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 30th July 2020, 08:02 PM   #2761
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
She said she mixed it up with when he arrived at the questura early in the morning on Nov. 6. But that excuse does not hold up when you take into account her immediately following that with "Altieri, Knox, and Sollecito (had) long since departed the scene and Lalli had not yet arrived." What "scene" did the trio depart from on Nov. 6 and Lalli was never at the questura on Nov. 6.

It's just another screw up she won't admit to.
1. Somewhat arbitrarily, I've chosen to post here the English translation of the Massei trial transcript showing Amanda Knox's lawyer attempt to have her testimony about being abused by the police sent to a prosecutor. Massei ignored this request while allowing Mignini to forward the same testimony to himself for prosecution of alleged calunnia against the police.

Quote:
SPONTANEOUS DECLARATION BY THE DEFENDANT –AMANDA MARIE KNOX

Thank-you your honor, I wanted to insist on one point that is very important for me, very important. The witnesses are avoiding and also denying some facts about what happened, during the interrogation on the night of the 5th and 6th of November 2007.

I wanted to clarify certain elements that for me are really important and I’m not willing to let it pass. First of all there are hours and hours where they don’t say that I continued to confirm my same version even when they told me that Raffaele apparently said that I left the house. There was this aggressive insistence about the message that I received and replied to Patrick, really aggressive! They called me “a stupid liar”, from everywhere... there was also this story of the trauma that this Donnino had told me about and then after that she suggested that this could have been the same situation that happened to me. In the sense that right while I couldn’t remember very well because I was traumatized and because of this I should be able to remember something different. Then these slaps on the head that I really did receive... it’s true, I’m sorry, that’s the way it was! I wanted to say these things, thank-you.

Prosecutor Mignini: At this point the Prosecution requests the transmission of these statements made by Amanda Knox to our offices.

Defense Dalla Vedova: Indeed we also ask for the same thing, if your Honor believes there are verifications that should be made...

Judge: The Prosecution have requested it.

Prosecutor Mignini: We have the prerequisites of an offense.

Defense Dalla Vedova: The prerequisites for establishing responsibility without doubt

ORDER: The Court, on the basis of the request by the Prosecution, will arrange for the transmission of the current transcript to that same Prosecution.
Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.net/amanda-knox-transcripts/
Amanda Knox's spontaneous statement, 13 March 2009

2. Is there documentation establishing that Lalli was not at the police station at any time on 6 November? Isn't Vixen's confused and erroneous statement clearly false whether or not Lalli was at the police station on 6 November?
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 30th July 2020, 09:01 PM   #2762
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
She said she mixed it up with when he arrived at the questura early in the morning on Nov. 6. But that excuse does not hold up when you take into account her immediately following that with "Altieri, Knox, and Sollecito (had) long since departed the scene and Lalli had not yet arrived." What "scene" did the trio depart from on Nov. 6 and Lalli was never at the questura on Nov. 6.

It's just another screw up she won't admit to.
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
1. Somewhat arbitrarily, I've chosen to post here the English translation of the Massei trial transcript showing Amanda Knox's lawyer attempt to have her testimony about being abused by the police sent to a prosecutor. Massei ignored this request while allowing Mignini to forward the same testimony to himself for prosecution of alleged calunnia against the police.



Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.net/amanda-knox-transcripts/
Amanda Knox's spontaneous statement, 13 March 2009

2. Is there documentation establishing that Lalli was not at the police station at any time on 6 November? Isn't Vixen's confused and erroneous statement clearly false whether or not Lalli was at the police station on 6 November?
The reason I ask this question is because there are contemporary Italian legal documents, apparently originating with the police and directed to Mignini and the case file, that indicate Lalli was at the police station on 6 November.

There are three "Body Search" documents, one for each of the three suspects, Lumumba, Knox, and Sollecito, each dated 6 November 2007, timed respectively at 12:30, 12:45, and 13:00, each of which includes, among other text, the following:

Si precisa che l'ispezione corporale e stata eseguita dal Medico Legale nominato Dott. Luca Lalli coadiuvato dalla Dott..essa Giulia Ceccarelli entrambi appartenenti al locale Instituto di Medicina Legale.

That text, translated by Google with my help, gives the following:

It should be noted that the body inspection was carried out by the appointed Legal Doctor [forensic pathologist] Dr. Luca Lalli assisted by Dr. Giulia Ceccarelli both belonging to the local Institute of Legal Medicine [Forensic Pathology].

Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.net/case-files-reports/

Last edited by Numbers; 30th July 2020 at 09:26 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 30th July 2020, 11:07 PM   #2763
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Numbers, you're correct. I was thinking the body inspection on Amanda was carried out at Capanne Prison, not the questura. How weird for something so intimate to take place at the police station. However, that does not change the fact that Vixen claimed that Mignini came 'early the next morning' when, in fact, the murder wasn't even discovered until the afternoon of Nov. 2 so no matter how Vixen tries to excuse it, Mignini did not come "early the next morning" unless she was referring to Nov. 3 which she claims she was not. Still, what "scene" had "Altieri, Knox, and Sollecito" already departed from on Nov. 6? Vixen was clearly referring to the events of Nov 2...and by her statement Nov. 3... and not Nov. 6 as he is now trying to claim.
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 31st July 2020, 07:02 AM   #2764
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,461
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Numbers, you're correct. I was thinking the body inspection on Amanda was carried out at Capanne Prison, not the questura. How weird for something so intimate to take place at the police station. However, that does not change the fact that Vixen claimed that Mignini came 'early the next morning' when, in fact, the murder wasn't even discovered until the afternoon of Nov. 2 so no matter how Vixen tries to excuse it, Mignini did not come "early the next morning" unless she was referring to Nov. 3 which she claims she was not. Still, what "scene" had "Altieri, Knox, and Sollecito" already departed from on Nov. 6? Vixen was clearly referring to the events of Nov 2...and by her statement Nov. 3... and not Nov. 6 as he is now trying to claim.
Let's not lose sight of what was being discussed. Vixen wants to argue that Amanda had insight into the method by which Meredith was murdered because she was there. In support of this she is trying to suggest no one with insight was at the scene on 2 Nov prior to Amanda, Raffaele and Altieri leaving for the Questura. Therefore, what did or didn't happen on 6 Nov is irrelevant.

To Bill's question.. I think Vixen decided she is going to push a myth - in this case that Amanda could not have learned from anyone else how Meredith died, and as such, this would prove she was present at the murder. When it was pointed out that Altieri had overheard a conversation where he learned Amanda's throat had been slashed and passed this information onto Amanda, Vixen immediately tried to disprove this by suggesting those who would have such knowledge hadn't yet arrived when the three headed off to the Questura. I assume in her mind only Mignini and Lalli would know how she died and so it was important to Vixen to claim they didn't arrive prior to them leaving, thus the bogus statement.

This is just typical Vixen (and pro-guilt in general) behavior. Create a false narrative, and then fabricate bogus 'facts' to support the false narrative. This was just more of the same.
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 31st July 2020, 07:56 AM   #2765
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Let's not lose sight of what was being discussed. Vixen wants to argue that Amanda had insight into the method by which Meredith was murdered because she was there. In support of this she is trying to suggest no one with insight was at the scene on 2 Nov prior to Amanda, Raffaele and Altieri leaving for the Questura. Therefore, what did or didn't happen on 6 Nov is irrelevant.

To Bill's question.. I think Vixen decided she is going to push a myth - in this case that Amanda could not have learned from anyone else how Meredith died, and as such, this would prove she was present at the murder. When it was pointed out that Altieri had overheard a conversation where he learned Amanda's throat had been slashed and passed this information onto Amanda, Vixen immediately tried to disprove this by suggesting those who would have such knowledge hadn't yet arrived when the three headed off to the Questura. I assume in her mind only Mignini and Lalli would know how she died and so it was important to Vixen to claim they didn't arrive prior to them leaving, thus the bogus statement.

This is just typical Vixen (and pro-guilt in general) behavior. Create a false narrative, and then fabricate bogus 'facts' to support the false narrative. This was just more of the same.
TruthCalls, thanks for your excellent summary of this discussion issue.

We also need to be aware of the tendency of the PGP myth-building to result in diversions from real issues, such as the misconduct of the Italian authorities as declared by the ECHR in its Knox v. Italy judgment.
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 31st July 2020, 10:46 AM   #2766
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Good summation, TruthCalls, and spot on. It's the "hydroxychloroquine" lie tactic.

Make a false claim.

When multiple credible evidence disproves claim, continue to make claim.
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 31st July 2020, 11:30 AM   #2767
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
On the highlighted part you might want to read the first page of judge Micheli's report...
Charge A is:

"in concorso" translates to "joint murder" in this context, if I'm not mistaken (Numbers?)... and not to being "an accessory"...
So unless the charge was altered on the case's way up to Cassazione, Guede was convicted of "joint murder" and not just of "being an accessory"...
The media gets it wrong, of course. Here in Germany it's "gemeinschaftlich begangener Mord" (correct) vs. "Beihilfe" (false)...
But I guess you know that. The question is, why you are still propagating the "only as an accesory" nonsense?
Well, I guess Matthew Best got it
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
The Italian word "concorso" is interesting because its most common translation is "competition", so "in concorso con" can mean "in competition with" (see for example, a Google Translate mis-translation of the quoted phrase).

However, Collins Reverso provides the other translations relevant to the context of the use of "in concorso con" in Italian criminal law. In that context, it means "in complicity with" or "in combination with". That is, it indicates that one person committed a crime in a cooperative effort with another person.

Source: https://context.reverso.net/translat...n+concorso+con

The exact roles of the persons supposedly complicit in a joint crime are specified by an Italian court in the motivation report. None of the motivation reports convicting Guede identified him as an "accessory" (in its meaning under US or UK law). An accessory in the US or UK law provides some assistance to other criminals, but is not the chief actor and is not present during the commission of the criminal act. This obviously could not apply to Guede. However, Guede, the prosecution and at least one MR, that of the convicting Borsini appeals court, attempted to diminish Guede's responsibility for the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher while falsely attributing responsibility to Knox and Sollecito. The Giordano CSC panel MR, in finally convicting Guede, somewhat corrected this attempt to diminish Guede's responsibility, as follows.
To more completely understand the context of "in concorso con" it is useful to examine the text of the relevant Italian law, CP Article 110, which uses a different word which has a clear translation:


Articolo 110 Codice penale

Pena per coloro che concorrono nel reato

Quando più persone concorrono nel medesimo reato, ciascuna di esse soggiace alla pena per questo stabilita, salve le disposizioni degli articoli seguenti.

Google Translation:

Article 110 Criminal Code

Penalty for those who cooperate in the crime

When several people cooperate in the same offense, each of them is subject to the penalty established for this, subject to the provisions of the following articles.
_____

Since the charges against Guede list CP Article 110 with none of the immediately subsequent articles, the understanding must be that Guede was to be considered fully responsible for the crimes against Kercher; he was not an "accomplice" or "accessory" (if those US legal terms even have meaning in Italian law).

The other charges against Guede are all specific to the crimes - murder and sexual violence - committed against Kercher, and to their aggravating factors or circumstances that justify an increase in the penalties upon conviction.

CP Art. 575 is Murder
CP Art. 576 is the aggravating factors for murder, including when the penalty may be life imprisonment
CP Art. 577 is additional aggravating factors for life imprisonment
CP Art. 609 bis is Sexual Violence
CP Art. 609 ter is aggravating factors for sexual violence (such as using a weapon).
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 31st July 2020, 02:35 PM   #2768
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 778
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Let's not lose sight of what was being discussed. Vixen wants to argue that Amanda had insight into the method by which Meredith was murdered because she was there. In support of this she is trying to suggest no one with insight was at the scene on 2 Nov prior to Amanda, Raffaele and Altieri leaving for the Questura. Therefore, what did or didn't happen on 6 Nov is irrelevant.

To Bill's question.. I think Vixen decided she is going to push a myth - in this case that Amanda could not have learned from anyone else how Meredith died, and as such, this would prove she was present at the murder. When it was pointed out that Altieri had overheard a conversation where he learned Amanda's throat had been slashed and passed this information onto Amanda, Vixen immediately tried to disprove this by suggesting those who would have such knowledge hadn't yet arrived when the three headed off to the Questura. I assume in her mind only Mignini and Lalli would know how she died and so it was important to Vixen to claim they didn't arrive prior to them leaving, thus the bogus statement.

This is just typical Vixen (and pro-guilt in general) behavior. Create a false narrative, and then fabricate bogus 'facts' to support the false narrative. This was just more of the same.
If there was any evidence Altieri had lied, why was this never used by by the prosecution or mentioned in any motivation reports. If Amanda had knowledge of how Meredith was killed that no one else would have known, this would have been damming evidence. This is a question I have asked repeatedly which Vixen has consistently refused to answer. Vixen boasts about the strong overwhelming evidence against Amanda and Raffaele. If this was the case, why does Vixen time after time has to resort to inventing evidence and devote so much time and effort defending falsehoods. Surely basic common sense dictates that if the case against Amanda and Raffaele was a slam dunk and there was plenty of genuine evidence against Amanda and Raffaele, PGP would not need to lie about non existent evidence to argue their case.

If Amanda was guilty would Amanda tell how Meredith was killed knowing this would be highly incriminating.
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 31st July 2020, 06:41 PM   #2769
schmidt61
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Canada
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by schmidt61 View Post
The first time Rudy was at the cottage (boy's apt.) The first time he meets both Amanda and Meredith.

Rudy Guede March 26, 2008 Deposition page 9

Pros. Mignini Did you never frequent each other?

Guede We didn’t… I never frequented Amanda except, if we could call it
frequenting, later the evening when I was in the house of the guys

Pros. Mignini Understood. So before getting on to… so you saw Amanda again the evening that you went to Meredith’s house.

Guede No [the house] of the guys

Pros. Mignini Ah of the guys… of the guys

Guede Of the guys below but this was later however

Pros. Mignini This happened when?

Guede It happened… well the date it happened was in October however
the date I recall it was the birthday of another American friend of
mine, I would use that as the date

Pros. Mignini Eh

Guede However it happened in October, now I wouldn’t be able to say if it
was the 12th or the 14th
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...mony_(English)


Before you, Lawyer Brocchi told us of this theft you were subject to on the night between the 13th and 14th of October 2007
Testimony of Matteo Palazzoli

So the break-in at the lawyers office was October 13, and Guede first visit to the cottage was either the day before or the day after the break-in.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
What relevancy does this have?
First I should have check Amanda side of this story is on pages 45-47 in Waiting To Be Heard.

She talks about a night when Juva who usually walked her home after work couldn't do it one night. She runs into an acquaintance of Meredith named Shaky a nick-name that Meredith and girl friends call him because of the way he danced. He offers her a ride home on his scooter which she excepts, he doesn't take her home, taking her to a bakery instead then to his apartment.
After sometime she threaten (empty) to walk home he finally relents and takes her home. By the time she gets home she is bursting to tell Meredith who sighs and says "sorry" he tried that same thing with her friend Sophie.
But he was so responsible the night our friend was sick, I still really trust him.

Since Meredith always went out with a group of girlfriends but Amanda was often on her own. She told Amanda to text her when was coming home safely. Which gave a sense of comfort that if she didn't hear from me she would know something was wrong.

One night the bar was slow and Patrick decided to close early. I texted Meredith who reply was she would meet her the fountain by Doumo, three minutes away. She made her way through the mass of drunk students in Piazza Novembre, she saw Giacomo and Marco before she makes her way to the fountain to find Meredith. Then rejoining the boys who introduce them to a friend "Rudy" after a few minutes they headed back home together. The boys invited them to their apartment. They stopped at their apartment to drop off their purse, with Amanda going down first, joined later by Meredith.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-con...ne_Traffic.pdf

Checking this copy of Amanda phone record you will see Amanda and Meredith texted either other on the nights of Oct 18/19. So instead of morning of Oct 14 when she was exactly texting with Spyros, who may have been with Meredith and her ill friend at the disco Gatsios.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.net/amanda-knox-transcripts/

Spyros Gatsios testimony if June 27, 2009

DEFENCE – Avv. Dalla Vedova – To be precise this is the SMS that Amanda sent you in response to yours. Your Honor, in the records there aren’t the SMSs received because I presume they were cancelled as we heard from the accused during the examination. Listen, returning to the relationships between the young women and above all with Meredith, you talked about an evening in the Gradisca discothèque
where you saw Meredith.
WITNESS – Yes.
DEFENCE – Avv. Dalla Vedova – Together?
WITNESS – I was with my friends who I went on Saturdays to dance with and we met Meredith with her English friends that I saw, they were always together. We said hello in the sense because she too, Meredith too used to come to the Coffee Break and we saw each other around, and then a young woman, one of Meredith’s friends was a little ill, she told me she was a little ill and they were always racing to thebathroom...
DEFENCE – Avv. Ghirga – Do you remember this young woman’s name?
WITNESS - No, I didn’t know Meredith’s friends.
JUDGE – Which day are we on? Is it Saturday?
WITNESS – It is a Saturday in October, now I don’t know, I can’t know
precisely.
DEFENCE – Avv. Dalla Vedova – In the statement of November 9 2007 you
say “it was Saturday 13 or Saturday 20”.

It would be the 13th since Amanda, Meredith, Giacomo, Marco and Amy Frost were at the Red Zone on October 20th.

Since the break-in does happen on the night between the 13th/14th would that give him a alibi? If he was at the boy's apartment sleeping all night? Which he wasn't.
.

Last edited by schmidt61; 31st July 2020 at 07:10 PM.
schmidt61 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 31st July 2020, 07:24 PM   #2770
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Sorry, but I'm having a bit of trouble following all this. Are you saying Guede could have an alibi for the law office break in?
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 31st July 2020, 08:35 PM   #2771
schmidt61
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Canada
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Sorry, but I'm having a bit of trouble following all this. Are you saying Guede could have an alibi for the law office break in?
No since Amanda and Meredith and the boys meeting with Guede was October 18. Back up by the texts they shared. So Rudy spent the night of 18/19 at the boy's apartment.

While the break-in happen between the 13th and 14th no getting around when the break-in happen.

Meredith and her friends were at the disco Granisca seen by Spyros on October 13th. This the night Shaky help Meredith and her ill friend get home.

So in the end I think Guede was hoping that no one would remember the dates the meeting happens. It wouldn't be the first time he used a made up date he said in his deposition the first time he met Amanda was Sept 4 when she was working at Le Chic. Then we they run into either other which is October 18th she remember him from the meeting at Le Chic. A lie.
schmidt61 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 1st August 2020, 12:23 AM   #2772
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by schmidt61 View Post
No since Amanda and Meredith and the boys meeting with Guede was October 18. Back up by the texts they shared. So Rudy spent the night of 18/19 at the boy's apartment.

While the break-in happen between the 13th and 14th no getting around when the break-in happen.

Meredith and her friends were at the disco Granisca seen by Spyros on October 13th. This the night Shaky help Meredith and her ill friend get home.

So in the end I think Guede was hoping that no one would remember the dates the meeting happens. It wouldn't be the first time he used a made up date he said in his deposition the first time he met Amanda was Sept 4 when she was working at Le Chic. Then we they run into either other which is October 18th she remember him from the meeting at Le Chic. A lie.
I understand. Yes, Amanda was not even in Perugia on Sept. 4th much less working at Le Chic; she was in Germany.
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 1st August 2020, 01:01 AM   #2773
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
1. Somewhat arbitrarily, I've chosen to post here the English translation of the Massei trial transcript showing Amanda Knox's lawyer attempt to have her testimony about being abused by the police sent to a prosecutor. Massei ignored this request while allowing Mignini to forward the same testimony to himself for prosecution of alleged calunnia against the police.



Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.net/amanda-knox-transcripts/
Amanda Knox's spontaneous statement, 13 March 2009

2. Is there documentation establishing that Lalli was not at the police station at any time on 6 November? Isn't Vixen's confused and erroneous statement clearly false whether or not Lalli was at the police station on 6 November?
Erm, I mentioned several days ago I was mistaken is saying 'he arrived next morning'. How long will you keep up the pretence that that remains my claim? Perhaps you can find a spelling mistake and focus on that for the next five years.


For the avoidance of doubt the error came about because I was thinking of Mignini's description of being dragged out of bed in the early hours, whcih I conflated with his description of having to interrupt a strong traditional Itlaian Bank Holiday - All Souls Day/Day of the Dead - with his four daughters, to attend the murder scene.

Nowhere did I say 'he was there on the 3 November'.

Clear now?
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 1st August 2020, 01:04 AM   #2774
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Numbers, you're correct. I was thinking the body inspection on Amanda was carried out at Capanne Prison, not the questura. How weird for something so intimate to take place at the police station. However, that does not change the fact that Vixen claimed that Mignini came 'early the next morning' when, in fact, the murder wasn't even discovered until the afternoon of Nov. 2 so no matter how Vixen tries to excuse it, Mignini did not come "early the next morning" unless she was referring to Nov. 3 which she claims she was not. Still, what "scene" had "Altieri, Knox, and Sollecito" already departed from on Nov. 6? Vixen was clearly referring to the events of Nov 2...and by her statement Nov. 3... and not Nov. 6 as he is now trying to claim.
Erm, I mentioned several days ago I was mistaken is saying 'he arrived next morning'. How long will you keep up the pretence that that remains my claim? Perhaps you can find a spelling mistake and focus on that for the next five years.


For the avoidance of doubt the error came abut because I was thinking of Mignini's description of being dragged out of bed in the early hours, whcih I conflated with his description of having to interrupt a strong traditional Italian Bank Holiday - All Souls Day/Day of the Dead - with his four daughters, to attend the murder scene.

Nowhere did I say 'he was there on the 3 November'.

Clear now?

You have already been told this twice and yet you still insist on making out it was not an error.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 1st August 2020, 01:09 AM   #2775
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Let's not lose sight of what was being discussed. Vixen wants to argue that Amanda had insight into the method by which Meredith was murdered because she was there. In support of this she is trying to suggest no one with insight was at the scene on 2 Nov prior to Amanda, Raffaele and Altieri leaving for the Questura. Therefore, what did or didn't happen on 6 Nov is irrelevant.

To Bill's question.. I think Vixen decided she is going to push a myth - in this case that Amanda could not have learned from anyone else how Meredith died, and as such, this would prove she was present at the murder. When it was pointed out that Altieri had overheard a conversation where he learned Amanda's throat had been slashed and passed this information onto Amanda, Vixen immediately tried to disprove this by suggesting those who would have such knowledge hadn't yet arrived when the three headed off to the Questura. I assume in her mind only Mignini and Lalli would know how she died and so it was important to Vixen to claim they didn't arrive prior to them leaving, thus the bogus statement.

This is just typical Vixen (and pro-guilt in general) behavior. Create a false narrative, and then fabricate bogus 'facts' to support the false narrative. This was just more of the same.
There is no way Altieri learnt from the police, the ambulance men, the Carabinieri, the pahtologist or the prosecutor shortly after the discovery of the murder the way Meredith Kercher died and 'fought for her life'.

Amanda Knox loudly bragging at the Questura to Mez' grief stricken and stunned friends, when one of them said, 'I hope she did not suffer', 'Of course she suffered she had her throat cut and she ******* bled to death ew.' or words to that effect as reported by the 'British birds'.

Of course Knox knew Mez suffered. She was the cause of it! And her attitude was, 'She deserved it'.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 1st August 2020, 01:13 AM   #2776
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
TruthCalls, thanks for your excellent summary of this discussion issue.

We also need to be aware of the tendency of the PGP myth-building to result in diversions from real issues, such as the misconduct of the Italian authorities as declared by the ECHR in its Knox v. Italy judgment.
Yes, of course. The right of a US citizen not to have her own confession used against her is of paramount importance over the poor victim being sexually assaulted, tortured and viciously killed is uppermost.

Let's remember the real victim, here.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 1st August 2020, 04:56 AM   #2777
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,840
Oooh, looks like someone's "arguments" are still displaying an arrant incomprehension of law, and of the ethics which underpin law. As they say: quelle surprise!
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 1st August 2020, 06:08 AM   #2778
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, of course. The right of a US citizen not to have her own confession used against her is of paramount importance over the poor victim being sexually assaulted, tortured and viciously killed is uppermost.

Let's remember the real victim, here.
The denial of rights to the accused is at the root of wrongful convictions. Fully 1/4 of wrongful convictions in the US involved a coerced confession.

In this case, the ECHR has tasked Italy with remedying the calunnia conviction against Knox, as the interrogation violated Knox's right. Indeed, Giuliano Mignini was censured by his own professional association for violating Sollecito's rights.

However, in a fledgling police state, it's amazing how many people can be thrown into prison when basic rights are trampled upon.
__________________
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 1st August 2020, 07:25 AM   #2779
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,461
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
There is no way Altieri learnt from the police, the ambulance men, the Carabinieri, the pahtologist or the prosecutor shortly after the discovery of the murder the way Meredith Kercher died and 'fought for her life'.

Amanda Knox loudly bragging at the Questura to Mez' grief stricken and stunned friends, when one of them said, 'I hope she did not suffer', 'Of course she suffered she had her throat cut and she ******* bled to death ew.' or words to that effect as reported by the 'British birds'.

Of course Knox knew Mez suffered. She was the cause of it! And her attitude was, 'She deserved it'.
I'm sorry, I forgot you were present and you know exactly what everyone said or heard. How silly of me.

Nonetheless, Altieri DID testified he overheard a Red Cross driver and a member of the Carabinieri talking about the means by which Meredith had died and that he had informed Amanda of what he had heard. A very inconvenient fact for you, even if you choose to ignore it.

Amanda's response to the question could hardly be termed "bragging". More like she found the question ignorant - one doesn't need to experience having their throat slashed to know it would be a horrible way to die - and she responded accordingly.

I'm amused at how you interpret things. You see things exactly as you wish to see them, not as logic and common sense would dictate.
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 1st August 2020, 10:21 AM   #2780
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
Amanda's response to the question could hardly be termed "bragging". More like she found the question ignorant - one doesn't need to experience having their throat slashed to know it would be a horrible way to die - and she responded accordingly.

I'm amused at how you interpret things. You see things exactly as you wish to see them, not as logic and common sense would dictate.
First off, there is no right way to navigate the first few hours after a horrible ordeal for all concerned.

Second, I belong to a group of people who'd be a tad angry at such a comment in that kind of raw situation. I wouldn't be right to be pissed, nor would I be wrong. My pissed-off-ness is also covered by the "first off".

What none of this is, is indication either way if it indicated participation in a horrible murder only hours earlier.

For my money, all this is covered in the 2015 motivation report by Marasca-Bruno, because if this had been part of the lower Nencini court's finding of guilt, then that finding needed to be reversed. That final court said that the original investigation had been so inept, that no court had ever been in a position to convict.

Vilifying the accused is **always** what you fall back on when there's no reliable evidence. It's amazing how many times it works!
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 1st August 2020 at 10:23 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 1st August 2020, 10:49 AM   #2781
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Erm, I mentioned several days ago I was mistaken is saying 'he arrived next morning'. How long will you keep up the pretence that that remains my claim? Perhaps you can find a spelling mistake and focus on that for the next five years.


For the avoidance of doubt the error came abut because I was thinking of Mignini's description of being dragged out of bed in the early hours, whcih I conflated with his description of having to interrupt a strong traditional Italian Bank Holiday - All Souls Day/Day of the Dead - with his four daughters, to attend the murder scene.

Nowhere did I say 'he was there on the 3 November'.

Clear now?

You have already been told this twice and yet you still insist on making out it was not an error.
I could accept that you merely conflated those two events except your excuse above fails to explain your statement immediately following that Altieri, Knox and Sollecito had already departed the scene. How on earth could you confuse that with Nov 6?

You also continued to argue that Mignini was not at the scene at the same time as "Altieri and co" and that they'd left before Lalli had arrived. Both of which are false.

Do you acknowledge the following as true, yes or no?

1. Altieri and Grande were present at the scene when the ambulance men, Mignini and Lalli arrived.

2. Both overheard the men talking about Kercher's throat being cut.

3. Altieri told Knox and Sollecito in the car on the way to the questura that Kecher's throat had been cut.

4. No one, including Altieri or Grande, claims that either spoke directly to Mignini or Lalli about Kercher's throat having been cut.


Those are simple yes and no questions.
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 1st August 2020, 11:14 AM   #2782
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I'm sorry, I forgot you were present and you know exactly what everyone said or heard. How silly of me.

Nonetheless, Altieri DID testified he overheard a Red Cross driver and a member of the Carabinieri talking about the means by which Meredith had died and that he had informed Amanda of what he had heard. A very inconvenient fact for you, even if you choose to ignore it.

Amanda's response to the question could hardly be termed "bragging". More like she found the question ignorant - one doesn't need to experience having their throat slashed to know it would be a horrible way to die - and she responded accordingly.

I'm amused at how you interpret things. You see things exactly as you wish to see them, not as logic and common sense would dictate.
Not only did Altieri testify under oath that is what happened, it's also what Paola Grande testified she heard. Neither of them knew Knox or Sollecito so Vixen's absurd claim that Altieri had some kind of need to cover for them is not based on any logic or common sense. It's based solely on her need to support her false narrative that Knox could only have known how Kercher was killed because she was involved. As you say, their testimony is very inconvenient for Vixen so she attempts to discredit them with a ludicrous and totally unfounded accusation.

As for Knox's angry reaction to one of the girl's statement that she hoped Kercher hadn't suffered, Vixen also refuses to accept the fact that ANGER is a normal response to tragedy. It's actually one of the stages of grief.

In the Wake of Tragedy Anger Can Mask Grief and Fear

Profound sadness, grief and anger are normal reactions to an abnormal event.
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 1st August 2020, 11:26 AM   #2783
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, of course. The right of a US citizen not to have her own confession used against her is of paramount importance over the poor victim being sexually assaulted, tortured and viciously killed is uppermost.

Let's remember the real victim, here.
Oh, get off it. Your pearl clutching and misrepresentation are absurd.
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 2nd August 2020, 07:58 AM   #2784
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, of course. The right of a US citizen not to have her own confession used against her is of paramount importance over the poor victim being sexually assaulted, tortured and viciously killed is uppermost.

Let's remember the real victim, here.
It's a good thing no one accused you of this crime. According to you, by being accused you forfeit your right to defend yourself against predatory police tactics.
__________________
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 2nd August 2020, 10:10 AM   #2785
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I'm sorry, I forgot you were present and you know exactly what everyone said or heard. How silly of me.

Nonetheless, Altieri DID testified he overheard a Red Cross driver and a member of the Carabinieri talking about the means by which Meredith had died and that he had informed Amanda of what he had heard. A very inconvenient fact for you, even if you choose to ignore it.

Amanda's response to the question could hardly be termed "bragging". More like she found the question ignorant - one doesn't need to experience having their throat slashed to know it would be a horrible way to die - and she responded accordingly.

I'm amused at how you interpret things. You see things exactly as you wish to see them, not as logic and common sense would dictate.
That is not true. Knox claimed Sollecito told her. As I said, The Red Cross driver or any ambulancemen would not have been admitted. The Carabinieri do not stand gossiping on a corner with the likes of Paola and Luca listening.


In any case, it would have been speculative, yet Knox was as bold as brass when she was loudly informing the 'British birds' of how their good friend had died. One even overheard Knox on the phone telling someone the other end, 'I found her body'.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 2nd August 2020, 10:18 AM   #2786
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Not only did Altieri testify under oath that is what happened, it's also what Paola Grande testified she heard. Neither of them knew Knox or Sollecito so Vixen's absurd claim that Altieri had some kind of need to cover for them is not based on any logic or common sense. It's based solely on her need to support her false narrative that Knox could only have known how Kercher was killed because she was involved. As you say, their testimony is very inconvenient for Vixen so she attempts to discredit them with a ludicrous and totally unfounded accusation.

As for Knox's angry reaction to one of the girl's statement that she hoped Kercher hadn't suffered, Vixen also refuses to accept the fact that ANGER is a normal response to tragedy. It's actually one of the stages of grief.

In the Wake of Tragedy Anger Can Mask Grief and Fear

Profound sadness, grief and anger are normal reactions to an abnormal event.

Sure. Knox was so ANGRY she was sitting on Sollecito's lap kissing and cuddling and pulling funny faces at each other. Sollecito was overheard teaching Knox Italian curses such as 'I spit on your dead relative's grave'.

Like psychopathic killer Johanna Dehenny, Knox was in a state of high excitement after the murder.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 2nd August 2020, 10:53 AM   #2787
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That is not true. Knox claimed Sollecito told her. As I said, The Red Cross driver or any ambulancemen would not have been admitted. The Carabinieri do not stand gossiping on a corner with the likes of Paola and Luca listening.


In any case, it would have been speculative, yet Knox was as bold as brass when she was loudly informing the 'British birds' of how their good friend had died. One even overheard Knox on the phone telling someone the other end, 'I found her body'.
Wow! You're a first person source to all this. You must be, because someone who wasn't would need to provide citations.

BTW - do the Carabinieri avoid gossip **only* when Paola and Luca are listening, or is that something they never do?
__________________
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 2nd August 2020, 11:25 AM   #2788
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That is not true. Knox claimed Sollecito told her.
Knox said Altieri told Raffaele (who told her since he was translating). From her book:

Quote:
The police wouldn't tell us anything,but Luca and Paola stayed close, trying to read lips an overhear. At one point, Luca told Raffaele what the police had said: "the victim's throat had been slashed."

Quote:
As I said, The Red Cross driver or any ambulancemen would not have been admitted.
They didn't have to be admitted to the bedroom for the police to tell them. You do understand that they would eventually be admitted to the room anyway to remove the body, don't you? So why wouldn't the police tell them?

Quote:
The Carabinieri do not stand gossiping on a corner with the likes of Paola and Luca listening.
LOL! You do assume to know an awful lot what the Carabinieri do and do not do! Why not since you also profess to know what people were thinking, too? "Gossiping", "...the likes of Paola and Luca"! Your choice of words are deliberate and your motive is obvious. Once again, you're calling Altieri and Grande liars and perjurers.


Quote:
In any case, it would have been speculative, yet Knox was as bold as brass when she was loudly informing the 'British birds' of how their good friend had died.
Why would it have been speculative? When you're told the police said the victim's throat was slashed, why would you not believe it? Because, after all, they don't "gossip", right?


Quote:
One even overheard Knox on the phone telling someone the other end, 'I found her body'.
She did. She's the one who started the discovery of the murder. She's the one who found the blood in the bathroom. She's the one who found poop in the toilet. She's the one who discovered the locked bedroom door and couldn't contact Meredith. She's the one who called Filomena. She and Raffaele discovered the break-in. Raff called 112.
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 2nd August 2020, 11:31 AM   #2789
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sure. Knox was so ANGRY she was sitting on Sollecito's lap kissing and cuddling and pulling funny faces at each other. Sollecito was overheard teaching Knox Italian curses such as 'I spit on your dead relative's grave'.

Like psychopathic killer Johanna Dehenny, Knox was in a state of high excitement after the murder.
If you understood anything about the psychology of trauma, you'd realize that emotions and reactions run from one extreme to the other after something like this. People react in weird ways. I suggest you stop making psychological assessments.

But you're right: Knox is a psychopathic killer which is why she's killed again in the almost 13 years since the murder. Oh, wait......
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 2nd August 2020, 11:37 AM   #2790
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Wow! You're a first person source to all this. You must be, because someone who wasn't would need to provide citations.

BTW - do the Carabinieri avoid gossip **only* when Paola and Luca are listening, or is that something they never do?
No, they don't gossip only when "the likes" of people like Paola and Luca are listening. You know, liars and perjurers.
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 2nd August 2020, 11:38 AM   #2791
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,840
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If you understood anything about the psychology of trauma, you'd realize that emotions and reactions run from one extreme to the other after something like this. People react in weird ways. I suggest you stop making psychological assessments.

But you're right: Knox is a psychopathic killer which is why she's killed again in the almost 13 years since the murder. Oh, wait......


Ah, but you see...... Knox HAS killed again since! Multiple times in fact! It's just that she's learned from the Kercher murder just how close she came to getting caught that time, so she's now going about her murderous deeds in a 100% "Captain Amanda" criminal mastermind psychopath way - no more "Hapless Amanda" for her, nosiree!

So, can't you see Stacy that the very fact we've not heard of Knox committing any further murders since 2007 is actually proof positive that she's committed further murders since 2007?! How can you be SO NAIVE, Stacy?!!!
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 2nd August 2020, 11:42 AM   #2792
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,840
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
No, they don't gossip only when "the likes" of people like Paola and Luca are listening. You know, liars and perjurers.


And I can see a perfectly obvious reason why those two would choose to lie and commit the crime of perjury in order to supply Knox (whom they barely knew, and with whom they had no apparent affinity or loyalty) with a false explanation as to how she'd learned about Kercher's cause of death.

Oh, wait now......................

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 2nd August 2020, 12:03 PM   #2793
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Ah, but you see...... Knox HAS killed again since! Multiple times in fact! It's just that she's learned from the Kercher murder just how close she came to getting caught that time, so she's now going about her murderous deeds in a 100% "Captain Amanda" criminal mastermind psychopath way - no more "Hapless Amanda" for her, nosiree!

So, can't you see Stacy that the very fact we've not heard of Knox committing any further murders since 2007 is actually proof positive that she's committed further murders since 2007?! How can you be SO NAIVE, Stacy?!!!
OMG! You're so right! I've now seen the light! I'm going to go right on over to TJMK and join so I can be one the of Main Contributors and write articles proving Knox's ...oh, sorry...Knox' guilt like they do!

Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
And I can see a perfectly obvious reason why those two would choose to lie and commit the crime of perjury in order to supply Knox (whom they barely knew, and with whom they had no apparent affinity or loyalty) with a false explanation as to how she'd learned about Kercher's cause of death.

Oh, wait now......................

No, no, no....Luca lied "to help Sollecito explain how Knox knew how she had died" and he "clearly had an eager desire to help out and simply made things up in his enthusiasm to do so. There are signs he had a misguided belief he had to help out Sollecito" according to Vixen. Why he felt he had to do this since he'd never met Sollecito and, as far as we know, had never met Amanda either, is a mystery. But Vixen has told us.
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 2nd August 2020, 12:49 PM   #2794
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
No, no, no....Luca lied "to help Sollecito explain how Knox knew how she had died" and he "clearly had an eager desire to help out and simply made things up in his enthusiasm to do so. There are signs he had a misguided belief he had to help out Sollecito" according to Vixen. Why he felt he had to do this since he'd never met Sollecito and, as far as we know, had never met Amanda either, is a mystery. But Vixen has told us.
It's not readily apparent how Vixen knows this stuff. So I am putting out a plea to her - please cite sources. By citing sources you have the wonderful opportunity to prove your opinions.

Simply coming back with a "you've been told", or "try to keep up" simply is not helpful, even if true. You present a compellingoid set of factoids.... and your opportunity is right there - connect the dots and we all convert to your position.

Why would you not want that?
__________________
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 2nd August 2020, 01:20 PM   #2795
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I'm sorry, I forgot you were present and you know exactly what everyone said or heard. How silly of me.

Nonetheless, Altieri DID testified he overheard a Red Cross driver and a member of the Carabinieri talking about the means by which Meredith had died and that he had informed Amanda of what he had heard. A very inconvenient fact for you, even if you choose to ignore it.

Amanda's response to the question could hardly be termed "bragging". More like she found the question ignorant - one doesn't need to experience having their throat slashed to know it would be a horrible way to die - and she responded accordingly.

I'm amused at how you interpret things. You see things exactly as you wish to see them, not as logic and common sense would dictate.
Here's Altieri's testimony on this:

Quote:
PUBBLICO MINISTERO – qualcuno l’ha detto?

TESTE - Sì, sì, sì, dopo un po', ecco, dopo che era sopraggiunta una macchina della croce rossa, sono arrivati la scientifica, i Carabinieri, tutti quanti, dopo un po' uno dei due medici, credo, di questa volante della croce rossa, non era un’ambulanza, è uscito dal sopralluogo, diciamo, all'interno della casa, rivolgendosi ad uno dei Carabinieri che era lì fuori gli ha un po' descritto quello che era successo, dicendo... facendo riferimento sia al fatto che le fosse stata tagliata la gola sia il fatto che aveva che aveva anche lottato, diciamo, e quindi da lì ho appreso questa cosa.

PUBBLICO MINISTERO - lei l'ha appresa, lo sa se l'hanno saputo anche gli altri? In particolare...

TESTE – Sì, c'era Paola affianco a me che l’ha sentito.
Google Translation with my help:

Quote:
Prosecutor: Did anyone say this {detail of how Meredith died}?

Witness [Altieri]: Yes, yes, yes, after a while, here, after a Red Cross vehicle had arrived, the scientific [police], the Carabinieri arrived, all of them, after a while one of the two doctors, I think, from this Red Cross vehicle, it was not an ambulance, he came out from the inspection, let's say, inside the house, addressing one of the Carabinieri who was out there he described a bit what had happened, saying ... referring both to the fact that her throat was cut and the fact that she had also fought, let's say, and so from there I learned this.

PROSECUTOR - you learned it, do you know if the others have known it too? In particular...

WITNESS - Yes, Paola was there next to me who heard him.

Last edited by Numbers; 2nd August 2020 at 01:27 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 2nd August 2020, 01:37 PM   #2796
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,398
Numbers, I already quoted both Luca's and Paola's testimonies (#2721) This was Vixen's response:

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
During the eight-month follow up to the trial Luca never discussed his claims with his sister. Quelle surprise so now it was Paula who claims she was the one who heard it. Did she convey this special knowledge to Knox by ESP? No, the ambulance man did NOT inform him or her of the cause of death and that Mez fought for her life, as the body was not even removed until much later, long after Altieri and co had gone. Any ambulancemen would not have been let anywhere near by the Carabinieri. How would they know of the cause of death when not even Lalli knew until after the autopsy?
I have no idea who this 'sister' is supposed to be unless Vix thinks Paola was his sister when she was actually his girlfriend. She also doesn't seem to understand that Paola ALSO overheard the police and ambulance men talking about Kercher's throat having been cut, not INSTEAD of.

Why she think the guys who would be there to remove the body would not be anywhere near the Carabinieri is anyone's guess. It's also a mystery why she thinks it would be illogical to conclude that having one's throat cut would be the cause of death. I think Lalli more than suspected what the cause of death was before he did the autopsy.
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 2nd August 2020, 02:48 PM   #2797
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Numbers, I already quoted both Luca's and Paola's testimonies (#2721) This was Vixen's response:

I have no idea who this 'sister' is supposed to be unless Vix thinks Paola was his sister when she was actually his girlfriend. She also doesn't seem to understand that Paola ALSO overheard the police and ambulance men talking about Kercher's throat having been cut, not INSTEAD of.

Why she think the guys who would be there to remove the body would not be anywhere near the Carabinieri is anyone's guess. It's also a mystery why she thinks it would be illogical to conclude that having one's throat cut would be the cause of death. I think Lalli more than suspected what the cause of death was before he did the autopsy.
Stacyhs, yes, my memory failed.

Thanks for having quoted that testimony! And by including Paola's testimony, you show the chain of transmission from Luca Altieri to Raffaele and thus to Amanda.

Last edited by Numbers; 2nd August 2020 at 02:53 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 2nd August 2020, 03:36 PM   #2798
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 804
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
On the highlighted part you might want to read the first page of judge Micheli's report...
Charge A is:
Quote:
del delitto di cui agli artt. 110,575,576 primo comma n. 5, in relazione al reato sub C) e 577 primo comma n. 4, in relazione all'art. 61 nn. 1 e 5, c.p., per avere in concorso con KNOX AMANDA MARIE e SOLLECITO RAFFAELE, ucciso KERCHER MEREDITH,...
"in concorso" translates to "joint murder" in this context, if I'm not mistaken (Numbers?)... and not to being "an accessory"...
So unless the charge was altered on the case's way up to Cassazione, Guede was convicted of "joint murder" and not just of "being an accessory"...
The media gets it wrong, of course. Here in Germany it's "gemeinschaftlich begangener Mord" (correct) vs. "Beihilfe" (false)...
But I guess you know that. The question is, why you are still propagating the "only as an accesory" nonsense?
Well, I guess Matthew Best got it
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
The Italian word "concorso" is interesting because its most common translation is "competition", so "in concorso con" can mean "in competition with" (see for example, a Google Translate mis-translation of the quoted phrase).

However, Collins Reverso provides the other translations relevant to the context of the use of "in concorso con" in Italian criminal law. In that context, it means "in complicity with" or "in combination with". That is, it indicates that one person committed a crime in a cooperative effort with another person.

Source: https://context.reverso.net/translat...n+concorso+con

The exact roles of the persons supposedly complicit in a joint crime are specified by an Italian court in the motivation report. None of the motivation reports convicting Guede identified him as an "accessory" (in its meaning under US or UK law). An accessory in the US or UK law provides some assistance to other criminals, but is not the chief actor and is not present during the commission of the criminal act. This obviously could not apply to Guede. However, Guede, the prosecution and at least one MR, that of the convicting Borsini appeals court, attempted to diminish Guede's responsibility for the murder/rape of Meredith Kercher while falsely attributing responsibility to Knox and Sollecito. The Giordano CSC panel MR, in finally convicting Guede, somewhat corrected this attempt to diminish Guede's responsibility, as follows.
Quote:
In the meantime it is now necessary to escape the attempt, pursued by the overall setting of the defence, but out of place in the context of this decision, to involve the Court in supporting the thesis of the responsibility of others, namely Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox, for the murder aggravated by the sexual assault of Meredith Kercher. The decision to which this court is called concerns uniquely the responsibility of Guede regarding the deed with which he is charged, and the possible participation of others in the crime should be taken into account only to the extent to which such a circumstance would have an impact on the exclusive commitment of the Court to either modifying or confirming the verdict of guilt of the defendant, which was entirely shared by the courts of first and second instance.
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
To more completely understand the context of "in concorso con" it is useful to examine the text of the relevant Italian law, CP Article 110, which uses a different word which has a clear translation:


Articolo 110 Codice penale

Pena per coloro che concorrono nel reato

Quando più persone concorrono nel medesimo reato, ciascuna di esse soggiace alla pena per questo stabilita, salve le disposizioni degli articoli seguenti.

Google Translation:

Article 110 Criminal Code

Penalty for those who cooperate in the crime

When several people cooperate in the same offense, each of them is subject to the penalty established for this, subject to the provisions of the following articles.
_____

Since the charges against Guede list CP Article 110 with none of the immediately subsequent articles, the understanding must be that Guede was to be considered fully responsible for the crimes against Kercher; he was not an "accomplice" or "accessory" (if those US legal terms even have meaning in Italian law).

The other charges against Guede are all specific to the crimes - murder and sexual violence - committed against Kercher, and to their aggravating factors or circumstances that justify an increase in the penalties upon conviction.

CP Art. 575 is Murder
CP Art. 576 is the aggravating factors for murder, including when the penalty may be life imprisonment
CP Art. 577 is additional aggravating factors for life imprisonment
CP Art. 609 bis is Sexual Violence
CP Art. 609 ter is aggravating factors for sexual violence (such as using a weapon).
Thank you Numbers.
So I guess we can file the "convicted only as an accessory or accomplice" along with a lot of other things in this case under: "lost in translation"
It's interesting though, that so called "journalists" like Nadeau, Pisa and Vogt - who should have known better (since they are fluent in Italian... ) - have been propagating and repeating this nonsense, creating the wrong impression that Guede was convicted of a "lesser" crime than his alleged "accomplices"...
__________________
"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 2nd August 2020, 03:49 PM   #2799
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 804
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Yes, of course. The right of a US citizen not to have her own confession used against her is of paramount importance over the poor victim being sexually assaulted, tortured and viciously killed is uppermost.

Let's remember the real victim, here.
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
It's a good thing no one accused you of this crime. According to you, by being accused you forfeit your right to defend yourself against predatory police tactics.
Well, Bill, as you have been told numerous times:
- police would never ever arrest innocent people
- prosecutors would never ever bring cases against innocent people to trial, because
- pre-trial judges would never ever let them... So if a case actually goes to trial
- it's just a show to present the great work of police and prosecutors to the public...

...at least that's the way "justice" seems to work when it comes to - what do you rightly call them? - guilter nutters?
__________________
"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 2nd August 2020, 10:03 PM   #2800
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Well, Bill, as you have been told numerous times:
- police would never ever arrest innocent people
- prosecutors would never ever bring cases against innocent people to trial, because
- pre-trial judges would never ever let them... So if a case actually goes to trial
- it's just a show to present the great work of police and prosecutors to the public...

...at least that's the way "justice" seems to work when it comes to - what do you rightly call them? - guilter nutters?
Altieri described in fine minute detail two mobile phones he saw present at the scene. He later had to admit he completely made it up. There were no such phones.

So a person admirably eager to be of help, kicking down the door and backing up Sollecito, a fellow young person in deep dippy doo, being hassled by the pigs, as one does. A mis-memory.

Fact is, Knox did not offer it as a tenuous opinion, she stated it as a known fact, which is no surprise as KNOX WUZ THERE as upheld by the Supreme Court.

No two ways about it.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
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 01:14 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.