Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:21 am
It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:21 am
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 - SEPT 29, 13

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 19 of 21 [ 5060 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
Author Message

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Hey E, I am not able to get into TJMK either.


The domain truejustice.org is not resolving. That means the site is likely still there but no one can reach it.

I was concerned at first because someone did a really clumsy attempt at hacking the wiki last night and then today TJMK goes missing but is appears to be a routing issue rather than a site issue.

A check of the sites records shows activity today 19-Sep-2013 13:31:29 UTC so 4 hours ago something was changed and that is causing issue with the site resolving.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:33 pm   Post subject: COINCIDENCE?   

Leone from London posts this update from TJMK here: London John?

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by Leone » Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:07 am

Quote:
Latest...

Judge Nencini’s Guidelines Authorize Televising Of The Florence Appeal Live In Real Time


then:

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by ScifiTom » Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:15 am

Quote:
To everyone

Hey everyone, I can't get into True Justice of Meredith Kercher today is it Poor Peter failing the job of not knowing anything into a court of law. His site is down of what I am getting is Opps True Justice is not working. So something is happen and yes Peter we know your site is dying of bad taste, of why you fail so terrible into your justice system!!!


Gloating much?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The poor thing is mad, bars??????????

She thinks she is in a John Wayne movie in Mexico, for Christ's sake, prisons don't have bars like you see in films, there are walls and doors and there is no letter box, window, gap or anything, an insect could not get in or out, prisoners cannot see in or out, the only way the prison officers can see in, is through a spy hole, bars, hi ha har, my warted elephant's arse, she is so lost in her fantasy world she even believes it and forgets, as does Crusoe, that it is so easy to disprove.

On those prison wings every movement has to be accounted for.
That's the only way they can control a prison and stop prisoners escaping, passing money, drugs, weapons, etc., beating up or killing one another.

A director is miles away in a building that looks nothing like the prison interior (only rarely going onto any wing).
There (in the director's premises) he/she will receive outside visitors.

Prisoner only very occasionally, by SPECIAL request in relation to some matter or because they have done something wrong, go there, accompanied by two prison officers (minimum) the prisioner gets TAKEN to that director, before getting to him/her, the prisioner shall go through a whole series of locked corridors/doors (of steel with bars), each one with prison officers with responsibility for that section; she is insane to say such stuff, it is so easy to disprove.

Fnox: Ah ah, bang bang bang, oew my head, guards, water, water, help, why ain't ya feeding me, water, help, I ain't did nuffin.

Knox has been reading the things we say and has now worked that into her escapades, she did not complain because she knew nobody would believe her, ha.... ha.... ha.... ha..... haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

No, incorrect, it would have been examined immediately, she would have been exposed as a liar, fast; prisoners are all locked up, and it would have been so easy to show that she was lying.

The bit about nobody believing her anyway, is not to do with being accused or convicted, nor has it anything to do with falsely accusing a man who worked without any trouble in the prison service for 45 years, it has everything to do though with her telling lies about everyone and everything and for that reason she will never be believed by anyone with the slightest hint of intelligence and real knowledge as this particular lie fits into the wentire sequence as generated by this individual found guilty of falsely accusing an innicent man of rape & murder. She did that, nobody else.

The only thing I can imagine is that she was obsessed with sex and must have fanntasized about the males in the prison.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ava wrote:
Thank you as always for the updates, guermantes. She seriously seems to think she can somehow save her skin by giving interview after interview. Otherwise, why would she do this to herself (and the world, and most of all: the Kerchers)? She is old enough to say "no" to interview offers/her PR machine if she's really as miserable as she claims to be. Or maybe she's enjoying it in a weird way, even though she's not good at it.


Hi Ava,

yeah, wasn't a good look, was it: big time sour grapes. I guess it's hard to swallow to see yourself on trial for murder for the third time. Why is she doing this? She is a stubborn and unforgiving person; it's Amanda Knox vs. The World now. She is driven by the urge to prove herself, to show how tough she is. She has this delusion that she has been wronged by the Italian courts, which is just a delusion.

What she fails to understand, though, is that the public's perception of herself is what she portrays herself to be. Blaming others doesn't exactly endear her to the wider public. She seemed rather arrogant and ungracious, especially to Italians, in these last two interviews. Who in their right mind would go on Italian TV and say something like: "In Italy, I learned bad things to be afraid of and how not to trust people." She doesn't strike me as being very smart.

She also seemed, as Sollecito said, to be "out of control" again, emotionally. At least he showed more restraint during his interviews.

So all it does is only damage her already bad, frosty image, IMO.
Top Profile 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The stories continue to get bigger. Didn't she claim that a worker allowed in to fix her shower drain tried to hug or kiss her in her book. Now in Oggi we hear guards took her to the bathroom and tried to do the same.Sounds like it happened often. Isn't this a new claim? I get the distinct feeling that Amanda is enjoying letting everyone know how great her Italian is and as a result is adding bits to give it more flair and punch. What happened to prison being pretty ' swell' ? early musings I guess.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I was reading over at IIP a few weeks ago and one of the posters (don't ask which one, they all blend together to me) made the comment that Amanda's problem was that she wasn't 'forceful enough' to date giving her 'truth'. It was suggested that she needed to be more forceful and basically get in everyone's face with her story.

Perhaps that's what we are seeing. I dunno.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

And to think I used to anticipate hearing her speak to herself. It's like one of those stories when someone makes a wish to a literal-minded genie.

"You'd like to hear her speak, eh? WELL HERE SHE COMES!"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

R Crusoe gets in on the Foxious act

Crusoe: Oh yeah, yeah yeah, well, every night, this officer would arrive at my cell, dressed only in high heels, offering me sandwiches and coffee, just tell the truth, she said, and your wish is my command, I banged my head against the bars and just like in that film Papillon, I begged for mercy as she started beating me.

Reporter: You sure about this

Crusoe: Of course I'm sure, she was 6 feet 2, brunette, followed me into the shower, I dídn't klnow she was there to fix the plumbing, I said, don't do this, it's not allowed, she took advantage of me, I said what are you doing here, so I showered fully clothed

Reporter: But what did she look like, what was her name

Crusoe: Jessica Beilioni I believe, she looked good but I would never betray my ex, my honori is too valuable, even if, like an idiot, I have to spend 35 years in prison I shall never tell.

Reporter: You are very convincing

Crusoe: thank you

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I'm embarrassed to admit that it doesn't make any difference to me. I don't understand what she is trying to say when she is speaking English either.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

malvern wrote:
The stories continue to get bigger. Didn't she claim that a worker allowed in to fix her shower drain tried to hug or kiss her in her book. Now in Oggi we hear guards took her to the bathroom and tried to do the same.Sounds like it happened often. Isn't this a new claim? I get the distinct feeling that Amanda is enjoying letting everyone know how great her Italian is and as a result is adding bits to give it more flair and punch. What happened to prison being pretty ' swell' ? early musings I guess.


Only not quite musings when you put it to paper, go to concerts, and make hand drawings.
She also had the priest to speak to her, and reporters also wrote how she was adjusting well to prison.

Only later did we get the 'hair falling out' and 'eyesight failing' bologna. Wasn't RS going bonkers too? What happened... did he get treatment for his psychosis?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Only later did we get the 'hair falling out' and 'eyesight failing' bologna. Wasn't RS going bonkers too? What happened... did he get treatment for his psychosis?


Knox Codefendant Having Mental Problems (2009)

Quote:
Speaking to the Italian news agency Ansa, Maori said Sollecito continues to suffer from "space-time perception" and an inability to understand fully what has happened to him to the point of repeatedly asking to be released.

In the Il Messaggero interview, Sollecito conceded he is having difficulty accepting what has happened to him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Yeah... space-time perception can be a real bugaboo. The difficulty accepting I can get.
Nobody wants to get caught... for the most part anyway.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I was reminded of it by his comment to the HardTalk host about the police not wanting him to know what day they were talking about -- if he thinks that's a believable lie that anyone can relate to, it might be a clue into his wobbly faculties and perhaps also a reason for his helicopter father.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Believable like his phantom emails... like his lawyers just forgot about a solid alibi during trial. Right.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Ava wrote:
Thank you as always for the updates, guermantes. She seriously seems to think she can somehow save her skin by giving interview after interview. Otherwise, why would she do this to herself (and the world, and most of all: the Kerchers)? She is old enough to say "no" to interview offers/her PR machine if she's really as miserable as she claims to be. Or maybe she's enjoying it in a weird way, even though she's not good at it.


Hi Ava,

yeah, wasn't a good look, was it: big time sour grapes. I guess it's hard to swallow to see yourself on trial for murder for the third time. Why is she doing this? She is a stubborn and unforgiving person; it's Amanda Knox vs. The World now. She is driven by the urge to prove herself, to show how tough she is. She has this delusion that she has been wronged by the Italian courts, which is just a delusion.

What she fails to understand, though, is that the public's perception of herself is what she portrays herself to be. Blaming others doesn't exactly endear her to the wider public. She seemed rather arrogant and ungracious, especially to Italians, in these last two interviews. Who in their right mind would go on Italian TV and say something like: "In Italy, I learned bad things to be afraid of and how not to trust people." She doesn't strike me as being very smart.

She also seemed, as Sollecito said, to be "out of control" again, emotionally. At least he showed more restraint during his interviews.

So all it does is only damage her already bad, frosty image, IMO.


I see that differently Guer, she is not driven to prove, not in that way, because if she is guilty, then she is fully aware that the case against her is correct, rather it is her will to try and get off that is behind her doing these things, I in no way believe she is under any delusion at all about being wronged because she knows it is only right that they try to bring those responsible to justice so, from her viewpoint where she is the killer, then she cannot be under a delusion of being wrong, for she knows that SHE is wrong, she just wants to undermine the case in order to get off.

One would, as murderer, need to be more than delusional to actually consider yourself wronged, only if she were innocent could she have the view that she was being wronged if everything brought forward happened to be truly incorrect, but everything points to all of the evidence, curcumstantial too, fitting together as it has been presented by the prosection.

She is, for her own benefit, trying to banish everything, directly related to reality, out of her mind, so you hear her repeating what her supporters said and still say, but SHE is the one being accused so shouldn't SHE have an OWN original version, without needing to use what some person who was not there and is not involved, says?

I think though, that this is actually what you meant above.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Here's something that may get an idea of Knox's financials, as her adviser writes this for Hollywood Reporter, March 26, 2013: Bargain Bob

"The man behind blockbuster book contracts for both Clintons and Ann Curry's exit deal from "Today" says the memoirist, who scored $4 million for "Waiting to Be Heard," went through "every person's nightmare."---

"THR: What's the advantage of billing by the hour instead of taking a traditional commission?
Barnett: I don't make sense for a first-time novelist from Vermont who's getting a $10,000 advance. I admire them, but I would make no sense to them. Let me answer it this way: I recently had a deal where the advance was $2 million. That would've cost $300,000 with a 15 percent agent. My bill was, I think, $35,000. That's a big difference."

Does a $2 million advance sound just about right? Final word from 'Bargain Bob' (Stilicho's quip, not mine :)

"Barnett: The advances are determined by the marketplace. I'm happy to say that with all the big-advance books I've done, only two have not made money for the publisher".

Make that three now ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Interviews, interviews. Same old, same old. Nigh on six years labouring under the same error that it's all about PR. It matters not a jot and the public traction has never been that large in any case. All that matters is what happens in court. They thought a PR campaign could influence the court or force a release as a matter of politics and thought they had hit the jackpot. The reek of fish hung heavy around the appeal court but it's not over until the fat lady sings. Now quite what was causing that fishy smell is a matter of conjecture but the result is annulled and it's back to the real world where the court looks at the hard evidence.

No amount of special pleading, cheap books, slanderous accusations and 'poor suffering me' stories will change what happens in court. (Stories that strangely often revolve around the fixation that men are all after her sexually and want to force themselves on her). Police, journalists, prison guards, they're all obsessed by poor Amanda's sexuality and just cannot think of anything else apparently. One look at her unremarkable visage and they're out of control. The racist undertones are apparent; it's those pesky Italians who just cannot control their lust and need to persecute an innocent and naïve white American girl. Her stories are more akin to a cheap 70's 'women in prison' porn film than an account of real life. The main person obsessed by Amanda Knox's sexuality seems to be Amanda Knox herself. Some of her creepy would-be rescuers are puffing to catch up of course.

They're all stuck in a fantasy world. Unless they have the means and opportunity to cook up another fish dish in the latest court, they need to stop and start facing reality. The chances of either seem minimal.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Okay, cos I'm a good samaritan and learned a trick from Crusoe, I'm going to set up a donate button to collect funds to send Knox to the court in Italy, it's just a shame they are not under obligation to attend, especially if Chief Accuser Knox is going to England, it would be so fitting for her to be incarcerated there, at least until Britain extradites her, anyway the donate button would say click here, to help Knox attend court. Everyone knows Knox spent all her winnings on takeaways and stuff

Donate to send Knox to Florence. Click HERE

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox to appear live on TODAY Friday
By Scott Stump,
TODAY contributor

In her first live U.S. interview in advance of her upcoming re-trial, Amanda Knox will appear on TODAY Friday to talk about her six-year saga.
...
After her live interview, Amanda and her sister Deanna will talk to Carson Daly in TODAY's Orange Room about their life and family now.


TODAY NEWS
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Any one else having problems accessing True Justice? I note the number of hacks being attempted by members of Bruce's forum, but then, that's what the Amandii do.



Well, let's not jump the gun, we need some sort of evidence before we accuse Fischer or any of his people of hacking, either individually or collectively. Without evidence, such public accusations are libelous.

Honestly, I don't believe Fischer's minions have the technical capability. And you don't suddenly become a hacker overnight. IF, and I emphasise the "if", someone connected to the defence or FOAKers have hacked anywhere, then they've hired someone, someone (or plural) brought in from outside. Douglas Preston has threatened to hire hackers to hack us before now (or at least, The Machine's email accounts and his computer). But here's the thing, it's most likely nothing to do with them, as right now there is a major global cyber war going on, the principle antagonists being Anonymous and the Syrian Electronic Army (S.E.A). The latter, are not just attacking Western Government websites and sites that criticise President Assad, but any Western based websites that are vulnerable (they are then defaced with all manner of pro-Assad propaganda). And a lot of sites are vulnerable as many have poor security. Moreover, lots of other hacking goes on in the world for a range of other reasons and anyone can be a target at any time (often, it's for financial reasons). Just the other day (well, a few weeks ago) I removed a compressed archive file that some bot or individual had uploaded to the forum and that file was carrying a trojan payload. It wasn't designed to hack the forum, but it very easily could have been. Our hosts constantly have to fight off DDos attacks. This is crap that webmasters or/and their hosts have to deal with all the time. Welcome to the web, the one place where extreme paranoia is justified.

But, we cannot possibly say who it was or why it happened, without more information.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Hey E, I am not able to get into TJMK either.


As expected, the attacks begin. They're also trolling all your social networks, following Twitter and so on, then posting any personal photos they can find. All as a build up to Sept 30.


The solution is to block them, all of them. They can't troll you on Twitter if they're blocked. Trolls on Twitter require feeding. If you don't feed them by responding to their trolls, they wither away and die. They need you to live, as they are parasites and parasites need hosts to survive.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Hey E, I am not able to get into TJMK either.


The domain truejustice.org is not resolving. That means the site is likely still there but no one can reach it.

I was concerned at first because someone did a really clumsy attempt at hacking the wiki last night and then today TJMK goes missing but is appears to be a routing issue rather than a site issue.

A check of the sites records shows activity today 19-Sep-2013 13:31:29 UTC so 4 hours ago something was changed and that is causing issue with the site resolving.



Not the S.E.A then, they know what they're doing. If it was clumsy, you may be able to track it back to its source, depending on the method used. Being a good hacker is not just about being able to hack sites, it's about being able to do so whilst also covering your tracks and the latter is the hardest part. Bad hackers get caught.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:05 am   Post subject: Re: COINCIDENCE?   

Ergon wrote:
Leone from London posts this update from TJMK here: London John?

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by Leone » Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:07 am

Quote:
Latest...

Judge Nencini’s Guidelines Authorize Televising Of The Florence Appeal Live In Real Time


then:

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by ScifiTom » Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:15 am

Quote:
To everyone

Hey everyone, I can't get into True Justice of Meredith Kercher today is it Poor Peter failing the job of not knowing anything into a court of law. His site is down of what I am getting is Opps True Justice is not working. So something is happen and yes Peter we know your site is dying of bad taste, of why you fail so terrible into your justice system!!!


Gloating much?



Peter's site will often go down when there's too much traffic. And if there's one thing Peter likes to do, it's steer lots of traffic to TJMK. Have they been advertising a new TJMK article recently? (I've been off-web for a while).

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Amanda Knox to appear live on TODAY Friday
By Scott Stump,
TODAY contributor

In her first live U.S. interview in advance of her upcoming re-trial, Amanda Knox will appear on TODAY Friday to talk about her six-year saga.
...
After her live interview, Amanda and her sister Deanna will talk to Carson Daly in TODAY's Orange Room about their life and family now.


TODAY NEWS



Infotainment.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Believable like his phantom emails... like his lawyers just forgot about a solid alibi during trial. Right.


Not merely phantom emails, a phantom internet connection!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Ava wrote:
Thank you as always for the updates, guermantes. She seriously seems to think she can somehow save her skin by giving interview after interview. Otherwise, why would she do this to herself (and the world, and most of all: the Kerchers)? She is old enough to say "no" to interview offers/her PR machine if she's really as miserable as she claims to be. Or maybe she's enjoying it in a weird way, even though she's not good at it.


Hi Ava,

yeah, wasn't a good look, was it: big time sour grapes. I guess it's hard to swallow to see yourself on trial for murder for the third time. Why is she doing this? She is a stubborn and unforgiving person; it's Amanda Knox vs. The World now. She is driven by the urge to prove herself, to show how tough she is. She has this delusion that she has been wronged by the Italian courts, which is just a delusion.

What she fails to understand, though, is that the public's perception of herself is what she portrays herself to be. Blaming others doesn't exactly endear her to the wider public. She seemed rather arrogant and ungracious, especially to Italians, in these last two interviews. Who in their right mind would go on Italian TV and say something like: "In Italy, I learned bad things to be afraid of and how not to trust people." She doesn't strike me as being very smart.

She also seemed, as Sollecito said, to be "out of control" again, emotionally. At least he showed more restraint during his interviews.

So all it does is only damage her already bad, frosty image, IMO.



I'll tell you exactly what she's doing. She refuses to attend her Appeal but she won't leave her legal team to get on with it, she always needs to be in control and she thinks she can control. In lieu of attending the Appeal (as she knows that without a doubt, they'll find her guilty), she has decided to hold her own trial, a trial by media, one where she writes the rules and is President of the court. She honestly thinks this pseudo trial will be able to influence "something". She isn't doing this for fun (although, she does love to talk about herself endlessly to any audience), she's doing it because she thinks it will achieve something. That is down either to naivety or desperation, or both. It's a very risky thing to do, as anything she says in the media can be used against her in court, but I think she feels she has nothing to lose at this point. I don't believe her for a moment when she says she believes the Appeal Court will acquit her. If that's true, why then does she feel the need to try and influence the process via the media?

This is why she never went to Gubio with Sollecito. She doesn't do "keeping your head down", she always has to be "there", trying to control things.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Ava wrote:
Thank you as always for the updates, guermantes. She seriously seems to think she can somehow save her skin by giving interview after interview. Otherwise, why would she do this to herself (and the world, and most of all: the Kerchers)? She is old enough to say "no" to interview offers/her PR machine if she's really as miserable as she claims to be. Or maybe she's enjoying it in a weird way, even though she's not good at it.


Hi Ava,

yeah, wasn't a good look, was it: big time sour grapes. I guess it's hard to swallow to see yourself on trial for murder for the third time. Why is she doing this? She is a stubborn and unforgiving person; it's Amanda Knox vs. The World now. She is driven by the urge to prove herself, to show how tough she is. She has this delusion that she has been wronged by the Italian courts, which is just a delusion.

What she fails to understand, though, is that the public's perception of herself is what she portrays herself to be. Blaming others doesn't exactly endear her to the wider public. She seemed rather arrogant and ungracious, especially to Italians, in these last two interviews. Who in their right mind would go on Italian TV and say something like: "In Italy, I learned bad things to be afraid of and how not to trust people." She doesn't strike me as being very smart.

She also seemed, as Sollecito said, to be "out of control" again, emotionally. At least he showed more restraint during his interviews.

So all it does is only damage her already bad, frosty image, IMO.


Not very smart and out of control sums it up nicely. Also sounds like a description of a common criminal in a way, doesn't it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I don't know if this is old news or not, but TJMK is back up: http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Any one else having problems accessing True Justice? I note the number of hacks being attempted by members of Bruce's forum, but then, that's what the Amandii do.



Well, let's not jump the gun, we need some sort of evidence before we accuse Fischer or any of his people of hacking, either individually or collectively. Without evidence, such public accusations are libelous.

Honestly, I don't believe Fischer's minions have the technical capability. And you don't suddenly become a hacker overnight. IF, and I emphasise the "if", someone connected to the defence or FOAKers have hacked anywhere, then they've hired someone, someone (or plural) brought in from outside. Douglas Preston has threatened to hire hackers to hack us before now (or at least, The Machine's email accounts and his computer). But here's the thing, it's most likely nothing to do with them, as right now there is a major global cyber war going on, the principle antagonists being Anonymous and the Syrian Electronic Army (S.E.A). The latter, are not just attacking Western Government websites and sites that criticise President Assad, but any Western based websites that are vulnerable (they are then defaced with all manner of pro-Assad propaganda). And a lot of sites are vulnerable as many have poor security. Moreover, lots of other hacking goes on in the world for a range of other reasons and anyone can be a target at any time (often, it's for financial reasons). Just the other day (well, a few weeks ago) I removed a compressed archive file that some bot or individual had uploaded to the forum and that file was carrying a trojan payload. It wasn't designed to hack the forum, but it very easily could have been. Our hosts constantly have to fight off DDos attacks. This is crap that webmasters or/and their hosts have to deal with all the time. Welcome to the web, the one place where extreme paranoia is justified.

But, we cannot possibly say who it was or why it happened, without more information.


First they post, in the past, it would be a good idea to hack us.
Doug Preston threatens to 'hire a teen age hacker' to hack us.
Then they decide to investigate McCall, and see who he is. An attempt is made to hack his forum two days ago and get email addresses (It was caught)
Bruce's member "Katody" writes
Quote:
Isn't 'McCall' that mentally ill guy, Brendan Mull? Maybe simply contact his caretakers again.

The very next day, as predicted, a Ground Report article from Bruce Fischer attacks McCall "Blogger" McCall

All part of their um, package.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
I don't know if this is old news or not, but TJMK is back up: http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php


I am quite excited about this. I feel that there is a good chance it will be picked up by one of our broadcasters. Something like HLN has been filling the day with live trial coverage. Because of the time difference they would be able to air the trial with translated voice-over during the day. We will know soon enough but I'm crossing my fingers on this.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

[wave=][/wave]I am brave I am.
took a look at the 13 photo's of the most happier than happy undisturbed family Foxion... but mom and dad and apple pie, another great big fat ol' lie.

My they are happy, one would think they'd never been divorced for years, one would never know dad refused to contribute financially to his daughters' keep, one would never know, only, we do, one would never think Knox is actually a convicted murderer,
because,
get this,
they were convicted.

The appeal that took place would and could either confirm the initial ruling or overturn it.

The ruling by Hellmann, that the highest court power of Italy established was invalid,
was thus, is thus void and null.

This therefore means that the original ruling still stands.

They are in fact convicted murderers.

As there was, or is, no element in place to stop people fleeing, they did just that, fled.

They are actually on the run; they have stated that they do not acknowledge the power of the courts.
This means that they do not respect them.

They have stated this repeatedly and most clearly while trying to portray the authorities in Italy as not knowing their profession, while both culprits, Knox and Sollecito, were found guilty and have absolutely no training in law.

They are busy trying to convince people that it is those trained in law, in every part of it, who are mistaken.

This refusing to show that they understand the reasoning behind what the Supreme Court stated as regards why the ruling by Hellmann was invalid, why all evidence must be viewed in relationship to every other piece of evidence, is a clear demonstration of their sheer and utter contempt for the judiciary in Italy,

That connectivity between all of the evidence is the basis of the way the law works and to refuse to accept it shows just how crimninally minded they are.

The evidence already did show that there was every reason to find them guilty the first time around and that the:
police,
scientists,
prosecutorial departments,
all carried out their work according to applicable legal procedures and did therefore nothing wrong.

Everything was accounted for.

However,
Hellmann just ignored what he pleased, which is illegal
replacing his idea of an angle on any single point,
throwing out any point originally established and substantiated, replacing with nothing at all, which is illegal.

You cannot just through out/cast aside/ignore a well-reasoned/underpinned/substantiated point/piece of evidence that is guided and outlined according to logic and facts,
and then offer no alternative to combat or bring the original point into dispute,
or to cancel out the original point,
you have to introduce another point or set of points that show,
through logic and in conformity with the rules of law,
that the point in the first ruling was not correct,
you cannot just say it was not and that's it. That is illegal.
That would mean a judge could do any old thing he or she pleased. That would be illegal.

The reasons for these rules are the result of olden times when those that ruled, and therefore the ruling classes, had the power to do what they liked as is and was the case anywhere, therefore to prevent individuals from assuming power that is not rightfully theirs to exert, these rules have been introduced so that a ruling is not a ruling of one man but of an entire body, and that body ultimately is the court judges that the supreme court is composed of.

It seems to me, that even if Hellmann were a terrible jusge, there is no way he would not know these things, for that reason I would imagine that there has been a conspiracy, and I would also imagine he must have been paid to do that, so that Knox would be released, and then he taking rwetirement, he must have imagined, would be exempt from any consequences.

It struck me as very peculiar from the get go when the first thing Hellmann announced was something that appeared to place himself smugly above his, what are after all, or were, his own colleagues,
to say that the only thing that is certain is that Meredith is dead,
seems like a bad omen,
for what he was already knew he was going to do, that is illegal
and he did know what he was going to do,
how he was going to rule,
before he ever entered court,
and this totally was prearranged it would seem in his mind long before court and this would be the way for him, along with a total disregard for all of the relevevant matter, irrespective of what might transpire in the courtroom, he was going to allow to go only one way.
His intention was to release them no matter what, that is also illegal,
it was his mission,
and missions are like assignments,
they are not supposed to be what judges do, you cannot have an own agenda as a judge, nobody would be safe.

Basically, Hellmann acted as though he too was above the law and as though he was a law unto himself.

There's no way he could not have known how he was under obligation to provide thorough reasoning for every point and every point already entered by previous judges that he was going to throw out,
he must have been fully aware that nowhere in Italian law was there any clause saying you can just change what has been determined by simply saying, I have a different opinion on that,
and this throwing out then being totally in line with what the defence or prosecution says,
depending on which side such a judge would be choosing to take beforehand thus not actually judging but taking sides, which is illegal,
this time it was taking it up for the defence,
without listening to any other input,
so ignoring this man Aviello, who had been brought in by the defence in the first place, to begin with, but then Hellmann refused to allow any further testimony from him when the prosecution requested it.
That is illegal.
The supreme court also stated how at no time had the defence objected when tests were made, and only much later started making all kinds of accusations, the supreme body stated that this unacceptable, invalid; if they truly had wabnted to object they ought to have done it in a timely fashion, as should Knox have done if she had indeed been upset by any prison officer, the actual truth obviously is that Knox was never approached by anyone and that the defence knew full well that Stefanoni's tests were kosher.

I guess what Knox and Sollecito are pretending to themselves or rather to those they hope continue to support them, is that all of these things are meaningless and that Hellmann, who disobeyed the laws he was trained in to grasp, in fact was superior to the supreme court judges in his knowledge and intellectual calibre.

Personally, seeing the way he handled things, makes me see him dressed in a parking attendant's uniform, I mean how he ended up in court, only God knows.


So there you have Ms Knox, 13 photos, pen in hand, what he heck is that supposed to be a display of? Is it the arduous writer, the serious, studious young lady, all nicely dressed, yet they don't miss a chance of presenting at least one of her showing off her legs on the bike, like maybe to keep the horn dogs interested like Desperado Danny, who came here pretending to give a shit and all as he was interested in was her looks, and his own genitals, and did not give a shit about what happened to Meredith, so yeah, dress her up in nice clothes, short skirts, have her on a bike like the girl next door, but do play im on the sexual element because well, many of her supporters have been led only it, if she had looked like Mama Cass, it is hardly likely that she'd have had anyone at all following her around hoping to get in her pants and it is not me who is vulgar to say such a thing because look at Lance Corporal Sfarzo, he does all of what he did then even manages to upset the family, try to bed Knox then all of them keep dead still about it, we only know it happened through a run of chance where Sfarzo had abused others, and so this was revealed, yet they support Sfarty the abuser because they did already and they cannot let go of it, or admit how awfully wrong thy have been, they never were and never are going to admit any such thing because they are totally uncaring about the truth, and who really got hurt, let alone killed.

All as I get is the impression of; hey, let's present it like she is a studious good girl, but she herself even imagines people think of her as some kind of an author, give us a break, is that how you do it, do you have to kill someone to get your parents back together?

Well done, well done.

Weird how they airbrush her up like that when on the video (same blue top on) she had whacking great bags under her eyes and the idea is to have her looking attractive but all as I see is ugliness because it is all ugly what is going on behind her eyes.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Knox has written a letter to her 'unborn child' :roll:

Amanda Knox imagines life in prison with 'letter to my unborn child'

Letter to My Unborn Child, by Amanda Knox

My dearest Natasha, or Lotte, or Astrid,

Today is always a new day. For a change I had tea this morning, with honey, instead of the coffee mix and watery milk. The usual fette biscottate. I work in the prison nursery, or nido, as often as I can, and today I cleaned the cribs and cabinets there from 8:30 to 11:30. The little Nigerian boy, Joseph, is learning to speak with his hands—a wave for “Hello,” a thumbs-up or down for “Yes” and “No,” a twist of the wrist to say, “Please open the door.” You would say, “Agente, aprimi il cancello?”


TODAY
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Knox has written a letter to her 'unborn child' :roll:

Amanda Knox imagines life in prison with 'letter to my unborn child'

Letter to My Unborn Child, by Amanda Knox

My dearest Natasha, or Lotte, or Astrid,

Today is always a new day. For a change I had tea this morning, with honey, instead of the coffee mix and watery milk. The usual fette biscottate. I work in the prison nursery, or nido, as often as I can, and today I cleaned the cribs and cabinets there from 8:30 to 11:30. The little Nigerian boy, Joseph, is learning to speak with his hands—a wave for “Hello,” a thumbs-up or down for “Yes” and “No,” a twist of the wrist to say, “Please open the door.” You would say, “Agente, aprimi il cancello?”


TODAY


God what a devious liar she is, now the little African boy, give us a break she acted like a complete racist, is entirely unremorseful about falsely accusing a black man of rape and murder, and now she's the little black baby hugging helper outer, whatever next: the small boy didn't pester her for sex?

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Truly, I've had enough of her interviews.

Amanda Knox, video interview via Skype: "I'm not going back to Italy for the trial"

Speaking Italian in a confident way, unravels between conditional and subjunctive, and explains to the reporter of La Repubblica, Meo Ponte, via Skype, why she will not return to Italy for the appeals process. Amanda Knox speaks from Seattle, from her home in front of the camera on a PC.

Here's how she proclaims her innocence in a lengthy video-interview in La Repubblica.


BLITZ QUOTIDIANO

WARNING: the full Skype video is nearly 20 minutes long!
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Knox has written a letter to her 'unborn child' :roll:

Amanda Knox imagines life in prison with 'letter to my unborn child'

Letter to My Unborn Child, by Amanda Knox

My dearest Natasha, or Lotte, or Astrid,

Today is always a new day. For a change I had tea this morning, with honey, instead of the coffee mix and watery milk. The usual fette biscottate. I work in the prison nursery, or nido, as often as I can, and today I cleaned the cribs and cabinets there from 8:30 to 11:30. The little Nigerian boy, Joseph, is learning to speak with his hands—a wave for “Hello,” a thumbs-up or down for “Yes” and “No,” a twist of the wrist to say, “Please open the door.” You would say, “Agente, aprimi il cancello?”


TODAY


Trainwreck... What are they thinking? Seriously. I am holding my head in either awe or disgust. Certainly disbelief.
I am trying to visualize this from a FOA, or FamilyOA standpoint. Shame on all of you. You believe this. You believe HER. Or, at least, you say that you do. And you all sit there and enable this?

Here is a word for all of you: Therapy. Help, counseling. Is it your plan, in believing her, to let her totally implode and then sit back and say, "See, it's Italy's fault, it's PMFs fault, the media did this to her?" For God's sake, if any of you truly believe her, get her off the TV and into some form of intervention. You're the people who insist they care about her. Seriously, I believe this is all a sham. It has to be. Nobody who truly cared about another human being would allow this.

ETA: Maybe that's the plan. Keep showing and telling what a total mess she is and then hospitalize her as the time gets closer. Point is, that plan is already a total fail, because the time to do this would have been BEFORE all of the interviews were allowed to take place. Totally unbelievable.


Last edited by Napia5 on Fri Sep 20, 2013 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Here is Meo Ponte's original report for La Repubblica:

Amanda Knox:
"Four years in prison
aged me by fourty"

By Meo Ponte

LA REPUBBLICA

I'll post a translation later. It's a little too much Amanda Knox in one week.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Any one else having problems accessing True Justice? I note the number of hacks being attempted by members of Bruce's forum, but then, that's what the Amandii do.



Well, let's not jump the gun, we need some sort of evidence before we accuse Fischer or any of his people of hacking, either individually or collectively. Without evidence, such public accusations are libelous.

Honestly, I don't believe Fischer's minions have the technical capability. And you don't suddenly become a hacker overnight. IF, and I emphasise the "if", someone connected to the defence or FOAKers have hacked anywhere, then they've hired someone, someone (or plural) brought in from outside. Douglas Preston has threatened to hire hackers to hack us before now (or at least, The Machine's email accounts and his computer). But here's the thing, it's most likely nothing to do with them, as right now there is a major global cyber war going on, the principle antagonists being Anonymous and the Syrian Electronic Army (S.E.A). The latter, are not just attacking Western Government websites and sites that criticise President Assad, but any Western based websites that are vulnerable (they are then defaced with all manner of pro-Assad propaganda). And a lot of sites are vulnerable as many have poor security. Moreover, lots of other hacking goes on in the world for a range of other reasons and anyone can be a target at any time (often, it's for financial reasons). Just the other day (well, a few weeks ago) I removed a compressed archive file that some bot or individual had uploaded to the forum and that file was carrying a trojan payload. It wasn't designed to hack the forum, but it very easily could have been. Our hosts constantly have to fight off DDos attacks. This is crap that webmasters or/and their hosts have to deal with all the time. Welcome to the web, the one place where extreme paranoia is justified.

But, we cannot possibly say who it was or why it happened, without more information.


First they post, in the past, it would be a good idea to hack us.
Doug Preston threatens to 'hire a teen age hacker' to hack us.
Then they decide to investigate McCall, and see who he is. An attempt is made to hack his forum two days ago and get email addresses (It was caught)
Bruce's member "Katody" writes
Quote:
Isn't 'McCall' that mentally ill guy, Brendan Mull? Maybe simply contact his caretakers again.

The very next day, as predicted, a Ground Report article from Bruce Fischer attacks McCall "Blogger" McCall

All part of their um, package.



Yes, I understand and agree, that behaviour is suspicious, but that still doesn't quite constitute enough evidence to publicly accuse them of having done it, as an absolute fact. We can post that we suspect that they they "may" be responsible, but without more data as evidence any public statements that they did it as fact would be libelous.

I know Preston made that threat, but that was donkeys ago. If he was truly serious and he had the ability, nerve and will to carry out his threat (or attempt to), he'd have done it long ago. If FOAKer command have the ability to attempt such attacks, why haven't they attempted to do so in the (almost) six years before now? And if the FOAKers are attacking justice sites, why has no attempt been to attack Net or Org, or Net's two DotNet Twitter accounts.

My current line of thinking is that either the attack on MOMK.com was carried out by someone unconnected to the FOAK for reasons unknown, or perhaps some lone FOAKer has been doing a bit of googling on How-To-Hack-For-Dummies and has taken it upon themselves to try and have a go, in the hopes that they may have some success to take back to FOAK Headquarters and wave around and win a "Hero Status Award". In the event that was the case, the intention was most likely to try and find out the identities of McCall and his MOMK.com team to be used in an attempt to bully them into silence and to use the info to try and dig up dirt about them (or anything innocent that can be twisted into a lie) so they can be publicly smeared.

But, these are just educated guesses as that's what we're really doing right now, guessing. Before we can move beyond guessing into the realm of any kind of certainty, we need hard data, or some other form of hard evidence.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox: “I have to think the worst-case scenario”
By Mary Elizabeth Williams

The tabloid queen talks to "Today" about how the country sees her: "I’m either a victim or a bloodthirsty killer"

It didn’t matter that everybody knew Amanda Knox wasn’t going to say anything new on the “Today” show Friday, that she wasn’t going to drop any big bombshells. It didn’t matter, because Amanda Knox is such a subject of deep public fascination, she could have sat in that chair opposite Matt Lauer and said nothing at all, and people would have tuned in. And she knew that. Amanda Knox – whose name has become synonymous with a lurid murder, and all those rumors about orgies and devil worship and drugs. The tabloid headline queen of the world. The pretty, all-American girl.


SALON

Photo of Knox, her sister Deanna and Carson Daly: happy faces all round.

http://instagram.com/p/ee53VpAvQB/#

I thought she was suffering from PTSD? ;) I do think she is sick: grandiose lying is one of the characteristics of being a sociopath.

https://twitter.com/StephSiegelNBC/status/381013638531649536/photo/1
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thankfully, Nick Squires has translated parts of the Amanda Knox La Repubblica video-interview:

Amanda Knox: I aged 40 years in prison and returning to Italy would be a "return to hell"
By Nick Squires

"The evidence shows that he was there. His DNA was everywhere, all over the room, also mixed with the blood of Meredith. And he had a history of breaking into houses while carrying a knife. And then he got rid of all his clothing and fled Italy. It was not a complicated case."


THE TELEGRAPH
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

'I loosen her up': Amanda Knox sister on their family bond (VIDEO)

So Deanna is trying to help her sister unwind.
“I loosen her up,’’ Deanna said. “She's a little tense now, so that's where I come in. We're working on it.”


TODAY
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

No wonder I don't watch daytime television.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Thanks for your support, Tamale. It may not seem that way, but I have kept most of my own battles away from this forum. But appropriating my identity, stealing my copyrighted title and material, setting up a fake profile on. Dating site? They are being hit hard, and don't know much yet. But when Bruce Fischer lies to his own members that I-A doesn't support those activities? He lies, and we have the proof of it in a screen grab, the best kind. And make no mistake, they aren't attacking me, they are attacking justice for Meredith.


I know you have...those FOA pests are probably attacking you from all sides. You have the one thing that gives you the edge...Truth...oh, and intelligence.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hi all. I got my solar/internet going with out blowing anything up. It was close, tho. I must go read up and then I will be back.
pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that Sollecito doesn't actually no anything about computers. Some universities offer degrees in computer media which is basically playing with various design applications and not a real computer science degree. I would not be surprised if that is what Sollecito's degree turns out to be in.

Now that said being able to establish that you were on a computer at the time of death and so incapable of being the person who murdered Meredith is not difficult to do. You don't need a computer science degree for that. This is especially true given Sollecito claims to have been sending e-mails to his professors. That is an obvious lie because if these e-mails existed it would be so very to establish and his defence team would have. That none of the Groupies even question why a murder suspect is lying is a perfect example of how little critical thought they have given this.

Regarding the cleaning of the hall I am in agreement with Iodine that I don't believe there was a significant cleaning of the hallway. The luminol traces would look different if there was.


I have always wondered about his mentality..and, I always (like you) wondered if he was unaware that the server/mother ship would have them. It seemed so obvious.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I was reading over at IIP a few weeks ago and one of the posters (don't ask which one, they all blend together to me) made the comment that Amanda's problem was that she wasn't 'forceful enough' to date giving her 'truth'. It was suggested that she needed to be more forceful and basically get in everyone's face with her story.

Perhaps that's what we are seeing. I dunno.

Her advisors and handlers are grasping in the dark. They have reached Chaos. pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

tamale wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I was reading over at IIP a few weeks ago and one of the posters (don't ask which one, they all blend together to me) made the comment that Amanda's problem was that she wasn't 'forceful enough' to date giving her 'truth'. It was suggested that she needed to be more forceful and basically get in everyone's face with her story.

Perhaps that's what we are seeing. I dunno.

Her advisors and handlers are grasping in the dark. They have reached Chaos. pp-(


Hi, tamale. All that I get from this is that her 'people', whoever they may be, can't believe that she is innocent either. Who in their right mind would believe that this person is this truly terrorized, stressed. depressed, suffering from PTSD, and think that it was a GOOD thing to parade around, giving interviews in this state? Who allows this with people that they truly love and believe in?

I try to be a reasonable person, and try to view where the other person is coming from. And all I can think to say is that I would have to be bat-shit crazy to encourage this if I truly felt she was innocent. They all have already said that she will not be going back. So, be done with it already.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

So, as I see it, bottom line:

1. you believe she is guilty and see these interviews as an attempt to gain sympathy or,
2. you believe that she is innocent, in which case you are bat-shit crazy for encouraging and enabling this.

Are there any other options?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I have gotten to the point in reading the translation where it is difficult for me to post my opinion.

Yesterday, with first reading, I was filled with optimism, both for justice for Meredith, and a more selfish sense in reading that I had pinpointed correctly the obvious flaws with the Hellman Motivation. It felt good to be right.

However, I slept on it last night, and I awoke with such an overwhelming sense of sadness that it took a few moments to process what my problem was. Sleep is generally a time where the subconscious gears click into place, problems sometimes resolved and a refreshed picture emerges. And I came to realize that my thoughts have again settled on the Kerchers.

While I am overjoyed that the SC is moving forward in righting this absolute wrong, (and there can be no denial at this point that Hellman was wrong, if not out and out illegal), I'm horrified anew at what a travesty the Kerchers have endured these past years.

I'm sending them good thoughts today, and feeling much regret and sadness that all of this was even necessary.
Rest in peace, Meredith.

God yes...The Kerchers are amazing and cultured and classy. RIP Meredith
Top Profile 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

It's going to be a long autumn.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
So, as I see it, bottom line:

1. you believe she is guilty and see these interviews as an attempt to gain sympathy or,
2. you believe that she is innocent, in which case you are bat-shit crazy for encouraging and enabling this.

Are there any other options?


The only other one I know is like the most of the media... take a little bit of the 'given to you' information without investigating the source/information and MAKING a decision and showing/writing about it. Disgusting.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Any one else having problems accessing True Justice? I note the number of hacks being attempted by members of Bruce's forum, but then, that's what the Amandii do.



Well, let's not jump the gun, we need some sort of evidence before we accuse Fischer or any of his people of hacking, either individually or collectively. Without evidence, such public accusations are libelous.

Honestly, I don't believe Fischer's minions have the technical capability. And you don't suddenly become a hacker overnight. IF, and I emphasise the "if", someone connected to the defence or FOAKers have hacked anywhere, then they've hired someone, someone (or plural) brought in from outside. Douglas Preston has threatened to hire hackers to hack us before now (or at least, The Machine's email accounts and his computer). But here's the thing, it's most likely nothing to do with them, as right now there is a major global cyber war going on, the principle antagonists being Anonymous and the Syrian Electronic Army (S.E.A). The latter, are not just attacking Western Government websites and sites that criticise President Assad, but any Western based websites that are vulnerable (they are then defaced with all manner of pro-Assad propaganda). And a lot of sites are vulnerable as many have poor security. Moreover, lots of other hacking goes on in the world for a range of other reasons and anyone can be a target at any time (often, it's for financial reasons). Just the other day (well, a few weeks ago) I removed a compressed archive file that some bot or individual had uploaded to the forum and that file was carrying a trojan payload. It wasn't designed to hack the forum, but it very easily could have been. Our hosts constantly have to fight off DDos attacks. This is crap that webmasters or/and their hosts have to deal with all the time. Welcome to the web, the one place where extreme paranoia is justified.

But, we cannot possibly say who it was or why it happened, without more information.


First they post, in the past, it would be a good idea to hack us.
Doug Preston threatens to 'hire a teen age hacker' to hack us.
Then they decide to investigate McCall, and see who he is. An attempt is made to hack his forum two days ago and get email addresses (It was caught)
Bruce's member "Katody" writes
Quote:
Isn't 'McCall' that mentally ill guy, Brendan Mull? Maybe simply contact his caretakers again.

The very next day, as predicted, a Ground Report article from Bruce Fischer attacks McCall "Blogger" McCall

All part of their um, package.



Yes, I understand and agree, that behaviour is suspicious, but that still doesn't quite constitute enough evidence to publicly accuse them of having done it, as an absolute fact. We can post that we suspect that they they "may" be responsible, but without more data as evidence any public statements that they did it as fact would be libelous.

I know Preston made that threat, but that was donkeys ago. If he was truly serious and he had the ability, nerve and will to carry out his threat (or attempt to), he'd have done it long ago. If FOAKer command have the ability to attempt such attacks, why haven't they attempted to do so in the (almost) six years before now? And if the FOAKers are attacking justice sites, why has no attempt been to attack Net or Org, or Net's two DotNet Twitter accounts.

My current line of thinking is that either the attack on MOMK.com was carried out by someone unconnected to the FOAK for reasons unknown, or perhaps some lone FOAKer has been doing a bit of googling on How-To-Hack-For-Dummies and has taken it upon themselves to try and have a go, in the hopes that they may have some success to take back to FOAK Headquarters and wave around and win a "Hero Status Award". In the event that was the case, the intention was most likely to try and find out the identities of McCall and his MOMK.com team to be used in an attempt to bully them into silence and to use the info to try and dig up dirt about them (or anything innocent that can be twisted into a lie) so they can be publicly.

But, these are just educated guesses as that's what we're really doing right now, guessing. Before we can move beyond guessing into the realm of any kind of certainty, we need hard data, or some other form of hard evidence.


It is ALWAYS the ones that they post-attack and verbally abuse are the ones that work and statements are the most devastating to them.

McCall should be proud to join the ranks of Michael, Yummi, Ergon, brmull, SomeAlibi and the Machine. They do dislike you... their conspiracy theories and excuses crumble every time you confront them. Way to go McCall. cl-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
So, as I see it, bottom line:

1. you believe she is guilty and see these interviews as an attempt to gain sympathy or,
2. you believe that she is innocent, in which case you are bat-shit crazy for encouraging and enabling this.

Are there any other options?


The only other one I know is like the most of the media... take a little bit of the 'given to you' information without investigating the source/information and MAKING a decision and showing/writing about it. Disgusting.


You're right, dg. #3 should read:

Those not bothering to be informed one way or the other. Just out to make a buck.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
The only thing Bruce Fischer has successfully exposed so far is his own stupidity.


Darn right!! heehee pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


Thanks for keeping us up to date with links to all her interviews Guermantes.

I find this bit interesting: "It’s not clear whether the U.S. would allow her to be extradited if she is re-convicted. Knox said her lawyers have not met with U.S. government officials to see if they would allow her to be extradited."

What Knox meant to say was have not met yet.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

You guys should probably sit down for this, but CNN just had a reasonable segment on What's-her-face.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/category/ ... exclusive/

It will end up on there sooner or later -- the guest basically says
- She isn't important enough for the US to squander goodwill on
- She was convicted on accomplice testimony, physical evidence, etc., which Americans are convicted on all the time.
- She is not warm or believable in interviews.

His evaluation seems to be that whatever the US might, hypothetically, do for a hypothetical innocent person isn't on the table for Knox.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


Thanks for keeping us up to date with links to all her interviews Guermantes.

I find this bit interesting: "It’s not clear whether the U.S. would allow her to be extradited if she is re-convicted. Knox said her lawyers have not met with U.S. government officials to see if they would allow her to be extradited."

What Knox meant to say was have not met yet.


Extradition has two parts.

The first part is certification of the extradition request. This is the legal component and it is a 100% certainty that the extradition request will be certified.

The second part is the actual decision and this is political. For Knox to avoid extradition the State Department would have to specifically state that despite a certified extradition request they were not going to honor their treaty. The State Department is not going to do that. They have been monitoring the situation from the start and have repeatedly stated that there is absolutely nothing to object to. There is no way they could turn around now and refuse a G7 country a certified request.

The only hope Knox has of avoid extradition is compassionate grounds but she does not qualify here either. She might attempt to become pregnant but that only delays the inevitable.

There is no way that Knox can stay in the United States. I expect she knows that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Omicidio Meredith: legale Kercher "Dichiarazioni Amanda insopportabili"
Google translate
Quote:
' We continue to be more and more 'surprised by this attitude of Amanda Knox and her statements, maybe it' time to stop being the victim of Italian justice.'' He says the lawyer Francesco Maresca, of Meredith Kercher family lawyer, commenting on the interview of Amanda Knox appeared in La Repubblica, in which you define innocent, explaining having to rebuild his life. '' Amanda - says Maresca - beginning to respect the judges, the court of Florence, the supreme court, which has made a good judgment and meticulous. The statements of Amanda are becoming almost unbearable. His attention and 'always on your location, but it also takes respect for the victim.'' '' We all have to think to participate in this new appeal in an absolutely quiet - he concludes - to get to the bottom of this court case.''

http://www.ilsitodifirenze.it/content/8 ... pportabili

Quote:
"These statements are out of place - said Francesco Maresca - because I think it is now exhausted the tolerance of this attitude as a victim of the Italian judicial system. Outputs are usually offensive a little bit for everyone. " "There is an ongoing process - he added - and as I already said, we must respect the judges, all the parts and the memory of a young victim."

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/13_sett ... 0b93.shtml
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/category/outfront-exclusive/

It will end up on there sooner or later -- the guest basically says
- She isn't important enough for the US to squander goodwill on
- She was convicted on accomplice testimony, physical evidence, etc., which Americans are convicted on all the time.
- She is not warm or believable in interviews.

His evaluation seems to be that whatever the US might, hypothetically, do for a hypothetical innocent person isn't on the table for Knox.


She serves no strategic purpose for the USA...I agree, she is not important enough for the USA to squander good will. If we send her, maybe Perugia won't dump Seattle. it seems like a fair trade to me.
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
--- snip ---

My current line of thinking is that either the attack on MOMK.com was carried out by someone unconnected to the FOAK for reasons unknown, or perhaps some lone FOAKer has been doing a bit of googling on How-To-Hack-For-Dummies and has taken it upon themselves to try and have a go, in the hopes that they may have some success to take back to FOAK Headquarters and wave around and win a "Hero Status Award". In the event that was the case, the intention was most likely to try and find out the identities of McCall and his MOMK.com team to be used in an attempt to bully them into silence and to use the info to try and dig up dirt about them (or anything innocent that can be twisted into a lie) so they can be publicly.

--- snap ---


Of course it's just a guess, but not a far fetched one. I agree with Ergon that this is not a coincidence. TMOMK was a thorn in their side since the start and now that Andrea Vogt has even used it as a reference pointing to the primary sources and court documents presented on that site, Bruce Fischer has not lost any time to smear McCall and Andrea Vogt in an attempt to discredit them.

After what I have witnessed on Twitter, where certain users (@Noel_0409, @GuilterWatching, @Annella and @CarlynnFronder) post names, personal information and photos of users who oppose their views, it is not far fetched to believe Bruce Fischer is in the know. He is closely connected to all of them and has maintained an outing thread on his forum "Injustice Anywhere" where information like locations, employers and real names were posted in public.

Bruce Fischer is completely off the rails. What he does is immature, calling everyone names like haters or guilters, people, who after looking at the evidence have come to a different conclusion than he has. Somehow, they are not entitled to free speech, even though Bruce Fischer defends the viewpoint that even gross insults, smearing and unsubstantiated accusations should be covered. He is a hypocrite with a double standard and that makes him useless for any serious debate.

Most people who read his articles will come away thinking there is something seriously wrong with him. His constant abusive remarks about those who oppose his view regarding Knox's innocence make the topic of his articles appear minor in comparison.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Nell wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


Thanks for keeping us up to date with links to all her interviews Guermantes.

I find this bit interesting: "It’s not clear whether the U.S. would allow her to be extradited if she is re-convicted. Knox said her lawyers have not met with U.S. government officials to see if they would allow her to be extradited."

What Knox meant to say was have not met yet.


Extradition has two parts.

The first part is certification of the extradition request. This is the legal component and it is a 100% certainty that the extradition request will be certified.

The second part is the actual decision and this is political. For Knox to avoid extradition the State Department would have to specifically state that despite a certified extradition request they were not going to honor their treaty. The State Department is not going to do that. They have been monitoring the situation from the start and have repeatedly stated that there is absolutely nothing to object to. There is no way they could turn around now and refuse a G7 country a certified request.

The only hope Knox has of avoid extradition is compassionate grounds but she does not qualify here either. She might attempt to become pregnant but that only delays the inevitable.

There is no way that Knox can stay in the United States. I expect she knows that.


I would like to believe that, but I am more cautious with what to expect since the Hellmann verdict.

I always assumed the Sollecitos behind this mess, but in hindsight it has become clear that Knox's defence team was overly close to Vecchiotti and it is difficult to ignore that the acquittal mainly helped Amanda Knox, not Sollecito.

The arguments made by Hellmann for an acquittal were outrageously stupid and I don't believe him to be stupid, which leaves me with either threatened or bribed.

Knox has done it once and I think she can do it again.

It's not fair and it should not be this way, but she is the only one from the remaining two who has a real chance to not spend one more day in prison for having stabbed Meredith Kercher. The irony is that, from all three, she is likely the most responsible one - not only the instigator, but also the one who took Meredith's life by inflicting the fatal stab wound.

Let's wait and see. Legally, there is nothing she can do. In my opinion the guilty verdict will be confirmed and her extradition will be requested. The Hellmann travesty could be annulled, but the decision on Knox's extradition will be final, no matter if it's the right decision or not. It cannot be appealed. So, if she can get to anyone with the power to influence the decision, she will be one lucky girl. It's her only chance in my opinion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Omicidio Meredith: legale Kercher "Dichiarazioni Amanda insopportabili"
Google translate
Quote:
' We continue to be more and more 'surprised by this attitude of Amanda Knox and her statements, maybe it' time to stop being the victim of Italian justice.'' He says the lawyer Francesco Maresca, of Meredith Kercher family lawyer, commenting on the interview of Amanda Knox appeared in La Repubblica, in which you define innocent, explaining having to rebuild his life. '' Amanda - says Maresca - beginning to respect the judges, the court of Florence, the supreme court, which has made a good judgment and meticulous. The statements of Amanda are becoming almost unbearable. His attention and 'always on your location, but it also takes respect for the victim.'' '' We all have to think to participate in this new appeal in an absolutely quiet - he concludes - to get to the bottom of this court case.''

http://www.ilsitodifirenze.it/content/8 ... pportabili

Quote:
"These statements are out of place - said Francesco Maresca - because I think it is now exhausted the tolerance of this attitude as a victim of the Italian judicial system. Outputs are usually offensive a little bit for everyone. " "There is an ongoing process - he added - and as I already said, we must respect the judges, all the parts and the memory of a young victim."

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/13_sett ... 0b93.shtml


Maresca speaks out loud what everyone thinks: Amanda Knox is disrespectful to the court, the people of Italy and to the victim, Meredith Kercher. Well said. This criticism was overdue.

Amanda Knox should shut up and focus on her legal battles, that should give her something to do, instead of bothering the poor Kerchers if they would be willing to visit Meredith's grave with her. Absolutely absurd.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
McCall wrote:
Nell wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


Thanks for keeping us up to date with links to all her interviews Guermantes.

I find this bit interesting: "It’s not clear whether the U.S. would allow her to be extradited if she is re-convicted. Knox said her lawyers have not met with U.S. government officials to see if they would allow her to be extradited."

What Knox meant to say was have not met yet.


Extradition has two parts.

The first part is certification of the extradition request. This is the legal component and it is a 100% certainty that the extradition request will be certified.

The second part is the actual decision and this is political. For Knox to avoid extradition the State Department would have to specifically state that despite a certified extradition request they were not going to honor their treaty. The State Department is not going to do that. They have been monitoring the situation from the start and have repeatedly stated that there is absolutely nothing to object to. There is no way they could turn around now and refuse a G7 country a certified request.

The only hope Knox has of avoid extradition is compassionate grounds but she does not qualify here either. She might attempt to become pregnant but that only delays the inevitable.

There is no way that Knox can stay in the United States. I expect she knows that.


I would like to believe that, but I am more cautious with what to expect since the Hellmann verdict.

I always assumed the Sollecitos behind this mess, but in hindsight it has become clear that Knox's defence team was overly close to Vecchiotti and it is difficult to ignore that the acquittal mainly helped Amanda Knox, not Sollecito.

The arguments made by Hellmann for an acquittal were outrageously stupid and I don't believe him to be stupid, which leaves me with either threatened or bribed.

Knox has done it once and I think she can do it again.

It's not fair and it should not be this way, but she is the only one from the remaining two who has a real chance to not spend one more day in prison for having stabbed Meredith Kercher. The irony is that, from all three, she is likely the most responsible one - not only the instigator, but also the one who took Meredith's life by inflicting the fatal stab wound.

Let's wait and see. Legally, there is nothing she can do. In my opinion the guilty verdict will be confirmed and her extradition will be requested. The Hellmann travesty could be annulled, but the decision on Knox's extradition will be final, no matter if it's the right decision or not. It cannot be appealed. So, if she can get to anyone with the power to influence the decision, she will be one lucky girl. It's her only chance in my opinion.


I think she's already conceded she knows she will lose, Nell, and is making the PR rounds to start priming to fight extradition. At this stage, what makes the appeal so unpredictable (not the outcome, but the dramatic quotient of the hearings) will be what's happening in Sollecito's camp? Is there a change in his legal team, Mastro instead of Bongiorno? Will Raffaele show up? And overall, will trace "I" be retested? My guess is Mastro and Bongiorno will both be there, Raffaele will not, and the knife will be tested. But the only thing I believe is that November will bring fireworks, and Meredith's cause will get a big boost then.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
I think she's already conceded she knows she will lose, Nell, and is making the PR rounds to start priming to fight extradition. At this stage, what makes the appeal so unpredictable (not the outcome, but the dramatic quotient of the hearings) will be what's happening in Sollecito's camp? Is there a change in his legal team, Mastro instead of Bongiorno? Will Raffaele show up? And overall, will trace "I" be retested? My guess is Mastro and Bongiorno will both be there, Raffaele will not, and the knife will be tested. But the only thing I believe is that November will bring fireworks, and Meredith's cause will get a big boost then.


I absolutely agree with you. That is also my impression. Amanda Knox's words that she "still believes she can win her appeal" are phoney, especially taking into account the various statements from her family, including her father Curt Knox ("She's not staying here, period.") and grandmother Huff ("None of the family will return to Italy.").

The truth is, Amanda Knox pins all her hope on the hypothetical refusal of her extradition. I have no idea how likely that is. She and her family have smeared the Italian justice system and the country as a whole for six years now. They have no respect for others while constantly demanding fairness, respect, compassion and tolerance for themselves from others.

In my opinion the Knox/Mellas family are simpletons with xenophobic attitudes.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I don't believe Bongiorno is representing Sollecito this time around. Sollecito apparently will be represented by a different lawyer who is related to him. This new lawyer has previously been very critical of Bongiorno's decision to not sever Sollecito's trial from Knox's. This was at least what was being said a few days ago. If this is true it is not good news for Knox.

For extradition the law is really simple. All that is required to certify an extradition request is proof that a conviction exists and that the conviction is for the person that they have in custody. These are both just formalities. There is nothing to fight. When a conviction exists extradition trials do not review evidence nor do they consider the guilt or innocence of the requested individual. The certification of the request is not in doubt. Even concerns that a rouge judge would disobey the law are irrelevant since Italy is free to continuously request certification. If one judge violates his or her oath the procedure will just start again with a new judge. Judges take their roles seriously so I can't imagine any judge would refuse to certify the request but there is a safety net regardless.

What the State Department will do is a different matter. That is a political decision and so no one can say with certainty what will happen but it is extremely unlikely that we would refuse to send a convicted murder to a G7 country because of public opinion. The State Department has been involved with the arrest and trial from the start and they have stated explicitly that they have nothing to object to. If there is nothing to object to you have no reason to not honor the treaty. The policy of the United States has always been to cooperate very enthusiastically with extradition requests as a means of maintain reciprocity. This has been the true especially since the 1980s and became even more important with the war on terror. The Obama administration has made numerous statements recently about the importance of honoring extradition with respect to Snowden so I can't see how they would contradict their position for Knox. She is not important. Her current media blitz is a transparent attempt to make herself more important but it is not working. It is actually having the opposite result.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
--- snip ---

She is not important. Her current media blitz is a transparent attempt to make herself more important but it is not working. It is actually having the opposite result.

--- snap ---


A search on Twitter today revealed an outrage over Knox's self-declared victim status, her faked compassion for Meredith and her family and the complete disregard for the Italian justice system.

Amanda Knox is stupid. Failure after failure and she does not learn from it. I have no doubt that her reaction will be yet another interview which she sees as another chance to be believed. Too bad she isn't a quick learner.

Reminiscent of her parents interviews repeating again and again "The Kerchers don't have a chance with their daughter anymore, but we still have a chance with Amanda." It took them a few years to understand why they weren't popular and when they finally could bring themselves to express their condolences of sorts, they did not understand why people believed them to be phoney.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

A few screen shots from the Quarto Grado interview, via TV in Diretta:

Quarto Grado (Fourth Degree) exclusive interview Amanda Knox (gallery)
By Debora Marighetti
20 September 2013

NB: Amanda talks about the night of the murder

TV IN DIRETTA

Knife Boy appears incapable of keeping his mouth shut, just like his ex-girlfriend.

Raffaele Sollecito writes an SMS to "Fourth Degree"

Raffaele Sollecito sent a statement via SMS to "Fourth Degree". The message - here early - will be shown during the episode aired tonight, Friday, September 20, in prime time, on Retequattro.

Raffaele Sollecito wrote:

Quote:
"I hope that this Court will examine in depth and accept our requests/demands, not taking account of prejudices and judgments about personality, not being diverted/distracted by the press eager to gossip, that have nothing to do with any responsibility."

"Me and Amanda are innocent and most of our words, our innocence is as clear as sunlight in court papers. Any accusatory theory is only the fruit of an imagination, a turbid and senseless fury driven by pride and greed".


MEDIASET
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/category/outfront-exclusive/

It will end up on there sooner or later -- the guest basically says
- She isn't important enough for the US to squander goodwill on
- She was convicted on accomplice testimony, physical evidence, etc., which Americans are convicted on all the time.
- She is not warm or believable in interviews.

His evaluation seems to be that whatever the US might, hypothetically, do for a hypothetical innocent person isn't on the table for Knox.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/v ... l.cnn.html
Paul Callan spoke before.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4l-zLi1b3o
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Okay, cos I'm a good samaritan and learned a trick from Crusoe, I'm going to set up a donate button to collect funds to send Knox to the court in Italy, it's just a shame they are not under obligation to attend, especially if Chief Accuser Knox is going to England, it would be so fitting for her to be incarcerated there, at least until Britain extradites her, anyway the donate button would say click here, to help Knox attend court. Everyone knows Knox spent all her winnings on takeaways and stuff

Donate to send Knox to Florence. Click HERE




Last edited by Jester on Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


When rating her confidence that the courts will rule in her favour at 9, she says:

“It’s not just the prosecution’s voice that is out there … [Italy has] the legal process where one can be convicted of a crime if there’s no motive to be found and there’s only circumstantial evidence, you can’t be convicted if there is proof to the contrary.”

A motive is not always required at murder trials in US courts either. In the US, one can also be convicted of a crime if there's only circumstantial evidence. It's also true that one cannot be convicted if there is proof to the contrary. Does she actually believe that in the US she couldn't be convicted without a motive? Is that her take on things ... no motive, can't get caught? Circumstantial evidence alone was used to convict people for centuries.

What is Knox trying to say? She seems to be saying that there is circumstantial evidence, she disagrees with the motive theory - but it's routinely not required to prove a motive, and she doesn't have proof to the contrary because the "some other guy did it and his name is Patrick" ploy didn't work.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 7:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

On this phenomenon of playing Ye Olde Victim Card, Chris Brown sounds just like Knox and Sollecito.

He complains about everything in his life that is in fact the result of his own aggression, as though it is all someone else's fault, and this idea of his, concerning the force against him, is according to him just the institutions in society which he now calling the slave masters.
So therefore, like Knox, according to him, he ought never have been taken to court for beating Ruihanna.

He is now saying I've been called a woman beater, I've taken my lashings, etc.
That's avoiding taking responsibility; he DID beat a woman.

Saying things this way shows he too takes no real responsibility for his own actions and he could well go off again like a bomb later on and lash out.

No Siree, he did not take his lashings.
Him beating a woman has nothing to do with being abused by the racist slave masters of yesteryear, get real.
He a multi-millionaire, had everything going for him in the first Western country ever to have a black president, he is kidding with his everyone is racist and that's why they are wronging me.

What he is doing is being a racist himself by making misuse of a very serious fact of life, past wrongs.

The history of America and the negatives from yesterday have nothing to do with him being jealous or a nasty and beating up his girlfriend.

So we have Chris Brown trying to slant his situation as though all of America is still like it was when there was segregaion, I mean him saying I took my lashings is exactly the same linews Knox and Sollecito keep on using.

Him saying they called me.... a woman beater............. Knox's, they called me a liaaaaaaaaaaar

I mean, I think he must have been reading Knox's book.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hi Jester,

Thank you for your donation, don't worry, I will see that the right people get it, with no tax, or other employee costs, expenses, etc., you can take my word for it.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 10:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.



Well, west of Seattle lies North Korea, she could become a chairman something or other over there, though she will have difficulty firing nuclear missiles off onto Italy, they would need to be launched into space and from there landed on Italy, will she do it, will she, I mean will she do it, can she do it, bomb Italy, I mean, she has already bombed Italy in every other way, she's taken her lashings she said, they called me a liar. Aye cos ya are, pathologically.

Oh dear, poor thing.

Apart from my gesture of goodwill by adding a send Knox to Italy donate button
Here
, Here & p-((( Here, I'm writing simultaneously on two keyboards, I'm reaching out to the North Koreans by writing to chairman number something or other, and requesting that Knox be married to one of their strange little men who likes executing people for no reason at all, after all, they will make a perfect match.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 2:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Full Sep 20 episode of Quarto Grado (duration: 2hrs 11min!) and a few video clips are now available to watch on the Mediaset website:

http://www.video.mediaset.it/video/quarto_grado/full/408645/puntata-del-20-settembre.html

Make sure you have the latest version of the Silverlight plugin. It can be downloaded from here:

http://www.microsoft.com/silverlight/
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thanks to Jools on .org for translating the Oggi interview.
Quote:
I then loved Meredith: I had a lot of pictures on my screen saver, that proved it, but they had “burned” the hardware in my computer, the one belonging to Raffaele and that of Meredith: is it possible that it was a coincidence? Because one could be burn also, by mistake, but three! I also shot a video during the Chocolate Festival: there was a band playing, I pretended to interview Meredith, she parried [the questions], we laughed. My camera was never found.

http://mentiinformatiche.com/2013/09/am ... ccato.html

The part I hadn't read yet is where she claims her video/photo camera was never found. That is new to me. I wonder what she means since this was never reported.

- She claims the 'burglar' went into her room also and took it? This has never been reported. The police does not always release all the information but I remember that reports stated that nothing was taken from Knox's room.
- She claims the police made it missing?
- She 'forgot' to tell the police that her camera is missing.

There was no burglar, and police usually does not make camera's missing so the camera must have been hidden/tossed by Knox herself. Or maybe she is just making stuff up.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hi Max,

some portions of her Oggi interview, which paint her in a bad light, haven't been quoted in the press, either.

About Patrick Lumumba, his lawyer Carlo Pacelli, and the Kercher family lawyer Francesco Maresca:

Q: Have you heard from Lumumba?

Amanda Knox wrote:
«No. I understand his anger, he has every right to hate me. But it hurt me to hear him say that I flirted with the customers, that I was a lioness, a lioness: lies! His lawyer then said that I was a murderer, that I accused Lumumba only to divert suspicion. The terrible thing is that, in my opinion, he did not say it because he believes it, but to win the case. Like the lawyer for the Kercher family, who in the courtroom said: “Don’t be fooled by Amanda, [she] appears cute here because the discipline of the prison has changed her.” But do they know what it means to be in prison? The prison turns you into a monster. Rehabilitation? Does not exist! In jail everything I had learned outside, was overturned».


About her part-time job: apparently, she has quit her job. So, not surprisingly, the idyllic image presented by her PR is deceptive.

Q: I've read that you are working in a library.

Amanda Knox wrote:
«It is not true. Before I used to go three times a week in the office of a financial consultant, I have now stopped: the media pressure is going to go up, I don’t want to give trouble to some one who gives me a job. I filled in documents, kept the files in order, I was doing the photocopies: here we call it grunt work, menial work. But it kept me busy, and I was earning some money».


MENTI INFORMATICHE

Translation: Jools
http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=142995#p142995
Top Profile 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Quit again, eh? LOOK WHAT YOU MADE HER DO, GUYS.

Or maybe:
"Amanda, you've been a big help but there are some rumors going around. I need to ask: Are you, in fact, on trial for murder?"
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Thanks to Jools on .org for translating the Oggi interview.
Quote:
I then loved Meredith: I had a lot of pictures on my screen saver, that proved it, but they had “burned” the hardware in my computer, the one belonging to Raffaele and that of Meredith: is it possible that it was a coincidence? Because one could be burn also, by mistake, but three! I also shot a video during the Chocolate Festival: there was a band playing, I pretended to interview Meredith, she parried [the questions], we laughed. My camera was never found.

http://mentiinformatiche.com/2013/09/am ... ccato.html

The part I hadn't read yet is where she claims her video/photo camera was never found. That is new to me. I wonder what she means since this was never reported.

- She claims the 'burglar' went into her room also and took it? This has never been reported. The police does not always release all the information but I remember that reports stated that nothing was taken from Knox's room.
- She claims the police made it missing?
- She 'forgot' to tell the police that her camera is missing.

There was no burglar, and police usually does not make camera's missing so the camera must have been hidden/tossed by Knox herself. Or maybe she is just making stuff up.


Oh, and did the police tear out her diary pages too?
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:25 pm   Post subject: Re: COINCIDENCE?   

Ergon wrote:
Leone from London posts this update from TJMK here: London John?

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by Leone » Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:07 am

Quote:
Latest...

Judge Nencini’s Guidelines Authorize Televising Of The Florence Appeal Live In Real Time


then:

Re: Today over at TJMK
Post by ScifiTom » Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:15 am

Quote:
To everyone

Hey everyone, I can't get into True Justice of Meredith Kercher today is it Poor Peter failing the job of not knowing anything into a court of law. His site is down of what I am getting is Opps True Justice is not working. So something is happen and yes Peter we know your site is dying of bad taste, of why you fail so terrible into your justice system!!!


Gloating much?

Gloating is not good idea...might come back to bite him in the ass.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.

None of camp amanda is 'right' these days. ouch. pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Thanks to Jools on .org for translating the Oggi interview.
Quote:
I then loved Meredith: I had a lot of pictures on my screen saver, that proved it, but they had “burned” the hardware in my computer, the one belonging to Raffaele and that of Meredith: is it possible that it was a coincidence? Because one could be burn also, by mistake, but three! I also shot a video during the Chocolate Festival: there was a band playing, I pretended to interview Meredith, she parried [the questions], we laughed. My camera was never found.

http://mentiinformatiche.com/2013/09/am ... ccato.html

The part I hadn't read yet is where she claims her video/photo camera was never found. That is new to me. I wonder what she means since this was never reported.

- She claims the 'burglar' went into her room also and took it? This has never been reported. The police does not always release all the information but I remember that reports stated that nothing was taken from Knox's room.
- She claims the police made it missing?
- She 'forgot' to tell the police that her camera is missing.

There was no burglar, and police usually does not make camera's missing so the camera must have been hidden/tossed by Knox herself. Or maybe she is just making stuff up.

I will go with the making up stuff, part. pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
max wrote:
Thanks to Jools on .org for translating the Oggi interview.
Quote:
I then loved Meredith: I had a lot of pictures on my screen saver, that proved it, but they had “burned” the hardware in my computer, the one belonging to Raffaele and that of Meredith: is it possible that it was a coincidence? Because one could be burn also, by mistake, but three! I also shot a video during the Chocolate Festival: there was a band playing, I pretended to interview Meredith, she parried [the questions], we laughed. My camera was never found.

http://mentiinformatiche.com/2013/09/am ... ccato.html

The part I hadn't read yet is where she claims her video/photo camera was never found. That is new to me. I wonder what she means since this was never reported.

- She claims the 'burglar' went into her room also and took it? This has never been reported. The police does not always release all the information but I remember that reports stated that nothing was taken from Knox's room.
- She claims the police made it missing?
- She 'forgot' to tell the police that her camera is missing.

There was no burglar, and police usually does not make camera's missing so the camera must have been hidden/tossed by Knox herself. Or maybe she is just making stuff up.


Oh, and did the police tear out her diary pages too?

Ergon...you hit the perfect pitch of sarcasm with that reply..haha pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

So Knox pretends she cares about what she did, then comes along with the BUTs in which she actually blames him, when factually, she does not believe he has every right or she wouldn't start making up excuses to put him down with. This is the dinner conversation she has to keep up, that is unless everyone ignores her and they never eat together, so she has to keep commenting on things, as they may talk about something else but I bet not for long, so for instance, if Patrick comes up, she is obliged to make small talk to her family to declare her own bad behaviour but lessen it by blaming someone else. I'm afraid anyone who know/understands the case can easily see she did not and does not care about Meredith, and she was not nice at all, if you cared you would never enter a court of law --in relation to murder-- with huge blood-red letters on it saying all you need is love, that is so repulsively horrible, even that one thing, let alone of all of the rest. Patrick did not just say any old thing in order to win, it is what he thought of her. Her saying to win, means she thinks he would not have won otherwise and so she is not really guilty, so everything she says contradicts something else she said.

Plenty of people have been in prison, some for not paying fines, car offences, anything but some even benefit from it, and obviously if you are a complete and utter liar, and are carrying all of that around, then for you there is no rehabilitation as you admit nothing, regret nothing are sorry for nobody and no one except for yourself.

Her experience was not bad at all, as the prison is new, she was well taken care of, but more, prison is prison and is the place people get sent to when they murder others, she should never have been given this long holiday in between, saying it is hell or whatever is so ridiculous; she was supposed to be there in prison and she ought to be in there now too.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.


She doesn't look well and she doesn't seem well. In the translation from Jools (linked upthread), Knox claims that she has only seen a therapist twice since her release, and that the visits were at the insistence of her mother. This brings to mind Joran van der Sloot. He wrote a book about his role as a suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway. During book interviews, he was asked whether he had sought counseling and, like Knox, he said that he had no use for them. Five years after Holloway vanished, van der Sloot was directly connected with the murder of another woman - this time clearly guilty. I find it interesting that both Knox and van der Sloot claim that they were falsely accused; that they were wronged, yet they do not seek normal avenues for healing from their emotional trauma. The fact is that, if she is guilty, a therapist will probably unveil that guilt, so it is too risky to meet with a therapist. If Knox is innocent, there cannot be a downside to talking it through with someone that is trained to help people cope with emotional trauma.

Knox, in response to whether she has seen a psychologist: "I have been twice, my mother insisted so much ... The first time I could not say a single word. The second time I spoke for 15 minutes at a stretch ..."

In my opinion, just like with Joran van der Sloot, her decision to not seek professional help to cope with "false imprisonment" speaks to guilt and continued efforts to hide her involvement in the murder. It suggests to me that she still has so much to hide that she fears actually discussing the facts of the case with a trained professional whose job it is to get to the bottom of her "sadness".
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Nell wrote:
McCall wrote:
Nell wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Here she is, speaking with Matt Lauer:

Amanda Knox on retrial: 'Everything's at stake' (VIDEO)

"I was already imprisoned as an innocent person in Italy, and I can't reconcile the choice to go back with that experience," she told Matt Lauer in her first TV interview about the upcoming retrial in Florence on Sept. 30.
...
"Besides the fact that there are so many factors that are not allowing me to go back — financial ones, ones where I'm going to school, ones where I want the court to proceed without distraction. I was imprisoned as an innocent person. It's common sense not to go back."


TODAY


Thanks for keeping us up to date with links to all her interviews Guermantes.

I find this bit interesting: "It’s not clear whether the U.S. would allow her to be extradited if she is re-convicted. Knox said her lawyers have not met with U.S. government officials to see if they would allow her to be extradited."

What Knox meant to say was have not met yet.


Extradition has two parts.

The first part is certification of the extradition request. This is the legal component and it is a 100% certainty that the extradition request will be certified.

The second part is the actual decision and this is political. For Knox to avoid extradition the State Department would have to specifically state that despite a certified extradition request they were not going to honor their treaty. The State Department is not going to do that. They have been monitoring the situation from the start and have repeatedly stated that there is absolutely nothing to object to. There is no way they could turn around now and refuse a G7 country a certified request.

The only hope Knox has of avoid extradition is compassionate grounds but she does not qualify here either. She might attempt to become pregnant but that only delays the inevitable.

There is no way that Knox can stay in the United States. I expect she knows that.


I would like to believe that, but I am more cautious with what to expect since the Hellmann verdict.

I always assumed the Sollecitos behind this mess, but in hindsight it has become clear that Knox's defence team was overly close to Vecchiotti and it is difficult to ignore that the acquittal mainly helped Amanda Knox, not Sollecito.

The arguments made by Hellmann for an acquittal were outrageously stupid and I don't believe him to be stupid, which leaves me with either threatened or bribed.

Knox has done it once and I think she can do it again.

It's not fair and it should not be this way, but she is the only one from the remaining two who has a real chance to not spend one more day in prison for having stabbed Meredith Kercher. The irony is that, from all three, she is likely the most responsible one - not only the instigator, but also the one who took Meredith's life by inflicting the fatal stab wound.

Let's wait and see. Legally, there is nothing she can do. In my opinion the guilty verdict will be confirmed and her extradition will be requested. The Hellmann travesty could be annulled, but the decision on Knox's extradition will be final, no matter if it's the right decision or not. It cannot be appealed. So, if she can get to anyone with the power to influence the decision, she will be one lucky girl. It's her only chance in my opinion.


I think she's already conceded she knows she will lose, Nell, and is making the PR rounds to start priming to fight extradition. At this stage, what makes the appeal so unpredictable (not the outcome, but the dramatic quotient of the hearings) will be what's happening in Sollecito's camp? Is there a change in his legal team, Mastro instead of Bongiorno? Will Raffaele show up? And overall, will trace "I" be retested? My guess is Mastro and Bongiorno will both be there, Raffaele will not, and the knife will be tested. But the only thing I believe is that November will bring fireworks, and Meredith's cause will get a big boost then.

I bet she is not pleased by her handlers. I still feel sorry for her....the best way to heal is to come clean. pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jester wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.


She doesn't look well and she doesn't seem well. In the translation from Jools (linked upthread), Knox claims that she has only seen a therapist twice since her release, and that the visits were at the insistence of her mother. This brings to mind Joran van der Sloot. He wrote a book about his role as a suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway. During book interviews, he was asked whether he had sought counseling and, like Knox, he said that he had no use for them. Five years after Holloway vanished, van der Sloot was directly connected with the murder of another woman - this time clearly guilty. I find it interesting that both Knox and van der Sloot claim that they were falsely accused; that they were wronged, yet they do not seek normal avenues for healing from their emotional trauma. The fact is that, if she is guilty, a therapist will probably unveil that guilt, so it is too risky to meet with a therapist. If Knox is innocent, there cannot be a downside to talking it through with someone that is trained to help people cope with emotional trauma.

Knox, in response to whether she has seen a psychologist: "I have been twice, my mother insisted so much ... The first time I could not say a single word. The second time I spoke for 15 minutes at a stretch ..."

In my opinion, just like with Joran van der Sloot, her decision to not seek professional help to cope with "false imprisonment" speaks to guilt and continued efforts to hide her involvement in the murder. It suggests to me that she still has so much to hide that she fears actually discussing the facts of the case with a trained professional whose job it is to get to the bottom of her "sadness".


100% Agree.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 11:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jester wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.


She doesn't look well and she doesn't seem well. In the translation from Jools (linked upthread), Knox claims that she has only seen a therapist twice since her release, and that the visits were at the insistence of her mother. This brings to mind Joran van der Sloot. He wrote a book about his role as a suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway. During book interviews, he was asked whether he had sought counseling and, like Knox, he said that he had no use for them. Five years after Holloway vanished, van der Sloot was directly connected with the murder of another woman - this time clearly guilty. I find it interesting that both Knox and van der Sloot claim that they were falsely accused; that they were wronged, yet they do not seek normal avenues for healing from their emotional trauma. The fact is that, if she is guilty, a therapist will probably unveil that guilt, so it is too risky to meet with a therapist. If Knox is innocent, there cannot be a downside to talking it through with someone that is trained to help people cope with emotional trauma.

Knox, in response to whether she has seen a psychologist: "I have been twice, my mother insisted so much ... The first time I could not say a single word. The second time I spoke for 15 minutes at a stretch ..."

In my opinion, just like with Joran van der Sloot, her decision to not seek professional help to cope with "false imprisonment" speaks to guilt and continued efforts to hide her involvement in the murder. It suggests to me that she still has so much to hide that she fears actually discussing the facts of the case with a trained professional whose job it is to get to the bottom of her "sadness".


In another interview, linked by Guermantes above, Amanda Knox stated that "years of therapy have not helped her". She is a despicable liar, even reaching out to the Kerchers, asking them to think "logically", recognising her innocence. Right after, I guess, they should show her around Meredith's grave.

Amanda Knox is perverse and cruel.

Nobody knows if her condition is even treatable.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I think she's already conceded she knows she will lose, Nell, and is making the PR rounds to start priming to fight extradition. At this stage, what makes the appeal so unpredictable (not the outcome, but the dramatic quotient of the hearings) will be what's happening in Sollecito's camp? Is there a change in his legal team, Mastro instead of Bongiorno? Will Raffaele show up? And overall, will trace "I" be retested? My guess is Mastro and Bongiorno will both be there, Raffaele will not, and the knife will be tested. But the only thing I believe is that November will bring fireworks, and Meredith's cause will get a big boost then.


I absolutely agree with you. That is also my impression. Amanda Knox's words that she "still believes she can win her appeal" are phoney, especially taking into account the various statements from her family, including her father Curt Knox ("She's not staying here, period.") and grandmother Huff ("None of the family will return to Italy.").

The truth is, Amanda Knox pins all her hope on the hypothetical refusal of her extradition. I have no idea how likely that is. She and her family have smeared the Italian justice system and the country as a whole for six years now. They have no respect for others while constantly demanding fairness, respect, compassion and tolerance for themselves from others.

In my opinion the Knox/Mellas family are simpletons with xenophobic attitudes.

She has been manipulating her family since the diaper years...of course the public is not so easily fooled.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Jester wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Jester wrote:
What I find entertaining in Knox's interview is that she is asked about the possibility that she has to hide in the US for the rest of her life because of a possible extradition order outside of the US. She was asked how she would cope with the travel restrictions.

She already has travel restrictions because of her conviction in Italy. She's already trapped except for a few destinations. At one point months ago, wasn't there something about Knox and Sollecito wanting to travel to Canada ??? - but that's not an option for Knox right now. There's a waiting period of about five years, after spending three years in jail, before convicted US criminals can enter Canada (maybe New York was Plan B). She gave some sort of convoluted answer about her imagined, hypothetical life without travel, but the bottom line is that she knows what it is to have travel restrictions and she'll cope just fine.


Unfortunately, she doesn't look like she's 'fine'.


She doesn't look well and she doesn't seem well. In the translation from Jools (linked upthread), Knox claims that she has only seen a therapist twice since her release, and that the visits were at the insistence of her mother. This brings to mind Joran van der Sloot. He wrote a book about his role as a suspect in the disappearance of Natalie Holloway. During book interviews, he was asked whether he had sought counseling and, like Knox, he said that he had no use for them. Five years after Holloway vanished, van der Sloot was directly connected with the murder of another woman - this time clearly guilty. I find it interesting that both Knox and van der Sloot claim that they were falsely accused; that they were wronged, yet they do not seek normal avenues for healing from their emotional trauma. The fact is that, if she is guilty, a therapist will probably unveil that guilt, so it is too risky to meet with a therapist. If Knox is innocent, there cannot be a downside to talking it through with someone that is trained to help people cope with emotional trauma.

Knox, in response to whether she has seen a psychologist: "I have been twice, my mother insisted so much ... The first time I could not say a single word. The second time I spoke for 15 minutes at a stretch ..."

In my opinion, just like with Joran van der Sloot, her decision to not seek professional help to cope with "false imprisonment" speaks to guilt and continued efforts to hide her involvement in the murder. It suggests to me that she still has so much to hide that she fears actually discussing the facts of the case with a trained professional whose job it is to get to the bottom of her "sadness".


100% Agree.



I too agree with this. She plays on all of these things, so like she is all messed up by abuse, needed help, but, she then doesn't partake.

Everything she says and does is contradictory. I dare say she is actually now allergic for any person or place that might unravel what needs unravelling, this on purpose or by mistake, or as a matter of how things go ordinarily, counsellers, psychologists are trained to pick up on certain pointers and like to have a system in place to record what was said, so if stories change the person analysing sees this while the liar cannot get one lie straight with the other.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:50 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The one thing, as far as Knox goes, that never changes with her, is the line right through everything she does, in the way she repeatedly refuses to take responsibility for anything at all.
This is truly awful, at this late date, to start accusing Patrick, yet again, of a negative, as in, he did it only to win the case.

That is so nasty.

If she ever did care, at any point anywhere, about what happened to him as a result of what SHE did, then even if she thought this, any sense of good taste would mean she would shut up about it. However, she most obviously does not truly think he spoke up for himself and criticised her to win the case; he was falsely accused, what did she expect him to say: Hey thank you very much, shit happens?
Instead of showing that at least on the one point she learned from it, learned that it was a wicked thing to do, and she should make amends and admit full responsibility for her own actions and words, she continues in exactly the same vein as she has used in relation to everything else to do with Meredith's murder.
She respects Italian law, but....
She has been well-treated, but...
The prison officers were good, but....
She loved Italy, but...

She knows how Patrick feels and he has a right to be angry, but... HE BAD

Now will she ever shut her lying mouth?
No, because this about Patrick is a continuation on the theme, the one that she has been playing all along; she accepts nothing, and everyone else is in the wrong, even those who did nothing wrong it all, like Patrick, but were placed in an awful position.

Patrick lost his business, it could have caused the breakdown of his marriage, he could have been beaten to death in prison. He could have ended up being in prison to this very day, other parents could have kept their children away from his son, all because Knox told complete lies about him.

To put it politely, I would say; She really does need to shut her mouth.

And what did Patrick get with which to compensate his losses, losses which were real? Rent alone costs a fortune for business premises, overheads, orders and stock you can basically throw away or consume yourself, so his losses, ran into the 50 thousands bare, but as regards calculation what the actual losses are, one must examine what were real and potential earnings, which were lost, taken over a 1 to 5 year period; his business was going very well and he would not have been shutting shop after a year, therefore his actual losses run into the hundreds of thousands, all lost earnings, and what, he could set up a new shop with a few grand?

In this the court is way off track, and look at the justice, whether Knox and Sollecito got as much as they said they did when it suited them to say they did, doesn't matter, because they certainly got a lot more than Patrick, so he gets ruined and they rich quick?

Christ almighty, where is the justice?

My belief is, and this means I may be incorrect: Both got paid by media outlets, they signed up to providing exclusive access to certain parties, and signed many more short-term agreements with other media outlets, for interviews and TV appearances.

I think this paid all of the lawyers' fees.
I think flights to Italy were always a part of these deals, and that's why ABC became a Knox family babysitter or whatever it was they were doing, when Knox was found guilty and dad freaked out, very aggressively so, at journalists on the street (otherwise courting them completely as and when it pleased/suited him), while leading his two daughters, who were minors, around, and involving them in this in that way. I suspect hotel bills and accommodation were all paid for and part of the smiles the parents have on their faces, who knows, may well be simply the result of being treated by their "author" in blood daughter; here have this hundred thousand for all your troubles.

All of this could be wrong yet if they had ever been straight up about anything it would be all have been transparent and one would not be led into thinking ill of them, yet we've seen what they have done therefore it is absolutely acceptable to suspect them of hiding so very much about what is what. I doubt Marriot needed paying, the publicity had every businessman crook running to employ him. I bet. You don't want your priest defending you when you need to be deceitful.
And he'd have known that it works that way too.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 12:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox will be interviewed for the first time on British television tomorrow on ITV’s Daybreak. You can leave comments on their website:

http://www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/a ... -daybreak/

Lorraine Kelly - presenter

E-mail

lorraine.kelly@itv.com
Twitter

@reallorraine

https://twitter.com/reallorraine

Aled Jones - presenter

E-mail

aled.jones@itv.com
Twitter

@realaled

https://twitter.com/realaled

Natalie Sadlier - publicity manager for Daybreak

E-mail

natalie.sadlier@itv.com
Twitter

@NatSadlier

https://twitter.com/NatSadlier

Here are the Twitter contact details for ITV:

@ITV

https://twitter.com/ITV
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Chelsea Hoffman via Twitter: "Either she [Amanda Knox] is a sicko or she's completely socially retarded".

Agree with Chelsea 100%. "Sicko" is the right word.

Amanda Knox continues taunting victim's family
By Chelsea Hoffman
22 September 2013

Amanda Knox claims that she has a nine out of 10 chance of being found innocent in her upcoming retrial, yet she still refuses to return to Italy to face her responsibilities. When you consider this along with her strange need to reach out to Meredith Kercher's family it's more and more apparent that this woman probably isn't playing with a full deck.


ALL VOICES
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Knox will not be in a London studio tomorrow; she will appear via videolink. I hope the Kerchers won't be watching. Truly, there's no escape from Amanda Knox's claws.

Amanda Knox to appeal to family of murdered Meredith Kercher on ITV's Daybreak
By: Mike Parker and David Stephenson

Murder suspect Amanda Knox will appear on Daybreak tomorrow, but ITV refuses to say whether it is paying her, although it admits it does often pay guests.

She will be interviewed on Daybreak from America via videolink by Aled Jones and Lorraine Kelly.

Last night, Knox’s lawyer Anne Bremner confirmed: “I don’t know if she is being paid but I do know that virtually all her money went towards enormous legal fees. Her parents re-mortgaged their homes and maxed-out their credit cards. Now a publicist arranges her interviews. I expect her to try to reach out to the Kercher family, to whom she wants to express her deepest condolences. From what I know, she would be willing to contact them on any terms. She understands they have a position on this but she wants to tell them how she feels.


SUNDAY EXPRESS
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Chelsea Hoffman via Twitter: "Either she [Amanda Knox] is a sicko or she's completely socially retarded".

Agree with Chelsea 100%. "Sicko" is the right word.

Amanda Knox continues taunting victim's family
By Chelsea Hoffman
22 September 2013

Amanda Knox claims that she has a nine out of 10 chance of being found innocent in her upcoming retrial, yet she still refuses to return to Italy to face her responsibilities. When you consider this along with her strange need to reach out to Meredith Kercher's family it's more and more apparent that this woman probably isn't playing with a full deck.


ALL VOICES


Hi, guermantes, when you look at the people she's surrounded with, her family and 'friends', then many of them are indeed 'sicko' and 'completely socially retarded' as their many postings on the net either abusing or their unwanted 'reaching out to the Kerchers' shows.

@ Nell, no, it is not treatable. As @zorba points out, speaking to a psychologist who'd be trained to read any lies might force her to confront her truth, which she is not prepared to do, therefore, she will not see a therapist, and therefore, she can only get sicker. Catch-22.

One of the reasons I got so involved in the case. The psychology of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. And, offering an opinion is very different than a diagnosis. Remember the Time Magazine article and many commenters who said she might be somewhere on the Autism Spectrum Scale? I personally believe there is more than just that, but can't say more without actually seeing her.

Not that she can be excused in any way for what she did.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 2:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Oh dear Aled Jones, presenter of the Sunday TV programme that has been on every Sunday since the 1960s, Songs of Praise, that never failed to make me come over all strange, feeling horrible on those cold wintry grey Sunday evenings, back to fcuking horrible school tomorrow, and just to make it seem like the world is run by a bunch of hypocritical self-righteous people, Songs Of Praise, I never can get to the remote fast enough, to switch it off, but though this man may be a Christian goody gumdrops, I cannot stand the sight or sound of him as he kind of induces that tiredness disease, whatever its name is, I think he is so boring, so, there's a double for ya, can't stand him, switch off, can’t stand Knox, switch off.

Now Sollecito, there's a hero.

I'd prefer to have my unmentionables bitten off by a crocodile rather than listen to this lot.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

ah no talk of the devil, so to speak, forgot it is Sunday, forgot that it's that time of day, was caught unawares, Songs of Praise

but why I'm so pissed, at this Aled, is that someone with absolutely nothing to say is messing around interviewing Knox, okay, he is a as they call it, Christian, but obviously, he on a programme having her on where they challenge her in no way whatsoever, means he'll so anything for money, just like so many others, and to me, that is a type of crime, but then to call yourself someone who supposedly lives according to the things Jesus stood for, is a lie, you stand for nothing at all, you just like to think you are good, but just this, the very thing I detest about those who say they follow Jesus, so follow meaning doing what they imagine he would do, as a so-called Christian, is a lie too, because he threw people, traders, out of the temple, and people just going along with what some bosses of a TV channel (company) say makes them a trader, and you as a teader would be one of those being cast out.

All those with eyes, say aye, all those with ears say, hear, here, ere, ear.

Verily, I say, for those not entering sit in front of the door allowing nobody else in either.

Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, "These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father's) kingdom."

Woe to you, scribes who eat the best food and sit at the best tables, for in that day, in my Father's Kingdom, two will be one, and the meek shall inherit the earth, when your inside becomes the outside, and any one that stands in the way of these small children might just as well hang an anchor about the neck and dive into the deepest ocean, for your hands are full of blood, when you come to me, I will say I do not know you, go away from me, ye who strain at a gnat and swallow camels whole, pray to be seen praying.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 4:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
The one thing, as far as Knox goes, that never changes with her, is the line right through everything she does, in the way she repeatedly refuses to take responsibility for anything at all.
This is truly awful, at this late date, to start accusing Patrick, yet again, of a negative, as in, he did it only to win the case.

That is so nasty.

If she ever did care, at any point anywhere, about what happened to him as a rwsult of what SHE did, then even if she thought this, any sense of good taste would mean she would shut up about it. However, she most obviously does not truly think he spoke up for himself and criticised her to win the case; he was falsely accused, what did she expect him to say: Hey thank you very much, shit happens?
Instead of showing that at least on the one point she learned from it, learned that it was a wicked thing to do, and she should make amends and admit full responsibility for her own actions and words, she continues in exactly the same vein as she has used in relation to everything else to do with Meredith's murder.
She respects Italian law, but....
She has been well-treated, but...
The prison officers were good, but....
She loved Italy, but...

She knows how Patrick feels and he has a right to be angry, but... HE BAD

Now will she ever shut her lying mouth?
No, because this about Patrick is a continuation on the theme, the one that she has been playing all along; she accepts nothing, and everyone else is in the wrong, even those who did nothing wrong it all, like Patrick, but were placed in an awful position.

Patrick lost his business, it could have caused the breakdown of his marriage, he could have been beaten to death in prison. He could have ended up being in prison to this very day, other parents could have kept their children away from his son, all because Knox told complete lies about him.

To put it politely, I would say; She really does need to shut her mouth.

And what did Patrick get with which to compensate his losses, which were real, rent alone costs a fortune for a business premises, overheads, orders and stock you can basically throw away or consume yourself, so his losses, ran into the 50 thousands bare, but as regards calculation what the actual losses are one must examine what were real and potential earnings, which were lost, taken over a 1 to 5 year period, his business was going very well and he would not have been shutting shop after a year, therefore his actual losses run into the hundreds of thousands, all lost earnings, and what, he could set up a new shop with a few grand?

In this the court is way off track, and look at the justice, whether Knox and Sollecito got as much as they said they did when it suited them to day they did doesn't matter, because they certainly got a lot more than Patrick, so he gets ruined and they rich quick?

Christ almighty, where is the justice?

My belief is, and this means I may be incorrect,: Both got paid by media outlets, they signed up to providing exclusive access to certain parties, and signed many more short-term agreement with other media outlets, for interviews and TV appearances.

I think this paid all of the lawyers' fees.
I think flights to Italy were always a part of these deals, and that's why ABC became a Knox family babysitter or whatever it was they were doing, when Knox was found guilty and had freaked out, very aggressively at journalists on the street, while leading his two daughters, who were minors, around and involving them in this in that way. I suspect hotel bills and accommodation were all paid for and part of the smiles the parents have on their faces, who knows, may well be simply the result of being treated by their "author" in blood daughter, here have this hundred thousand for all your troubles.

All of this could be wrong yet if they had ever been straight up about anything it would be all have been transparent and one would not be led into thinking ill of them, yet we've seen what they have done therefore it is absolutely acceptable to suspect them of hiding so very much about what is what. I doubt Marriot needed paying, the publicity had every businessman crook running to employ him. I bet. You don't want your priest defending you when you need to be deceitful.
And he'd have known that it works that way too


This is what I find so bizarre about this, Zorba. None of them seem to be able to see the off-mindedness of these endeavors. It's what I have been trying to put into words. If you believe that your loved one is innocent and suffering, do you think that Matt Lauer is an apt psychologist? If you are suffering and know that Patrick is suffering because of your actions, do you hand-wave his problems away? Do you try to distance yourself? Do you make light of it? Isn't there a sense of guilt, regret, remorse over Patrick's fate?

Observing these things and commenting on them does NOT make me a hater. I am, I admit, highly critical of the behavior of the Groupies and hangers-on, who lash out at any comment that appears to put Knox in any kind of negative light, however small. I think they should open their collective eyes to the fact that there will eventually be a backlash from all of the me, me, me interviews. Most people won't buy this tripe.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 5:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

In case anyone has plans to watch

Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 5:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

@Iodine

Excellent!!! I've tweeted it :)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 5:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox On Why She Is Not Coming Back To Italy For Retrial
By Silvia Donati

Amanda Knox, the American student whose retrial for the murder of British student Meredith Kercher begins in Florence on September 30, granted a video interview to Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica...
...
Knox wrote a book about her experience called “Waiting to Be Heard: A Memoir”, which was published on April 30 of this year in the U.S. “My book has been received positively here in the U.S. But I really hope it’s published in Italy. The reason why I wrote it is to make people understand who I am and the reasons behind my actions.

When asked about what she expects from this trial and what she would tell the judges, Knox answered: “I’m curious as to what will happen. I’m waiting with anxiety to see what points the judges will focus on. Circumstantial evidence has been overly discussed already. I’m waiting with an open heart that is beating fast. To the judges I would say to look at what I already said in the courtroom; I said everything I thought could be useful. I’d tell them again I didn’t do it. I trust that they will look at the facts. I’m innocent. I’m waiting.”


ITALY MAGAZINE
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Daily Mail's preview of Knox's ITV interview (30 sec video):

'I'm not the person they say I am': Amanda Knox says Meredith Kercher deserves justice and should not be remembered for the way she was murdered

Amanda Knox has claimed she is 'not the person' she has been portrayed as by the prosecution in the re-trial for the murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher.

Speaking ahead of her only British interview, the 26-year-old student instead insists she 'cares about Meredith' and about achieving justice for her.

Miss Knox, who was acquitted over the 2007 killing of Meredith Kercher, in 2010, made the comments ahead of her appearance live on ITV's Daybreak, tomorrow morning - her only British interview.

During a brief interview with Daybreak's New York correspondent Lucy Watson, she said: 'I'm not the person who the prosecution says I am.

I'm not the person who their lawyer says I am.

'That I care about Meredith, I care about justice for her, I care about remembering her for who she is not about the way that she was murdered.'

She will appear on ITV Daybreak tomorrow at 7.10 am, 8.10 am and on Lorraine at 8.55am.


DAILY MAIL
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:

This is what I find so bizarre about this, Zorba. None of them seem to be able to see the off-mindedness of these endeavors. It's what I have been trying to put into words. If you believe that your loved one is innocent and suffering, do you think that Matt Lauer is an apt psychologist? If you are suffering and know that Patrick is suffering because of your actions, do you hand-wave his problems away? Do you try to distance yourself? Do you make light of it? Isn't there a sense of guilt, regret, remorse over Patrick's fate?

Observing these things and commenting on them does NOT make me a hater. I am, I admit, highly critical of the behavior of the Groupies and hangers-on, who lash out at any comment that appears to put Knox in any kind of negative light, however small. I think they should open their collective eyes to the fact that there will eventually be a backlash from all of the me, me, me interviews. Most people won't buy this tripe.



Yes, they've just continued with the media blitzkrieg, when they should have recognised this has been a failure, this is a PR attack, there must be a couple of them with a full time job sat all day long making up multiple IDs with which to post on sites, like the newspaper sites, to try and make it look like everyone is on their side.
This part of it will all come out in the wash too.
They have no intention of acknowledging anything.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Knox will not be in a London studio tomorrow; she will appear via videolink. I hope the Kerchers won't be watching. Truly, there's no escape from Amanda Knox's claws.

Amanda Knox to appeal to family of murdered Meredith Kercher on ITV's Daybreak
By: Mike Parker and David Stephenson

Murder suspect Amanda Knox will appear on Daybreak tomorrow, but ITV refuses to say whether it is paying her, although it admits it does often pay guests.

She will be interviewed on Daybreak from America via videolink by Aled Jones and Lorraine Kelly.

Last night, Knox’s lawyer Anne Bremner confirmed: “I don’t know if she is being paid but I do know that virtually all her money went towards enormous legal fees. Her parents re-mortgaged their homes and maxed-out their credit cards. Now a publicist arranges her interviews. I expect her to try to reach out to the Kercher family, to whom she wants to express her deepest condolences. From what I know, she would be willing to contact them on any terms. She understands they have a position on this but she wants to tell them how she feels.


SUNDAY EXPRESS

Hi G....while I agree with you on the vile nature of this circus, I believe The Kerchers are stronger, maybe because they are smart enough to avoid the entertainment part of this process. I will watch no more interviews with A/R or any other member of the 'amanda show'. I will not watch Brittish interview and will only tune in for trial. xxooMeredith
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
In case anyone has plans to watch


Too bad I promised not to watch before I saw this....you so fun and poignant. pp-(
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Interesting to see Chris Halkides engage with the likes of me on Huffington Post this day of rest : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/2 ... 61620.html

1: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ch ... 19835.html

2: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ch ... 09286.html

Replied to already, plus many more in the main article:)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Chelsea Hoffman via Twitter: "Either she [Amanda Knox] is a sicko or she's completely socially retarded".

Agree with Chelsea 100%. "Sicko" is the right word.

Amanda Knox continues taunting victim's family
By Chelsea Hoffman
22 September 2013

Amanda Knox claims that she has a nine out of 10 chance of being found innocent in her upcoming retrial, yet she still refuses to return to Italy to face her responsibilities. When you consider this along with her strange need to reach out to Meredith Kercher's family it's more and more apparent that this woman probably isn't playing with a full deck.


ALL VOICES


Hi, guermantes, when you look at the people she's surrounded with, her family and 'friends', then many of them are indeed 'sicko' and 'completely socially retarded' as their many postings on the net either abusing or their unwanted 'reaching out to the Kerchers' shows.

@ Nell, no, it is not treatable. As @zorba points out, speaking to a psychologist who'd be trained to read any lies might force her to confront her truth, which she is not prepared to do, therefore, she will not see a therapist, and therefore, she can only get sicker. Catch-22.

One of the reasons I got so involved in the case. The psychology of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. And, offering an opinion is very different than a diagnosis. Remember the Time Magazine article and many commenters who said she might be somewhere on the Autism Spectrum Scale? I personally believe there is more than just that, but can't say more without actually seeing her.

Not that she can be excused in any way for what she did.



More to this Ergon, I reckon the family would have issaued strong instructions, to prevent any such treatment, saying, she's fine, nothing wrong with her, seems like they've been this way all along and that's part of the reason why she went haywire.

I don't think ahe was absolutely potty before all of this, and maybe even wasn't quite as potty even during the murder but the chosen path afterwards, has now thoroughly planted insanity in her and throughout her entire being, you cannot play at this stuff, even soldiers go nuts because what they are programmed to believe, to be able to take, is not in reality doable, they become depressed, unable to cope with what the army told them is okay under the banner of it's right, later in private their conscience and their most heavy experiences haunts them, causes them to be no longer able to function in society. That is why Vietnam veterans went to live in some out of the way forests where nobody ever comes, and abandoned society. Heavy duty criminals cave in, when in prison, because they finally have time to get a perspective on themselves and see that there were reasons for whart they did in that they were nowhere, and they need to tell someone, because to only keep it to yourself is too much, it's called confiding in someone, these two have one another so in a way, that release valve may not be needed quite as much as it would had Knox committed murder on her own, but it, the knowledge then, is a special bond between them, that they as demons wallow in, knowing that nobody else knows the exact details, Sollecito already lets bits out, he releases pointers, because he cannot deal with it as well as Knox does, but he is in no way any less of a liar. Reality though, and incarceration, on his own, will have him release the rest in much less than a 5 year period. Maybe eithin 1 year, because once in, after supreme court, he will be fully aware there is no getting out before the allocated time, that is, except for in a coffin. As the days tick by he will become bitter, not ever having actually known Knox anyhow, and then the viciousness already in him, that formed part of the components that resulted in the murder, will transfer to a different target, and that will be Knox, as he will be so distant from her. Imagine him being bombarded with reports on Knox enjoying freedom, imagine if she in fact did stab Meredith to death and he ends up being the one locked up, though he should be, he's going to start thinking he is innocent, think it for real, because he will think it's so unfair that he is paying an she is not.
Honour was never real, honour is not a matter of lying for someone, honour is being true to yourself and by admitting you were wrong and need help.

There is no European country Sollecito can hide in, or reside in, or get any permit to stay in, when he is wanted. There in South America, where so much is similar to Italian flavours, where they appreciate each other, those countries will not at all be in a hurry to upset Italy. There is in fact nowhere he can run to for long. He cannnot put a short skirt on either in order to play on male fixation on sex.

Murdering someone stays in you.
Meredith does not, did nit, will not remain with her, what Knox means is she is tied to her through the murder, which by all accounts, was committed by her.
To speak of visiting graves, parents, when it has been clear that they do not like you and believe you are guilty is no more than a continuance of the abuse, it is frightening because the degree to which Meredith was not left alone means she does and to do this stuff is a continuance of that sheer lack of respect for someone else.

Knox is it appears, obsessed, she made her bed she ought to lie in it, she has dug her own grave, her being is already dead, to behave that way means you are physically alive but mentally and spiritually a corpse.

Is that then Patrick's fault, is it to be blamed on the citizen's of Perugia, a shopkeeeper, a neighbour, police scientists, interpreters, the police, a poor old prison officer about to retire after many years of dedicated service?
And she feels BAD?
Oh sure.

Give us a break, what a complete insult to everyone's intellect.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

You know, maybe Knox should pack her bag, toothbrush, admit her guilt, explain what happened and why.
Surely the outcome is always going to be way better than in Texas or some place in America where for these crimes she would have spent any amount of time on death row, 30 years, etc, before finally being executed, or otherwise in any number of American States, receiving a sentence like 1000 years, obviously no parole, or is it parole after 666 years of time served?

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Oh dear, it's all going terribly wrong for Amanda Knox in her Daybreak interview!

Lorraine Kelly asked her if she'd take a lie detector test. Knox shit bricks and tried to squirm out of it, saying she really didn't think there was a need for that. But, Lorraine wouldn't give up and Knox agreed to take a lie detector test! Not that she will, of course. Just seeing her reaction when Lorraine suggested it though, was priceless!!!

Knox is getting crucified on Twitter!!!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

You can see a clip or two here: http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-09-2 ... f-retrial/

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:50 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Okay, so, all of the news headlines from today's interview are going to be "Amanda Knox agrees to take a lie detector test"!

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I've worn out my Twitter. Hit my Tweet allowance, so can't make any more tweets/retweets for a few hours. Others will have to take over if they can. Second part of interview is starting. You can follow all the tweets about Knox here: https://twitter.com/search?q=amanda%20knox&src=typd

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Oh dear, it's all going terribly wrong for Amanda Knox in her Daybreak interview!

Lorraine Kelly asked her if she'd take a lie detector test. Knox shit bricks and tried to squirm out of it, saying she really didn't think there was a need for that. But, Lorraine wouldn't give up and Knox agreed to take a lie detector test! Not that she will, of course. Just seeing her reaction when Lorraine suggested it though, was priceless!!!

Knox is getting crucified on Twitter!!!


Success!!!

Take that Vargus, Battiste, Dempsey and the rest of the carrion.

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Image from Daybreak interview:


_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
I've worn out my Twitter. Hit my Tweet allowance, so can't make any more tweets/retweets for a few hours. Others will have to take over if they can. Second part of interview is starting. You can follow all the tweets about Knox here: https://twitter.com/search?q=amanda%20knox&src=typd


Me too, sorry.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:40 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

To Amanda Knox: If you're innocent, prove it
Seattle : WA : USA | Sep 23, 2013 at 1:30 AM PDT
By Chelsea Hoffman



ALL VOICES

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Image from Daybreak interview:



Good one, Michael!

The possibilities are endless!

Image
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

To see the level of flack Knox has gotten just view my Twitter timeline, and I wasn't able to retweet anything close to all of them!: https://twitter.com/PMFdotNet

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I just watched the few parts of the interview that are offered online and the biggest problem for Amanda Knox is that she believes her performance is convincing. Big mistake.

Even someone absolutely uninformed about this case would have doubts about her involvement after seeing her on tv.

For those who watched the whole thing: What happened? Was this interview recorded on two different occasions? What's with the change of clothes, the sudden hairdo and the make-up? What did I miss?

She insists she only lied a little bit and had those imaginations when the police made her do it, but what about Raffaele Sollecito's many lies? She does not address her testimony being in contradiction with his and their phone records.

At this point, Amanda Knox and her family are only "entertainment". I don't think they realise that. They still believe thy can fight their case on television and ignore the courts.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

i forgot: Another thing that stands out for me is that Amanda Knox makes an effort to have the Kerchers acknowledge her innocence and accept her, which is completely ridiculous given the evidence that implicates her in the murder of Meredith. The Kerchers have publicly stated they would not appreciate any advances from her or her family. Now Amanda Knox vehemently ignores that, and considering the circumstances, she must know that what she is doing is offensive. But as everything is about HER, she keeps insisting.

From Knox's point of view, I believe she is trying to demonstrate that she is willing to put this behind her and "forgive them" for being mistaken about her. They weren't thinking logically due to the trauma, she says. I am sure that Amanda Knox believes she is being "generous". It was her bid to show she does not have a mean bone in her body.

I am not an expert, but whatever it is she is suffering from, it seems very serious to me. Unfortunately she is only surrounded by people and family members who encourage her abnormal behaviour instead of trying to help her. Her parents are not the ideal role models either.

I noticed she referred to herself as a "kid" and she is serious about that. If that does not make you wonder about her mental health, nothing will.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Image

Image

Image

Image


Last edited by Jackie on Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Golly, I'm having trouble watching ANY of that, I took about a minute or so, but it's awful, it's like she has rehearsed every line, I have not heard anyone asking her anything, all as she did was talk, in her, as Ionine described so well, sheepy voice.

Actually she is asking nothing, she is demanding... Meredith's parents like her, just as she must have done with Meredith, forced her to like her but Meredith had real trouble with her, had trouble liking Knox after a while and it seems that this really was the reason, a main motive leading to Meredith's murder.

God, her voice, her lines, like she's reading a script on the wall, is awful to beholds, her staged crackling, I'm going to breakdown voice, so fake and most notable cringeworthy

It's a good thing I cannot see the entire interview.

I want to see the way she was questioned more than listen to what Knox came out with as that was predictable, though I would like to see the bit where she is asked about the lie detector test.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well, I found the entire interview on PMF.O

Her voice, as I was saying recently, about hearing her in court and being able to imagine her going ape shit on someone, well this onterview has her dong it again, namely, her voice sounds manically aggressive


Oh just heard now she added that the parents dug deep into their pensions

ahaha what a carry on, we made films in Britain, Carry On Up the Jungle
Carry On Telling Lies is her one


You know, ages ago I pointed out that what she and her family were doing was use character assassination, like of Dott. Mignini and so many others, like she also most recently did, yet again, against Patrick Lumumba, so then how awful to see them stealing this term from me and others in order to misuse it, it was all about them, not for them to use, nobody has used character assassination, not against them or her or Sollecito, they assassinated, they assassinated themselves through their behaviour, like this going on TV, only this time Lorraine is asking all the questions that interviewers in America seem to find impolite to ask.
Yeah, more like avoid asking, cos she is our girl, one of ours, it's those terrorists, gh no wait, wrong line, it's those foreigners, Italians, etc.

Laughing when asked if she would be prepared to undergo a lie detector test, mmm, yes laughing is what small children do when mother knows the child is lying, and the kid knows mother knows she is, only, isn't this stuff a bit too serious to be laughing at, her laugh is what she really thinks because this is ALL an ACT to HER.

If it wasn't clear to some before, it should be now.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
I just watched the few parts of the interview that are offered online and the biggest problem for Amanda Knox is that she believes her performance is convincing. Big mistake.

Even someone absolutely uninformed about this case would have doubts about her involvement after seeing her on tv.

For those who watched the whole thing: What happened? Was this interview recorded on two different occasions? What's with the change of clothes, the sudden hairdo and the make-up? What did I miss?

She insists she only lied a little bit and had those imaginations when the police made her do it, but what about Raffaele Sollecito's many lies? She does not address her testimony being in contradiction with his and their phone records.

At this point, Amanda Knox and her family are only "entertainment". I don't think they realise that. They still believe thy can fight their case on television and ignore the courts.


I bet that they blame it on the 'Brits' being biased because Meredith was British. They never loved Amanda, they were horrible to Amanda blah blah blah

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Damn, she said the only way anyone is going to heal is if we all cxome together.

She is as brazen as brazen gets.


No, the only way anyone is going to heal is if she admits her guilt and leaves Meredith's family alone.

She is sick in the head

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Golly, I'm having trouble watching ANY of that, I took about a minute or so, but it's awful, it's like she has rehearsed every line, I have not heard anyone asking her anything, all as she did was talk, in her, as Ionine described so well, sheepy voice.

Actually she is asking nothing, she is demanding... Meredith's parents like her, just as she must have done with Meredith, forced her to like her but Meredith had real trouble with her, had trouble liking Knox after a while and it seems that this really was the reason, a main motive leading to Meredith's murder.

God, her voice, her lines, like she's reading a script on the wall, is awful to beholds, her staged crackling, I'm going to breakdown voice, so fake and most notable cringeworthy

It's a good thing I cannot see the entire interview.

I want to see the way she was questioned more than listen to what Knox came out with as that was predictable, though I would like to see the bit where she is asked about the lie detector test.


One of Knox's biggest mistakes is that she keeps insisting on having been friends with Meredith when there is ample witness testimony saying otherwise.

IMO the reason why she so vehemently denies any troubles with Meredith is because it's the key to the motive for the crime.


Zorba, you would be surprised, but sometimes I had to laugh during the interview snippets I saw.

What Amanda Knox does often during interviews, to add some drama, is that she opens her mouth as if she was about to say something and then she keeps moving her lips as if she was in search for words, then she looks down, still trying to vocalise something, sometimes shaking her head slightly, but she remains silent for a long time.

It's tragic in a way.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jackie wrote:
Michael wrote:
Image from Daybreak interview:



Good one, Michael!

The possibilities are endless!

Image



Its the Chicken song:

_________________
The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.- Michael Rivero
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

She does it as if she is giving a speech, she has fixed cues for when she pauses, bows her head, purses her lips, frowns like everyone else is stupid, has her sheep-sounding voice pop up, etc.

She must have taken long solitary walks in the forest practising this stuff.


She also states the stuff her support and family used as a monologue about paying people only she does not say paying, she says paying back, paid back her lawyers, so what did her lawyers lend her money, no, she paid her lawyers, full stop, period, basta, halt, who goes there, a liar that is what. Her mannerisms are so awful to watch, her pauses where she then enunciates what she is about to say as if oh yeah I know that one, yeah I know, that onme, the old line about me profiting from the murder, pause, pause, pause, I paid my family back to FREE me from the burdeen of knowing they'd mortaged, spent pensions, etc, come offf it, it seems clear to me, I think, that the truth could well be that they all got paid, like a film thar gets shown, 2 films, even, before the main one, she is acting out that main film, being that she is the subject of the murder, but it's all to live my life, pause, voice slotting into staged crackle mode, eyes shifting left to right, hardly at front, yes, pauser, brows touching ceiling (they're all stupid) yes I stayed in prison wrongfully convicted. Lorraine: Yeah but you did accuse Patrick Lumumba ya do understand how some people think, a lot of people think that you may not be innocent. Pause, brows touch top of Hilton, select voice, cue, speak, Yes but they did this that and the other to ME, I was the one that SUFFERED, I am the one who must live MY life.

You said ya want to visit Meredith's grave. But, the family doesn't want it, so...

Yes but one of the things that has stood in the way of us all healing bla bla bla, well, I did make one good friend.. CUE, select voice mode, 2 degrees of emotion, falter, stop/start, pause, act like you are hurt or even UPSET, but immediately carry on, in a timed fashion, the one ya practiced, yeah oh mad ONE, made one good friend in prison and that was, wait for it, wait for it, because here cometh the lawd, a PRIEST.

Yeah he did not request ta look in muh drawers but said, bla bla bla, let me paint you whilst you take a shower, I have waterp[roof paint, could you be my subject. Oh sure priest friend when I need you later, I will call yor name, like in a bad dream, help, help, Oh she loveth da God on high, she religious, she sing the hymns, cuddle da baby from Nigeria and clean da beds out n all, in jail. Oh how grateful they all were to me, I dirtied my hands one day.

Priest: Ya knows full well Foxious that the last place anyone was ever letting you near in jail while there for murder was in a creche, kindergarten.

Baby black boy: Oh hello dear sweet murderess, how do I saw/or say open the big iron cell door Ms Killeress.

Killeress: Ah there's nothing to it, apri la porto Mr Prison Abuser guy, at least that's what I call them Mr Little Black Baby Boy.
By the way what ya in for?
Baby Black Boy: I must have murdered one of those rubber bath ducks, I don't know, I can't really talk. My you are pretty, your place or mine?
Why you talking all funny, you not from round these parts?

Killeress: Nah, I'm from paradise, I'm an angel
Baby Black Boy: Is that of death madam? as one of my long lost cousins seemed to be saying you accused him of rape n murder

Warden warden warden, break your lock n key, get me away from baby black boy, he is bullying me.

Warden: Baby black boy, how dare you do whatever it is this Killeress says you did and I'm taking her word for it, right, I've had enough, you shall have your milk rationed.

Baby Black Boy: But I didn't do nothing Mr warden Sir, it was her, she was horrible to me

Warden: Yea yeah tell that to the judge, your are black, you are a boy, you probably carry guns and have your hat on back to front, anything else I can do for ya Ms Killer?

Murderess: That'll be all Warden Jiles, I sure is gonna character assassinate everyone except the priest later on, you wait.

Warden: Will you accuse me of wanting sex with you?

Killeress: Well what do you think?

Warden: And the priest, didn't he want to crawl into the gutter and the sewage system with ya?

Killeress: Oh no, for god didst send him to me. When I is in trouble, I calls on da lawd. Lawd, why am I in this sewage, get me out immediately do you hear, or I'll kill ya.


Latest News
Prison allows convicted killer to takw care of the liddle widdle babies...... aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

Public: What a good person, fantastic, cleaned the cribs out 2 hours long with her precious fingers. They had no blood on them at that time as she'd taken the opportunity to wash it off with lashings of bleach many moons ago


Cop: What the fuck is that awful smell?
Cop 2: Bleach?
Cop: NAR, smells like a Chinese brothel
Cop2: Oh that'll be Mrs two showers in a single morning, she smell bad, bad, bad, must be using the wrong soap, in fact she wants to turn the case into a soap.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:02 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
zorba wrote:
Golly, I'm having trouble watching ANY of that, I took about a minute or so, but it's awful, it's like she has rehearsed every line, I have not heard anyone asking her anything, all as she did was talk, in her, as Ionine described so well, sheepy voice.

Actually she is asking nothing, she is demanding... Meredith's parents like her, just as she must have done with Meredith, forced her to like her but Meredith had real trouble with her, had trouble liking Knox after a while and it seems that this really was the reason, a main motive leading to Meredith's murder.

God, her voice, her lines, like she's reading a script on the wall, is awful to behold, her staged crackling, I'm going to breakdown voice, so fake and most notable cringeworthy

It's a good thing I cannot see the entire interview.

I want to see the way she was questioned more than listen to what Knox came out with as that was predictable, though I would like to see the bit where she is asked about the lie detector test.


One of Knox's biggest mistakes is that she keeps insisting on having been friends with Meredith when there is ample witness testimony saying otherwise.


IMO the reason why she so vehemently denies any troubles with Meredith is because it's the key to the motive for the crime.

Zorba, you would be surprised, but sometimes I had to laugh during the interview snippets I saw.

What Amanda Knox does often during interviews, to add some drama, is that she opens her mouth as if she was about to say something and then she keeps moving her lips as if she was in search for words, then she looks down, still trying to vocalise something, sometimes shaking her head slightly, but she remains silent for a long time.

It's tragic in a way.


Exactly, I thought that too, as the line about friend friend friend every time sounds like someone briefed her on it: And don't forget to mention she was ya FRENDY wendy pooh
but, the more she says that the more she sounds like a totally wooden, distant, disattached NOT friend. The lat friend anyone would want. YOU WILL BE MY FRIEND

Oh man, you describe that so well, that's what I've been trying to describe, her mannerisms, those cued actions she takes, she must have worked hard practising and trying to think up what questions are likely to be asked and exactly how to react but because of that practising the spontaniety is nowhere to be seen or found or heard, as it is fake, everything.

Nell wrote:
IMO the reason why she so vehemently denies any troubles with Meredith is because it's the key to the motive for the crime.


Exactly.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
I've worn out my Twitter. Hit my Tweet allowance, so can't make any more tweets/retweets for a few hours. Others will have to take over if they can. Second part of interview is starting. You can follow all the tweets about Knox here: https://twitter.com/search?q=amanda%20knox&src=typd


Me too, sorry.


Wow. The only person I know who has ever ended up in Twitter Jail is a social media agent for a major news agency. It takes a lot. I think you get 1000 tweets per 24 hours.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Okay, so, all of the news headlines from today's interview are going to be "Amanda Knox agrees to take a lie detector test"!

Amanda Knox: I would take lie detector test to prove I'm innocent
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I followed Twitter yesterday. It was a total EXPLOSION of support for Meredith and her wonderful family. Support for justice. Wonderful. Commendable. Heartfelt. I hope the Kerchers can draw some small comfort from all of the sincere support being sent their way.

I haven't been able to watch the interview as yet, but, from all of the comments I've been reading, it appears that she has hurt rather than helped herself. I wish I could muster up some compassion. I can't.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I followed Twitter yesterday. It was a total EXPLOSION of support for Meredith and her wonderful family. Support for justice. Wonderful. Commendable. Heartfelt. I hope the Kerchers can draw some small comfort from all of the sincere support being sent their way.

I haven't been able to watch the interview as yet, but, from all of the comments I've been reading, it appears that she has hurt rather than helped herself. I wish I could muster up some compassion. I can't.



Naps, the full interview is on Perugiamurderfile.org

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thanks, Zorba. I'll go have a view.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Thanks, Zorba. I'll go have a view.


Just looking if I can find a version

Not one for links, but in this case it's good to advertise her lies.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

This is the full interview, supposedly. I'm not sure how much it may have been edited: http://www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/a ... interview/

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
I've worn out my Twitter. Hit my Tweet allowance, so can't make any more tweets/retweets for a few hours. Others will have to take over if they can. Second part of interview is starting. You can follow all the tweets about Knox here: https://twitter.com/search?q=amanda%20knox&src=typd


Me too, sorry.


Wow. The only person I know who has ever ended up in Twitter Jail is a social media agent for a major news agency. It takes a lot. I think you get 1000 tweets per 24 hours.


That's the information I found on Google too. I definitely did not send 1,000 tweets in 24 hours, but according to one article, they use formulas so you don't tweet your allowed limit in let's say an hour.

I re-tweeted a lot of messages in a relativey short time, maybe 30 -60 minutes, and I received an error message. 3 hours later I could tweet again.

Good to know for people who tweet regularly and a lot: Not all at once please.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I followed Twitter yesterday. It was a total EXPLOSION of support for Meredith and her wonderful family. Support for justice. Wonderful. Commendable. Heartfelt. I hope the Kerchers can draw some small comfort from all of the sincere support being sent their way.

I haven't been able to watch the interview as yet, but, from all of the comments I've been reading, it appears that she has hurt rather than helped herself. I wish I could muster up some compassion. I can't.


Congratulations to all those who posted on twitter. I was there all day yesterday and posted lots to @Daybreak. And on Huffington Post with the hordes :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Michael wrote:
Okay, so, all of the news headlines from today's interview are going to be "Amanda Knox agrees to take a lie detector test"!

Amanda Knox: I would take lie detector test to prove I'm innocent


A bit late, that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
This is the full interview, supposedly. I'm not sure how much it may have been edited: http://www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/a ... interview/



Michael,

Do you know how to embed that in JW or something which releases it from the limits set, because it is not visible to people outside the UK

I tried but too much messing about for me.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
For those who watched the whole thing: What happened? Was this interview recorded on two different occasions? What's with the change of clothes, the sudden hairdo and the make-up? What did I miss?


I can imagine that it would be confusing. What they did was split the live interview into three parts....so, after the first part, they came back to her about half an hour later or so and so-on. She obviously went through changes between one or two of the segments.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Oh dear, it's all going terribly wrong for Amanda Knox in her Daybreak interview!

Lorraine Kelly asked her if she'd take a lie detector test. Knox shit bricks and tried to squirm out of it, saying she really didn't think there was a need for that. But, Lorraine wouldn't give up and Knox agreed to take a lie detector test! Not that she will, of course. Just seeing her reaction when Lorraine suggested it though, was priceless!!!

Knox is getting crucified on Twitter!!!



Nice work everyone. I thought she said a lie detector wasn't necessary... I didn't know the lady would not give up on the question.

hugz-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Michael wrote:
This is the full interview, supposedly. I'm not sure how much it may have been edited: http://www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/a ... interview/



Michael,

Do you know how to embed that in JW or something which releases it from the limits set, because it is not visible to people outside the UK

I tried but too much messing about for me.



I can't hotlink the video into a site player, so we may have to wait until it's put up on Youtube later I'm afraid.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Here's a link to the video where Knox is on with her parents, for those able to watch it: http://www.itv.com/lorraine/hottopics/a ... mily-live/

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Wow, rewatching the interview. Amanda Knox is totally delusional.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I couldn't watch any of the clips on the ITV website from my location. Thanks to Clander for uploading the video to .org. What a disaster for Knox, this interview. A complete PR failure. It's very heartening to see all the negative reactions to her lies on Twitter. I hope Clander will upload the second part with her parents, too.

Knox, after taking (and failing) a lie detector test live on TV:

"I'm not the person who the lie detector says I am. The lie detector is simply wrong!"

I also think she's lying about the money being all spent and gone (around 18:40 min mark). All the signs are there: • her forehead tightens up in area between eye brows, • shoulders pulled up and elbows pulled in to sides more (body takes up less space).

Once again,

Quote:
Typically, in a person who is lying, their microexpression will exhibit the emotion of distress, characterized by the eyebrows being drawn upwards towards the middle of the forehead (sometimes causing short lines to appear across the forehead skin).


Knox can somewhat control her words, i.e., what she' saying, but she can't control her facial muscles. Busted!
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The court is one big lie detector test. She failed once and refuses to take it again. Why's that then?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ten Hard Questions For Knox That Should Be Asked Monday On ITV’s Daybreak

Posted by The Machine

TJMK
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 4:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Watched a bit of the interview in fits and starts (thanks .org). The woman interviewing Knox is very good, IMO. While I would liked to have seen some harder questions, Knox was left to fill in the blanks of her own silence. The interviewer did not rush in to fill in the gaps for Knox when she struggled, and struggle she did.

In the minutes that I watched, Knox did what she always does, IMO. Talks and talks and talks, but actually doesn't give a direct answer to some questions.

When asked about a lie detector test, her facial expression is priceless. Again, she would have been better off, and more easily believed if she had said, "Sure, bring it." It feels like it takes her an hour and a half to get to the end of that answer.. And, if I'm not mistaken, she can later say, "I would, but my lawyer advised against it."

What little I saw of the interview does not help her. At all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 4:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well, Lorraine did well.
And, it's an art, because you could ask too much and get nothing out of someone.
Let them go on, and on, and on, as Lorraine did but then after letting Knox think she was getting away with what she is used to getting away with, meaning reciting her speech and not have any spanners thrown in her works, Lorraine did ask a few questions that upset Knox's apple cart (flow), and THAT is just about the ONLY time her TONE changes throughout that entire spiel of hers.

If you do not do it right, and were in fact to ask such a list, with so many details and then show you are doing it in the accusative for sure, then someone such as Knox could just walk out. So you have to play it right.

It's weird because it was clear that every single one of the American interviews definitely was done under agreement, and the agreements as far as I could tell were defined by the clauses Knox's lawyers in America drew up for her, so that the interviewers were not allowed to ask her certain things or easier still, must only ask what is written in the contract.

This time, it seems they may have imagined that in Britain the nice presenters would ask the same stuff Knox and Sollecito had become accustomed to and being desperate to force public opinion by giving a barrage of interviews and press releases, they made a mistake, because I bet Knox will not do any more like this one, as her parents will be going ape shit at the result of Daybreak.
Daybreak will soon be criticised by the usuals.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

https://twitter.com/MartinLitMgmt Raffaele's agent, just announced
Quote:
#AmandaKnox JUST ANNOUNCED:
RAFFAELE SOLLECITO RETAINS JOHN Q. KELLY, ESQ. AS U.S. COUNSEL FOR THIRD MURDER TRIAL


Ahem. Have been engaging with https://twitter.com/Raffasolaries for the last two days so asked him and her to confirm. Will this be for Florence Appeal, final hearing in Rome, or an extradition hearing? Will post reply when I get one.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

If it's this fellow, then hokay, http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... n_q_kelly/ I can see Cassazione being really impressed :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Just heard back from source: Raffaele Sollecito ‏@Raffasolaries 57s
@manfromatlan Yes I confirm him as a spokesman in my behalf, not as my lawyer
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

In other words, glorified PR man.

Thanks, Ergon.

Someone should ask Sollecito if he shouldn't be spending his money on proper legal representation instead of PR. If he can afford to buy PR men, he can't be that desperate to pay for lawyers and experts to represent him in court in Italy, as he's claimed.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Her parents are not the ideal role models either.


Just watched the segment with her parents; sigh. Those stone faces of mom and dad. I haven't seen them on TV in a while. I can't say I miss them. In a sense, AK is trapped between who she is and who her parents want her to be ("innocent"), and of course in a web of her own lies.

Nell wrote:
I noticed she referred to herself as a "kid" and she is serious about that.


Good catch by Piktor over at .org:

Post by piktor » 23 Sep 2013, 15:06

Quote:
Knox calls herself "a kid", although she was a 20 year-old on Nov. 1, 2007.

Guede was also 20 years old on Nov. 1, 2007.

Yet, on the Today Show, @ 3:15 she says of Guede: "there's traces all over the place of the man who actually did this."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwvZzq5-Mq4

She repeats her two-faced trick on the ITV interview @ 2:49 Knox says: "I was a kid".

@ 3:13 she says "Rudy Guede, the man who has been proven to have... blah blah blah"
Top Profile 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

A black person age 20 is only ten in white-people years.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Oh dear, it's all going terribly wrong for Amanda Knox in her Daybreak interview!

Lorraine Kelly asked her if she'd take a lie detector test. Knox shit bricks and tried to squirm out of it, saying she really didn't think there was a need for that. But, Lorraine wouldn't give up and Knox agreed to take a lie detector test! Not that she will, of course. Just seeing her reaction when Lorraine suggested it though, was priceless!!!

Knox is getting crucified on Twitter!!!

I wondered how interview went...thanks Michael.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Some unfavorable shots of Knox in Mail Online:

DAILY MAIL
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
tamale wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I was reading over at IIP a few weeks ago and one of the posters (don't ask which one, they all blend together to me) made the comment that Amanda's problem was that she wasn't 'forceful enough' to date giving her 'truth'. It was suggested that she needed to be more forceful and basically get in everyone's face with her story.

Perhaps that's what we are seeing. I dunno.

Her advisors and handlers are grasping in the dark. They have reached Chaos. pp-(


Hi, tamale. All that I get from this is that her 'people', whoever they may be, can't believe that she is innocent either. Who in their right mind would believe that this person is this truly terrorized, stressed. depressed, suffering from PTSD, and think that it was a GOOD thing to parade around, giving interviews in this state? Who allows this with people that they truly love and believe in?

I try to be a reasonable person, and try to view where the other person is coming from. And all I can think to say is that I would have to be bat-shit crazy to encourage this if I truly felt she was innocent. They all have already said that she will not be going back. So, be done with it already.

Yes..i agree, everyone is in melt down. KP has been giving unhappy hair cuts...so sad.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Raffie doesn't like being upstaged by Mandy and speaks to an IBT reporter, while her face is plastered all over TV:

Meredith Kercher Murder Retrial: I’m Not Hiding from Justice Says Raffaele Sollecito
By Umberto Bacchi
September 23, 2013 10:07 AM GMT

Skype interview (video on the right-hand column)

Meredith Kercher's murder retrial is to proceed without both its main protagonists, as Amanda Knox's ex-boyfriend has said he will not attend the first hearings but watch Italian prosecutors make the case against him from a secret location overseas.

Raffaele Sollecito spoke exclusively to IBTimes UK after revealing that, like Knox, he will not be returning to Italy for a re-run of the murder case.

Sollecito, 29, denied he was hiding from justice and reached out to the family of the British student he is jointly accused of killing, pleading with them to talk to him.

"I can understand their suffering" Sollecito told our reporter, referring to the Kercher family. "But on the other side I'm begging them to find out that I'm open to dialogue."

He claims the move has nothing to do with the looming trial, maintaining he is "not running away".

"I'm not hiding anywhere," he says. "I have my Italian passport. I'm travelling with my identity. I'm exposed to any decision from the Interpol and Italian authorities. Saying that I'm hiding is just ridiculous."

Sollecito will eventually go back to Italy when the trial enters its crucial stages.

He is keeping his movements out of the public eye because unwanted press attention threatens the success of some projects he is currently working on.


In an interview with Italian magazine Oggi, Knox said she would be at peace if prosecutors simply apologised for their alleged mistakes.

Sollecito is less-forgiving. "I want an explanation," he demands.

The 29-year-old is particularity enraged at police wire-tapping of some of his family members and some offensive comments he says police wrote on the transcripts of the recordings.

"They made comments on the tapes [related] to my aunt and stepmother saying 'this snake' or 'this s**t,'" he said. "They took everything very personally. They offended my family with no reason at all."


Sollecito is now parroting Knox's words about Guede:

He also blames authorities for the different treatment meted out to him and Knox compared to the other suspect, Guede.

"They always protected him," Sollecito says accusingly. "All he did was maintain the building of the prosecution case, not saying that we were over there [at the murder scene] but not excluding it.

"He took the way in the middle strategically not to upset detectives."


IBTIMES UK
Top Profile 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

They sound really bitter that Guede's path was the wiser one. Shut up, don't make waves, do your time and get scheduled parole.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The whole crowd has been bitter about that... for the entire time since the murder.

They thought/think they are/were smarter than everyone else. Fatal mistake IMO.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Image from Daybreak interview:


Her eyes look quite dull...as in medicated.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Just heard back from source: Raffaele Sollecito ‏@Raffasolaries 57s
@manfromatlan Yes I confirm him as a spokesman in my behalf, not as my lawyer

Ask Raff is will unblock me so I can ask a question. I promise not to bite.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Yeah, but your bark of truth is worse than your bite ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
Michael wrote:
This is the full interview, supposedly. I'm not sure how much it may have been edited: http://www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/a ... interview/



Michael,

Do you know how to embed that in JW or something which releases it from the limits set, because it is not visible to people outside the UK

I tried but too much messing about for me.



I can't hotlink the video into a site player, so we may have to wait until it's put up on Youtube later I'm afraid.


Right thanks Mike.

Think Clander used Chrome to see the page details on ITV and collected the codes used for the vid there, took that and re-embedded it in RW, I signed up to RW to try all that stuff but it was time consuming as I'm not familiar with it, so gave up, for now.
He didn't make it simple to copy to somewhere else.

Sometimes you sign up to something and all the time they are saying it's free, and once you've altered your machine by adding it, you find out you do have to buy something.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

That’s a record for me today folks, tolerating the sound of that whining voice.

What I got, yet again, was that at moments she sounds so aggressive, she is at those moments putting on her plead act, where it's: please sympathise with me, yes all as I get is visions of her going insane on someonme, someone with nobody there to help them, and that is really creepty about her, as obviouslty what happened, the dyamics from that awful night, have not at all changed in her, she is as far from Meredith as she ever was, even further.

My friend, strained voice, cue, pleading voice, sheep-like tones, I was very good friends with my friend, we had such fun, pause, eyebrows hit the fan, and the attic (you can see her sliding, thinking, I know this one, I practiced it, she takes a number of moments, awkward, as though it were real, yet evety single time it is exactly the same, so that's what I mean, it's like on cue, and then she says her thing like she just formulated it, but she learned it off by heart.
She almost did not know how to answer when asked something real that upset that flow, and very momentarily, you heard her real voice, one that may have a tad of spontaneity in it as do most voices, because that is human, but to speak like you are a robot is not normal, that is not human, and she is now sounding so weird because the lies she is telling mean she has to keep up this single line, and that is why everything sounds the same, you could cut it all into little bits and re-enter it in any order and it would still all sound exactly the same, there is no real tone, there is no real emotion except poor me and I want to get away with this.

Nobody speaks about a friend that way

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Yeah, but your bark of truth is worse than your bite ;)


pp-( hugz-)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Take that, Knox!

Meredith Kercher's dad rejects Amanda Knox's request to visit grave of her 'friend'

The dad of murdered student Meredith Kercher today poured scorn on her suspected killer’s plea to meet his family and visit his daughter’s grave.

Amanda Knox, 26, made her bizarre appeal during an interview on ITV1’s Daybreak, saying: “The greatest closure would be for the Kerchers to take me to Meredith’s grave.

"I also want them to understand that Meredith really was my friend.”

She even urged the family to “acknowledge the pain that we have all gone through”.

But Meredith’s journalist dad John, 70, rejected her suggestions, saying: “Rubbish, I’ve heard it all before.”


THE MIRROR
Top Profile 

Offline beans


Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:00 am

Posts: 220

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

What I noticed about the "my friend" comments was that she said something to the effect of "Meredith was my friend. She was kind to me." I don't remember much of "we" doing anything. Perhaps I'm just forgetful--but I'm not listening to that tripe again!!! It was nearly endless the first time.

But, yes, all the references to her "friend" brought on her awful mannerisms.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I haven't watched the entire interview yet. I went back to it, several times. Nope, can't sit through it.
I'll try again later. I think I must be catching Zorba-itis.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Part 1 of the Daybreak interview (videotaped in Seattle):




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUDawSZRE0


picture of a pumpkin
This Post has been edited by a Moderator
Details: Put it into a large player ;)
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I haven't watched the entire interview yet. I went back to it, several times. Nope, can't sit through it.
I'll try again later. I think I must be catching Zorba-itis.



Ha ha, yes it's contagious, I'll let you into a secret, I partook of it for a mere trifle, stopping starting, I think the best way to view it is upside down, and backwards.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline beans


Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:00 am

Posts: 220

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I watched bits and pieces at a time also--but the whole thing. It was still endless.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

beans wrote:
I watched bits and pieces at a time also--but the whole thing. It was still endless.


Hi Beans

Yeah an exercise in monotony wasn't it, as is all of what she said after the murder

and do ya know, like, when are they going to get it into their thick heads that this blame everyone strategy hasn't worked? or else the Supreme Court would not have said what it did, it is very serious, as they've (the supreme court) basically already dismissed all of this false accusing, maybe if Knox had not started out by accusing Patrick they would have been more successful when blaming every Tom, Dick and Harry in town, to go on with this unsucessful strategy is just the end for them because all of their actions in realtion to this behaviour is all extra evidence for the court of what they are actually up to, have been up to all along. So they've helped the court now, as it is very easy to see what the game is, they've simply gone too far with all of that, all of this will count against them, as they actually disrespect and ignore the Supreme courts too, and carry on regardless of whatever has been ascertained.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I haven't watched the entire interview yet. I went back to it, several times. Nope, can't sit through it.
I'll try again later. I think I must be catching Zorba-itis.



Ha ha, yes it's contagious, I'll let you into a secret, I partook of it for a mere trifle, stopping starting, I think the best way to view it is upside down, and backwards.


I'll let YOU in on a little secret. There IS no best way to watch it. Seriously, the parts that I did see, I kept thinking, wait, what? How do I rewind this to see what the woman actually asked. The answers didn't seem to really address the questions, often, and I wanted to backtrack to see what had been asked, exactly. I couldn't figure out how to go back a few seconds (the clip that I watched didn't have that feature) and I really didn't want to go back and start all over again. I know she never answered the question where she started out saying something about living the life of a fugitive. She went right off track. I will at some point go back over it, but not now, not today.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Take that, Knox!

Meredith Kercher's dad rejects Amanda Knox's request to visit grave of her 'friend'

The dad of murdered student Meredith Kercher today poured scorn on her suspected killer’s plea to meet his family and visit his daughter’s grave.

Amanda Knox, 26, made her bizarre appeal during an interview on ITV1’s Daybreak, saying: “The greatest closure would be for the Kerchers to take me to Meredith’s grave.

"I also want them to understand that Meredith really was my friend.”

She even urged the family to “acknowledge the pain that we have all gone through”.

But Meredith’s journalist dad John, 70, rejected her suggestions, saying: “Rubbish, I’ve heard it all before.”


THE MIRROR

Right on, Mr Kercher.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I followed Twitter yesterday. It was a total EXPLOSION of support for Meredith and her wonderful family. Support for justice. Wonderful. Commendable. Heartfelt. I hope the Kerchers can draw some small comfort from all of the sincere support being sent their way.

I haven't been able to watch the interview as yet, but, from all of the comments I've been reading, it appears that she has hurt rather than helped herself. I wish I could muster up some compassion. I can't.


Congratulations to all those who posted on twitter. I was there all day yesterday and posted lots to @Daybreak. And on Huffington Post with the hordes :)

Yeah a powerful surge of support for beautiful Meredith. thanks all
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Just let Knox talk (and write) and she will reveal herself. One of these days she is going to blurt out that she didn't mean to kill Meredith and that whole face will jump back to 'normal' in a flash. I noticed she said 'there is no trace of me on the murder room'. One of these little slip-ups I think. Her trace is on the knife, not in the room (because she took the knife out of the room :roll:). Oh well, it is Tuesday here. Less than a week to go :mrgreen:
Top Profile 

Offline jodyodyo


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:02 am

Posts: 257

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   




Good job with the twitter fest everyone!


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.


I am not sure this family think it's necessary to give her advice to prepare her for her tv appearances, but just by comparing Knox's first interviews for her book tour with the one for Daybreak, it seems she is far more confident now.

The problem is that she is satisfied with her responses. She believes to be convincing. She has an answer for everything. If the viewers and the Kerchers don't believe her, it's because they have some sort of problem, like the inability to think "logically", or they are "haters".

Everyone else is at fault, not Knox, just like in 2007 in the police station.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I haven't watched the entire interview yet. I went back to it, several times. Nope, can't sit through it.
I'll try again later. I think I must be catching Zorba-itis.



Ha ha, yes it's contagious, I'll let you into a secret, I partook of it for a mere trifle, stopping starting, I think the best way to view it is upside down, and backwards.


I'll let YOU in on a little secret. There IS no best way to watch it. Seriously, the parts that I did see, I kept thinking, wait, what? How do I rewind this to see what the woman actually asked. The answers didn't seem to really address the questions, often, and I wanted to backtrack to see what had been asked, exactly. I couldn't figure out how to go back a few seconds (the clip that I watched didn't have that feature) and I really didn't want to go back and start all over again. I know she never answered the question where she started out saying something about living the life of a fugitive. She went right off track. I will at some point go back over it, but not now, not today.



But I will let you into another nother other teeny likkle wikkle secwit, the best way to watch it is in fact to not watch it at all.
However, what is happening, is she is indeed not answering and that's because one might as well try talking to a machine, and you can these days, I see a feature in Chrome, or I did the other day, I had to try it a few times before it responded, when I said a name, it immediately said, Did not catch that, and I repeated this until it caught something, only it was not what I had said so it took me to another site, or a site I did not want to go to. Only when I said something that it was REALLY familiar with, like one of its own things, did it react correctly, like when I said, Google Translate, well that's one of Google's children so it knew that one.

And this is exactly what I meant about her reeling off her spiel, and when the interviewer did break through that, suddenly her own real voice come out, the one thjat could be like anone else's, spontaneous, because to do what she is doing when engaging, which is to stick to a rigid format costs a lot of effort but you can hear it, you can hear that it does; she becomes a human ROBOT.
The robot in action means hardly anything can get in or out.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
dgfred wrote:
I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.


I am not sure this family think it's necessary to give her advice to prepare her for her tv appearances, but just by comparing Knox's first interviews for her book tour with the one for Daybreak, it seems she is far more confident now.

The problem is that she is satisfied with her responses. She believes to be convincing. She has an answer for everything. If the viewers and the Kerchers don't believe her, it's because they have some sort of problem, like the inability to think "logically", or they are "haters".

Everyone else is at fault, not Knox, just like in 2007 in the police station.


I don't think she is satified with her answers... she just doesn't understand why EVERYONE thinks she is a lying murderer. s-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
I haven't watched the entire interview yet. I went back to it, several times. Nope, can't sit through it.
I'll try again later. I think I must be catching Zorba-itis.



Ha ha, yes it's contagious, I'll let you into a secret, I partook of it for a mere trifle, stopping starting, I think the best way to view it is upside down, and backwards.


I'll let YOU in on a little secret. There IS no best way to watch it. Seriously, the parts that I did see, I kept thinking, wait, what? How do I rewind this to see what the woman actually asked. The answers didn't seem to really address the questions, often, and I wanted to backtrack to see what had been asked, exactly. I couldn't figure out how to go back a few seconds (the clip that I watched didn't have that feature) and I really didn't want to go back and start all over again. I know she never answered the question where she started out saying something about living the life of a fugitive. She went right off track. I will at some point go back over it, but not now, not today.



But I will let you into another nother other teeny likkle wikkle secwit, the best way to watch it is in fact to not watch it at all.
However, what is happening, is she is indeed not answering and that's because one might as well try talking to a machine, and you can these days, I see a feature in Chrome, or I did the other day, I had to try it a few times before it responded, when I said a name, it immediately said, Did not catch that, and I repeated this until it caught something, only it was not what I had said so it took me to another site, or a site I did not want to go to. Only when I said something that it was REALLY familiar with, like one of its own things, did it react correctly, like when I said, Google Translate, well that's one of Google's children so it knew that one.

And this is exactly what I meant about her reeling off her spiel, and when the interviewer did break through that, suddenly her own real voice come out, the one thjat could be like anone else's, spontaneous, because to do what she is doing when engaging, which is to stick to a rigid format costs a lot of effort but you can hear it, you can hear that it does; she becomes a human ROBOT.
The robot in action means hardly anything can get in or out.


I'm pretty much stuck at this exact point. Watching it is an exercise in futility for me. I keep thinking of the Kerchers. I cannot imagine how they manage to continue to exhibit such strength and restraint. God be with them all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Raffaele Sollecito has been found, vacationing in the Caribbean. I think his supporters have been had. ;) I know, we don't really want to see him, but here he is, in tomorrow's issue of Oggi.

Raffaele Sollecito, charged, together with Amanda Knox, with Meredith Kercher's murder, is staying in the Caribbean. And the weekly Oggi [Today] (on sale from 25 September) publishes exclusive photographs of his journey.

Raffaele Sollecito in the Caribbean, exclusive photos

The weekly [magazine] Oggi publishes exclusive photos of Raffaele's stay in Santo Domingo, also known as a refuge for people waiting to clarify their legal position. But he has already promised to return to face trial.

FULL RELAX - Pending an opening of the new appeal process, in Florence, September 30, Sollecito went to Bayahibe, one of the most beautiful beaches in the South-east of Santo Domingo, where he decided to stay at least one month in residence Casa Caribe Tamarindo. As he has disclosed to Oggi, the young man from Bari stays up late, with the inseparable computer runs constantly in search of wireless zones and has acquainted several fellow residents, including a native of Pavia, who moved there for work, and a Roman businessman with several businesses in the tourism sector.

SKIP THE [FIRST] HEARING - The Dominican Republic is also known as a refuge for people waiting to clarify their legal position. Such as the former owner of the Perugia football club Luciano Gaucci who stayed there for a long time. But in an interview with Oggi just a few weeks ago, Sollecito had announced that he would miss the early stages of the trial, but promised to return to face the judgment.


OGGI

Club Casa Caribe Tamarindo - Bayahibe, Repubblica Dominicana

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6J7wbUIVy0

7 nights: 1100 €

Club Casa Caribe Tamarindo
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

That settles it, guermantes. I'm off to set up my own gofundme account.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Raffaele Sollecito has been found, vacationing in the Caribbean. I think his supporters have been had. ;) I know, we don't really want to see him, but here he is, in tomorrow's issue of Oggi.

Raffaele Sollecito, charged, together with Amanda Knox, with Meredith Kercher's murder, is staying in the Caribbean. And the weekly Oggi [Today] (on sale from 25 September) publishes exclusive photographs of his journey.

Raffaele Sollecito in the Caribbean, exclusive photos

The weekly [magazine] Oggi publishes exclusive photos of Raffaele's stay in Santo Domingo, also known as a refuge for people waiting to clarify their legal position. But he has already promised to return to face trial.

FULL RELAX - Pending an opening of the new appeal process, in Florence, September 30, Sollecito went to Bayahibe, one of the most beautiful beaches in the South-east of Santo Domingo, where he decided to stay at least one month in residence Casa Caribe Tamarindo. As he has disclosed to Oggi, the young man from Bari stays up late, with the inseparable computer runs constantly in search of wireless zones and has acquainted several fellow residents, including a native of Pavia, who moved there for work, and a Roman businessman with several businesses in the tourism sector.

SKIP THE [FIRST] HEARING - The Dominican Republic is also known as a refuge for people waiting to clarify their legal position. Such as the former owner of the Perugia football club Luciano Gaucci who stayed there for a long time. But in an interview with Oggi just a few weeks ago, Sollecito had announced that he would miss the early stages of the trial, but promised to return to face the judgment.


OGGI

Club Casa Caribe Tamarindo - Bayahibe, Repubblica Dominicana

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6J7wbUIVy0

7 nights: 1100 €

Club Casa Caribe Tamarindo




It's incredible for all the wrong reasons!

Not that I wish to take credit for his choices, all as I know is I wrote a lot of nutty scenarios with him in South America and the Caribbean, we pretty much worked out his escape route would be somewhere there. You know it's as though he's been reading us, and thought, mmm, well that's a good idea.

I'm sure the fellow guests are just going to love it when they read about him in their dailies and magazines, fancy that, did you say murderer Martha. My god, where's our Jennifer?

I've got it, this guy has a head but it is empty. There's more brains in sawdust.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Nell wrote:
dgfred wrote:
I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.


I am not sure this family think it's necessary to give her advice to prepare her for her tv appearances, but just by comparing Knox's first interviews for her book tour with the one for Daybreak, it seems she is far more confident now.

The problem is that she is satisfied with her responses. She believes to be convincing. She has an answer for everything. If the viewers and the Kerchers don't believe her, it's because they have some sort of problem, like the inability to think "logically", or they are "haters".

Everyone else is at fault, not Knox, just like in 2007 in the police station.


I don't think she is satified with her answers... she just doesn't understand why EVERYONE thinks she is a lying murderer. s-((

Does she comprehend that people think she is lying??
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

tamale wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Nell wrote:
dgfred wrote:
I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.


I am not sure this family think it's necessary to give her advice to prepare her for her tv appearances, but just by comparing Knox's first interviews for her book tour with the one for Daybreak, it seems she is far more confident now.

The problem is that she is satisfied with her responses. She believes to be convincing. She has an answer for everything. If the viewers and the Kerchers don't believe her, it's because they have some sort of problem, like the inability to think "logically", or they are "haters".

Everyone else is at fault, not Knox, just like in 2007 in the police station.


I don't think she is satified with her answers... she just doesn't understand why EVERYONE thinks she is a lying murderer. s-((

Does she comprehend that people think she is lying??


Yes. Knox knows that no one believes her. Her performance is so bad that I doubt even her Groupies are going to think this is going well. Some are too delusional but the rest will see she is sinking fast and start making up excuses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
tamale wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Nell wrote:
dgfred wrote:
I can't believe that anyone 'responsible' for that interview did not prep her for the questions about the Kerchers or the money... or did they and she is trying in her warped way to fool everyone. She answered horribly. It hasn't worked well so far and from the looks of things is not going to. She might as well have a guilty tatoo right there on her forehead.


I am not sure this family think it's necessary to give her advice to prepare her for her tv appearances, but just by comparing Knox's first interviews for her book tour with the one for Daybreak, it seems she is far more confident now.

The problem is that she is satisfied with her responses. She believes to be convincing. She has an answer for everything. If the viewers and the Kerchers don't believe her, it's because they have some sort of problem, like the inability to think "logically", or they are "haters".

Everyone else is at fault, not Knox, just like in 2007 in the police station.


I don't think she is satified with her answers... she just doesn't understand why EVERYONE thinks she is a lying murderer. s-((

Does she comprehend that people think she is lying??


Yes. Knox knows that no one believes her. Her performance is so bad that I doubt even her Groupies are going to think this is going well. Some are too delusional but the rest will see she is sinking fast and start making up excuses.

Agreed
Top Profile 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
The problem with Chris Halkides's claims is that he continues to ignore that the SAL was filed with the court and further that it is public. If he looked at that document his already absurd reasoning would go be impossible so he pretends like the records don't exist. He is just dishonest.

It is best to just ignore Chris Halkides. Most of the time he doesn't understand the science and occasionally when he does he just lies about it.


Yes, McCall, you are correct that the SAL document was produced. However, it is not very useful. The SAL logs generally track the labwork up to the point of extraction. The SAL is thus useful for identifying sample numbers and corresponding Rep. numbers, some information about blood testing, and extraction plate/well locations.

It is important to note, though, that the SAL is not an actual record of any testing—it is just a summary. Thus, somewhere there must be underlying blood testing records, and there are extraction records that were generated by the extraction machine. Neither of these categories of documents have been produced.

Moreover, the SAL documents contain no information whatsoever about amplification, purification, concentration and/or electrophoresis. In short, while the SAL is a disclosure of some information in summary form, it is not at all a substitute for disclosure of the lab records.

I have identified a large number of records that have been suppressed. In particular, if your sources can get any of these suppressed records, I would love it if you would post them on your wiki: (i) Real Time PCR records for run nos. 545 to 548, which would include the amplification records for 36b, (ii) records of concentration/purification processes, (iii) supressed electropherograms (e.g., nos. 600-604, 617, 622, 626, 628, 631, 685-86, 688-89, 693-94, 758-60, 762-69, 939, 944, 948, and 952), and of course (iv) EDFs.

I believe that criminal defendants are entitled to disclosure. Cheers.


In addition to the SAL we also have Vecchiotti's testimony to rely on. The issue of testing was discussed in court and Vecchiotti ruled out the possibility of contamination in her testimony. So unless you claim is that Vecchiotti relied upon factually incorrect information your post is again just an attempt to mislead.

With respect to the documents being suppressed unless you are one of the defence lawyers you can't make any such claims. There is no obligation to disclose to you. The defence lawyers are the only people who can object about the disclosure and they have not. Quite the contrary the final word on disclosure both from the defence and from C&V is that they had everything they needed.



It's all irrelevant anyway, as this is the Italian system, not the American system. In the American system, experts for the defence are not permitted to be present for evidence testing and as such, there may be an argument for all sorts of testing records to be handed over to the defence. In the Italian system and in this specific case, experts for the defence were present for the tests and the generation of the records. THAT is full disclosure. Therefore, the FOAKer whinging on this matter is without merit.

Note to Diocletian: If you wish to pursue this matter here, please wait until Tuesday in line with the Tuesday Rule.

It is true that Italy has a very specific set of procedures concerning the right of the defense to attend lab testing. That said, under the particular circumstances of this case, I’m not sure that there would be that much of a difference between Italy and US/UK procedures. I know that the US provides defendants with a right to observe destructive testing, which is what we are talking about in the case of 36b.

While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.

Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

CRUSOE ALERT!!!!

Unofficial translation by me.



Raffaele Sollecito in Santo Domingo a few days before the appeal process


Amanda, the truth interview: "I'm not going to Florence, too much media attention on me"

The weekly magazine OGGI (Today) reveals Sollecito intends to stay in the Caribbean. Meanwhile, the prosecutor has the means of access in the courtroom to the public and press at the trial to be held in Florence from 30 September.

Florence, 24 September 2013 - Raffaele Sollecito, a few days before the start of the appeals process where he will appear as an accused party in Florence from 30 September, he bathes in the waters of the Caribbean, dividing his time between the beach and bed.

The news weekly 'Oggi' says, in the issue on newsstands tomorrow, they will be publishing the photographs of Sollecito in Bayahibe, one of the most beautiful beaches in the South East of Santo Domingo.

The Dominican Republic is known to serve as a refuge for celebrities noted in judicial reports, such as the former owner of the Perugian football club Luciano Gaucci. Sollecito had already made it clear, however, that he will miss the first phases of the process, promising that he will return to face the judgment.

The man from Bari whose stay will last for about a month in Casa Caribe Tamarindo, sleeps until late morning, goes around with the inevitable computer and entertains friendly relations with many fellow residents on the island, including one who moved to Santo Domingo for work and a businessman from Rome with several interests in the tourism sector.

In the meantime, with regard to the appeal process, the General Prosecutor has ordered court access to the public and press. In the next hours the indications will also be published on the site http://www.giustizia.toscana.it

In the meantime, with regard to the appeal process, the General Prosecutor has ordered court access to the public and press. In the next hours the indications will also be published on the site http://www.giustizia.toscana.it. For accreditation of journalists you need to send an email with your name, membership number and proof of professional status to pg.firenze @ giustizia.it.

The public can access the courthouse through the side openings Peretola and San Donato, while journalists and accredited technicians will access the courthouse by 9 entrances of San Donato, using badges issued with bar codes delivered to them in the specially equipped room next to the entrance area of San Donato, on 25 to 27 September from 13.15 to 19.15 and 30 September, the date of the first hearing, from 7:15 to 9:00.

The courthouse is prohibited to bring cameras and instruments intended to make video footage. Only one TV station will be allowed to introduce no more than three fixed cameras and related accessories installed in the courtroom by September 26.

The authorisation [to one TV station] will be granted provided that the authorised party undertakes to ensure the use of shots taken, both live and pre-recorded, for the benefit of all the TV stations who request them. Additional equipment of video or photographic images will be placed in the open space outside the front entrance point of San Donato.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:57 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Oh God how horribly funny it will be if, DR of all places, decides well a few crooked businessman okay, but let's keep in Italy's good books and be so kind as to extradite Sollecito immediately, and imagine his consternation when arrested and cast, meanwhile, into a DR prison, oh lawdy, he'd have something to cry about then and will fondly remember his nice Italian prison accommodation that he has not stopped complaining about; Sollecito never said anything like Knox did until everyone onlne started pointing that out whereupon he suddenly started making lame and weak accusations (about 5 years after arrest), but man if someone hit or abused me I'd be going for it as soon as I got the chance and I'd have had my lawyers enter official complaints through the correct channels to the correct bodies.

We might just have given him the right idea, in that it is entirely the wrong place to BE.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:53 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletion prefers to rant on about insignificant, irrelevant matters, anything to just try to uphold the false accusations of corruption that have already been nullified/dismissed/stated to be unfounded by the Supreme Court.

Give us a break, for FS.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Donate HERE to Sollecito, for he wants a Presidential Suite

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

re: ITV interview

Knox doesn’t have her camera face on in the Lucy Watson segment. I’m not talking about her makeup, i mean her lack of animation, the hard and raspy voice, and she barely had any control over the anger she wears on her face. It’s like it's not the same person who showed up for the interview with Lorraine Kelly later on, with her PR game face on, the difference was far more than makeup and a costume change.

It was almost like watching two distinct personalities.
(Untreated panic attacks can lead to schizophrenia.)

Just my impression. Anyone else notice this?
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.


Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.[/quote]

The problem with this position is that the only people who complain about the lack of disclosure are individuals who are not entitled to disclosure. Disclosure does not mean that the prosecution distributes everything to random people who just happen to have an interest in the trial. I have yet to see a reliable source for the claim that the defence have an issue with disclosure. Can you provide such a source?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hey McCall. That is the last dull, mangled arrow in their quiver.

Oh what could have been if the defense would just listen to Dio and CH.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Diocletion prefers to rant on about insignificant, irrelevant matters, anything to just try to uphold the false accusations of corruption that have already been nullified/dismissed/stated to be unfounded by the Supreme Court.

Give us a break, for FS.

I don't think that the Supreme Court addressed the issue of disclosure at all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.


Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.


The problem with this position is that the only people who complain about the lack of disclosure are individuals who are not entitled to disclosure. Disclosure does not mean that the prosecution distributes everything to random people who just happen to have an interest in the trial. I have yet to see a reliable source for the claim that the defence have an issue with disclosure. Can you provide such a source?[/quote]
I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

louiehaha wrote:
re: ITV interview

Knox doesn’t have her camera face on in the Lucy Watson segment. I’m not talking about her makeup, i mean her lack of animation, the hard and raspy voice, and she barely had any control over the anger she wears on her face. It’s like it's not the same person who showed up for the interview with Lorraine Kelly later on, with her PR game face on, the difference was far more than makeup and a costume change.

It was almost like watching two distinct personalities.
(Untreated panic attacks can lead to schizophrenia.)

Just my impression. Anyone else notice this?


Hi louie,

I thought the same and even wanted to write a post about it, but, being a non-native English speaker, I often struggle with expressing my thoughts clearly. I was struck by all the different faces and personalities she presented in her four recent interviews (Oggi, La Repubblica, Today, Daybreak). It was like watching a different person every time, I fully agree. In the Oggi interview she seemed angry and defiant, in La Repubblica - chatty and prattling, on Today show - sweet and composed, on Daybreak - dissembling and exasperated, etc Her interviews are scary to watch, actually.

Apparently, she's not the only one capable of rapid changeover in mood/personality:

Quote:
Before her imprisonment, Homolka had been evaluated by numerous psychiatrists, psychologists, and other mental health and court officials. Homolka, reported one, "remains something of a diagnostic mystery. Despite her ability to present herself very well, there is a moral vacuity in her which is difficult, if not impossible, to explain."

..."what is particularly compelling – and telling – is how radically different are the faces she presents" to each audience.


KARLA HOMOLKA

Make your own conclusions... ;)
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.


So basically you have nothing to support your claim. Not at all surprised.


Last edited by McCall on Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline jodyodyo


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:02 am

Posts: 257

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I was inspired by Diocletian.




You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.


The issue would have been raised during Massei. Between witnesses there is a lot of discussion about disclosure of this or that. Requests are made. In one case a witness was rescheduled because an item had not been disclosed and it was possible it would be relevant to his testimony. None of the requests for disclosure were denied with the exception of the confidential source on Sollecito's previous attack on a girl.

So if there was a disclosure issue why is it not discussed? Why do none of the defence experts complain about this lack of disclosure? If I was an expert and something I wanted was not given to me that would be part of my testimony. If I was a lawyer and had an expert witness testifying who was complaining about a lack of documentation that would certainly be a line of questioning that I would definitely pursue. None of this happens.

The only people who believe there is a disclosure issue are delusional Groupies who are attempting to confuse people with lies.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.


Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.


The problem with this position is that the only people who complain about the lack of disclosure are individuals who are not entitled to disclosure. Disclosure does not mean that the prosecution distributes everything to random people who just happen to have an interest in the trial. I have yet to see a reliable source for the claim that the defence have an issue with disclosure. Can you provide such a source?

I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.[/quote]

You would have to see if the defense raised that in their new motion before the Florence court. Until then, the SC clearly indicates, by ignoring that in its report, that it is a non-issue - possibly because C&V agreed they had received the EDF files, and Hellman did not address that further. Yet, here you are :)

What the SC also makes very clear, (and I wonder if you read the .ORG translation instead of the tidied up Google translate on your site?) that the Hellman Court, once it allowed for further testing, erred by not demanding that C&V retest the 3rd trace of human remains found in a nick on the knife blade. We'll see what happens.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.


Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.


The problem with this position is that the only people who complain about the lack of disclosure are individuals who are not entitled to disclosure. Disclosure does not mean that the prosecution distributes everything to random people who just happen to have an interest in the trial. I have yet to see a reliable source for the claim that the defence have an issue with disclosure. Can you provide such a source?

I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.


You would have to see if the defense raised that in their new motion before the Florence court. Until then, the SC clearly indicates, by ignoring that in its report, that it is a non-issue - possibly because C&V agreed they had received the EDF files, and Hellman did not address that further. Yet, here you are :)

What the SC also makes very clear, (and I wonder if you read the .ORG translation instead of the tidied up Google translate on your site?) that the Hellman Court, once it allowed for further testing, erred by not demanding that C&V retest the 3rd trace of human remains found in a nick on the knife blade. We'll see what happens.[/quote]
I'm cool with testing trace I.

I don't think that C&V ever got the EDFs. I think that in the end they thought they had what they needed to reach their conclusions and so they moved on without the EDFs. But in any event, they were court appointees, and could not waive any rights belonging to the defendants.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.


So basically you have nothing to support your claim. Not at all surprised.

OK, well, I think that they did request disclosure, but let's assume that they didn't before, but now they do request disclosure. Shouldn't they get the materials before they are sentenced to jail? What's so bad about disclosure?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
I don't think that C&V ever got the EDFs. I think that in the end they thought they had what they needed to reach their conclusions and so they moved on without the EDFs. But in any event, they were court appointees, and could not waive any rights belonging to the defendants.


That doesn't explain why defence experts did not complain about lack of disclosure. Have you read the testimony from the expert witnesses? I don't see them asking for anything. The only people complaining about non-disclosure are people who are not involved with the trial.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

No, Diolectian, they complained to the Hellmann court they did not receive the EDF's then they said they got it. Address any concerns you might have to the defense teams, whose job it is to fight for 'rights belonging to their defendants', and please, you seem to be making a lot of assertions that never seem to have been raised by the defense. So either do your homework, or, provide a link? And please, when you hit the quote button, make sure you do so in the right place. Every reply after that leads to confusion who's saying what.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.


So basically you have nothing to support your claim. Not at all surprised.

OK, well, I think that they did request disclosure, but let's assume that they didn't before, but now they do request disclosure. Shouldn't they get the materials before they are sentenced to jail? What's so bad about disclosure?


Ok so we agree that there was no disclosure issue. Good. Hopefully that means this disclosure argument will not be used again.

If they make the requests now I would support disclosure of all relevant information. If they could make an argument for why this would be relevant then certainly. It just seems very unlikely that such an argument can be made. Both Knox and Sollecito had multiple experts testify on the DNA evidence. That evidence was then subject to a review by court assigned defence advocates. Nobody ever felt the need to request additional material. It will be difficult now to justify that additional material is necessary. It would require answering why none of the previous defence experts felt any need to have this material.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not much for interviews. My feeling is that they are trying to humanize themselves to try to tamp down the most extreme of the press attacks.

As for pricking Meredith, that wasn't a good thing to say, was it? That said, it's neither his DNA on the knife handle nor her blood on the blade.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Dioc
Think if you read the motivations by the Supreme Court judges thoroughly you'll find that this issue WAS covered.

It is irrevelant, that's why they see no issue with it, and as they said, the defence parties had every opportunity to attend, nobody is questioning the procedures used by Stefanoni, only persons who falsely attempt to accuse them of corruption. This accusing of corruption of every single organ in Italy, including the judiciary, police authorities, scientific departments, was deemed to be unfounded and is just so over the top, that it is and has been deemed to be unreasonable, in fact, it is ridiculous, what kind of defence is it that just accuses everyone of corruption?
It's just one too many accusations, and the too many part makes all of it dismissible.

You are basically going on and on and on like a worn out old LP stuck in a groove; it's a non-starter.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not much for interviews. My feeling is that they are trying to humanize themselves to try to tamp down the most extreme of the press attacks.

As for pricking Meredith, that wasn't a good thing to say, was it? That said, it's neither his DNA on the knife handle nor her blood on the blade.


It is her blood on the blade, and whether his was on it or not, is not the issue, Knox's is.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well maybe not blood, but DNA ... he sure was worried about that knife tho. Don't ya think?

Why would that be?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
The problem with Chris Halkides's claims is that he continues to ignore that the SAL was filed with the court and further that it is public. If he looked at that document his already absurd reasoning would go be impossible so he pretends like the records don't exist. He is just dishonest.

It is best to just ignore Chris Halkides. Most of the time he doesn't understand the science and occasionally when he does he just lies about it.


Yes, McCall, you are correct that the SAL document was produced. However, it is not very useful. The SAL logs generally track the labwork up to the point of extraction. The SAL is thus useful for identifying sample numbers and corresponding Rep. numbers, some information about blood testing, and extraction plate/well locations.

It is important to note, though, that the SAL is not an actual record of any testing—it is just a summary. Thus, somewhere there must be underlying blood testing records, and there are extraction records that were generated by the extraction machine. Neither of these categories of documents have been produced.

Moreover, the SAL documents contain no information whatsoever about amplification, purification, concentration and/or electrophoresis. In short, while the SAL is a disclosure of some information in summary form, it is not at all a substitute for disclosure of the lab records.

I have identified a large number of records that have been suppressed. In particular, if your sources can get any of these suppressed records, I would love it if you would post them on your wiki: (i) Real Time PCR records for run nos. 545 to 548, which would include the amplification records for 36b, (ii) records of concentration/purification processes, (iii) supressed electropherograms (e.g., nos. 600-604, 617, 622, 626, 628, 631, 685-86, 688-89, 693-94, 758-60, 762-69, 939, 944, 948, and 952), and of course (iv) EDFs.

I believe that criminal defendants are entitled to disclosure. Cheers.


In addition to the SAL we also have Vecchiotti's testimony to rely on. The issue of testing was discussed in court and Vecchiotti ruled out the possibility of contamination in her testimony. So unless you claim is that Vecchiotti relied upon factually incorrect information your post is again just an attempt to mislead.

With respect to the documents being suppressed unless you are one of the defence lawyers you can't make any such claims. There is no obligation to disclose to you. The defence lawyers are the only people who can object about the disclosure and they have not. Quite the contrary the final word on disclosure both from the defence and from C&V is that they had everything they needed.



It's all irrelevant anyway, as this is the Italian system, not the American system. In the American system, experts for the defence are not permitted to be present for evidence testing and as such, there may be an argument for all sorts of testing records to be handed over to the defence. In the Italian system and in this specific case, experts for the defence were present for the tests and the generation of the records. THAT is full disclosure. Therefore, the FOAKer whinging on this matter is without merit.

Note to Diocletian: If you wish to pursue this matter here, please wait until Tuesday in line with the Tuesday Rule.

It is true that Italy has a very specific set of procedures concerning the right of the defense to attend lab testing. That said, under the particular circumstances of this case, I’m not sure that there would be that much of a difference between Italy and US/UK procedures. I know that the US provides defendants with a right to observe destructive testing, which is what we are talking about in the case of 36b.

While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.

Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.


It is full disclosure, period. You are attempting to split hairs in a desperate attempt to find fault and make complaint, a complaint I might add, that the defence are not making. I see no reason for you to demand, what the defence were present to observe being actually created. What's more, your complaint seems to be about something you see wrong in the Italian system overall, rather then something specific to this case that demonstrates that those whom you worship were treated in any way unfairly and that is not helpful either to your cause or to anyone elses. Rather, it puts you back in the old tiresome FOAKer position of whining that they weren't given special treatment in line with your attitude of entitlement. And as a final note, when comparing, perhaps you should go away and find out exactly what the American rules and protocols are exactly, in the same circumstances, instead of simply "guessing" that they are the legal utopia you are suggesting.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
Well maybe not blood, but DNA ... he sure was worried about that knife tho. Don't ya think?

Why would that be?

Because of the shoes.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
While a decision not to observe testing obviously deprives the defendant of the ability to watch, I am unaware of any law that provides that a defendant’s election not to view destructive testing operates as a waiver of any right to review the machine-generated testing records and data. I see no reason why those records couldn’t be delivered after the fact.


Again, I think that it’s important for the fairness legitimacy of a criminal prosecution to allow full and broad disclosure. It’s certainly not harmful if the work is done right and the defendants are guilty.


The problem with this position is that the only people who complain about the lack of disclosure are individuals who are not entitled to disclosure. Disclosure does not mean that the prosecution distributes everything to random people who just happen to have an interest in the trial. I have yet to see a reliable source for the claim that the defence have an issue with disclosure. Can you provide such a source?

I believe that they filed a discovery motion in Massei's court, and since we are now at the level of an appeal from Massei, the propriety of the ruling on that motion would be squarely before the Florence court. I guess we'll see what happens.[/quote]


The Massei Court is not Cassation now, is it? McCall has already demonstrated that those requests were satisfied during the course of the Massei and Hellmann procedures.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Yeah, right. He claimed it was because he was anxious. Maybe you should let him know it was the shoes instead.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.



Wrong, because the defence were not limiting themselves merely to challenging the calunnia conviction, but also the whole grounds of the prosecution and Maresca appeals. That would make any non-disclosure issues relevant, IF they actually existed.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Well maybe not blood, but DNA ... he sure was worried about that knife tho. Don't ya think?

Why would that be?

Because of the shoes.


I know most of the Groupies have no grasp on reality but how do shoes explain Meredith's DNA on the knife?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.



Wrong, because the defence were not limiting themselves merely to challenging the calunnia conviction, but also the whole grounds of the prosecution and Maresca appeals. That would make any non-disclosure issues relevant, IF they actually existed.

Let's assume that you're right. But let's also assume that there is a lot of lab information that hasn't been disclosed, some of it exculpatory. What should happen?

But I really can't understand why a defendant would appeal an acquittal.


Last edited by Diocletian on Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Well maybe not blood, but DNA ... he sure was worried about that knife tho. Don't ya think?

Why would that be?

Because of the shoes.


I know most of the Groupies have no grasp on reality but how do shoes explain Meredith's DNA on the knife?

It doesn't. It explains his apprehension.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not much for interviews. My feeling is that they are trying to humanize themselves to try to tamp down the most extreme of the press attacks.

As for pricking Meredith, that wasn't a good thing to say, was it? That said, it's neither his DNA on the knife handle nor her blood on the blade.



It's more than "not a good thing", it's incriminating.

Meredith's blood cannot be ruled out from being, or having been, present on the blade. This is down to the TMB test not being nearly sensitive enough and being only a presumptive blood test which can not be used to definitively rule in or out the presence of blood. This point was well argued by Judge Massei in his report. Your argument is therefore opinion rather then fact.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not much for interviews. My feeling is that they are trying to humanize themselves to try to tamp down the most extreme of the press attacks.

As for pricking Meredith, that wasn't a good thing to say, was it? That said, it's neither his DNA on the knife handle nor her blood on the blade.



It's more than "not a good thing", it's incriminating.

Meredith's blood cannot be ruled out from being, or having been, present on the blade. This is down to the TMB test not being nearly sensitive enough and being only a presumptive blood test which can not be used to definitively rule in or out the presence of blood. This point was well argued by Judge Massei in his report. Your argument is therefore opinion rather then fact.

Well, maybe trace "I" will solve the dilemma. What do you think?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.



Wrong, because the defence were not limiting themselves merely to challenging the calunnia conviction, but also the whole grounds of the prosecution and Maresca appeals. That would make any non-disclosure issues relevant, IF they actually existed.

Let's assume that you're right. But let's also assume that there is a lot of lab information that hasn't been disclosed, some of it exculpatory. What should happen?

But I really can't understand why a defendant would appeal an acquittal.


I think there are enough REAL arguments in this case to be had, instead of everyone having to waste their time arguing imaginary "what if" arguments. Come back and demonstrate the actual existence of this mythical exculpatory evidence and we'll discuss it.

The defence appealed against the prosecution and Maresca appeals. I shouldn't think that is too challenging for you to get your head around.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Please don't waste a (your) tuesday with a non-issue. Is there anything interesting you could possibly debate with us? It is really hard to believe that you and a couple of others are still bleating on about this. What did you think of the interview(s) or what did you think about RS saying he was just anxious when he wrote about pricking Meredith?

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I'm not much for interviews. My feeling is that they are trying to humanize themselves to try to tamp down the most extreme of the press attacks.

As for pricking Meredith, that wasn't a good thing to say, was it? That said, it's neither his DNA on the knife handle nor her blood on the blade.



It's more than "not a good thing", it's incriminating.

Meredith's blood cannot be ruled out from being, or having been, present on the blade. This is down to the TMB test not being nearly sensitive enough and being only a presumptive blood test which can not be used to definitively rule in or out the presence of blood. This point was well argued by Judge Massei in his report. Your argument is therefore opinion rather then fact.

Well, maybe trace "I" will solve the dilemma. What do you think?


I've no idea, I'm not a fortune teller.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Well maybe not blood, but DNA ... he sure was worried about that knife tho. Don't ya think?

Why would that be?

Because of the shoes.


I know most of the Groupies have no grasp on reality but how do shoes explain Meredith's DNA on the knife?

It doesn't. It explains his apprehension.


Can you respond in a way that makes sense?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

@Diocletian

Are you in favour of Knox taking a lie detector test as she has agreed?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

To recap, Diocletian has spent the last god-knows-how-long thinking that, because *he* doesn't have a copy...

The EDFs have not been disclosed.
The EDFs would have to be requested.
Therefore: The EDFs are being withheld.
Therefore: The EDFs contain suppressed exculpatory data.

'Bout right?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Not addressed by the Supreme Court = No issue with discovery/disclosure

The defendants were acquitted of murder below, and the issue isn't relevant to the calunnia appeal, so there is no way that the issue would have been raised in the appeal to the supreme court. So, I would agree with you if by "no issue," you mean it's an issue that was not before that court.



Wrong, because the defence were not limiting themselves merely to challenging the calunnia conviction, but also the whole grounds of the prosecution and Maresca appeals. That would make any non-disclosure issues relevant, IF they actually existed.

Let's assume that you're right. But let's also assume that there is a lot of lab information that hasn't been disclosed, some of it exculpatory. What should happen?

But I really can't understand why a defendant would appeal an acquittal.


I think there are enough REAL arguments in this case to be had, instead of everyone having to waste their time arguing imaginary "what if" arguments. Come back and demonstrate the actual existence of this mythical exculpatory evidence and we'll discuss it.

The defence appealed against the prosecution and Maresca appeals. I shouldn't think that is too challenging for you to get your head around.

Lab results would not have been withheld if they were favorable for the prosecution. And yet, they were. For example, amplifications of "cat's blood" that were in fact positive for human DNA.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Lab results would not have been withheld if they were favorable for the prosecution. And yet, they were. For example, amplifications of "cat's blood" that were in fact positive for human DNA.


I'm going to need something to support this claim.

I just met you and you've already lied about disclosure and I know you are now lying about this.


Last edited by McCall on Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
@Diocletian

Are you in favour of Knox taking a lie detector test as she has agreed?

Well, that's why we have trials, but that said, I don't see the harm. I don't think she will.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

You're saying this lab is so underworked that they took a sample that failed the species test, amplified it anyway and got a human result?

Which sample is that, D? The genetic tests results are here: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Lab results would not have been withheld if they were favorable for the prosecution. And yet, they were. For example, amplifications of "cat's blood" that were in fact positive for human DNA.


There you go claiming opinions as facts again. And do with have anything other then Bongiorno's assertion that the cat blood contained human DNA? I also note, that she didn't assert that it didn't contain cat DNA. So, what exactly does her assertion amount to? And without being able to demonstrate them with actual hard facts, what do YOUR assertions amount to?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
@Diocletian

Are you in favour of Knox taking a lie detector test as she has agreed?

Well, that's why we have trials, but that said, I don't see the harm. I don't think she will.


I don't think she will either. That goes without saying.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Well, that's why we have trials...


Yes, but most people attend their trials.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Lab results would not have been withheld if they were favorable for the prosecution. And yet, they were. For example, amplifications of "cat's blood" that were in fact positive for human DNA.


I'm going to need something to support this claim.

I just met you and you've already lied about disclosure and I know you are now lying about this.

Sure, but let's not be nasty. Take a look at the SAL for Sample 47032: "Gatto". But then look at the amplification record: amplifies positive at 26 Ct. Only human DNA amplifies, and this is a strong amplification. So, we have an amplification of human DNA in a sample that is attributed to a cat.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
You're saying this lab is so underworked that they took a sample that failed the species test, amplified it anyway and got a human result?

Which sample is that, D? The genetic tests results are here: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results

Exactly right. They did it lots of times. Almost all of the "cat's blood" amplified positive for human DNA.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
You're saying this lab is so underworked that they took a sample that failed the species test, amplified it anyway and got a human result?

Which sample is that, D? The genetic tests results are here: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results

Exactly right. They did it lots of times. Almost all of the "cat's blood" amplified positive for human DNA.


Did the defence claim that a species test wasn't done?

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
To recap, Diocletian has spent the last god-knows-how-long thinking that, because *he* doesn't have a copy...

The EDFs have not been disclosed.
The EDFs would have to be requested.
Therefore: The EDFs are being withheld.
Therefore: The EDFs contain suppressed exculpatory data.

'Bout right?



Please confirm/deny you think the Rome lab is suppressing exculpatory evidence.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well, we know Diocletian "thinks" that. It's not what he thinks that matters though, but what he can demonstrate.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

.


Last edited by McCall on Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
Iodine wrote:
To recap, Diocletian has spent the last god-knows-how-long thinking that, because *he* doesn't have a copy...

The EDFs have not been disclosed.
The EDFs would have to be requested.
Therefore: The EDFs are being withheld.
Therefore: The EDFs contain suppressed exculpatory data.

'Bout right?



Please confirm/deny you think the Rome lab is suppressing exculpatory evidence.

I think that the following egrams have been suppressed: Nos. 600-604, 617, 622 (control), 626, 628, 631 (control), 685-86, 688-89, 693-94, 758-60, 762-63, 939, 944, 948 and 952. Those are for runs completed by about 11/23/07. I think that they are exculpatory.

I also think that amplification runs 545 to 548 have been suppressed, and that these include the amplification of 36b.
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 19 of 21 [ 5060 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ergon and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,150,155 Views