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 !MOD BOX WARNING! , Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 17th November 2017, 09:34 AM   #161
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
"Waiting to be Heard", Amanda Knox's memoir of her experience in Perugia, Italy, where she was falsely accused and wrongfully convicted of the murder/rape of her flatmate, Meredith Kercher, before being acquitted of that crime and released from prison, is a book that the PGP apparently don't want to read.

I have read it and can assure all that it is not pornographic.

On Amazon, it has 1,287 customer reviews, with an average rating of 4.5 stars out of 5; 65% of the reviews gave the book 5 stars while 21% gave it 4 stars, while 5% gave it 1 star.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:13 AM   #162
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,823
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I don't care how convinced you are of your conclusion, there is always room to look at the details and admit you had 'something' wrong, while still believing you got the conclusion correct. But I've never read a single admission of getting something wrong from any of these hard core guilters.

It's entirely understandable that someone with a cursory understanding of forensic science would think Luminol always shows you where there is blood, but with just a little research you can discover just how prone to false positives Luminol really is. And it doesn't take much more research to learn that if a sample is both TMB and DNA negative then that sample can NOT be made from the victim's blood. It's really not that difficult. Yet I've never seen a single hard core guilter ever say "OK, so the Luminol results weren't indicative of Amanda tracking Meredith's blood around, but I still think there's overwhelming evidence of her guilt". And at this point, if someone like Vixen were to ever say that - and mean it - I just might suffer a coronary!

So no, I'd say don't expect any epiphanies from any of the remaining hard core guilters.
For what it's worth, the remaining "hard core" seem to have stopped covering this case after the 2009 Massei trial, even if they've spent the last years posting about how guilty they think Knox and Sollecito are, but mostly Knox. They seem to regard John Follain's 2010 book, "A Death in Italy," as the definitive history of the case. What I've found is that whenever one of them claims to have been quoting from the 10,000 pages of testimony/evidence/motivations reports, they really are quoting from John Follain.

Rather than accepting that BOTH the 2011 Hellmann trial (ending in acquittal) and the 2013/14 Nencini trial (ending in conviction) had completely different narratives from the Massei trial, and rather than accepting that the 2015 ISC final and definitive acquittal ended the case for all time - the hardcore cling to some claimed miraculous last-minute turn-around, just around the corner.

Witness Peter Quennell on TJMK - which Vixen parrots here - saying that the recent legal-collapse of Mignini's defamation claim (both criminal and civil) was "really" about clearing the way for Sollecito/Gumbel issuing a full and public apology......

..... an apology which never came.....

..... and that's all you need to know about the remaining hardcore. The inventions are legion, the lies are telling, and the doxing of people who post innocentisti posts is also all you need to know.

For some, Knox's "Waiting to be Heard" is both "porno" and the equivalent to "Mein Kampf".

It's time to ask one last time - are their ANY lurkers out there willing to make a post, as to whether or not that sort of claim is convincing?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 17th November 2017 at 10:18 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 17th November 2017, 10:32 AM   #163
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I don't care how convinced you are of your conclusion, there is always room to look at the details and admit you had 'something' wrong, while still believing you got the conclusion correct. But I've never read a single admission of getting something wrong from any of these hard core guilters.

It's entirely understandable that someone with a cursory understanding of forensic science would think Luminol always shows you where there is blood, but with just a little research you can discover just how prone to false positives Luminol really is. And it doesn't take much more research to learn that if a sample is both TMB and DNA negative then that sample can NOT be made from the victim's blood. It's really not that difficult. Yet I've never seen a single hard core guilter ever say "OK, so the Luminol results weren't indicative of Amanda tracking Meredith's blood around, but I still think there's overwhelming evidence of her guilt". And at this point, if someone like Vixen were to ever say that - and mean it - I just might suffer a coronary!

So no, I'd say don't expect any epiphanies from any of the remaining hard core guilters.
I can't say I expect any. It just saddens me when people hang on to wrong ideas or won't reevaluate based on the evidence. I see it in politics and of course religion. Religion is the king of holding on to wrong ideas. They manage to do it for centuries.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 17th November 2017 at 10:34 AM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:35 AM   #164
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,823
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I can't say I expect any. It just saddens me when people hang on to wrong ideas or won't reevaluate based on the evidence. I see it in politics and of course religion. Religion is the king of holding on to wrong ideas.
Although self-correction is built in to the scientific method, it too is not immune.

Einstein would not accept the insights of quantum physics.
__________________
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 17th November 2017, 10:47 AM   #165
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The lady from Kazaksthan (_sp?) whom Knox refers to as 'Ada' (can't even get the 'foreign' name right)contacted the Perugia police to report Knox' conduct.
What evidence do you have that Ardak contacted the police and not vice versa ? It is normal procedure for the police to seek out anyone they think may have information on a suspect. Do you think they all go to the police first? Next you'll be telling us that Amanda's teacher "reported" Amanda for being tired in class.
I'm sure Ardak just had to "report" to the police that Amanda wasn't happy with not being able to get any of her clothes from the cottage because that is just so suspicious!

What "conduct" are you talking about? Look at what she actually said to the police when they interviewed her. None of this is about Knox's "conduct". It's about Ardak's relationship with Knox and their interaction.

Your claim that Amanda couldn't get Ardak's name "right" because it was "foreign" is risible.
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 17th November 2017, 10:49 AM   #166
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 644
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Did she contact them before Amanda was arrested and accused of murder or after? It makes a substantial difference. People can always spot the eyes of a killer...in hindsight.

I also wonder about her e-mail home. It was sent to the police, but the question is before or after the arrest?

I'm trying to document if there was a single person on Earth suspicious of Amanda before her arrest that didn't work for the Italian government.
Good luck with that.

The e-mail was forwarded to the police on Nov 15th...

Ms Ardak K. gave a statement to the police also on Nov 15th. She was contacted by the police because her name (and phone number) was on the list of people who visited the cottage written by Amanda Knox on Nov 5th.
See also Rita Ficcara's notes.
By the time the Massei trial had started she was nowhere to be found...
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 10:58 AM   #167
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 644
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
The lady from Kazaksthan (_sp?) whom Knox refers to as 'Ada' (can't even get the 'foreign' name right)contacted the Perugia police to report Knox' conduct.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
What evidence do you have that Ardak contacted the police and not vice versa ? It is normal procedure for the police to seek out anyone they think may have information on a suspect. Do you think they all go to the police first? Next you'll be telling us that Amanda's teacher "reported" Amanda for being tired in class.
I'm sure Ardak just had to "report" to the police that Amanda wasn't happy with not being able to get any of her clothes from the cottage because that is just so suspicious!

What "conduct" are you talking about? Look at what she actually said to the police when they interviewed her. None of this is about Knox's "conduct". It's about Ardak's relationship with Knox and their interaction.

Your claim that Amanda couldn't get Ardak's name "right" because it was "foreign" is risible.
See my previous post for the answer to the question if "Amanda can't get the foreign name right", it's there in her own handwriting
Amanda Knox wrote about that chance meeting:
Quote:
The young woman and I held each other’s gaze for a moment. Nothing more would have come of it had we not run into each other in the bathroom.
She recognized me first. As I leaned over the sink to wash my hands, she asked, “Amanda? From Perugia?”
I turned to her, scanned her face, and felt an undefined, but unmistakable recognition.
“It’s Ada. From Kazakhstan.”
Ada! From Kazakhstan! ...
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 11:03 AM   #168
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Good luck with that.

The e-mail was forwarded to the police on Nov 15th...

Ms Ardak K. gave a statement to the police also on Nov 15th. She was contacted by the police because her name (and phone number) was on the list of people who visited the cottage written by Amanda Knox on Nov 5th.
See also Rita Ficcara's notes.
By the time the Massei trial had started she was nowhere to be found...
And look! Somehow Amanda managed to spell Ardak's "foreign name" correctly in her phonebook, too! Are the PGP so petty that even Amanda's obviously intentional use of a pseudonym has to be falsely presented? Apparently so.
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 17th November 2017, 11:07 AM   #169
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
See my previous post for the answer to the question if "Amanda can't get the foreign name right", it's there in her own handwriting
Amanda Knox wrote about that chance meeting:
Ha. Our posts crossed. Perhaps if Vixen had bothered to read WTBH she would have known that instead of claiming they'd had coffee. You have to wonder why false claims keep being made about a book when she knows we have read it, own it, and can quote from it. But, no...
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 17th November 2017, 11:28 AM   #170
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Well we've proven countless times that no, all your assertions are not based on fact. Most of them DEFINITELY are not. Over the years we've only rarely seen you provide any citations. But it is nice to see that maybe some of them are. Note, I said 'maybe' as the link for that thumbnail is broken.
It was posted on dotnut yesterday.

As I said earlier, I didn't know if Chris R was related to the Seattle Herald Robinsons or not and, frankly, I don't care. It has zero to do with the case. What I wanted from Vixen was evidence which she was unable to provide until Ergon posted it on dotnut.

The only reason the PGP bring this up is because they are obsessed with denigrating anyone associated with Amanda. They did it to Colin Sutherland and now they're doing it to Chris Robinson. As much as I dislike Guede, the proven killer, I would never publicly denigrate a woman whom he may end up dating or even marrying. Admittedly, I would wonder what she saw in him and about her decision making, but never denigrate her publicly.
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 17th November 2017, 11:38 AM   #171
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,764
They're Guede murder groupies imo
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 17th November 2017, 11:41 AM   #172
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,764
Let's remember that it was Mach's brightest day when Guede went on TV and said he didn't **** Meredith because he had no condom.
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 17th November 2017, 11:42 AM   #173
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,764
These are the "PGP"
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 17th November 2017, 11:47 AM   #174
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Let's remember that it was Mach's brightest day when Guede went on TV and said he didn't **** Meredith because he had no condom.
That Guede had no condom may be the explanation for the apparent semen stain, not apparently tested by the police, but detected on the pillow found under Meredith Kercher's body.

For a brief introduction to the topic of murder groupies - and there does seem to be a certain unnatural attraction to Guede among some of the PGP - see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybristophilia
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 01:36 PM   #175
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
It was posted on dotnut yesterday.

As I said earlier, I didn't know if Chris R was related to the Seattle Herald Robinsons or not and, frankly, I don't care. It has zero to do with the case. What I wanted from Vixen was evidence which she was unable to provide until Ergon posted it on dotnut.

The only reason the PGP bring this up is because they are obsessed with denigrating anyone associated with Amanda. They did it to Colin Sutherland and now they're doing it to Chris Robinson. As much as I dislike Guede, the proven killer, I would never publicly denigrate a woman whom he may end up dating or even marrying. Admittedly, I would wonder what she saw in him and about her decision making, but never denigrate her publicly.
Well, it shows pretty clearly Vixen's epistemological process or maybe the lack of one.

As for the PGP's compulsive and reactionary need to mount a scorched earth campaign against everyone who is associated with Amanda in any way speaks volumes about the sickness inside these people. Pretty sad.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 02:14 PM   #176
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Although self-correction is built in to the scientific method, it too is not immune.

Einstein would not accept the insights of quantum physics.
No, even scientific individuals are not immune. The scientific method however is. But Einstein wasn't living in denial. It's not that he didn't accept quantum physics, it's that he thought it to be incomplete. He especially never cared for the probabilistic nature of the explanation. That's where Einstein famously said that 'God didn't play with dice'.

There is no question that Einstein had issues with the theory. But he never stood in the way of the scientific exploration of the theory. In fact, this is exactly how things should work. Einstein worked to disprove it and in failing he added to its validity.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:31 PM   #177
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
One of the false premises of the PGP is that all police officers are honest and ethical. Here's an example of where this was not so:

"State's attorney to dismiss 18 convictions tied to former Chicago police sergeant

In what is believed to be the first mass exoneration in Cook County history, prosecutors on Thursday plan to drop all charges against 15 men who alleged they were framed by corrupt former Chicago police Sgt. Ronald Watts and his crew.
....
It comes two months after lawyers for the 15 men filed a joint petition seeking to overturn a total of 18 criminal drug convictions, alleging that Watts and his crew framed all of them between 2003 and 2008. Watts and an officer under his command were sent to federal prison in 2013 for stealing money from a drug courier who'd been working as an FBI informant.

A review of the cases by the state’s attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit “has shown a pattern of narcotics arrests that raise serious concerns about the validity of the resulting convictions,” a spokesman for Foxx said in a written statement. “Therefore, the State’s Attorney’s Office is vacating the convictions.”"

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...115-story.html
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:44 PM   #178
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
More specific to Italy, there was the recent accusation that two Italian police officers had raped two American students:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/they-a...campaign-began

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/09/w...lice.html?_r=0
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 03:51 PM   #179
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
Italy is known to have a dysfunctional judicial system, and there are many miscarriages of justice; the Knox - Sollecito trials were not unique that way. Of course, the PGP ignore these issues to pretend that the Massei and Nencini courts, which convicted Knox and Sollecito, and the Chieffi CSC panel, which quashed the Hellmann court's acquittal of them, were perfect. On the other hand, the PGP claim that there was some underhand or illegal manipulation that resulted in the acquittal by the Hellmann court and the final and definitive acquittal by the Marasca CSC panel; the PGP ignore the valid criticisms of the Hellmann court of the Masse court verdict and of the Marasca CSC panel of the Nencini court verdict.

Here's an excerpt from an article discussing some issues in the Italian judicial system:

"Slow-moving, hugely bloated and sometimes alarmingly politicised, Italy's justice system needs fixing. In a critical report last year, the Council of Europe's top official for human rights, Nils Muiznieks, said Italy could "ill-afford" such an inefficient system, which is estimated to waste the equivalent of 1% of GDP. "The complexity and magnitude of the problem is such that Italy needs nothing short of a holistic rethinking of its judicial and procedural system, as well as a shift in judicial culture," he wrote of the country's "excessive" court proceedings.

Paula Severino, the justice minister under Mario Monti, attempted to improve the situation by pushing through reforms and cuts she estimated would make savings of €80m and improve efficiency. But she warned that, just as Rome wasn't built in a day, a system that was the product of 150 years of mismanagement and waste was not going to be put right in the short term of a technocratic government.

Italy is one of the most litigious countries in Europe, with more than 2.8m cases brought in 2011 alone, and has by far the most lawyers of any EU country – around 240,000. But the system simply cannot cope. Last year Severino said there were backlogs of 5.5m civil and 3.4m criminal cases waiting to be heard, with the former taking an average of seven to eight years to complete and the latter five. The system is clogged up with a vast number of appeals – Italy's top appeals court reviews more than 80,000 of them a year – and, in 2011, €84m was paid out by the state in compensation for miscarriages of justice and legal delays, along with €46m for people wrongly jailed.

A shockingly high proportion of inmates in Italy's overcrowded prisons are awaiting trial. Meanwhile, others remain free pending appeals against lower court convictions. Berlusconi, for instance, was convicted of tax fraud last year. He is appealing against the verdict and is campaigning for a fourth election victory. Often, by the time defendants have completed the two appeals to which they are entitled, the statute of limitations has expired and the slate is wiped clean."

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ong-with-italy

Last edited by Numbers; 17th November 2017 at 03:57 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 04:34 PM   #180
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Here's a little something for Vixen who has claimed that Prof. Vinci found Amanda's DNA on Meredith's bra and that a defense lawyer left the case due to it.

Based on theories developed by Peter Gill, Peter Balding created a software program that
Quote:
compares a full DNA profile of a suspect with an incomplete DNA profile found at a crime scene. By incorporating factors such as the natural decay of a DNA sample, or the presence of DNA from another person entirely, the software can provide a probability score that a suspect was at the crime scene. Using the software on a sample from a bra clasp found near Kercher’s body suggests it is very unlikely that the item carries Knox’s DNA.
https://www.newscientist.com/article...ene-bra-clasp/
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 17th November 2017, 04:49 PM   #181
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Here's a little something for Vixen who has claimed that Prof. Vinci found Amanda's DNA on Meredith's bra and that a defense lawyer left the case due to it.

Based on theories developed by Peter Gill, Peter Balding created a software program that


https://www.newscientist.com/article...ene-bra-clasp/
I hate to throw water on the post. But my response is 'so'? To my knowledge no one ever said it was. It was allegedly Raffaele's DNA that Stefanoni claimed was on the bra clasp.

I remember reading this article a long time ago wondering if Balding meant to say Sollecito and ended up saying Amanda. But without clarification, it would be wrong to put words in Balding's mouth.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 17th November 2017 at 05:12 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2017, 05:15 PM   #182
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I hate to throw water on the post. But my response is 'so'? To my knowledge no one ever said it did. It was allegedly Raffaele's DNA that Stefanoni claimed was on the bra clasp.

I remember reading this article a long time ago wondering if Balding meant to say Sollecito and ended up saying Amanda. But without clarification, it would be wrong to put words in Balding's mouth.
The "so" has to do with Vixen's claims that a defense lawyer left the case because Vinci had found Amanda's DNA on the bra.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...hkercher-italy

The implication being, of course, that it was evidence she was in the murder room and of her guilt. I pointed out that it was a "may be on the bra" case at the time (2008). This article is supporting evidence that her DNA was not on the bra. Of course, we know that was never brought into court as it wasn't true.
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 17th November 2017, 06:02 PM   #183
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The "so" has to do with Vixen's claims that a defense lawyer left the case because Vinci had found Amanda's DNA on the bra.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...hkercher-italy

The implication being, of course, that it was evidence she was in the murder room and of her guilt. I pointed out that it was a "may be on the bra" case at the time (2008). This article is supporting evidence that her DNA was not on the bra. Of course, we know that was never brought into court as it wasn't true.
You see, I never knew that.

As Rosanna Rosana-Danna use to say, 'never mind'.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume

Last edited by acbytesla; 17th November 2017 at 07:17 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 01:19 AM   #184
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
You see, I never knew that.

As Rosanna Rosana-Danna use to say, 'never mind'.
It took me a bit to find it, but here is Vixen's claim regarding Pascelli walking off the case because Amanda's DNA was found on the bra:

Quote:
If you want to insist that these should be evidence, then you have just shot yourself in the foot - in fact you seem to do this on a regular basis! - as fragments of Amanda and Rudy were found on the other bra fabrics. And Pascelli for the defence walked off the case after seeing Vinci's report, leaving a €50K bill, suggesting he no longer had confidence in his clients' innocence.
Continuation 26, post 2434
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 18th November 2017, 05:55 AM   #185
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 644
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Here's a little something for Vixen who has claimed that Prof. Vinci found Amanda's DNA on Meredith's bra and that a defense lawyer left the case due to it.

Based on theories developed by Peter Gill, Peter Balding created a software program that
Quote:
compares a full DNA profile of a suspect with an incomplete DNA profile found at a crime scene. By incorporating factors such as the natural decay of a DNA sample, or the presence of DNA from another person entirely, the software can provide a probability score that a suspect was at the crime scene. Using the software on a sample from a bra clasp found near Kercher’s body suggests it is very unlikely that the item carries Knox’s DNA.
https://www.newscientist.com/article...ene-bra-clasp/
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
It took me a bit to find it, but here is Vixen's claim regarding Pascelli walking off the case because Amanda's DNA was found on the bra:
Quote:
If you want to insist that these should be evidence, then you have just shot yourself in the foot - in fact you seem to do this on a regular basis! - as fragments of Amanda and Rudy were found on the other bra fabrics. And Pascelli for the defence walked off the case after seeing Vinci's report, leaving a €50K bill, suggesting he no longer had confidence in his clients' innocence.
Continuation 26, post 2434
Well, the "Vinci found Amanda's DNA on the bra" nonsense was talked about in Continuation 21 and the "Pascelli for the defence walked off the case after seeing Vinci's report" confusion should have been cleared in Continuation 25.
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 06:27 AM   #186
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,915
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
You see, I never knew that.

As Rosanna Rosana-Danna use to say, 'never mind'.
Correction.... It was Emily Litella...ooops.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 07:41 AM   #187
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The "so" has to do with Vixen's claims that a defense lawyer left the case because Vinci had found Amanda's DNA on the bra.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...hkercher-italy

The implication being, of course, that it was evidence she was in the murder room and of her guilt. I pointed out that it was a "may be on the bra" case at the time (2008). This article is supporting evidence that her DNA was not on the bra. Of course, we know that was never brought into court as it wasn't true.
If I recall correctly, Vixen did have an explanation why the prosecution never used Amanda's DNA on the clasp. She claimed that the prosecution decided not to use the DNA because the quantity was not enough. I have never come across any record of the prosecution carrying out tests on the clasp and deciding Amanda's DNA was insufficient.
Welshman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 08:47 AM   #188
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,823
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
If I recall correctly, Vixen did have an explanation why the prosecution never used Amanda's DNA on the clasp. She claimed that the prosecution decided not to use the DNA because the quantity was not enough. I have never come across any record of the prosecution carrying out tests on the clasp and deciding Amanda's DNA was insufficient.
Alternately Vixen has also offered two other explanations.
1) the convicting courts "bent over backwards" to give the pair the best result possible, but still convicted them.

2) once the court got enough evidence to convict them, they didn't bother to sift through the other "incriminating" stuff.
How anyone would know any of this is another matter.
__________________
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 18th November 2017, 11:21 AM   #189
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Alternately Vixen has also offered two other explanations.
1) the convicting courts "bent over backwards" to give the pair the best result possible, but still convicted them.

2) once the court got enough evidence to convict them, they didn't bother to sift through the other "incriminating" stuff.
How anyone would know any of this is another matter.
How anyone can claim to know any of this is another matter.
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 18th November 2017, 08:42 PM   #190
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Let's remember that it was Mach's brightest day when Guede went on TV and said he didn't **** Meredith because he had no condom.
Guede claimed neither he or Meredith had a condom. I'm surprised the Guede groupies didn't call him on this one since they often reference the claim made by Butterworth that Amanda made Meredith feel uncomfortable by leaving condom's and a rabbit vibrator in a beauty bag in the bathroom.
TruthCalls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 08:46 PM   #191
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by Welshman View Post
If I recall correctly, Vixen did have an explanation why the prosecution never used Amanda's DNA on the clasp. She claimed that the prosecution decided not to use the DNA because the quantity was not enough. I have never come across any record of the prosecution carrying out tests on the clasp and deciding Amanda's DNA was insufficient.
It couldn't have been any more insufficient (if that a double negative of sorts?... maybe should say "..any less sufficient...") than the non-existent DNA not found on the knife. That didn't stop them from running with that one though.
TruthCalls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th November 2017, 10:43 PM   #192
Stacyhs
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Guede claimed neither he or Meredith had a condom. I'm surprised the Guede groupies didn't call him on this one since they often reference the claim made by Butterworth that Amanda made Meredith feel uncomfortable by leaving condom's and a rabbit vibrator in a beauty bag in the bathroom.
These people actually believe Guede. Logic has nothing to do with their thinking.

I think it's hysterical that they think Meredith would be offended or feel uncomfortable about a pink bunny vibrator in a cosmetic bag. Amused? Yes. Shocked or offended? No.
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 18th November 2017, 11:09 PM   #193
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,823
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
These people actually believe Guede. Logic has nothing to do with their thinking.

I think it's hysterical that they think Meredith would be offended or feel uncomfortable about a pink bunny vibrator in a cosmetic bag. Amused? Yes. Shocked or offended? No.
Even worse Judge Nencini believed Guede, and Guede never gave testimony to the Florence court.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 07:41 AM   #194
Planigale
Master Poster
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,434
I find Vixen reassuring. That the case that Vixen makes for the guilt of Sollecito and Knox is dependent on provable falsities. This is reassuring that no real case for their guilt can be made.

A nice example is the continued repetition that Sollecito was into violent Manga, a case actually argued by Mignini. But as actually came out from the police testimony, the Manga magazines were still in their original cellophane wrappers - unread. Actually evidence that Sollecito was not into Manga. I wonder did Mignini know before the police testimony that the magazines were unread in which case he was deliberately misleading the court, certainly acting unethically and arguably criminally? If not then he was just incompetent.

Yet even though this testimony from the police is available, we still get Vixen coming up with the Sollecito was into violent Manga untruth.
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 19th November 2017, 08:29 AM   #195
sept79
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 289
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Even worse Judge Nencini believed Guede, and Guede never gave testimony to the Florence court.

Why?

--Ignorance

--Incompetence

--Pressure from above or within the judicial ranks

--Bias

--Anti-American

-- ?
sept79 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 08:59 AM   #196
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,823
Originally Posted by sept79 View Post
--Pressure from above or within the judicial ranks
My completely biased uninformed opinion?

He felt compelled to convict because of the 2013 ISC quashing of the 2011 Hellmann acquittals.

And even though many are correct in saying that declaring "motive" is not necessary for a conviction, in a highly circumstantial case it becomes vital.

Nencini's court had heard from the prosecutor, Crini, that the motive had been the overall cleanliness in the upstairs flat. Pooh in the toilet caused them the attack Knox..... wait a minute, it wasn't Knox who was attacked.....

So to fulfill the expectation to convict, Nencini turned to a motive that at least was on paper somewhere and "made sense". Crini's motive had the wrong person attacked!

Except the "she was killed by Knox over a rent money dispute" comes from Guede - the real perp - who lied about his fraudulent presence in the cottage that night, and lied about how his DNA had got into the victim's vagina.

But for Nencini, there was one element of that story that if Guede had lied about, then there would have been no credible motive. Meredith, acc. to Guede had let Knox in, and acc. to Guede an argument broke out over rent money.

I mean, in their directive to convict, the ISC had said that the "sex game gone wrong" theory/motive had not received enough attention at the Hellmann trial in 2011. So perhaps the only thing Hellmann's and Nencini's court agreed upon was that the sex game motive had been bunk.

But..... Nencini believed he'd been tasked to convict. Ergo Guede must have been right on that one, uncross-examined lie he'd told.

That's what needs to happen to retie the judicial pretzel into a conviction shape, when you're ordered to do it.

Your mileage may vary.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 19th November 2017 at 09:00 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 10:57 AM   #197
TruthCalls
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
My completely biased uninformed opinion?

He felt compelled to convict because of the 2013 ISC quashing of the 2011 Hellmann acquittals.

And even though many are correct in saying that declaring "motive" is not necessary for a conviction, in a highly circumstantial case it becomes vital.

Nencini's court had heard from the prosecutor, Crini, that the motive had been the overall cleanliness in the upstairs flat. Pooh in the toilet caused them the attack Knox..... wait a minute, it wasn't Knox who was attacked.....

So to fulfill the expectation to convict, Nencini turned to a motive that at least was on paper somewhere and "made sense". Crini's motive had the wrong person attacked!

Except the "she was killed by Knox over a rent money dispute" comes from Guede - the real perp - who lied about his fraudulent presence in the cottage that night, and lied about how his DNA had got into the victim's vagina.

But for Nencini, there was one element of that story that if Guede had lied about, then there would have been no credible motive. Meredith, acc. to Guede had let Knox in, and acc. to Guede an argument broke out over rent money.

I mean, in their directive to convict, the ISC had said that the "sex game gone wrong" theory/motive had not received enough attention at the Hellmann trial in 2011. So perhaps the only thing Hellmann's and Nencini's court agreed upon was that the sex game motive had been bunk.

But..... Nencini believed he'd been tasked to convict. Ergo Guede must have been right on that one, uncross-examined lie he'd told.

That's what needs to happen to retie the judicial pretzel into a conviction shape, when you're ordered to do it.

Your mileage may vary.
I suspect you're correct but ignorance and incompetence also clearly play a role. How do I know? ...because Nencini put his signature on a motivation report that was so littered with errors, baseless presumption and countless logic-free conclusions that he made even the Massei report look credible. You just can't do that without a healthy dose of ignorance and incompetence. JMHO.
TruthCalls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 11:35 PM   #198
bagels
Graduate Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,764
As komponisto pointed out, just try to construct an argument for acquittal that is compliant with the Chieffi report. It was an evidence-interpreting directive to convict.

BTW anytime Chieffi is mentioned it's always worth remembering some of his greatest hits:

-The break-in must be staged because Meredith would have heard the glass break
-Quintavalle must be legitimate because he says he recognized Amanda's blue eyes in court
-Curatolo must be legitimate because he was able to identify the two most famous defendants in Italy in court sitting next to their lawyers on trial

Just for fun let's try to think of an acquitting report that is compliant with Chieffi's directive:

"Quintavalle must have seen an identical blue eyed twin of Knox buying bleach that morning, and Curatolo must have merely witnessed Knox and Raffaele in an animated discussion on the deeper themes in Amelie that the two forgot they had outside because they were so engrossed in the debate, and Meredith didn't hear Rudy breaking in because she was practicing her loudest scream in Italian that woke Nara."

So yeah, Nencini went ahead and convicted.

This case really centers around Chieffi. If it weren't for his court it would be a provocative but otherwise unremarkable wrongful conviction case similar to many others with bumbling local authorities and judges. But it's not everyday you get the highest court in the land writing room temperature IQ level reasoning and transparent corruption for the world to see. Really kicked things up a notch.
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 20th November 2017, 03:35 AM   #199
RoseMontague
Published Author
 
RoseMontague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Elon, NC
Posts: 7,103
Just checking in. Has anything new come out about the case recently?
__________________
"I have hated the words and I have loved them, and I hope I have made them right".
RoseMontague is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 05:22 AM   #200
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,073
Originally Posted by RoseMontague View Post
Just checking in. Has anything new come out about the case recently?
The newest development is that the CSC has issued the motivation report for the decision denying Raffaele Sollecito compensation for unfair detention. I don't know if the CSC short-form verdict on Rudy Guede's request for a revision trial has been issued yet.

Here's a summary of the case, from my previous post #49 in this continuation:

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have been finally and definitively acquitted of the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher by the March, 2015 verdict of the Supreme Court of Cassation of Italy. According to Italian law, they can face no other legal action, criminal or civil, regarding the matters for which they have been acquitted.

Amanda Knox was finally convicted of the crime of calunnia (false accusation) against Patrick Lumumba by the March, 2013 verdict of the Supreme Court of Cassation. However, convictions in Italy are not necessarily definitive, and may be retried by an Italian revision court (a court of appeal) under certain conditions. One such condition, according to Italian law (a judgment of the Italian Supreme Constitutional Court) is a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) that the conviction was the result of an unfair trial, or was otherwise unfair, and that the legal proceedings must be reopened at the request of the convicted person. The ECHR is an international court that hears claims of violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), a treaty to which Italy is a charter signatory. Italy is obligated to follow the terms of the Convention under international and Italian law.

Amanda Knox lodged an application with the ECHR in November, 2013 (within the deadline, which is based on the date of delivery of the motivation report, and not the short-form verdict) claiming that Italy violated her rights under the Convention. The case was communicated to Italy by the ECHR in April, 2015, to allow Italy to prepare a defense, if it so chooses. The ECHR considers this case a "noteworthy pending case", meaning it considers the claims and potential outcome of significance for human rights in the Council of Europe states (that is, all the states that are signatories of the European Convention of Human Rights). A date for the publication of the ECHR judgment has not been announced; the ECHR has tens of thousands of pending cases before it, and it can be quite slow in reaching judgments.

There have also been some satellite cases in Italy related to the main Knox - Sollecito trials. These include, but are not limited to:

1. A case accusing Amanda Knox of false accusation against the police, regarding her statements in court, at her trial, about their behavior toward her during the Nov. 5-6, 2007 interrogation. Knox was finally acquitted on these charges in January, 2016.

2. A case accusing Raffaele Sollecito of criminal defamation against the police, regarding certain statements he had published in a book (which was not publicly available in Italy) he co-authored with Andrew Gumbel. Sollecito and Gumbel were acquitted in October, 2017 on these charges. Prosecutor Mignini had joined this case with a civil lawsuit, as allowed and rather usual in Italian cases. Mignini has withdrawn his suit. I suspect this will be a final acquittal, but I don't believe the time limit for an appeal by the prosecution has run out (I think it will by the end of December, 2017), and I am not sure when the statute of limitations will expire on the charges.

3. There were some additional cases, such as a defamation suit against Knox's parents by Mignini. I am not sure what has happened to those; I suspect the case against Knox's parents and any other such cases have been allowed to expire. But I'm not sure of that.

4. The request by Sollecito for compensation on account of unjust detention was recently finally denied by the Supreme Court of Cassation. His lawyers indicated that this will be taken to the ECHR, because the Convention mandates that there be acknowledgment and compensation for unfair detentions.

5. Rudy Guede, the only person convicted of the murder/rape of Kercher, has appealed the first rejection of his request for revision of his conviction. The Supreme Court of Cassation is expected to issue a ruling on this appeal by the end of November, 2017.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
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 12:06 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.