last statement in the article (written 24 Jan 2019) is most humorous:
"Because the court’s {ECHR} decision is non-binding, it is possible that she will never see any of the suggested payment." Apparently, she has no concept of the Council of Europe treaty and its obligations. Actually, Italy is really good on paying, eventually, for ECHR judgments against it. The really long delays are more in correcting its laws to conform to the requirements of the Convention and ECHR case-law. It still has not enacted a law against torture, for example, despite several judgments against it stemming from the Genoa cases. "Inhuman and degrading treatment by police forces against demonstrators during G8 summit; inadequate criminal legislation to prevent and punish torture and ill-treatment. Status of supervision: Enhanced Supervision" Source: https://rm.coe.int/1680709750 |
28th June 2019, 07:37 AM | #364 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 09:45 AM | #365 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,312
|
Today, the ECHR registry officials in charge of HUDOC changed the wording on the title page of the Knox v. Italy judgment to "Definitif" (final, definitive).
AFFAIRE KNOX c. ITALIE (Requête no 76577/13) ARRÊT STRASBOURG 24 janvier 2019 DÉFINITIF 24/06/2019 |
28th June 2019, 09:54 AM | #366 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 298
|
You telling that to, well, anyone is like Jupiter telling Mercury to stop having so many moons.
"It" doesn't prove anything of the sort. The only thing the above proves, once again, is your profound tastelessness in referring to a murder victim you never knew by anything other than her given name. Well, ok, it does prove one other thing....your denseness in not comprehending the obvious difference between knowing someone personally and knowing what that someone's name is. Knowing someone personally generally involves more than meeting that someone twice in passing. |
28th June 2019, 09:57 AM | #367 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Highlight #1: Apparently you didn't read the passage from Follain that Stacy provided, which read; "However, Stefano Bonassi also told police that Guede was S. African according to Follain:".
Highlight #2: How would anyone know he lived in Italy since age 5 and how would that alter where he was born? Highlight #3: What makes you assume someone would infer Ivorian heritage based on the last name of Guede? I certainly wouldn't and I suspect the vast majority wouldn't either. Highlight #4: You know this how? (although I agree Guede would have zero reason to tell the 'boys downstairs' he was Sotuh African.) Highlight #5: How does any of this prove Amanda knew Guede? I don't know my grocery store cashier, nor do I recall her name, although I've met her several times when checking out. Highlight #6: You know this how? You tell Stacy to stop talking rubbish yet your entire post is demonstrably rubbish. |
28th June 2019, 10:22 AM | #368 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
The series of continuations here on ISF/JREF got so elongated because of failures to comprehend differences like this.
All it would take, in days' gone by, would be for one innocentisi poster to say something like, "Look, neither Knox nor Sollecito even knew Rudy. Why would either of them (singly or together) ever in a million years conspire with him to murder someone?" Instead of conceding the exceeding obviousness of that, the thread would be comment-bombed with guilter-nutter posts that boiled down to this: - Knox had met Guede in the boys apartment on the first floor of the cottage.That last one was then claimed to be a substitute for actual proof that Knox and Guede had actually conspired in the hours/days before the murder to do the deed. Readers here can make up their own minds about all this, or perhaps even do their own searches here if they're so inspired. But truly, it all boiled down to those two things, which, in turn, became part of what guilter-nutters claimed was this wide existence of "all the other evidence" which when taken together proved guilt...... ...... when each and every claimed factoid was about as tenuous. ********************* ETA - I should add that the Massei convicting court explained in its 2010 motivations report, that it was actually irrelevant whether or not Knox and/or Sollecito knew Guede before the attack on the victim. Remember, this had not been a premeditated attack anyway - acc. to the convicting court, Guede actually needed no motivation to attack a young woman, and had probably begun the attacke with both AK and RS even unawares. What Massei said was that while "fooling around in Knox's room", they heard the commotion of the attack in the next room, the victim's room. They went to see what was going on, and instead of going to the aid of their friend, they made an inexplicable "choice for evil". Massei surmised that Knox had done that because as someone so young and so far from home, she was detached from the normal moral strictures of her upbringing. That was a convicting court trying to connect dots that weren't even there. That was it. There was no pre-planning, so it is quite irrelevant whether or not Guede and either of the other two had communicated beforehand. As well, acc. to even the convicting court, the crime was so unpremeditated that Massei had to make up a reason out of whole cloth why Knox had been carrying that large kitchen knife from Raffaele's back to the cottage. From this distance, does all that look even more ludicrous? |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 10:38 AM | #369 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
"It proves" HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Once again, your attempts at logical analysis and deductive reasoning are woefully inadequate. Oh and to add one other thing: you base your "argument" about when someone would or would not employ the term "South African" from your own narrow experience as a British national living in England. See, there are an awful lot of South African nationals (particularly in the 18-25 age bracket) living and working in London and the South East. And yes, most of them are white - mostly descendents of Dutch and British settlers. The UK has a specific colonial history with South Africa, and shares several cultural ties with it as well (notably in the sports of rugby and cricket). But most people outside the UK, for example Italy or the USA, have little or no experience of - or understanding of - South Africa or its ethnicity spread. And in addition, I wouldn't mind betting that many people from both of those countries (the USA especially) might incorrectly use the term "South Africa" to mean someone from the Southern part of the continent of Africa (as opposed to, say, the fairer-skinned Berber or Arabic-speaking populations of the Northern areas of Africa....). So in fact I'd say it's entirely feasible (note my lack of certitude, in sharp contrast to your own unwarranted certitude in the other direction) that someone from the North West coast of the USA, who'd never before travelled outside the USA and who probably knew little or nothing about the country of South Africa (apart from, perhaps, Nelson Mandela - who was of course Black Xhosa), might refer to a dark-black-skinned person as being from "South Africa". Yet another giant logic fail from you. Add it to the list. |
28th June 2019, 11:07 AM | #370 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Are you seriously claiming that Italians would know the origin of African names? That the boys would know "Guede" is Ivorian and not S. African, Kenyan, Somali, etc? Oh, lord. You are. You are ascribing knowledge to the boys downstairs that you cannot possibly know in a desperate effort to defend your ridiculous post. Once again, you claim to know what others thought even though it is in direct opposition to what Bonassi told the police. Ten days before he killed Meredith, Guede told a Spanish journalist, Nacho Azparren, he was from S. Africa:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Once again: are you conceding that Krissy G's claim that Guede referred to the knife as a 'stiletto' is false? Why would you have such difficulty admitting Krissy G is wrong? It's not like admitting you are wrong. |
28th June 2019, 11:45 AM | #371 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
It's because he got his ass kicked on multiple occasions on YouTube. He skulked in the murky backwaters of various comments sections looking for soft targets where he was discovered by Francisco and myself. Basically he capitulated after he could only offer the same old tired factoids about mixed blood that emerged at the start of the case. I'm certainly no big-hitter in an argument about the case, but it was surprising to see him so inept when quotes from the court proceedings were pasted in front of him. Basically, none of the motivations mention "mixed blood" only "mixed traces". I hunted him down at every opportunity on YouTube telling him I was going to kick his "**********g ass. Now I can't find his posts anywhere, nor can I find the posts of Quintus Beckmesser who at least had some sustainability compared to Rag. Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
28th June 2019, 12:18 PM | #372 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
Way way way too many of the guilter-nutters seemed to have only read John Follain's book. And by that I mean the edition put out before the 2011 acquittals. As such, the sub-text of the book was that the cops/PM/Massei court was right to first suspect, then convict Sollecito and Knox.
It took awhile to figure out that their "cut and pastes" were mainly from Follain, although to be honest I can't remember what Follain had said about mixed-blood. Methos!? Where are you!? Still, it drove me to cut and paste from Court motivation reports and the testimony I could make it through. It was telling to cut-and-paste what Massei had actually said about mixed blood. There weren't none. Massei convicted anyway. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 12:42 PM | #373 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
From Follain:
Quote:
Quote:
|
28th June 2019, 01:21 PM | #374 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 03:27 PM | #375 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
28th June 2019, 03:29 PM | #376 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 863
|
Me? Here, either in the basement of Supertanker Central, or feigning to be a Bavarian in the North West of Germany
I think you are mistaking "make up artist"-Follain for "Mixed Blood"-Barbie (3 mentions of "mixed blood") or "Darkness Descending" (14 mentions). The only mention of "mixed blood" in Follain's book is this one from chapter 32:
Quote:
Barbie "reduced to making snide comments from the sidelines since March 2015" Nadeau has this to say in her book: #1:
Quote:
Quote:
Btw. I just love how she tries to make herself and Andrea Vogt look like respectable or even "investigative" journalists, and still wonder how she could possibly know about what "The Knox family" said to their lawyers? Well, it's quite interesting that "Barbie" claims to have "explained the mixed blood" evidence to Edda "over a beer", while still claiming that she was (with Vogt) on a battle against the Seattle message machine, because "TV producers learned to be very cautious about being seen with people like me, lest the Knox family should cut them off." ... I kind of love Barbie's nonsense, because it makes clear that she is not just reporting, but thinks herself a part of (and a player) in "the story"... Especially because she's proving Ms Knox right about people turning her life into clickbait for a living... Tearful Amanda Knox to Italy: ‘I Am Not a Monster’ Paparazzi Alert: Amanda Knox Returns to Italy to Talk Crime European Court of Human Rights Sides With Amanda Knox—to a Point Barbie even invented "death threats" to promote a book written by her on a competely different topic, just to make herself interesting... But enough of Barbie... back to your question... It looks like the main "source" for "mixed blood" quotes is "Darkness Descending" (i.e. the pgp's "old testament", Nadeau, Vogt, Follain and John Kercher being their evangelists for their "new testament"). I won't "quote" all of the 14 mentions, just these two are interesting :
Quote:
Quote:
ETA: the highlighted parts from DD are nonsense, of course... |
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..." |
|
28th June 2019, 03:46 PM | #377 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
That is the word of the Spaniard (in 2011) not Rudy. In fact, he goes on to say Rudy claimed to be from Atlanta. I never knew Atlanta was in South Africa. The Spaniard likely gets the 'South Africa' reference from the case itself in retrospect
Read the quote from Follain properly:
Quote:
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
28th June 2019, 03:54 PM | #378 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
28th June 2019, 03:57 PM | #379 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
The value of DD is in the fact it was one of the earliest books about the case. Sure, it contains some inaccuracies but it contains a lot that the defence has tried to airbrush out of history. In addition, it directly interviews Stefanoni and Garofani (_sp?) has a whole chapter as an expert forensic scientist. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
28th June 2019, 04:01 PM | #380 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
Oh dear oh dear. That quote of Follain's in fact directly implies (through the use of inverted commas around 'South African') that Bonassi himself described Guede in those words to our two incompetent prosecutors. Do you know nothing about implied attribution in written English, Vixen? Oh, and "baron" in no way means (or even implies) "spiv" in English. Rather, it means "tycoon", "magnate" or "major player in...". So, for example, Rupert Murdoch is described as a press baron. The fact that the term can also be applied to people at the top of less fragrant trades ("drugs baron", "porn baron" etc) is of no more relevance than, say, the word "lover" can be used as much for "theatre-lover" or "animal-lover" as for "porn-lover" or "violence-lover" - the term "lover" in itself carries no pejorative meaning per se (just as with "baron") This is all deeply pathetic "argumentation" on your part, Vixen. |
28th June 2019, 04:07 PM | #381 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
1) How many of these West Africans make it to Seattle, Vixen? 2) How and why are you assuming that "most" African migrants to Italy will be West Africans? Is this another "fact" you've pulled straight out of the proverbial fundament? Because a) All of the closest African nations to Italy are North African nations, with predominantly fairer-skinned ethnicities; b) Italy's two former colonies in Africa were Ethiopia and Libya. The latter is a North African nation (see above), and the former is an East African nation. So please provide us with your data to support your (presumed) "fact" that most African migrants to Italy are from West Africa. Thanks in advance. 3) How and why did Bonassi - a young Italian male adult - apparently describe Guede as "South African" (unless Follain actually invented that attributed quote)? After all, as you seem to present as fact, Bonassi should have been well aware of the difference. Or not. As I just said: pathetic. |
28th June 2019, 04:11 PM | #382 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
Have the basic decency to actually check people's names for accuracy instead of writing any old thing followed by "(_sp?)". The man's family name is/was Garofano. A fact that it would have taken you literally seconds to check. From someone who claims rigour and accuracy in their analysis, it's woefully poor. Repeatedly. Oh, and what precisely has the defence tried to airbrush out of history? Entertain us with your list! |
28th June 2019, 04:22 PM | #383 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 863
|
Please point me to the parts of DD where it "directly interviews Stefanoni" and
the "lot that the defence has tried to airbrush out of history." ...and the "whole chapter having "Garofani (_sp?)" (no idea you have, about who you are talking, have you?) as an expert forensic scientist... ...please... |
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..." |
|
28th June 2019, 04:40 PM | #384 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
|
28th June 2019, 04:52 PM | #385 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,312
|
|
28th June 2019, 05:24 PM | #386 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
Nice try. You're citing the part where the final report summarizes the prosecution case. At the end of that section, the judges concluded that even if all that had been true, it still didn't make up for no forensics in the murder room.
You always leave all that out. I know why. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 05:27 PM | #387 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
Well, indeed. And in fact, since the Norman invasion in 1066 it has been - and continues to be - a rank in the nobility. When you hear about "Lord Smith", the actual proper title of the person is "The Baron Smith of xxxx" (where "xxxx" is a place chosen by the person upon their ennoblement). So, for example, when ex-BP CEO John Browne was ennobled, he became known as Lord Browne, but his correct full title was "The Baron Browne of Madingley"; and when Margaret Thatcher was elevated to the peerage after she resigned as Prime Minister, she was referred to in "shorthand" as "Lady Thatcher", but her proper title was "The Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven in the County of Lincolnshire"* The two examples above are/were what is known as "Life Peers" - they are ennobled during their lifetimes, and the rank is not handed down to any descendents upon their death. But hereditary peers also take the formal title "Baron", and indeed it's from here that the carried-over use of the word evolved to mean "person at the top of the tree" - hereditary barons were (up until around the mid-late-1800s) the large landowners across the UK, and were all-poweful over the "common people" upon their land. So there ya go. Back to your regular programming...... * One interesting further point is that it's much more common for women who've been ennobled to be referred to as "Baroness" than it is for ennobled men to be referred to as "Baron". And that's because the prefix "Lady" is also used for the wife of a knight - e.g. Sir Rod Stewart's wife Penny Lancaster has the title "Lady Stewart". So if one were to use "Lady Xxx" to refer to an ennobled woman, it might lead to the misinterpretation that the woman in question was the wife of a knight, rather than a (more important and higher-up-in-the-nobility) member of the Lords. So that's why you see "Baroness Xxxx" being used much more frequently than "Baron Yyyy" (there's no ambiguity when one refers to "Lord Yyyy") |
28th June 2019, 05:52 PM | #388 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Ten days before he killed Meredith, Guede told a Spanish journalist, Nacho Azparren, he was from S. Africa:
Quote:
Sigh. So now the Spanish journalist is lying? Why is it that anyone who agrees with you is upright and honest and anyone who doesn't is bent or lying?
Quote:
And you more than likely pulled this out of your.... I've got to give it to you, Vix; you will go down with the ship yelling and screaming "This ship is NOT sinking! You're only telling me the ship is sinking because it's got a huge hole in the side and it's filling up with water!"
Quote:
Speaking of reading properly, he does not say that Rudy claimed to BE from Atlanta, only that he had lived there and had also told Carlos, one of the Spaniards, that he had played for the Univ. of Atlanta:
Quote:
[quote]Read the quote from Follain properly:
Quote:
Quote:
Oh but he does...and so says Judge Michelli in his sentencing report of Guede:
Quote:
Quote:
Nice try. Who said anything about it having to do with drugs? No one. You are he one who brought it up. Guede explains in his prison diary that some Italian guys who lived below him gave him the nickname. But it's completely irrelevant to anything we were actually discussing. |
28th June 2019, 05:58 PM | #389 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
|
28th June 2019, 06:02 PM | #390 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,312
|
|
28th June 2019, 06:10 PM | #391 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Yep, Amanda really covered up for Guede by leaving his bloody footprint on the bathmat* and his crap in the toilet AND pointing them both out to the police. She also made sure to cover for Guede by leaving his visible bloody shoe prints in the bedroom, hallway, and kitchen. And let's not forget leaving his bloody palm print underneath Kercher's body. Yep, leaving all this evidence behind is a tried and true way of covering for somebody!
*Please don't claim it was Sollecito's as then you'd have to explain why Amanda and Raffaele would leave his bloody footprint behind and point it out to the police. But come to think of it, you already tried that when you claimed the pair did it on purpose to 'put one over' on the police to prove they were smarter. THAT was one of your best ever! |
28th June 2019, 06:13 PM | #392 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
"The Baron" had nothing to do with the title according to Guede. In his prison diary, he wrote:
Quote:
|
28th June 2019, 08:01 PM | #393 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
As Vixen constantly reminds us, Cassazione is not there to rule on the facts of the case. Yet then Vixen turns 180 degrees to claim that, "Cassazione found that X was factual."
What the 2015 Supreme Court did (as it outlined in Section 9.4 of its report) was summarize evidence as both sides, prosecution and defence, submitted it. It then ruled that even if all of it had been true, none of it approached the unassailable reality that no forensics of either RS or AK were present in the victim's room. Therefore even if all the factoids (my word) had been true, the Nencini court should have acquitted. Yet Vixen returns back 180 degrees.... to present the prosecution summary as if it was the only conclusion that Cassazione had arrived at. And.... as noted upthread, this still does not make judicial facts as fact-facts. The 2015 report had been written with the calunnia conviction as a judicial fact. We've just learned this month, that the ECHR has ruled that the calunnia conviction was based on rights being denied, therefore the conviction should be remedied by the member state. The calunnia conviction is no longer a fact-fact. It would have been interesting to see how the Italian Supreme Court would have written its report which had exonerated the pair, itself being freed from the calunnia being a judicial fact. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
28th June 2019, 10:59 PM | #394 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Still not going to address my "stiletto" question, are ya, Vix? Let me see if I can muster up some surprise....
........nope. |
29th June 2019, 07:28 AM | #395 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
Vixen - each time you make this error you should default to what the Italian Supreme Court actually said, and more importantly, how they framed the factoids you push.
It all starts with Section 9, of a 10-Section report, so it cannot be that hard to read. Section 9 both starts and ends with the conclusion that the Supreme Court reached in annuling the Nencini conviction, and exonerating RS and AK. Section 9 began with: None of this can be a surprise to you AS IT HAS BEEN PASTED HERE IN THIS THREAD 100 TIMES OR MORE. But more to the point, the context of Section 9 is what you either willfully miss, or simply are ignorant of. The way that the Supreme Court proves it's assertion that annulment is deserved is because of the way it goes on to example the evidence already on the record.
(underlining mine, not in original text.) Why is all this indicative of their innocence? Well it's because the Supreme Court took time to REVIEW the evidence, not state whether or not they agreed with each side's point of view. (If you read nothing else, please read 9.2 of the Supreme Court report....... You see, Vixen - what you conveniently ignore, is that the Supreme Court is summarizing, in synoptic fashion, the evidence considered at the Nencini trial. It is not passing judgment on that evidence, per se, except to say.... EVEN IF TRUE IT DOES NOT PUT EITHER OF RS OR AK IN THE MURDER ROOM AT THE TIME OF THE MURDER! Please don't make me repeat this. However, I know you will. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
29th June 2019, 07:45 AM | #396 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,312
|
That's understood. The title is used as someone's name. It's not unknown for words such as "Baron", "Prince", or "King" to be used as a name, just as words used to name flowers, animals, or abstractions are used as personal names.
However, it may be in Guede's case that when he was called "the Baron" or "Baron" not everyone who heard that knew that the reference was to the professional basketball player Baron Davis. The bottom line is that the discussion should not be diverted by misrepresentations of what the name means, for example, by suggesting it refers to criminal characteristics or criminal activity. |
29th June 2019, 08:12 AM | #397 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
One thing that's perplexing me is that if it is incumbent on Italy to redress the case to the point before the human rights violations took place it means that Italy can't even argue that Amanda was a suspect before Donnino's arrival since they have argued that she was only a witness for long enough; therefore, the case would have to be redressed to the point when Amanda was only a witness, making a resolution more emphatic in her favour. If Amanda had been a suspect before the interrogations as we have long argued it implies that the stage where the violations took place now become a bit murkier since Amanda would still theoretically have a case to answer as a suspect.
Hoots |
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
29th June 2019, 10:44 AM | #398 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Let's think about your claim logically.
Marasca declares that Knox and Sollecito were not involved in the murder itself in Kercher's bedroom even IF they were in the house. Therefore, Knox and Sollecito were in another part of the house, such as Knox's bedroom as one judge hypothesized. So when Guede murdered Kercher alone in an unpremeditated attack, what crime had AK and RS committed that they needed to cover up? None. Why would they need to cover for Guede at all? They had done nothing to hide from the police and there was no existing friendship between Guede and the other two that would cause them to want to protect him. |
29th June 2019, 11:18 AM | #399 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 550
|
|
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else. |
|
29th June 2019, 11:27 AM | #400 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
What you've written is, essentially, Judge Massei's theory of the crime, a theory he used to convict in 2009.
He wrote that it had all boiled down to an inexplicable "choice for evil", once (in his view) Knox and Sollecito discovered that Guede had been attacking the victim in the victim's bedroom. Massei went further to posit that this choice for evil was because Knox had been away from the moral norms of her upbringing for the first time. So it's more bizarre than this silly claim that "Knox had covered for Guede". Occams Razor begs for attention here.... .... rather than inventing out of whole cloth other bizarre factoids which need to be invented for a conviction to stand, why not bow to the simplest explanation? Ie. that neither Sollecito nor Knox had been there..... BTW - "other bizarre factoids" include positing that Knox had carried the kitchen knife from Sollecito's for some other purpose than murder, because even Judge Massei couldn't see how any of this had been premeditated. Everyone here can add more of these.... BTW2 - and those multiple bizarre evidenceless factoid become the fodder for thinking that "all the other evidence" adds up to something, as claimed by Stefano Maffei, the one reputable Italian lawyer who agrees with the guilter-nutters. |
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|