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 4th August 2017, 03:07 AM   #241
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Erm, you mean Alexa, not "Alexis". Please try to be more precise.

And what do you mean by "hits"? That fake wiki gets around 2,500 page views per day ("per diem" LMAO), but around 500 actual visits per day. And we know who's making most of those 500 visits per day don't we, Vixen? (Hint: it's not journalists from global media organisations )

And please provide evidence that Conti and/or Vecchiotti "met privately" with either party during the trial.
Do read the deposition filed against Raff's attorney Maori.

During a live ongoing trial barristers are not supposed to meet with court appointed expert witnesses because it contravenes bar standards.

Vecchiotti even commissioned a DVD for the defence eyes' only and was almost arrested by the carabonieri. She appealed to Hellmann, the judge in the relevant case, and even he ordered her to make a copy for the court and for the prosecution. Can you not see how bent it is for a court appointed witness to collude with one party?

The standard protocol during a trial - especially when that court appointed witness (or any witness) is giving their testimony - is that ALL exchanges MUST be in front of the other party and of the court. It's called 'disclosure'.

Maori wining and dining Conti & Vecchiotti during the hearing is a clear breach of ethics and bar standards.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP

Last edited by Vixen; 4th August 2017 at 03:09 AM.
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 4th August 2017, 03:46 AM   #242
Welshman
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 474
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Wow. This is one giant heap of made-up and incorrect.

I'll say it once again for you, Vixen: The only print of Sollecito's that was discovered on Kercher's bedroom door was found on the face of the door which faced the corridor - not the face which faced into Kercher's room itself.

(Should I do it in oversized red font? LMAO)

And I ask once again: if Sollecito's fingerprint really had been found on the face of that door which faced the inside of Kercher's room, then how can you possibly account for this "fact" not forming a significant part of the prosecution's argument against Sollecito (and, by extension, against Knox)?

The truth of the matter, Vixen, is that no fingerprint of Sollecito's was found on the Kercher-room-facing face of that door. And that, of course, is why no such print ever figured in the prosecution argument in any of the trials.

Next.
I have never heard the claim Raffaele left his fingerprints on the side of the door facing Meredith's room until Vixen made the claim. Raffaele leaving his fingerprints has never been claimed by the prosecution as Londonjohn has rightly pointed. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk why is that a decade after Meredith's murder Vixen has to resort to arguing that evidence existed which was never claimed by the prosecution. If the prosecution have a slam dunk case you should have never have to resort to arguing your case on the basis of evidence never presented by the prosecution because there should be plenty of genuine evidence to base your arguments on.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 03:53 AM   #243
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Wow. This is one giant heap of made-up and incorrect.

I'll say it once again for you, Vixen: The only print of Sollecito's that was discovered on Kercher's bedroom door was found on the face of the door which faced the corridor - not the face which faced into Kercher's room itself.

(Should I do it in oversized red font? LMAO)

And I ask once again: if Sollecito's fingerprint really had been found on the face of that door which faced the inside of Kercher's room, then how can you possibly account for this "fact" not forming a significant part of the prosecution's argument against Sollecito (and, by extension, against Knox)?

The truth of the matter, Vixen, is that no fingerprint of Sollecito's was found on the Kercher-room-facing face of that door. And that, of course, is why no such print ever figured in the prosecution argument in any of the trials.

Next.

Do have a close look at the police photo no.72. Turn it 180 upright and tell us what you see?


Those of us with normal perception can see it is the metal plate of the inside edge of the door.

The fingerprint on the outside door facing the corridor is no. 68.
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg inner edge of mk door #72.jpeg (63.3 KB, 1 views)
File Type: jpeg fingerprints 2.jpeg (39.2 KB, 0 views)
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 4th August 2017, 04:03 AM   #244
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
"In a letter Raff Sollecito wrote to his father"?

Why do you simply make stuff up? It wasn't in any letter to his father. You just pulled that out of thin air. It was in his prison diary/notebook.

Please can you try not to make stuff up? And please can you try to source your claims? (That will also help you not to make stuff up)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-cooking.html
OK fair enough, it was in his Prison Diary dated 18 Nov 2007:

Quote:
I am convinced that she could not have killed Meredith and then come back home. The fact that there is Meredithʹs DNA on the kitchen knife is because on one occasion, while we were cooking together, I, while moving around at home [and] handling the knife, pricked her hand, and I apologized at once but she was not hurt [lei non si era fatta niente]. So the only real explanation for that kitchen knife is this one.
However, he does state at the beginning:

Quote:
Dear father and big sister mainly, and all those who will read these lines.

Like Amanda and Rudy he will have been well aware his diary would be read by prison officers and police.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 4th August 2017, 07:07 AM   #245
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How long does it take for you to realise that the court is inferring the reason Knox has blood on her person is because she was spattered during the murder.
Now we are getting somewhere. Rather than your former continual repetition that the court found it as factual, you are now letting go of that by going down the road the Marasca-Bruno panel eventually did in exonerating the pair in 2015. Even you now concede that it is an inference - like the original judge, Massei, did when he wrote that there were no forensics to back up this claim, or like Stefanoni who conceded that one cannot (by definition) know the source of trace-DNA.

In summarizing what the Nencini court had in front of it, the M/B panel said it was manifestly illogical to assume that this hypothetical (that Knox had blood on her hands) had anything to do with the murder. Even if she'd had, then she must have acquired it at a time later than the murder and in another part of the cottage....

For the umpteenth time, this is what M/B wrote in exonerating the pair. The "attribution" mentioned, is the notion that she'd had blood on her hands....
Quote:
Nevertheless, even if attribution is certain, the trial element would not be
unequivocal as a demonstration of posthumous contact with that blood
, as a likely
attempt to remove the most blatant traces of what had happened, perhaps to help
someone or deflect suspicion from herself, without this entailing her certain direct
involvement in the murder. Any further and more meaningful value would be, in fact,
resisted by the fact - which is decisive - that no trace leading to her was found at the
scene of the crime or on the victim’s body, so that - if all the above is accepted - her
contact with the victim’s blood would have occurred after the crime and in another
part of the house.
Please also note that the spuclation that she'd been "deflect(ing) suspicion from herself" is also part of this hypothetical, which is included in the phrase, "if all the above is accepted".

So like you faking a photoshop showing that the fingerprint Fr. 72 was Raffaele's, the guilt-PR campaign continues.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 4th August 2017 at 07:15 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 07:12 AM   #246
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
I have never heard the claim Raffaele left his fingerprints on the side of the door facing Meredith's room until Vixen made the claim. Raffaele leaving his fingerprints has never been claimed by the prosecution as Londonjohn has rightly pointed. If the case against Amanda and Raffaele was such a slam dunk why is that a decade after Meredith's murder Vixen has to resort to arguing that evidence existed which was never claimed by the prosecution. If the prosecution have a slam dunk case you should have never have to resort to arguing your case on the basis of evidence never presented by the prosecution because there should be plenty of genuine evidence to base your arguments on.
If the case against the pair was such a slam dunk, why does Vixen herself have to provide a false-photoshop of what she says is the evidence?

Couldn't the prosecution itself have faked the evidence back in 2009? Why does Vixen need to do it for them almost 2 1/2 years after the exonerations?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 4th August 2017 at 07:16 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 07:34 AM   #247
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Indeed it is, and in England and Wales a barrister would be struck off for such behaviour. Vecchiotti and Conti were court appointed and should never have met privately with either party during the trial. Each side is entitled to full disclosure of the on-going trial.

Actually, 'murderofmeredithkercher.com' is Bruce Fischer's fake wiki. Hardly any hits, compared to 'themurderofmeredithkercher.com' which has up to 2K hits per diem according to Alexis.
This (here) thread on ISF right now gets about 500 hits per day. Continuation 25 averaged 1,250 hits per day for the 3 1/2 months of its life.

In contrast, the hits these continuations received max'ed out around the times of the major court activity:
Hellmann acquittal (2011) - 6800 hits per day
Nencini conviction (2014) - 6720 hits per day
Supreme Court acquittals (2015) - 5325 hits per day
Since those peaks ISF has lost more than 90%-93% of its traffic in relation to these trials. My guess is that all of the web-presences have gone the same way - PMF.ORG recently closed.

It's amusing that anyone, these days, would appeal to traffic-numbers in relation to these trials. Perhaps the latest "bump" was people who'd attended the recent Westside Bar Association talk on wrongful convictions that Knox attended......

But proof that this is a media-driven case is that when major, world-wide media pick this up (CNN, BBC, etc...) the hits here increase - and then inevitably just subside.

The sad truth? It's just us and Vixen generating the hits these days, not lurkers trying to piece together a puzzle.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 4th August 2017 at 07:35 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 10:29 AM   #248
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Do have a close look at the police photo no.72. Turn it 180 upright and tell us what you see?


Those of us with normal perception can see it is the metal plate of the inside edge of the door.

The fingerprint on the outside door facing the corridor is no. 68.

Start using some logic and just some plain old common sense. IF Sollecito's fingerprints had been found on the INSIDE of the door, it would have been slam dunk evidence that he had been IN the room...something that he has denied repeatedly. IF his fingerprints were on the INSIDE of the door, the prosecution would have been all over that like flies on ... well...you know what. Where is this crucial piece of evidence ever introduced into any of the trials?

Hint: it never was because no such fingerprint exists. When is the penny going to drop, Vix? Why can you not accept you are wrong about this?
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 4th August 2017, 10:38 AM   #249
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Start using some logic and just some plain old common sense. IF Sollecito's fingerprints had been found on the INSIDE of the door, it would have been slam dunk evidence that he had been IN the room...something that he has denied repeatedly. IF his fingerprints were on the INSIDE of the door, the prosecution would have been all over that like flies on ... well...you know what. Where is this crucial piece of evidence ever introduced into any of the trials?

Hint: it never was because no such fingerprint exists. When is the penny going to drop, Vix? Why can you not accept you are wrong about this?
This is as crazy as it gets.

Fr. 72 is situated CLEARLY on the outer part of the door, even in the fake-Wiki's pic of it, noted by Vixen here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...6#post11943446

Note that the pic shows the victim's door as it sits while OPEN. When closed, Fr. 72 is on the hall-side of the door. Fr. 72 is only "in" the victim's room, when the door is swung-open into the room!!!!!!!!!

This is the truly crazy part of the guilt-PR effort; their continual posting of stuff that actually REFUTES what they are claiming.

It makes us slightly less crazy, but crazy nonetheless that we get hooked by it. Every. Single. Time.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 4th August 2017 at 10:40 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 10:41 AM   #250
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 612
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Do keep up. Go back a few days and you will see it.
Vixen, let's recap here. YOU claimed Raffaele's prints were on the inside and inside edge of Meredith's door and you suggest us idiots go read Giunta's testimony. Thinking that perhaps I had this wrong I did exactly that. I was then kind enough to copy/paste that testimony directly from the Massei trial transcripts. Since you're apparently to dense to read it the first time I have included it here once again. Perhaps if I post it enough times it will sink in.

So, without further ado, here's the actual court transcript;

***
Giunta: We can repeat it, I'm 17 - we said what reliefs are - 5 fragments at Sollecito Raffaele are the relief 12), we can even say the annular and left little finger, it was found ...

Comodi: I know it, but not as much as I do. Here, where has this fingerprint been found?

Giunta: Inside the bedroom door behind the living room with kitchenette on the ground floor.

Massei:In the bedroom ...

Giunta: The ground floor is the only floor we have also done because ...

Massei:Excuse me, what bedroom?

Comodi: And so, in short, the famous edge of the Mezzetti room, the Mezzetti room door, right?

Giunta: 12) should be that of the Mezzetti. Then the 68), the left palm, the outside face of the victim's bedroom door.

Comodi: Outside?

Giunta: External face, then external face access.

Comodi: Yup.

Giunta: Pad 70) left thumb, victim's bedroom outdoor door side and 1'86, pad 86) left palm at fridge door.

Comodi: Well, these are the ones that have been attributed to your Solicitors by your colleagues?

Giunta: Exactly, 5 fragments etc, etc. 1 fragment was attributed to Knox, and it is the relief 103) the right glass index found on the kitchen sink.
***

To summarize;

(12) Laura's bedroom door (2 fragments)
(68) Outside face of Meredith's door
(70) Outside face of Meredith's door
(86) Refrigerator

Let's do the math.. 2 (12) + 1 (68) + 1 (70) + 1 (86) = 5 fragments, as testified.

Not convinced, go look at the color coded 'prints' diagram. Raffaele's are the ones marked in magenta.. two on the OUTSIDE of Meredith's door, one on the fridge, one on Laura's door (which count as two because two fingers were identified). That's five. FIVE... 5! - as testified to.

Unfortunately there is no crayon option for this board or I'd try to make this even more clear for you.

Now, before you post again and further prove your inability to comprehend even the most obvious facts of the case, even when they are laid out in a fashion simple enough for a child to get, I suggest you go find a friend and have them read thru this and explain it to you. Cause right now you are doing yourself no favors in the area of credibility.

BTW, you continue to share with us a photo of Fr. 72 as if that's relevant. Please cite where Giunta said this was Raffaele's. It's not in the court testimony and it's not on the color coded chart (even though the two magenta dots are incorrectly labeled 72 then are clearly on the outside of the door and Giunta's court testimony identifies these as Fr. 68 and Fr. 70). And as many others have pointed out, had Raffaele's prints been found on the inner side of Meredith's door it's rather obvious that the prosecution would have made a big deal of this yet it never came up in ANY trial, EVER.

Hello, McFly!!??
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 4th August 2017, 11:00 AM   #251
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Vixen, let's recap here. YOU claimed Raffaele's prints were on the inside and inside edge of Meredith's door and you suggest us idiots go read Giunta's testimony. Thinking that perhaps I had this wrong I did exactly that.

<..... sinister deletia .....>

BTW, you continue to share with us a photo of Fr. 72 as if that's relevant. Please cite where Giunta said this was Raffaele's. It's not in the court testimony and it's not on the color coded chart (even though the two magenta dots are incorrectly labeled 72 then are clearly on the outside of the door and Giunta's court testimony identifies these as Fr. 68 and Fr. 70). And as many others have pointed out, had Raffaele's prints been found on the inner side of Meredith's door it's rather obvious that the prosecution would have made a big deal of this yet it never came up in ANY trial, EVER.

Hello, McFly!!??
It would not be so bad if Vixen did not adopt the superior tone, as in:
Quote:
Do read the deposition filed against Raff's attorney Maori.

Please reflect on this until the penny drops.

Do keep up. Go back a few days and you will see it.

Sophistry is a well-known form of logical fallacy and is about the faulty argument technique and nothing to do with the person.

Thank goodness sophistry is not an acceptable form of argument in a law court.

Only a simpleton can fail to understand why the pair lied so many times and have no alibi.

All clear now?

Nice try at wool-pulling.

Ask Bill. He is the one who is obsessed with 'slut shaming' (whatever that is).

Look at the photos for yourself.

Have a look at Agatino Giunta's court testimony and the court police photos, for yourself.

What thanks do I get?
..... and then when one actually DOES accept the challenge they find that Vixen has not justified her superior tone.

Truth is - guilters are trying to fabricate a case. When their claims are checked out, even at the links they themselves provide, one can see this fabrication in the raw.
__________________
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 4th August 2017, 11:33 AM   #252
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Fingerprints: Correction

Fingerprints: Correction


Having reviewed Giunta and Iacuttio's testimony, the text on The Murder of Meredith Kercher com webpage has now been corrected where it said nos. 68 and 72 were attributed to Raffale Sollecito, to show the latter as "unattributed".

The text reads:

"There are two unattributable prints on the desk (Fr. 63) and two on the door (Fr.72) (in green)"


We can remain confident that The Murder of Meredith Kercher website strives to be as objectively accurate as humanly possible.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 4th August 2017, 11:45 AM   #253
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Fingerprints: Correction


Having reviewed Giunta and Iacuttio's testimony, the text on The Murder of Meredith Kercher com webpage has now been corrected where it said nos. 68 and 72 were attributed to Raffale Sollecito, to show the latter as "unattributed".

The text reads:

"There are two unattributable prints on the desk (Fr. 63) and two on the door (Fr.72) (in green)"


We can remain confident that The Murder of Meredith Kercher website strives to be as objectively accurate as humanly possible.
Thank you.
__________________
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 4th August 2017, 11:49 AM   #254
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,268
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How long does it take for you to realise that the court is inferring the reason Knox has blood on her person is because she was spattered during the murder.

BTW Here is a presumptive bodily fluids tests check list. http://www.ncids.com/forensic/serology/serology.shtml

We can date-stamp reasonably the victim's DNA, collected from stains that are obviously blood and in such quantity that only a simpleton would argue it didn't come from the murder night.
Thank you for the link.

Quote:
Blood
....
Presumptive Tests
....
Luminol Test
and

Quote:
DNA is not a confirmatory test for blood
The document you referenced says,
Quote:
"Chemical indications for the presence" of a substance generally means that only a presumptive test gave a positive result. Counsel should be aware that a presumptive test alone establishes only the possibility that a particular substance is present. Counsel should be prepared to object to testimony or questions from the prosecutor that refer to a substance as a particular bodily fluid, such as blood, if only a presumptive test was performed.
So does this link mean you now accept that Luminol as this document says is a presumptive test and that material that only had a presumptive test performed should not be referred to as blood?

Do you see the logical fallacy in the argument you give
1) Assuming Knox participated in murder she would have been spattered in blood
2) Since she was spattered in blood she would have washed it off
3) Since she washed off the blood she would have deposited her own DNA at the same time as depositing the blood from the victim in the basin
4) Since the DNA of Knox and the victim were co-located this is proof she participated in the murder
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 12:12 PM   #255
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 612
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Fingerprints: Correction


Having reviewed Giunta and Iacuttio's testimony, the text on The Murder of Meredith Kercher com webpage has now been corrected where it said nos. 68 and 72 were attributed to Raffale Sollecito, to show the latter as "unattributed".

The text reads:

"There are two unattributable prints on the desk (Fr. 63) and two on the door (Fr.72) (in green)"


We can remain confident that The Murder of Meredith Kercher website strives to be as objectively accurate as humanly possible.
And on a Friday no less. I am impressed. Can I pick the next "objectively accurate" failure to fix? Please.. please!

In case there was any confusion concerning the wording (or translation of wording) from Giunta's testimony regarding Fr. 70 ("Pad 70) left thumb, victim's bedroom outdoor door side"), here is what was documented for Fr. 66-71 in Giunta's final report;

https://www.internationalskeptics.co...ictureid=11347

At the bottom it reads;

"I frammenti di impronte papillari contraddistiniticon i numeri da 66 a 71 evidenziati sulla faccia esterna della porta della camera da letto"

Which translates to;

"The fragments of papillary imprints marked with numbers from 66 to 71 highlighted on the outer face of the bedroom door"

Last edited by TruthCalls; 4th August 2017 at 12:14 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 12:46 PM   #256
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Do read the deposition filed against Raff's attorney Maori.

During a live ongoing trial barristers are not supposed to meet with court appointed expert witnesses because it contravenes bar standards.

Vecchiotti even commissioned a DVD for the defence eyes' only and was almost arrested by the carabonieri. She appealed to Hellmann, the judge in the relevant case, and even he ordered her to make a copy for the court and for the prosecution. Can you not see how bent it is for a court appointed witness to collude with one party?
The standard protocol during a trial - especially when that court appointed witness (or any witness) is giving their testimony - is that ALL exchanges MUST be in front of the other party and of the court. It's called 'disclosure'.

Maori wining and dining Conti & Vecchiotti during the hearing is a clear breach of ethics and bar standards.
Citations) for the highlighted part?

I believe you are referring to the DVD made by the independent experts showing the collection of evidence by the police and errors therein. I can find no evidence that it was 1) made for the defense's eyes only or 2) Vecchiotti was almost arrested by the carabinieri, 3) she appealed to Hellmann or 4) Hellmann, as a result of this appeal, ordered a copy made for the court and prosecution.

What I did find was that 1) the DVD was appropriately filed with the Perugia Court of Appeals, 2) that the carabinieri were sent by the prosecution to seize the DNA from Vecchiotti but could not as they had no warrant to do so, and 3) that the prosecutor applied to get a copy of the DVD from Hellmann and he granted it.


Quote:
La Corte d'assise di appello di Perugia ha disposto il deposito di un dvd utilizzato nel corso dell'ultima udienza dai periti che hanno lavorato sulle tracce genetiche nell'ambito del processo a Raffaele Sollecito e ad Amanda Knox per l'omicidio di Meredith Kercher.

Sul supporto informatico, acquisito dalla polizia scientifica su autorizzazione del presidente del collegio giudicante dietro richiesta della procura generale, le immagini del sopralluogo nella casa del delitto. Ieri, quindi, personale della scientifica si e' recato nei laboratori romani dove lavorano gli esperti per acquisire il materiale.

Il processo riprendera' sabato proprio con il controesame dei periti.
http://www.umbrialeft.it/notizie/mer...la-scientifica

Quote:
The Perugia Court of Appeal ordered the filing of a dvd used during the last hearing by experts who worked on genetic traces in the trial of Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox for the murder of Meredith Kercher .

On the computer support, acquired by the scientific police on the permission of the chairman of the board of judges at the request of the general prosecutor, the images of the inspection in the house of the crime. Yesterday, therefore, scientists' staff went to the Roman laboratories where experts work to acquire the material.

The process will resume on Saturdays with the counter-exam of experts.
MEREDITH MURDER: THE SCIENTIFIC BRANCH DVD OF IMAGES USED BY EXPERTS LODGED

Quote:
Perugia. July 27th (Adnkronos)

The DVD used by the two experts Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti has been lodged with the office of the clerk of the Appeal Court of Perugia, in the ambit of the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of Meredith Kercher. The images have also been acquired by the Scientific Police with a specific authorisation of the court.

The Prosecutor’s Office of Perugia had requested that the DVD be lodged in view of the hearing on Saturday during which the experts will be questioned by magistrate Manuela Comodi.

In the DVD clips of the video can be seen, made on the occasion of the on-the-spot investigation of the crime house and some excerpts of the records of the hearing during which the scientific police were describing the work they carried out. The two experts have claimed that the work of the scientific branch is unreliable and that the results are untrustworthy. The prosecution supports the correct operation of the scientific police and is ready to demonstrate this to the judges of the court.
http://www.libero-news.it/news/79207...ai-periti.html


Your spin on this was very misleading. Police did not "almost arrest" Vecchiotti nor was she colluding with the defense. The police tried to seize the DVD without a warrant for it. She was not "forced" to give a copy to the prosecutor; the prosecutor requested a copy and it was granted by Hellmann.

Once again: Citation(s) for the highlighted part?
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 4th August 2017, 12:51 PM   #257
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Your spin on this was very misleading. Police did not "almost arrest" Vecchiotti nor was she colluding with the defense. The police tried to seize the DVD without a warrant for it. She was not "forced" to give a copy to the prosecutor; the prosecutor requested a copy and it was granted by Hellmann.

Once again: Citation(s) for the highlighted part?
Maybe those trying to fabricate a case against AK and RS, including fabricating cases against those who ever found them innocent or discredited the false-evidence against them.....

..... will find themselves able to also correct the record with regard to these claims of being "almost arrested" (whatever that means) against Vecchiotti.
__________________
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 4th August 2017, 01:09 PM   #258
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Fingerprints: Correction


Having reviewed Giunta and Iacuttio's testimony, the text on The Murder of Meredith Kercher com webpage has now been corrected where it said nos. 68 and 72 were attributed to Raffale Sollecito, to show the latter as "unattributed".

The text reads:

"There are two unattributable prints on the desk (Fr. 63) and two on the door (Fr.72) (in green)"


We can remain confident that The Murder of Meredith Kercher website strives to be as objectively accurate as humanly possible.
Only after being dragged kicking and screaming into reality and after so much evidence of error has been presented that to continue would be verging on insanity.

Now, how about fixing the "mixed blood" nonsense on TMofMK?
Mixed Blood / DNA

Quote:
Knox's DNA was found comingled with the victim's blood in five places, in visible dilute blood traces in the bathroom and elsewhere in footprints revealed with Luminol. Two Luminol traces were discovered in the room where the burglary was staged; one of these is a mixed trace. These are referred to as L1 and L2. Both traces are presumed to be blood and both contained the victim's DNA. There is no plausible explanation for this evidence that does not involve Knox being at least involved in the clean up after the murder.
Quote:
Other DNA Evidence

In the small bathroom immediately adjacent to Meredith's bedroom four drops of Meredith blood were found, a drop of Amanda's blood was found, and three sample of Amanda's blood mixed with Meredith's blood were discovered. There was no Rudy Guede or Raffaele Sollecito DNA discovered in this bathroom. The discovery of Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher's blood mixed in three diverse locations makes it difficult to image an innocent explanation for these finding.
Or this one:

Quote:
A knife was recovered from Raffaele's apartment that contained the victim's DNA on the blade, and Amanda Knox's DNA on the handle. There wasn't enough of the victim's DNA for a normal DNA profile, but an LCN one was obtained. This was a definitive match to Meredith.
Or this one:

Quote:
The Luminol Traces

A series of footprints in Amanda Knox's room, and in the hallway between her and Meredith's room were discovered when luminol was applied to the hallway and Knox's room. Luminol is used by crime scene investigators to detect blood that is invisible to the naked eye. This established that someone with blood on their feet walked between the two rooms. These footprints are compatible with the bare feet of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, but not with Rudy Guede's. Some of these footprints contained Amanda Knox's DNA, and one footprint contained both her and Meredith's DNA.
Or this one:

Quote:
The Staged Burglary

The burglary was determined to be staged. The reasons supporting this determination include, but are not limited to, an illogical point of entry, glass distribution that makes a proposed entry through the window impossible, no evidence that an entry was even attempted, the ransacked room that does not look like an authentic burglary, and the presence of glass on top of the clothing strewn over the floor indicating that the room was ransacked before the window was broken. This leaves little doubt that the burglary was staged.
So many things need correcting. Just where to start?
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 4th August 2017, 02:13 PM   #259
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
OK fair enough, it was in his Prison Diary dated 18 Nov 2007:



However, he does state at the beginning:




Like Amanda and Rudy he will have been well aware his diary would be read by prison officers and police.
Once again, you assume to know what others think, know, and feel. You don't. You are projecting onto them what you want them to think, know and feel in order to confirm you bias.
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 4th August 2017, 02:23 PM   #260
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 612
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Once again, you assume to know what others think, know, and feel. You don't. You are projecting onto them what you want them to think, know and feel in order to confirm you bias.
Yeah, but still... you do realize this is TWO admissions of 'having it wrong' by Vixen in one day. Yes, even as she admits she was wrong she's trying to twist it, but it is progress.
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 4th August 2017, 02:28 PM   #261
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Yeah, but still... you do realize this is TWO admissions of 'having it wrong' by Vixen in one day. Yes, even as she admits she was wrong she's trying to twist it, but it is progress.
There was also a third instance of Vixen owning up to a mistake - I'm wracking my brain to remember it. But it was a legitimate admission.
__________________
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 4th August 2017, 02:42 PM   #262
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Yeah, but still... you do realize this is TWO admissions of 'having it wrong' by Vixen in one day. Yes, even as she admits she was wrong she's trying to twist it, but it is progress.
"OK...fair enough"; she still can't say "I was wrong".

Note that she says TMofMK has corrected the text but she never says "I was wrong" And then tries to laud them for their honesty.



Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
There was also a third instance of Vixen owning up to a mistake - I'm wracking my brain to remember it. But it was a legitimate admission.
She claimed Battistelli said something he never said. I don't remember what it was. I can't keep track of all the false claims.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 4th August 2017 at 03:30 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 4th August 2017, 03:19 PM   #263
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Oh, my! I've found the smoking gun regarding Maori colluding with the (not so) independent forensics experts! A frequent contributor to TJMK, whose credibility is unassailable, gave this as evidence citing PMF as the source:

Quote:
1.Barbie Nadeau in Angel Face:
'Concern that the independent experts weren’t so independent after all spread quickly after several journalists saw Vecchiotti with Raffaele’s lawyer Luca Maori in the courthouse halls and coffee bars of Perugia. Curious, too, was the fact that the Vecchiotti-Conti report cited more American forensic standards than Italian ones, and that many of these had also been quoted by the Friends of Amanda.'
The curious thing is, when I search for this quote, including several short phrases from it, in Nadeau's book via Amazon's "Look inside" feature, nothing comes up except for "0 results". Nothing.

Even in this alleged (but unfound) quote from Nadeau's book, journalists were hardly seeing Maori "wining and dining" Conti and Vecchiotti.
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 4th August 2017, 03:20 PM   #264
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Deleted. Duplicate post.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 4th August 2017 at 03:26 PM. Reason: duplicate post
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 4th August 2017, 03:47 PM   #265
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Originally Posted by Bill Williams
There was also a third instance of Vixen owning up to a mistake - I'm wracking my brain to remember it. But it was a legitimate admission.
She claimed Battistelli said something he never said. I don't remember what it was. I can't keep track of all the false claims.
Yes, that was it.

What I don't get - my opinion only - is the wreckless disregard for things factual. All of us, me included, have made or fair share of mistakes, or have aired assumptions which turned out to be just air.

As I posted before, one of the advantages of private PMs with people of diametrically (and sometimes heated) opposed points of view is that there actually tend to be fewer examples of wreckless disregard for basic facts.

Let me put one out there - I still do not "get" why journalists would impugn some sort of corruption about Vecchiotti, just because she'd been seen chatting with Maori or even having a glass of wine with him at a coffee bar. It would not bother me in the least if Stefanoni had similarly been seen chatting with Mignini, or if members of the RIS Carabinieri at the Nencini trial had briefed either side about what they found with a retesting of the knife with Sample 36I.

I don't get it? I also don't get why it is allowed to mushroom into gigantic claims that "Vecchiotti is a criminal", etc. etc., said with no reference to the tenuousness of Barbie Nadeau's original claims - which turn out perhaps not even to have been her claims.

It's the wanton wrecklessness of it all.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 04:25 PM   #266
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,202
One last kick at the cat.

The wrecklessness is also in the way they treat the world-renowned experts who have waded in on this case. Vecchiotti is perhaps only a nationally recognized Italian forensic-DNA expert but it is positively ludicrous the way they criminalize and defame her for her expert opinions on this case.

Then there is Dr. Peter Gill, Saul Kassin, Steve Moore, Ron Hendry - agreed, not all of whom are internationally recognized. It's not just that guilters claim those people might be mistaken.....

..... they accuse them of being criminals or incompetent, all the while while not advancing one expert of their own - save for Patrizia Stefanoni - to vouch for the work.

That's just wreckless - and strategically alienating. I mean, who are they trying to attract to their point of view?

Finally - is the fake-Wiki really still touting "mixed blood"? For Pete's sake, even Massei's court in 2009 discounted that. 2009!!! That claim is based on claiming to know the origin of trace-DNA found at a scene where one would habitually be expected to find such a thing - a bathroom the person had used for weeks - and then claim to know the source of such trace-DNA; when by definition the source cannot be known.

The remaining guilters are still arguing what Mignini and Comodi argued in 2008. Mignini and Comodi won in 2009, but judging from even the appeal document they themselves wrote for the coming Hellmann trial in 2011, you'd have thought they'd lost! MOO is that that is because even Massei disbelieved major prosecution stuff - like mixed blood.

This is 2017. Most of the fake-Wiki has not been editted since 2014. The pair have been exonerated - 2 1/2 years ago. It looks like the exoneration in 2015 took the wind out of the sails of most guilters....

..... so why is ANYONE citing the fake-Wiki?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 4th August 2017 at 04:27 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 4th August 2017, 05:58 PM   #267
Stacyhs
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,862
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Yes, that was it.

What I don't get - my opinion only - is the wreckless disregard for things factual. All of us, me included, have made or fair share of mistakes, or have aired assumptions which turned out to be just air.

As I posted before, one of the advantages of private PMs with people of diametrically (and sometimes heated) opposed points of view is that there actually tend to be fewer examples of wreckless disregard for basic facts.

Let me put one out there - I still do not "get" why journalists would impugn some sort of corruption about Vecchiotti, just because she'd been seen chatting with Maori or even having a glass of wine with him at a coffee bar. It would not bother me in the least if Stefanoni had similarly been seen chatting with Mignini, or if members of the RIS Carabinieri at the Nencini trial had briefed either side about what they found with a retesting of the knife with Sample 36I.

I don't get it? I also don't get why it is allowed to mushroom into gigantic claims that "Vecchiotti is a criminal", etc. etc., said with no reference to the tenuousness of Barbie Nadeau's original claims - which turn out perhaps not even to have been her claims.

It's the wanton wrecklessness of it all.
I think it's pretty obvious why the PGP have to have claim corruption in regards to C&V: to negate their professional findings. Just as with Amanda and Raff, they have to be attacked on a personal level. They must be shown to be dishonest, lying, morally inferior characters. But they must also be attacked on a professional level despite the fact that the balance of opinion of other forensic experts is, by far, in agreement with C & V. We can be absolutely sure that, if they had agreed with Stefanoni, we'd be reading from the PGP how professional, upright, and competent they were .

I cannot say with 100% certainty that the alleged Nadeau quote is not accurate as I do not have the book. All I can say is that I most certainly could not find it anywhere else except the one source I cited and that the Amazon "Look inside" feature returned 0 results.
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 4th August 2017, 11:21 PM   #268
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Citations) for the highlighted part?

I believe you are referring to the DVD made by the independent experts showing the collection of evidence by the police and errors therein. I can find no evidence that it was 1) made for the defense's eyes only or 2) Vecchiotti was almost arrested by the carabinieri, 3) she appealed to Hellmann or 4) Hellmann, as a result of this appeal, ordered a copy made for the court and prosecution.

What I did find was that 1) the DVD was appropriately filed with the Perugia Court of Appeals, 2) that the carabinieri were sent by the prosecution to seize the DNA from Vecchiotti but could not as they had no warrant to do so, and 3) that the prosecutor applied to get a copy of the DVD from Hellmann and he granted it.


http://www.umbrialeft.it/notizie/mer...la-scientifica



MEREDITH MURDER: THE SCIENTIFIC BRANCH DVD OF IMAGES USED BY EXPERTS LODGED

http://www.libero-news.it/news/79207...ai-periti.html


Your spin on this was very misleading. Police did not "almost arrest" Vecchiotti nor was she colluding with the defense. The police tried to seize the DVD without a warrant for it. She was not "forced" to give a copy to the prosecutor; the prosecutor requested a copy and it was granted by Hellmann.

Once again: Citation(s) for the highlighted part?

LOL Your very own Candace Dempsey.

ROFLMAO Even the PIP find her writing trashy.


Quote:
In a thug move, Perugia prosecutors sent two police patrols to Rome today and tried to seize a DVD from the court-appointed independent experts who testified Monday in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito appeals trial, according to Perugia-based blogger Frank Sfarzo and confirmed by Libero News.

This latest harassment follows threats by police forensic scientist Patrizia Stefanoni to sue the experts for “false statements” supposedly made in their 145-page, meticulously argued report. After a five-month investigation, the experts reject police forensics, call the DNA tests “unreliable,” and identify 54 glaring mistakes that could free the two college students.
Quote:
So what did the experts do when two police patrols invaded their workspace?

“Today cops entered at the same time the hospital Gemelli and La Sapienza University, both in Rome, looking for Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, ” wrote blogger Frank Sfarzo. Prosecutor Giuliano Mignini convinced Google to pull his blog, but U.S. supporters have rebuilt it in WordPress. “According to university sources who witnessed part of the event the cops were sent by the Procura of Perugia (ndr., prosecutor’s office), and ordered Conti and Vecchiotti to hand over the DVD containing the presentation with which yesterday the two scientists had explained their report in court.”

Since the cops didn’t have warrants, the experts didn’t hand over the DVD. Instead, they dialed Judge Hellmann for support. He made a copy available to the prosecution.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP

Last edited by Vixen; 5th August 2017 at 12:14 AM.
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 4th August 2017, 11:24 PM   #269
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Yes, that was it.

What I don't get - my opinion only - is the wreckless disregard for things factual. All of us, me included, have made or fair share of mistakes, or have aired assumptions which turned out to be just air.

As I posted before, one of the advantages of private PMs with people of diametrically (and sometimes heated) opposed points of view is that there actually tend to be fewer examples of wreckless disregard for basic facts.

Let me put one out there - I still do not "get" why journalists would impugn some sort of corruption about Vecchiotti, just because she'd been seen chatting with Maori or even having a glass of wine with him at a coffee bar. It would not bother me in the least if Stefanoni had similarly been seen chatting with Mignini, or if members of the RIS Carabinieri at the Nencini trial had briefed either side about what they found with a retesting of the knife with Sample 36I.

I don't get it? I also don't get why it is allowed to mushroom into gigantic claims that "Vecchiotti is a criminal", etc. etc., said with no reference to the tenuousness of Barbie Nadeau's original claims - which turn out perhaps not even to have been her claims.

It's the wanton wrecklessness of it all.

Bar standards.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 4th August 2017, 11:29 PM   #270
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
One last kick at the cat.

The wrecklessness is also in the way they treat the world-renowned experts who have waded in on this case. Vecchiotti is perhaps only a nationally recognized Italian forensic-DNA expert but it is positively ludicrous the way they criminalize and defame her for her expert opinions on this case.

Then there is Dr. Peter Gill, Saul Kassin, Steve Moore, Ron Hendry - agreed, not all of whom are internationally recognized. It's not just that guilters claim those people might be mistaken.....

..... they accuse them of being criminals or incompetent, all the while while not advancing one expert of their own - save for Patrizia Stefanoni - to vouch for the work.

That's just wreckless - and strategically alienating. I mean, who are they trying to attract to their point of view?

Finally - is the fake-Wiki really still touting "mixed blood"? For Pete's sake, even Massei's court in 2009 discounted that. 2009!!! That claim is based on claiming to know the origin of trace-DNA found at a scene where one would habitually be expected to find such a thing - a bathroom the person had used for weeks - and then claim to know the source of such trace-DNA; when by definition the source cannot be known.

The remaining guilters are still arguing what Mignini and Comodi argued in 2008. Mignini and Comodi won in 2009, but judging from even the appeal document they themselves wrote for the coming Hellmann trial in 2011, you'd have thought they'd lost! MOO is that that is because even Massei disbelieved major prosecution stuff - like mixed blood.

This is 2017. Most of the fake-Wiki has not been editted since 2014. The pair have been exonerated - 2 1/2 years ago. It looks like the exoneration in 2015 took the wind out of the sails of most guilters....

..... so why is ANYONE citing the fake-Wiki?

The Murder of Meredith Kercher webpage was updated fairly recently with a whole batchload more court documents and transcripts.

It is an excellent library of source material for journalists, lawyers and anybody interested in the facts of the case and not the grotesque Trumpesque circus spin on it we get from the US fake media and the PIP.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 5th August 2017, 12:13 AM   #271
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,572
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The Murder of Meredith Kercher webpage was updated fairly recently with a whole batchload more court documents and transcripts.

It is an excellent library of source material for journalists, lawyers and anybody interested in the facts of the case and not the grotesque Trumpesque circus spin on it we get from the US fake media and the PIP.
Probably a truly neutral observer with a reasonable understanding of criminal evidence could discern that the case against the students is weak at best and closer to a baseless witch hunt, just using TMOMK as a source.

The only thing that might throw them for a loop is some of the prosecution's more baseless claims that TMOMK passes on unfiltered. Like a female's alleged bloody shoeprint in the bedroom. There one only needs to look at a photo of it to see that it is clearly Rudy's shoeprint (which is why I suspect no photo of what should be an incontrovertible end to the PIP position is shown). Of course one could find it if they dug through the prosecution's reports linked on the site.

The main obstacle the prosecution has to overcome is giving a compelling and conclusive reason why a crime scene covered in the abundant forensic traces a known knife carrying burglar requires the addition of two random accomplices that have no connection to said burglar. People will be looking for things like, forensic evidence against Amanda positively timestamped to the time of the crime, instead they will get blood negative DNA negative stains. They will be looking for text and phone exchanges between Amanda and Rudy, or witnesses that saw them together, and instead they will get Rudy's unprompted confession that he was there alone and images of him snooping around the cottage not long before the murder on CCTV alone.

None of those things are an issue for you PGP, because you take Amanda's guilt as a starting axiom and have let cognitive bias prevent you from comprehending how a compelling case against Rudy hurts the prosecution. But they're significant barriers for convincing rationally minded folks. Admittedly, that leaves plenty out there for the taking.
bagels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 12:32 AM   #272
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
How sick is it for someone who wrote sick rape/murder fantasies and convicted of falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba of the rape and murder she and Raff were found guilty of in the merits trial and appeal (annulled by the Supreme Court on non-legal grounds) to get to write for the LA TIMES about other sick criminals.

As per usual Knox turns the story round to one about herself, so no change to the narcissism there, then.

Interestingly, she also championed the cause of swimmer Brock Turner found 'dry humping' a woman in a coma on public ground.

I suspect Party Rock boyfriend, Chris Robinson, had a hand in helping her to write it and iron out the illiterate grammatical errors and spelling gaffes.

Pretentiously, she writes that whilst Michelle Carter - who urged her boyfriend to kill himself, which he then did - whilst 'morally and philosophically wrong' was 'unlawfully convicted'.

Really?

In which way is it 'philosophically' wrong? Just big words for form over substance. In fact there is plenty of philosophical literature on suicide: Hamlet, The Savage God; The Myth of Sisyphus, and so on and so forth. Who is Amanda Knox to say it is 'philosophically wrong' but not illegal? Someone who writes about her 'best truth' and things her 'head' is 'confusedly' telling her 'in blurry images'.

Fact is, it might be considered 'morally wrong' for someone who is a Christian, but Knox is a rabid atheist who frets she may never become President as she would be unable to swear on the Bible at the inauguration. What planet is this being on?

Legally: unfortunately for Knox suicide or aiding suicide was illegal in many western countries even up until the sixties, with 'assisted suicide' still being unlawful, with some countries, such as Switzerland allowing it for medical reasons in special clinics.

The fact the prosecutor in Carter's case had a criminal statute against her and there was jurisdiction to hear her case, means it cannot have been 'unlawful' to convict her, whether or not you agree with the charge.

How much was Knox paid for leeching off the murder of her roommate? Enquiring minds need to know.

What was LA TIMES thinking?
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP

Last edited by Vixen; 5th August 2017 at 12:37 AM.
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 5th August 2017, 12:38 AM   #273
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,572
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post

What was LA TIMES thinking?
Amanda Knox would be a nobody none of us ever heard of, but then they showed pics of her giving the evil eye next to pics of giant knives wrapped in evidence bags and you people ate it up and turned her into a star. Congratulations.
bagels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 12:58 AM   #274
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Amanda Knox would be a nobody none of us ever heard of, but then they showed pics of her giving the evil eye next to pics of giant knives wrapped in evidence bags and you people ate it up and turned her into a star. Congratulations.
No, bagels, Amanda Knox did it all by herself and probably relishes her infamy.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 5th August 2017, 01:10 AM   #275
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,835
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, bagels, Amanda Knox did it all by herself and probably relishes her infamy.

Vixen, you do know that:

1) there was never a single piece of credible, reliable evidence that Knox (or Sollecito) participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher;

2) the very high likelihood is that Knox and Sollecito were exactly where they always claimed they were (barring the unlawfully coercive police interrogations of 5/6 November 2007....) - alone together in Sollecito's apartment - throughout the entire evening and night of the murder;

3) all of the known evidence is entirely consistent with Guede acting alone?


Just for your information, like. Cos you seem to have some sort of unsupported and emotionally-charged vendetta against both Knox and Sollecito. Why is that, Vixen?
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 01:14 AM   #276
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,835
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Fact is, it might be considered 'morally wrong' for someone who is a Christian, but Knox is a rabid atheist who frets she may never become President as she would be unable to swear on the Bible at the inauguration. What planet is this being on?

Why do you seem to think that someone has to hold Christian beliefs in order to have a moral code, Vixen?
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 01:16 AM   #277
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,835
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
How sick is it for someone who wrote sick rape/murder fantasies and convicted of falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba of the rape and murder she and Raff were found guilty of in the merits trial and appeal (annulled by the Supreme Court on non-legal grounds) to get to write for the LA TIMES about other sick criminals.

As per usual Knox turns the story round to one about herself, so no change to the narcissism there, then.

Interestingly, she also championed the cause of swimmer Brock Turner found 'dry humping' a woman in a coma on public ground.

I suspect Party Rock boyfriend, Chris Robinson, had a hand in helping her to write it and iron out the illiterate grammatical errors and spelling gaffes.

Pretentiously, she writes that whilst Michelle Carter - who urged her boyfriend to kill himself, which he then did - whilst 'morally and philosophically wrong' was 'unlawfully convicted'.

Really?

In which way is it 'philosophically' wrong? Just big words for form over substance. In fact there is plenty of philosophical literature on suicide: Hamlet, The Savage God; The Myth of Sisyphus, and so on and so forth. Who is Amanda Knox to say it is 'philosophically wrong' but not illegal? Someone who writes about her 'best truth' and things her 'head' is 'confusedly' telling her 'in blurry images'.

Fact is, it might be considered 'morally wrong' for someone who is a Christian, but Knox is a rabid atheist who frets she may never become President as she would be unable to swear on the Bible at the inauguration. What planet is this being on?

Legally: unfortunately for Knox suicide or aiding suicide was illegal in many western countries even up until the sixties, with 'assisted suicide' still being unlawful, with some countries, such as Switzerland allowing it for medical reasons in special clinics.

The fact the prosecutor in Carter's case had a criminal statute against her and there was jurisdiction to hear her case, means it cannot have been 'unlawful' to convict her, whether or not you agree with the charge.

How much was Knox paid for leeching off the murder of her roommate? Enquiring minds need to know.

What was LA TIMES thinking?

I know! Terrible, isn't it Vixen?! The entire editorial staff of a major US daily newspaper seems to have been hoodwinked by the lies pumped out by the Gogerty Marriott PR supertanker and the nasty PIPs!!!!

Time for a concerted PGP email campaign to the LA Times methinks, Vixen!
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 01:46 AM   #278
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,814
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Interestingly, she also championed the cause of swimmer Brock Turner found 'dry humping' a woman in a coma on public ground.

I suspect Party Rock boyfriend, Chris Robinson, had a hand in helping her to write it and iron out the illiterate grammatical errors and spelling gaffes.
As I'm not as obsessive about Ms Knox as some people apparently are, I was unaware of her championing the cause of Brock Turner, which I found rather surprising. So I went looking for what she'd written about the case. It's this, in case anybody else here didn't know:

https://www.westsideseattle.com/west...irecting-focus

I'll let you read it for yourself and decide if you think "championing the cause of Brock Turner" is what this article actually does.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2017, 02:12 AM   #279
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Why do you seem to think that someone has to hold Christian beliefs in order to have a moral code, Vixen?
Anti-suicide is a Christian thing is it not? In my local church, suicides (and strangely, murder victims and fallen 'Reds') are buried to one side separate from the rest of the dear departed congregation.

I have no idea what other religions believe but I know Albert Camus was quite sympathetic to the idea.
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 5th August 2017, 02:21 AM   #280
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Old Blighty
Posts: 10,064
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
I know! Terrible, isn't it Vixen?! The entire editorial staff of a major US daily newspaper seems to have been hoodwinked by the lies pumped out by the Gogerty Marriott PR supertanker and the nasty PIPs!!!!

Time for a concerted PGP email campaign to the LA Times methinks, Vixen!
'Email campaign'?! What are you on about?
__________________
Galveston, oh, Galveston,
I still hear your seawaves crashin,
while I watch the cannons flashin'.
I clean my gun, and dream of Galveston ~ Glenn Campbell RIP
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 04:16 AM.
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.