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 12:11 am
It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:11 am
All times are UTC

Forum rules

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

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


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

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 10:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
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.



If the egrams/amplifications have been "suppressed", how would Bongiorno have them? If she has them, where are they? If she doesn't have them, how can she have made the claim she did with any credibility? If she doesn't have them and you don't have them, how can you claim they were suppressed when you can't even demonstrate they actually exist or ever did?

_________________
"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 10:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian, please be swift with the documentation of this humancat sample so we're all looking at the same thing. You said "take a look at" the SAL for this sample but omitted a link or scan. I'm interested in where you're going with this.

1. The cat's blood is cat's blood.
2. The cat's blood is human and you can align the DNA with Rudy's profile, therefore no big deal.
3. The cat's blood is human and you can't align the DNA with Rudy's profile, therefore
3a) it belongs to someone not suspicious, such as an occupant of the downstairs apartment.
3b) it belongs to someone we should consider suspicious (but means capitulating to multiple-attackers).


Diocletian wrote:
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.


Because....?

If they've been suppressed (and you have provided exactly 0 to substantiate that or explained why this is of no concern to anyone in Italy), what makes you think they're exculpatory if you don't know what's in them?

Quote:
I also think that amplification runs 545 to 548 have been suppressed, and that these include the amplification of 36b.


You think Stefanoni planted the evidence on the knife while the defense experts weren't looking, perhaps having called out "LOOK OVER THERE" to cause them to turn their backs.

Why would she do this? What does she or anyone else gain by it?

Why would an expert with access to huge amounts of victim blood plant such a small amount?


Everything you've said so far is just so tin-foily.
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 10:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
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?



Everyone, please note for the record, that Diocletian has declined to answer this question!

_________________
"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 10:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Note to McCall:

McCall, you made a duplicate post on the previous page. In line with Moderator protocols, I deleted the second duplicate version. Since then, you've edited out the content of the first version of your post and as such your original post no longer exists. Therefore, if you wish your post to exist for the record, you need to re-edit the post you edited and re-insert the original content. If however, you are happy to leave it blank, then leave it as it is and I will delete it later.

_________________
"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 10:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
Diocletian, please be swift with the documentation of this humancat sample so we're all looking at the same thing. You said "take a look at" the SAL for this sample but omitted a link or scan. I'm interested in where you're going with this.

1. The cat's blood is cat's blood.
2. The cat's blood is human and you can align the DNA with Rudy's profile, therefore no big deal.
3. The cat's blood is human and you can't align the DNA with Rudy's profile, therefore
3a) it belongs to someone not suspicious, such as an occupant of the downstairs apartment.
3b) it belongs to someone we should consider suspicious (but means capitulating to multiple-attackers).


Diocletian wrote:
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.


Because....?

If they've been suppressed (and you have provided exactly 0 to substantiate that or explained why this is of no concern to anyone in Italy), what makes you think they're exculpatory if you don't know what's in them?

Quote:
I also think that amplification runs 545 to 548 have been suppressed, and that these include the amplification of 36b.


You think Stefanoni planted the evidence on the knife while the defense experts weren't looking, perhaps having called out "LOOK OVER THERE" to cause them to turn their backs.

Why would she do this? What does she or anyone else gain by it?

Why would an expert with access to huge amounts of victim blood plant such a small amount?


Everything you've said so far is just so tin-foily.



Before we even get to the part of why Diocletian thinks "they" are exculpatory, we need him to demonstrate that "they" actually exist, or ever existed. Otherwise, he is dragging us all down the path of one long wild goose chase, which is actually the end game of almost every FOAKer that comes onto this board.

_________________
"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 10:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

I think I'm done listening to crazy. I thought this Tuesday rule would be entertaining but this is just inventing claims that have no foundation in reality.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Note to McCall:

McCall, you made a duplicate post on the previous page. In line with Moderator protocols, I deleted the second duplicate version. Since then, you've edited out the content of the first version of your post and as such your original post no longer exists. Therefore, if you wish your post to exist for the record, you need to re-edit the post you edited and re-insert the original content. If however, you are happy to leave it blank, then leave it as it is and I will delete it later.


No it is fine. I was just asking for a page number because I didn't want to go though a large document but I ended up finding 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: Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
You think Stefanoni planted the evidence on the knife while the defense experts weren't looking, perhaps having called out "LOOK OVER THERE" to cause them to turn their backs.

Why would she do this? What does she or anyone else gain by it?

Why would an expert with access to huge amounts of victim blood plant such a small amount?


Everything you've said so far is just so tin-foily.


The whole question of planting evidence is risible. There were less than ten cells in the sample she found. If one is going to plant evidence, one is going to plant an amount that cannot be questioned and does not require the machine to be turned up beyond the volume of its settings to detect. Moreover, it would practically be impossible to plant an amount so small. Finally, if they were in the mind to plant evidence, then they would have made sure plenty of Sollecito's and Knox's DNA was found in Meredith's room. The whole point of planting evidence is to absolutely seal a case.

_________________
"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 10:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.



So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

_________________
"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 10:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Iodine


User avatar


Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 9:56 pm

Posts: 141

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.


I suppose we're meant to believe this too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.
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 11:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


Yes and sometimes I thought maybe it wasn't good to say certain things, as I've noticed them taking things and switching them around, like that about Character Assassination, it was obviously all about them, all about what Knox did, starting with Mignini but then of Patrick, as that was what that was too, accusing him falsely, then of everyone else too, like Stefanoni, someone highly respected, but so many more people too, like as if such a huge amount of people would all be out to tell lies, to invent. When, who is it that has a reason to invent? Knox and Sollecito obviously.

Character Assassination described so very well what they have been doing, to see them twist it around is so annoying.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
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 11:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


Nice post Iodine. Your questions about the cat-blood and still being wrong will have Dio in knots the Boy Scouts couldn't get undone.

At first I thought some of them had some decent debate mostly regarding my personal opinions on stuff like the shower/bathmat boogie/RS's statements/the flood/the staging/the washine machine/the half-try with the door/the lack of alibi/etc... but then they started to fight every detail until they usually became uncivil. The problem for me at first was if you called them on it at InSession or Websleuths they seemed to have mods on their side (probably by aggravating them to tears) and couldn't really post what you actually thought. Ridiculous. You would destroy one excuse/explanation... they would switch to a different piece of evidence and start the whole crap over again. I enjoy honest debate... couldn't find it there for the most part because of Groupies.
Most of the important evidence is self-explanatory and shows all three completely responsible.
You are absolutely right about searching for answers... I wanted to know what I was posting about and soaked up the information.
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 11:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well... except for no self-respecting lawyer is going to ask or say some of those stupid-assed talking points/deflection/excuses/pipe-dreams/etc. No juror either.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

I think I'm done listening to crazy. I thought this Tuesday rule would be entertaining but this is just inventing claims that have no foundation in reality.


Now if you want to look at 'crazy', you should be looking at "professor" Chris Halkides multitudinous assertions made to your humble servant here at Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ch ... n=comments in the last 24 hours, and my responses to him and other crazies er, outcasts from the 'fact based community' here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Er ... n=comments I seem to have gotten under his skin :)

I am only surprised that I am surprised at the quality of intellectual reasoning shown by the Groupies, and, so called experts on the Amandist side. And keep in mind, he claims to me that Bruce Budowle was all willing to go to Italy to testify on behalf of Amanda but wasn't called by the defense. Truly a strange little man, which coming from me is something ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.



So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

The species test isn't specific to the blood.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Iodine wrote:
You think Stefanoni planted the evidence on the knife while the defense experts weren't looking, perhaps having called out "LOOK OVER THERE" to cause them to turn their backs.

Why would she do this? What does she or anyone else gain by it?

Why would an expert with access to huge amounts of victim blood plant such a small amount?


Everything you've said so far is just so tin-foily.


The whole question of planting evidence is risible. There were less than ten cells in the sample she found. If one is going to plant evidence, one is going to plant an amount that cannot be questioned and does not require the machine to be turned up beyond the volume of its settings to detect. Moreover, it would practically be impossible to plant an amount so small. Finally, if they were in the mind to plant evidence, then they would have made sure plenty of Sollecito's and Knox's DNA was found in Meredith's room. The whole point of planting evidence is to absolutely seal a case.

She didn't plant it. There was so little dna that it couldn't even have been a 50 cycle amplification product.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.


Your position is that for some reason the lab decided to do something that makes no sense. To add to that all the documentation I have seen makes it very clear that what you are claiming is false. You've previously made comments which turned out to be a lie and confronted with that you admitted it was a lie.

Amanda Knox is in a lot of trouble if this is the extend of her support. There is almost no possibility of avoiding extradition but if she was going to happen she'd need more than people with no grasp on reality. Oh well three more hours of this.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them.They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


Absolutely. That's why I think it would be wiser not to engage with them AT ALL. My and Zorba's position on this is well-known: these unwelcome guests clutter up and pollute this discussion board with their endless, useless arguments. I scroll past ALL of Diocletian's posts and replies to them.

It's obvious that Knoxii monitor these sites for tips and ideas. It's very noticeable that Knox constantly reacts to criticisms expressed by those who do not believe in her innocence. Just one recent example: no sooner had Michael said that she constantly changes her story and gives different reasons (in different interviews) for not going back to Italy, than she adjusted her answers accordingly. Now she speaks of a "number of reasons" why she will not be attending the new trial. Both Knox and Sollecito started accusing Guede more harshly only after they'd read on both PMF's that people were surprised that, if they were truly innocent, why wouldn't they express their satisfaction with the fact that Rudy Guede had been convicted and locked up in jail? And so on, and so forth. Just my opinion.

By the way, Amanda, if you and your handlers read here, don't bother to adjust your answers in interviews. You don't fool anyone and we don't believe a single word you say, so you might as well just save your breath and not even try. Stop your lying 'cause we're not buying!!! ;)
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

I think I'm done listening to crazy. I thought this Tuesday rule would be entertaining but this is just inventing claims that have no foundation in reality.


Now if you want to look at 'crazy', you should be looking at "professor" Chris Halkides multitudinous assertions made to your humble servant here at Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Ch ... n=comments in the last 24 hours, and my responses to him and other crazies er, outcasts from the 'fact based community' here http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Er ... n=comments I seem to have gotten under his skin :)

I am only surprised that I am surprised at the quality of intellectual reasoning shown by the Groupies, and, so called experts on the Amandist side. And keep in mind, he claims to me that Bruce Budowle was all willing to go to Italy to testify on behalf of Amanda but wasn't called by the defense. Truly a strange little man, which coming from me is something ;)


Halkides is a combination of incredibly dumb and completely dishonest. Debating with him is an entirely new circle of hell. I just saw that he is again making the Rep 199 argument despite the fact Halkides knows it is not human blood. The Groupies are just a very strange group of people. I think they can accept that Knox will be convicted because that is just a foreign government but when our government extradites her what is going to happen to their world?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?

What are you supposing I'm wrong about?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.

Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.



Who, specifically, "we"? And if "you" don't have them, how can you say they exist? How do you know?

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?

What are you supposing I'm wrong about?


What are you not wrong about?

If I didn't already know Knox supporters were as dumb as you're presenting yourself I would assume this was just someone having some fun.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.



So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

The species test isn't specific to the blood.


What then, "is" it specific to? And you didn't answer my questions.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Iodine wrote:
You think Stefanoni planted the evidence on the knife while the defense experts weren't looking, perhaps having called out "LOOK OVER THERE" to cause them to turn their backs.

Why would she do this? What does she or anyone else gain by it?

Why would an expert with access to huge amounts of victim blood plant such a small amount?


Everything you've said so far is just so tin-foily.


The whole question of planting evidence is risible. There were less than ten cells in the sample she found. If one is going to plant evidence, one is going to plant an amount that cannot be questioned and does not require the machine to be turned up beyond the volume of its settings to detect. Moreover, it would practically be impossible to plant an amount so small. Finally, if they were in the mind to plant evidence, then they would have made sure plenty of Sollecito's and Knox's DNA was found in Meredith's room. The whole point of planting evidence is to absolutely seal a case.

She didn't plant it. There was so little dna that it couldn't even have been a 50 cycle amplification product.



Great, glad we've got that out of the way. We've ruled out planting.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

The SAL cards do not address amplification at all. You would have to cross reference the sample numbers for the "cat's blood" samples against the PCR records to see whether the cat's blood samples were amplified. What you will find is that ever single one of them was. But you make a good point. Why would anyone attempt to amplify a sample that they believed to be "cat"? Answer: they wouldn't.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.



So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

The species test isn't specific to the blood.


What then, "is" it specific to? And you didn't answer my questions.

Antigens.

Environmental DNA is usual? Then why don't Stefanoni's egrams show it?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.

Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


It is not human blood.

I have an honest question. Do none of you read any of the material or do you just not understand it?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Friends. I have to run. I want to answer all questions but may not be able to until next week.

No, Michael, I do not think that the defense claimed the test wasn't done. But there's human dna in there no doubt.



So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

The species test isn't specific to the blood.


What then, "is" it specific to? And you didn't answer my questions.

Antigens.

Environmental DNA is usual? Then why don't Stefanoni's egrams show it?


Environmental DNA would look like noise in the presence of other DNA. It wouldn't show up on egrams. This is besides the point since you have done nothing to establish that there is any reason to believe your statement. The documentation point to no amplification ever happening, you've lied about disclosure, and now you are wither lying or unaware that Rep199 was established as non-human blood.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

The SAL cards do not address amplification at all. You would have to cross reference the sample numbers for the "cat's blood" samples against the PCR records to see whether the cat's blood samples were amplified. What you will find is that ever single one of them was. But you make a good point. Why would anyone attempt to amplify a sample that they believed to be "cat"? Answer: they wouldn't.


Where are these PCR records?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.

Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


It is not human blood.

I have an honest question. Do none of you read any of the material or do you just not understand it?

I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:

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.


I have no idea what you're talking about. I checked the SAL cards and they did not amplify any of the samples that have species as cat. That is what I expected because why would anyone applify blood that fails the species test.

So now we are on two claims you've made that are not true.

The SAL cards do not address amplification at all. You would have to cross reference the sample numbers for the "cat's blood" samples against the PCR records to see whether the cat's blood samples were amplified. What you will find is that ever single one of them was. But you make a good point. Why would anyone attempt to amplify a sample that they believed to be "cat"? Answer: they wouldn't.


Where are these PCR records?

They are the the PDF called "Quantificazione". It's available at the website whose name shall not be spoken.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.

Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


It is not human blood.

I have an honest question. Do none of you read any of the material or do you just not understand it?

I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Ok so Rep199 is not human blood. Good.

Are cats the only animals you are aware of or have you heard of say birds?

If we know it is not human blood why is Halkides discussing it? Do we believe Guede had an animal accomplice?
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.



Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


Fancy that. Could it be because TMB is not the magical-all-seeing-all-important-forensic-panacea that you people like to make out it is, but instead is merely a presumptive blood test and a poor one at that? It is funny, but you people only seem to understand the definition of "presumptive" when anyone mentions the word "luminol"!


Here is the most likely answer for you. That the stain in the window is indeed blood, but is a very ancient blood stain resulting in any DNA it contained having degraded away due to long-term environmental exposure. It was, after all, a house comprising of four inhabitants who had lived there for some months and had had guests during that time, it therefore, wouldn't be a leap to think someone may have bled in the house in the past for some reason or another and the small trace of blood got missed in cleaning runs. It may not even have been blood and may just have been a false positive.

What there isn't, is any evidence to suggest there was any foul play over the stain.

Do you have anything demonstrably concrete instead of mere aspersions, allusions, innuendo and unsupported assertions?

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:


So, if the species test was done, then it was indeed cat blood. The defence certainly would have said were that not the case. And any human DNA that may have been found, which if it was I suspect to be merely environmental DNA which is usual, it certainly wasn't Guede's DNA. The defence certainly would have said if it was. Therefore, how could this be exculpatory to Knox and Sollecito?

The species test isn't specific to the blood.


What then, "is" it specific to? And you didn't answer my questions.

Antigens.

Environmental DNA is usual? Then why don't Stefanoni's egrams show it?


Environmental DNA would look like noise in the presence of other DNA. It wouldn't show up on egrams. This is besides the point since you have done nothing to establish that there is any reason to believe your statement. The documentation point to no amplification ever happening, you've lied about disclosure, and now you are wither lying or unaware that Rep199 was established as non-human blood.

It would show up a 50 rfu egram, though. Right?
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
They are the the PDF called "Quantificazione". It's available at the website whose name shall not be spoken.


I assume you mean IIP? I did a survey to see if they had any original documentation that I did not and I saw nothing. The site is just a small group of badly written and incorrect opinion pieces.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
]
It would show up a 50 rfu egram, though. Right?


What would? This is my first Tuesday. It is really hard to have a conversation with someone who changes their position every time they are caught stating something that is either wrong or nonsense.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
]
It would show up a 50 rfu egram, though. Right?


What would? This is my first Tuesday. It is really hard to have a conversation with someone who changes their position every time they are caught stating something that is either wrong or nonsense.


This is why we adopted the policy of allowing FOAKers to post on only one day a week. Part of the rationale was, that if they were only allowed to post one day then they would up their quality of posting for that day since their time here was limited, but that never worked out. Whether they post one day or seven a week, the quality of their argument is just as dreadful. Another part of the reasoning was that at least with that rule, we'd have at least six days a week that we wouldn't have to put up with their crap. That one worked out.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:15 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
They are the the PDF called "Quantificazione". It's available at the website whose name shall not be spoken.


I assume you mean IIP? I did a survey to see if they had any original documentation that I did not and I saw nothing. The site is just a small group of badly written and incorrect opinion pieces.

That's where I got it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
]
It would show up a 50 rfu egram, though. Right?


What would? This is my first Tuesday. It is really hard to have a conversation with someone who changes their position every time they are caught stating something that is either wrong or nonsense.

The environmental contamination would. That's how you would find it. You would turn your "magnification" up to 50 RFU.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Image courtesy of SomeAlibi via Twitter:

Attachment:
Amanda Knox Can't Afford to Go to Italy.jpg


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
They are the the PDF called "Quantificazione". It's available at the website whose name shall not be spoken.


I assume you mean IIP? I did a survey to see if they had any original documentation that I did not and I saw nothing. The site is just a small group of badly written and incorrect opinion pieces.



That's where I got it.



Then perhaps you'd better post a link to it or/and upload it here as an attachment.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Not only is this the extent of their support, McCall, but Dialectician ;) still hasn't answered the question why this is relevant. As their "DNA Guy" Chris Halkides (Hampikian rather quiet these days) is banging away concurrently on Huffington Post about reps 198 and 199 on Filomena's window without answering why the defense never raised it as an issue, I take it that we're here to scratch THEIR itches. No thank you. Get an invite to Amanda's :)


The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.



Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


Fancy that. Could it be because TMB is not the magical-all-seeing-all-important-forensic-panacea that you people like to make out it is, but instead is merely a presumptive blood test and a poor one at that? It is funny, but you people only seem to understand the definition of "presumptive" when anyone mentions the word "luminol"!


Here is the most likely answer for you. That the stain in the window is indeed blood, but is a very ancient blood stain resulting in any DNA it contained having degraded away due to long-term environmental exposure. It was, after all, a house comprising of four inhabitants who had lived there for some months and had had guests during that time, it therefore, wouldn't be a leap to think someone may have bled in the house in the past for some reason or another and the small trace of blood got missed in cleaning runs. It may not even have been blood and may just have been a false positive.

What there isn't, is any evidence to suggest there was any foul play over the stain.

Do you have anything demonstrably concrete instead of mere aspersions, allusions, innuendo and unsupported assertions?

I believe that it was on the outside of the window muntons.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

That really doesn't address any of my points though, does 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 Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:22 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:

The reason the defense never raised it as an issue is because unlike Halkides they know what failing a species test means. Rep199 is not human blood.

Rep 199 is not supposed to be cats blood. It's a TMB positive sample that for some reason did not amplify. It's from Filomena's window, not downstairs.


It is not human blood.

I have an honest question. Do none of you read any of the material or do you just not understand it?

I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Ok so Rep199 is not human blood. Good.

Are cats the only animals you are aware of or have you heard of say birds?

If we know it is not human blood why is Halkides discussing it? Do we believe Guede had an animal accomplice?

It did not say that it is not human blood. Michael thinks that it is. I just said that it is TMB positive.

Honestly, I didn't bring up the subject of 199.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


It doesn't really matter what I think, does it? What matters, is what can be demonstrated. And since nobody can demonstrate that either the stain on the window, or the blood in the downstairs flat is important, one really doesn't need to give it too much though unless and until, someone can demonstrate otherwise.

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
That really doesn't address any of my points though, does it?

I think it's relevant.

I think your idea about degradation is a good one, though.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


You have already agreed that the blood was not human so how could it be Guede?

Would it be possible for the Groupies to send someone who is not such a drooler next Tuesday?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.

That's a good suggestion that I hadn't thought of. But it must have amplified positive for human DNA, because there are two egrams for it that have been suppressed.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:31 am   Post subject: BANGING ON WITH IDIOTS-ANYWHERE   

Apologies, but I don't want just let All Our Tuesdays be taken over by dishonest debaters (my pet peeve, which is why I'd rather engage with them elsewhere-when I feel like it) Still, I do feel a little ironic here :)

But for now, a change of subject: the size of Ms Knox's book deal. Slight spat going on at dot org about who's right about it, 3.8 million dollar 'deal' or 'advance? One reason for this is that the same source (Publisher's Weekly comes to mind) often uses those terms interchangeably, and this leads to confusion among us. I'm now inclined to say it's a deal based on potential sales, and we do not know the size of the advances made so far. I also think she got more than one million already, based on a) Bob Barnett's past record and b) she don't look broke, FWIW. Comedian Aziz Ansari's reputed to have received a $3.5 million advance but also, deal, and the same confused reporting's happened with Lena Dunham's $3.7 mil.

Next, it appears that Rafaelle Sollecito will not be answering any further questions. He has been warned by several of his fans on Twitter not to discuss 'evidence' with me just before the trial. Question, where were these ladies so willing to mother him, when his honking book came out? When he went on and on at Ask.FM? NOW they want to warn him? Why are they so scared now? It can't be the upcoming appeal, which they knew about all along. Still, modesty forbids ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


You have already agreed that the blood was not human so how could it be Guede?

Would it be possible for the Groupies to send someone who is not such a drooler next Tuesday?

I believe that I said that it didn't amplify. I have no idea what species it was or was not.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
It did not say that it is not human blood. Michael thinks that it is. I just said that it is TMB positive.

Honestly, I didn't bring up the subject of 199.



Please don't declare what I "think", I argued only what I believed possible. What I certainly do not "think", is that it is particularly relevant to the case and I certainly don't think that it was "suppressed" by the scientific lab or the prosecution. It was either animal blood, ancient human blood or a false positive by the TMB test, that's what I "think".

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


It doesn't really matter what I think, does it? What matters, is what can be demonstrated. And since nobody can demonstrate that either the stain on the window, or the blood in the downstairs flat is important, one really doesn't need to give it too much though unless and until, someone can demonstrate otherwise.

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.


The documentation for Rep.199 is as the end of this large file http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results The documentation for Rep.199 states the the blood is not human. Diocletian has admitted that he knows the blood is not human. Why is he asking if it is Guede's blood?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


It doesn't really matter what I think, does it? What matters, is what can be demonstrated. And since nobody can demonstrate that either the stain on the window, or the blood in the downstairs flat is important, one really doesn't need to give it too much though unless and until, someone can demonstrate otherwise.

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.


The documentation for Rep.199 is as the end of this large file http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/G ... st_Results The documentation for Rep.199 states the the blood is not human. Diocletian has admitted that he knows the blood is not human. Why is he asking if it is Guede's blood?

There is no test that she was running that would result in "not human," and I doubt that the report would say that. There is a test that results in "positive" for cat (not the case here). And, there can be a failure to amplify, which is what has occurred here.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.

That's a good suggestion that I hadn't thought of. But it must have amplified positive for human DNA, because there are two egrams for it that have been suppressed.


There you go again, with your "suppressed" meme. If they have been "suppressed", how do you know they exist? If they exist and you know they exist, how can they have been "suppressed"? These are simple questions.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


The documentation which I have supplied a link to establishes that Rep.199 is not human blood. Since we have determined that it is not human blood does this mean that you accept that it is not Guede's blood?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
It did not say that it is not human blood. Michael thinks that it is. I just said that it is TMB positive.

Honestly, I didn't bring up the subject of 199.



Please don't declare what I "think", I argued only what I believed possible. What I certainly do not "think", is that it is particularly relevant to the case and I certainly don't think that it was "suppressed" by the scientific lab or the prosecution. It was either animal blood, ancient human blood or a false positive by the TMB test, that's what I "think".

I never said that 199 was suppressed. They failed to amplify it, most likely because they collected it in November and didn't try to amplify it for four months, and as you pointed out, became degraded.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.

That's a good suggestion that I hadn't thought of. But it must have amplified positive for human DNA, because there are two egrams for it that have been suppressed.


There you go again, with your "suppressed" meme. If they have been "suppressed", how do you know they exist? If they exist and you know they exist, how can they have been "suppressed"? These are simple questions.

Gap analysis. There is a gap in the egram sequencing corresponding exactly with those two Reps., which means that the egrams for them were created but not produced.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
There is no test that she was running that would result in "not human," and I doubt that the report would say that. There is a test that results in "positive" for cat (not the case here). And, there can be a failure to amplify, which is what has occurred here.


I am not going to say this to you many more times before I lose patience. Provide the paperwork to support your claims. I've had enough of you going around in circles with unsupported assertions. If not, then change the subject or get out.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


The documentation which I have supplied a link to establishes that Rep.199 is not human blood. Since we have determined that it is not human blood does this mean that you accept that it is not Guede's blood?

It establishes that no useful amplification product was derived from the sample.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

As far as I'm aware, in English, "not human blood" means not human blood. Do you speak English, Diocletian?

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Gap analysis. There is a gap in the egram sequencing corresponding exactly with those two Reps., which means that the egrams for them were created but not produced.


Really, what if the egrams were blank? But if you have issue, why don't you ask the defence, since their experts were present for these tests? I really don't recall them complaining about missing egrams.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
There is no test that she was running that would result in "not human," and I doubt that the report would say that. There is a test that results in "positive" for cat (not the case here). And, there can be a failure to amplify, which is what has occurred here.


You do a precipitin test to determine if blood is human blood or not human. This sample was determined to be not human. How much time have you spent discussing this without knowing this? It is on page 243 or 244 of the file I just linked to.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
McCall wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
I did not say that it was human blood. I said thàt it is TMB positive. But it's not cats blood. After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


The documentation which I have supplied a link to establishes that Rep.199 is not human blood. Since we have determined that it is not human blood does this mean that you accept that it is not Guede's blood?

It establishes that no useful amplification product was derived from the sample.


It establishes that the sample failed the test for being human blood. If you look at page 245 you'll see a check-mark for TMB. This is the geneal determination that the sample is blood. Next to that is the box for diagnosi specie-specifica which means the species specific test. On the same line it also says Anticorpo anti-uomo which means does it contain human antibodies. What this box indicates is the result of a precipitin test to determine if blood is human blood or not human. This box has a little X which is the opposite of the check-mark so the blood was determined to not be human. How does Halkides hold himself out as an expert on the science of this trial and not know what I just explained to you? This is basic stuff.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
After all, how would the cat get up to Filomena's window?


Indeed, just as we could ask how would Guede get up to Filomena's window!!!

Do you think it was a cat or Guede?

We should also ponder who got the blood on the downstairs lightswitch, and why the egrams (2) from that lightswitch have been suppressed.


It doesn't really matter what I think, does it? What matters, is what can be demonstrated. And since nobody can demonstrate that either the stain on the window, or the blood in the downstairs flat is important, one really doesn't need to give it too much though unless and until, someone can demonstrate otherwise.

As for the blood on the lightswitch downstairs, a likely contender for putting it there is Meredith, since she was on cat feeding duty and the cat was bleeding from its ear.


We can establish that it is not important because we can establish that it is not human blood. The certificate for the light switch sample it also will have an X indicating that it is not human blood. That same process can be repeated for all the samples where there are no results. There are no results because testing stopped as soon as the blood was determined to not be human.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
As far as I'm aware, in English, "not human blood" means not human blood. Do you speak English, Diocletian?


Tuesday for me is about to end. If the Groupies expect me to explain the evidence to them next Tuesday I expect a few pints in return.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

One does start wondering how it is certain people obtain degrees, but then I'd be lying to say this, as I wonder NOTHING, I've long seen how the stupidiest people ever have degrees, some were eternal students, but another type is the one that can remember stuff but not really do any proper thinking.

Yes, Tuesday is like a disco for prisoners out on day release, they have 2 beers and go wild

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

Offline jhansigirl


User avatar


Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:58 am

Posts: 307

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.



Is this person trying to claim that Meredith was murdered by a cat?
:?


ETA: My cat has a solid alibi for that night. tou-)

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


Last edited by jhansigirl on Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Raffaele Crusoe update


As you can all see and as Sollecito mentioned on his donate page, he is having a T H OUGH (sic) time paying to defend himself from those preposterous accusations against his good and hardworking self.

Now I've worked out this guy needs all the support he can get, why not donate your pension or mortgage your house, if you cannot spare half a million, which, by the way, will as you can see, be money well-spent, then just donate whatever you can hundred thousand, fifty grand, 20, 10, 5 euro is also great.

Click HERE to donate and find out the secret truth, of the my versions episode.

All bow for the major con artist, wow what a guy.


Crisis what crisis?

Oh by the way he cannot find a job, it looks like he really wants one.

Well done donators, you are very clever.

The scrounger sends his best wishes and says keep on working, I need your money


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:49 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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

jhansigirl wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.



Is this person trying to claim that Meredith was murdered by a cat?
:?


ETA: My cat has a solid alibi for that night. tou-)



Yes and he thinks Italy is left or right of Texas (not your cat though I know they can talk, I mean the nutty professory cat).

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:37 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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Er, gimme an Alibi Club Sandwich waitress


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

What we saw here is an example of why the Groupies will never be taken seriously. Halkides is their "DNA Guy" and he in unable to figure out that the reason the testing on Rep.199 ceased was because they discovered that the blood was not human. As someone who claims to understand forensics he would know that once the substance is determined to be blood the next test would be a test to determine that it was human blood. Halkides knows that the result was TMB positive so he has seen the chart and seen that the next line says it is negative for human antibody. Using language as an excuse will not work since "diagnosi specie-specifica" can be understood by any English speaker and certainly someone supposedly educated in biology would know what that says.

The Groupies top science guy can't read a chart and his work is what they plan to use to criticize real scientists? That is going to work out well for them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

My honor your honour, they made me take off my shoes, it was so terrible, I lay awake on my bunk dreaming of salad and telling porkers I mean with pork


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
What we saw here is an example of why the Groupies will never be taken seriously. Halkides is their "DNA Guy" and he in unable to figure out that the reason the testing on Rep.199 ceased was because they discovered that the blood was not human. As someone who claims to understand forensics he would know that once the substance is determined to be blood the next test would be a test to determine that it was human blood. Halkides knows that the result was TMB positive so he has seen the chart and seen that the next line says it is negative for human antibody. Using language as an excuse will not work since "diagnosi specie-specifica" can be understood by any English speaker and certainly someone supposedly educated in biology would know what that says.

The Groupies top science guy can't read a chart and his work is what they plan to use to criticize real scientists? That is going to work out well for them.


This is exactly the sort of crap we've been having to put up with for six years now. And this is exactly the sort of crap that the main stream media, who have refused to look any further then the end of their noses, have been swallowing from the FOAKers, hook, line and sinker, for the last six years. It is beyond infuriating.

_________________
"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 zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
What we saw here is an example of why the Groupies will never be taken seriously. Halkides is their "DNA Guy" and he in unable to figure out that the reason the testing on Rep.199 ceased was because they discovered that the blood was not human. As someone who claims to understand forensics he would know that once the substance is determined to be blood the next test would be a test to determine that it was human blood. Halkides knows that the result was TMB positive so he has seen the chart and seen that the next line says it is negative for human antibody. Using language as an excuse will not work since "diagnosi specie-specifica" can be understood by any English speaker and certainly someone supposedly educated in biology would know what that says.

The Groupies top science guy can't read a chart and his work is what they plan to use to criticize real scientists? That is going to work out well for them.


That cat element was dealt with so early on and nobody had any trouble with that whatsoever because if there had been anything wrong with what Stefanoni said then the defence would have pounced on it immediately


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I don't know what it is, but obviously there is no honor among thieves, OGGI, showing him up as an exclusive, for them, it's theirs, their exclusive but I cannot see him saying, yes, I am in my new hideout, by all means run your exclusive on me showing me enjoying my earnings, from the donations, etc, especially with winter coming on, and there's me supposed to be getting ready for court looking like Lord Riley in the Caribbean.

SOL: Does yas really have to runs this now Mr OGGI?

Mr OGGI: Yes son, you know it makes sense, they will say, ah look at he, there, that's nice, he's innocento, send him more, send him more, more, more of our money.

I think OGGI doesn't give a shit about either of them, they're (OGGI) only in it for the money too, so, lump it Mr Blade


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

http://www.oggi.it/focus/gallery/raffae ... ?pid=18626

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I must admit though; he looks worried!!!

da da

So would I if I'd helped murder a girl

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:17 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.



It wasn't the SHOES
It wasn't the CAT.
Just say he LIED,
And leave it at that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Michael wrote:
As far as I'm aware, in English, "not human blood" means not human blood. Do you speak English, Diocletian?


Tuesday for me is about to end. If the Groupies expect me to explain the evidence to them next Tuesday I expect a few pints in return.


I suggest the pints early Tuesday... then enjoy the show.

They might be particularly nasty by about Oct 1st. angel-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

A documentary "exploring the murder of Meredith Kercher & the forthcoming retrial" airs tomorrow 10pm on Channel 5

26 Sep 2013; 22:00

Amanda Knox Trial: 5 Key Questions

Documentary exploring the murder of Meredith Kercher and the forthcoming retrial.

The documentary brings together two of the finest minds in the Italian legal system. Fulvia Guardascione, a glamorous criminal lawyer with a case history ranging from rape and theft to armed robbery and murder, argues for the prosecution. Taking the case for the defence is Alexander Guttieres, a no-nonsense Americo-Italian criminal litigator with over 30 years' experience in court.

Their arena is a purpose-built reconstruction of the Villa de la Pergola [sic], Kercher and Knox's Perugia home. Here, the opposing lawyers examine the evidence and contest the arguments on which the trial will turn. They are helped by a supporting cast of crime scene specialists including experts in glass shatter, DNA, sound and martial arts, who are on hand to test the evidence. High-speed cameras, luminous dye technology and hi-tech audio equipment are employed, both in the studio and at the crime scene, to attempt to answer the questions that remain about Meredith Kercher's death.


CHANNEL5
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:57 pm   Post subject: "DNA GUY", BANGING ALONG   

From the Huffington Post, a rejoinder to Chris Halkides, who has made approx 100 comments here Huffington Postand seems to be very upset we published his photographs at the party:

Quote:
This to Professor Chris Halkides, whose comments implying incompetence on the part of scientific police investigator Patrizia Stefanoni are buried somewhere below: General Garofano, former head of the carabinieri investigation division, admits that some mistakes were made, but that the evidence is still very strong enough to convict. The Massei Trial Court and Italian Supreme Court ruling that gave the reasons for annulling the Appeals court verdict supported Dr. Stefanoni. Professor Halkides obviously disagrees, but then, he's on the losing side, and that's understandable. However, I do find it ironic that he relies on the evidence of the Appeals Court's independent expert Dr. Vecchiotti, who actually was found incompetent by an Italian court for her sloppy work in two cases, one of which led to the release of a murderer who subsequently was found guilty by a higher court. Hmm.

Professor Halkides obviously believes passionately in the innocence of Amanda Knox. It is a pity that his approx. 100 comments here reflect his bias affecting his ability to rationally state his case and therefore he must resort to personal invective. It might be that his animus is due to the release of photos showing him socializing with Amanda Knox and the Mellas family, and I will let others decide if that colors his unfortunate remarks.

But, before he bangs on about a hair, and blood that wasn't tested, or too late, he might consider that yes, while mistakes were made, one in item in particular was missed, and this worked in Amanda Knox's favor: two blonde hairs were found on Meredith Kercher's body, and, as reported by Barbie Nadeau in Angel Face, they were lost. Not only has a photo about one of those hairs been published, I was told by a reliable source when I went to Italy that yes, those hairs were found, but then lost and therefore not tested.

So perhaps, Ms. Knox came out ahead in this, and she, and Halkides, have made much mileage about 'sloppy work'. However, as things stand, she has been convicted of murder, and her Appeal hearings will start September 30. Perhaps it is her few supporters, fearing the outcome, that are now trying to boost public opinion against her extradition. An extradition that appears likely to be granted if made by "the requesting state"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Tiziano has translated this piece posted on the TG5 website:

Post by Tiziano » 25 Sep 2013, 10:30

Mez, Sollecito: "I'll be back in Italy for the trial"
The boy's father assures: "He doesn't intend to run away, he's just looking for a bit 'of serenity"

“I’m just looking for a bit of peace.”
No running away, then. “Raffaele – the man explained to ANSA – is in Santo Domingo where he is staying in a house which was put at his disposal for free by an Italian couple who are his supporters. He is trying to get back in touch with himself, looking for a bit of peace after the difficult events of recent years. In mid-October he has a date to participate in a TV broadcast. In person in our country, certainly not in a link-up from abroad.”

“We are all convinced of his innocence.”
“My son, my family and I – Francesco Sollecito stressed – have a total respect for the Italian institutions. For this (reason) Raffaele has never had the slightest idea of running away. We want to defend ourselves in the trial and because of this my son’s defence, the lawyers Giulia Bongiorno and Luca Maori, with all our assistants, have given up their holidays to fine-tune the defence. I have done the same, trying to support them in every way. In fact we are totally convinced – Francesco Sollecito concluded – of the complete innocence of Raffaele.”


TG5

So, his lawyers have given up their summer holidays, but Raffaele is holidaying in the Caribbean? sun-)

huh-)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

MSNBC Guest Attacks Boehner and Cantor During Segment on... Amanda Knox?! (VIDEO)
By Paul Bremner (hopefully not related to Anne, and Doug, and their other brother, what's his name?)

... On Saturday’s Weekends with Alex Witt, investigative journalist Nina Burleigh took a cheap shot at House Republican leaders Eric Cantor and John Boehner during a segment about the Amanda Knox saga.

Burleigh said she did not think Knox and her boyfriend should return to Italy to face retrial for the murder of Knox’s roommate. She warned of the Italian justice system: “I wouldn't go back there because their system is such that they can put them into jail again right away and hold them. And so you know, why would you go back?”

Then Burleigh branched out into American politics: “Maybe we should send Cantor or Boehner over there to sit in for her. That would solve a lot of our problems.”

Below is a transcript of the segment...


Attachment:
Burleigh-Witt-Sep 21 2013.jpg


NEWSBUSTERS


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Barbie Nadeau @BLNadeau confirms to our Jeffski that she will indeed be covering the Florence Appeal of Knox and Sollecito from September 30. It is so good to see this. She was unfairly attacked by the Groupies, and now, she's going to be there at the end, yay.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

guermantes wrote:
Tiziano has translated this piece posted on the TG5 website:

Post by Tiziano » 25 Sep 2013, 10:30

Mez, Sollecito: "I'll be back in Italy for the trial"
The boy's father assures: "He doesn't intend to run away, he's just looking for a bit 'of serenity"

“I’m just looking for a bit of peace.”
No running away, then. “Raffaele – the man explained to ANSA – is in Santo Domingo where he is staying in a house which was put at his disposal for free by an Italian couple who are his supporters. He is trying to get back in touch with himself, looking for a bit of peace after the difficult events of recent years. In mid-October he has a date to participate in a TV broadcast. In person in our country, certainly not in a link-up from abroad.”

“We are all convinced of his innocence.”
“My son, my family and I – Francesco Sollecito stressed – have a total respect for the Italian institutions. For this (reason) Raffaele has never had the slightest idea of running away. We want to defend ourselves in the trial and because of this my son’s defence, the lawyers Giulia Bongiorno and Luca Maori, with all our assistants, have given up their holidays to fine-tune the defence. I have done the same, trying to support them in every way. In fact we are totally convinced – Francesco Sollecito concluded – of the complete innocence of Raffaele.”


TG5

So, his lawyers have given up their summer holidays, but Raffaele is holidaying in the Caribbean? sun-)

huh-)


Good to see this confirmation, in particular, that Bongiorno will be leading the defense. Things now looking even better for the prsoecution :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Barbie Nadeau @BLNadeau confirms to our Jeffski that she will indeed be covering the Florence Appeal of Knox and Sollecito from September 30. It is so good to see this. She was unfairly attacked by the Groupies, and now, she's going to be there at the end, yay.


Indeed good news.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 1m

Quote:
Update: new details on coming #amandaknox trial in #Florence, plus latest twist in Monster of Florence case


Update Sept. 25, 2013


What to expect in court as the Knox and Sollecito appeal begins Monday?

THE FREELANCE DESK
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox documentary reconstructs Italian apartment murder scene in CSI-style probe to try to answer five key questions

The 5 questions:

1. COULD RUDY GUEDE HAVE COMMITTED THE MURDER ON HIS OWN?

2. HOW WAS THE WINDOW AT 7 VILLA DE LAS PERGOLAS [sic] BROKEN?

3. WHAT EVIDENCE PLACES SOLLECITO AND KNOX AT THE CRIME SCENE?

4. DID KNOX OR SOLLECITO LEAVE A BLOODY FOOTPRINT ON THE BATHMAT?

5. WHO WAS HEARD LEAVING THE APARTMENT AT THE TIME OF THE MURDER?

For the TV investigation Eric Baskind, a martial arts expert, used a set exactly the same size, layout and dimensions as the villa in which Miss Kercher was killed.

He tested if he could restrain a model and inflict the fatal knife wound without the help of others and found that one person could have carried out the attack, but to do so would have been 'considerably more difficult'.

Mr Guttieres said: 'I don't think that was conclusive.'


DAILY MAIL
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thanks guermantes. This is the 'best' one. I understand they are just trying to make some interesting tv, but come one. Be serious :mrgreen:

Quote:
Traces of Sollecito's DNA were found on Miss Kercher's bra clasp. But at the appeal case his lawyers argued that the clasp had been moved by police and contaminated.

To test if this theory could be correct, the documentary team consulted John Manlove, an expert in forensics.

He applied colourless powder on his hands (a substitute for DNA) before shaking hands with the lawyers. Lights showed how the powder was transferred easily.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I don't expect much from documentary-makers who can't even spell Via della Pergola correctly. :mrgreen:

Villa de las Pergolas (DM)
Villa de la Pergola (Channel 5 website)
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Eyes For Lies has done a piece: http://t.co/oufcKUC1kI

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

More Astrology on Knox: http://t.co/thFzCdbu3X

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

That Channel 5 show is a one-way ticket to Hellmann Town.

"After determining that windows break from both sides, and without examining the glass that would clarify it, and ignoring where the glass was and wasn't, it's 'more likely' it was broken from the outside."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The groupies are already going bonkers because the video shows a glimpse of a man climbing 'to' the window.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Has anyone encountered this book before?: http://www.amazon.com/Amanda-Perugia-Mu ... 911&sr=1-1

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

This, from that fruitloop, Denver: http://groundreport.com/amanda-knox-hot ... e-updated/

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

They sound pretty certain they'll be convicted. Looks like they're going to try for some kind of asylum granting act of Congress for Sollecito (not that he's gone to the trouble of applying).

That's about all the crazed Knox shit I can take for the day.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
They sound pretty certain they'll be convicted. Looks like they're going to try for some kind of asylum granting act of Congress for Sollecito (not that he's gone to the trouble of applying).

That's about all the crazed Knox shit I can take for the day.


Do we know for certain that he hasn't? Is it possible, in the case of someone like Sollecito, to apply for US asylum and it not be public knowledge?

To be honest, I don't think their aim is to get him asylum, they know it will fail, rather the publicity from lobbying Congress for it, as well as to make contacts for when it's Knox's turn.

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Iodine wrote:
They sound pretty certain they'll be convicted. Looks like they're going to try for some kind of asylum granting act of Congress for Sollecito (not that he's gone to the trouble of applying).

That's about all the crazed Knox shit I can take for the day.


Do we know for certain that he hasn't? Is it possible, in the case of someone like Sollecito, to apply for US asylum and it not be public knowledge?

To be honest, I don't think their aim is to get him asylum, they know it will fail, rather the publicity from lobbying Congress for it, as well as to make contacts for when it's Knox's turn.


No one is getting asylum. Sollecito is a citizen of a G7 country who is going to be convicted of a murder. There is zero chance the United States will do anything for him.

Even Amanda Knox has absolutely no chance of avoid extradition and she is a US citizen.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Iodine wrote:
That Channel 5 show is a one-way ticket to Hellmann Town.

"After determining that windows break from both sides, and without examining the glass that would clarify it, and ignoring where the glass was and wasn't, it's 'more likely' it was broken from the outside."


Single pane window glass? Unglazed, approx 2mm thick? 'Climb' 12 foot wall from muddy surface an leave no marks? Lever up with one hand and unlatch inside shutters through a piece of broken glass that would sever an artery and not the little nicks found on his hands. Wearing gloves or not?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Sollecito sure looks like he's been stuffing neck in America.

Those pictures above seem to be the only ones ever, as far as I remember, in which he appears worried and a little less smug but his face shows strains of aggression, maybe it's dawning on him, that if he did help and which means, to this extent that is definitely as bad as carrying out the murder yourself, then he really made a mistake, being greedy, trying to escape every part of the responsibility he had/has for what he did, but now, I fear, for him, for her, it's too late to start pretending you are potty after all, and were at the time, I mean who as far as judges go, is ever going to believe that, seeing them ably going about their merry interviews all this time, no, that is a different type of insanity, it's called fully coherent, fully culpable and fully aware of every single thing you did and are doing, and knowing exactly why.

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

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

These two never cease to amaze do they? A rabid PR circus that pushes a stream of offensive slanders and lies as often and as widely as possible now reduced to trying to spin their charges bonkers and offensive behaviour and refusal to attend their own appeal in a good light. Are they really so dumb that they don't know how it looks or just resigned to defeat and want to get straight into the planning for their evasion of justice? The latter surely. RS is globetrotting like mad to find a bolthole and brazenly holidays on the beach in the Caribbean while collecting funds from any mug he can find on the internet to fund his legal bills? Now that's actually funny. A fool and his money are easily parted. But of course he's going to be returning for the verdict. Of course he is. All his globetrotting is just to find a suitable place to start an internet business. I hear Cuba has good internet connections; it's worth a try if Dominica doesn't work out.

Meanwhile AK and the clan (the AKK as you might say) are warming up for the outraged cry of ''She's an AMERICAN!'' and expect it to resonate across the land and convince congress to just flip the bird to any of those foreigners who dare ask for extradition. Now RS, an Italian citizen with no ties to the US, living in Italy/Switzerland/Caribbean islands/ North Korea/anywhere that he can hide, has a hired American 'spokesman' so he can shout 'I'm with her! So I'm sort of American too! If you back her, can I stay too?' It will be interesting to see if their two PR teams can maintain the same stories. Up until now they have had different propaganda lines in two different countries. Now they will both be competing in the US media. It could be a three-legged race. In awkward lockstep until one trips and they both fall flat. And then they have that small problem of something called the law. It's been the sticking point all along; it just wont come into sync with the helpful explanations and optimistic forecasts that the paid purveyors of media management have issued for six years. Time for another Big Push! Over the top and at 'em! Hit those media outlets hard. That's how to win a court case.
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Sollecito seems to be very upset at having been photographed in the Caribbean: https://www.facebook.com/raffa.sollecit ... 6284506653

_________________
"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 zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
These two never cease to amaze do they? A rabid PR circus that pushes a stream of offensive slanders and lies as often and as widely as possible now reduced to trying to spin their charges bonkers and offensive behaviour and refusal to attend their own appeal in a good light. Are they really so dumb that they don't know how it looks or just resigned to defeat and want to get straight into the planning for their evasion of justice? The latter surely. RS is globetrotting like mad to find a bolthole and brazenly holidays on the beach in the Caribbean while collecting funds from any mug he can find on the internet to fund his legal bills? Now that's actually funny. A fool and his money are easily parted. But of course he's going to be returning for the verdict. Of course he is. All his globetrotting is just to find a suitable place to start an internet business. I hear Cuba has good internet connections; it's worth a try if Dominica doesn't work out.

Meanwhile AK and the clan (the AKK as you might say) are warming up for the outraged cry of ''She's an AMERICAN!'' and expect it to resonate across the land and convince congress to just flip the bird to any of those foreigners who dare ask for extradition. Now RS, an Italian citizen with no ties to the US, living in Italy/Switzerland/Caribbean islands/ North Korea/anywhere that he can hide, has a hired American 'spokesman' so he can shout 'I'm with her! So I'm sort of American too! If you back her, can I stay too?' It will be interesting to see if their two PR teams can maintain the same stories. Up until now they have had different propaganda lines in two different countries. Now they will both be competing in the US media. It could be a three-legged race. In awkward lockstep until one trips and they both fall flat. And then they have that small problem of something called the law. It's been the sticking point all along; it just wont come into sync with the helpful explanations and optimistic forecasts that the paid purveyors of media management have issued for six years. Time for another Big Push! Over the top and at 'em! Hit those media outlets hard. That's how to win a court case.


I thought that strange, VERY STRANGE TOO, this having an American counsel or whatever name it goes under, so why wouldn't someone have one everywhere, Israel, UK, Australia, Brazil, what the hell is that supposed to mean, his American .....

Yes, obviously son love will be returning yes, that sounds better while proceeding, as they say, PROCEED, but what then as the sentencing nears, and he knows it's looking bad, will he wave his holidays in the sun bye bye, then return?

Yes, sure, of course he will. He respects the Italian things, institutions as dad says, he's very sure of his son.

No way is he returning, of his own free will, he will return in handcuffs.

_________________
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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:16 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?


pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:



If there is any truth to this, I guess we now know why Sollecito hired his American spokesman.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Sollecito seems to be very upset at having been photographed in the Caribbean: https://www.facebook.com/raffa.sollecit ... 6284506653



Yes, I thought so.
His pals the OGGIs, how dare they.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Iodine wrote:
That Channel 5 show is a one-way ticket to Hellmann Town.

"After determining that windows break from both sides, and without examining the glass that would clarify it, and ignoring where the glass was and wasn't, it's 'more likely' it was broken from the outside."


Single pane window glass? Unglazed, approx 2mm thick? 'Climb' 12 foot wall from muddy surface an leave no marks? Lever up with one hand and unlatch inside shutters through a piece of broken glass that would sever an artery and not the little nicks found on his hands. Wearing gloves or not?


Maybe they'll prove that someone threw the CAT through the window, and the cat opened the door for them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Iodine wrote:
That Channel 5 show is a one-way ticket to Hellmann Town.

"After determining that windows break from both sides, and without examining the glass that would clarify it, and ignoring where the glass was and wasn't, it's 'more likely' it was broken from the outside."


Single pane window glass? Unglazed, approx 2mm thick? 'Climb' 12 foot wall from muddy surface an leave no marks? Lever up with one hand and unlatch inside shutters through a piece of broken glass that would sever an artery and not the little nicks found on his hands. Wearing gloves or not?


Maybe they'll prove that someone threw the CAT through the window, and the cat opened the door for them.


Innappropriate laugh here hugz-) .
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hi, tamale. I'm mad at myself, more than anything. I used to be one of those people who actually BELIEVED what I read in the paper, and saw on television. I very seldom questioned what I saw or read. It must be true, I read it.

And now, with the appeal fast approaching, I read these things and realize that there are still many people out there who believed as I did, that I'm reading the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Michael wrote:



If there is any truth to this, I guess we now know why Sollecito hired his American spokesman.


I believe it is true but I suspect the Groupies are not representing what this is correctly. This is not addressing Congress directly. What will happen is that a room will be set up and they will make a presentation. Any group that has something of relevance to say and wants to pay the fee can hold one of these. There are hundreds of these a year. Turn out for these things is typically low and no one who matters ever shows up. In this case the attendance will be even lower than normal. I can't see anyone wasting their staff's time sending them to this accept as some kind of amusement.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Hi, tamale. I'm mad at myself, more than anything. I used to be one of those people who actually BELIEVED what I read in the paper, and saw on television. I very seldom questioned what I saw or read. It must be true, I read it.

And now, with the appeal fast approaching, I read these things and realize that there are still many people out there who believed as I did, that I'm reading the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Hi..I think the news used to be more fact based...And remember when our parentals told us to trust authority?? And we did!!!!
Don't be mad at you.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Susan Atkins / Amanda Knox



TATELABIANCA

_________________
"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: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox is dancing on Meredith Kercher's grave

By Lindy McDowell – 25 September 2013



BELFAST TELEGRAPH

_________________
"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 Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:


It's a press release from Sharlene Martin:

Quote:
Update from Sharlene Martin:

EXPERTS WILL PROVIDE UPDATE AND BRIEFING TO CONGRESS OF AMANDA KNOX AND RAFFAELE SOLLECITO CASE.
(Seattle, WA)– September 25, 2013. A panel of experts will address congressional members and staff on the third trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito during “Update and Briefing on the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito Case,” a congressional briefing hosted by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA9) at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Room SVC 203, on Wednesday, October 2, 2013 from 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. The trial is scheduled to begin on September 30, 2013 in Florence, Italy.

The experts will feature both legal and criminal experts. The three main speakers will be Judge Mike Heavey, a retired King County, Washington judge and co-founder of Judges for Justice, who will give an overview of the case and its legal considerations; Steve Moore, a retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent and criminal investigator, who will discuss the failures of the Italian police investigation and the evidence in the case; and John Douglas, a former FBI Special Agent, legendary criminal profiler and author of his most recent book, Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice, which includes an extensive analysis of the Knox-Sollecito case.

Also in attendance will be famed litigator John Q. Kelly, Esq., who has been retained to act as Raffaele Sollecito’s attorney/spokesman in the United States, and Mark Olshaker, a New York Times best-selling nonfiction writer, and Mr. Douglas’ co-author of Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice.

Additionally, these experts are available throughout the trial to comment for media reporting on this case as it proceeds through November. A verdict is expected prior to Christmas, 2013.

In 2009, American student Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend, Italian student Raffaele Sollecito, were found guilty of the murder in Perugia, Italy of Knox’s roommate, Meredith Kercher from England. In 2011, both Knox and Sollecito’s sentences were overturned by a jury and they were found innocent. They were released from prison after spending nearly four years incarcerated. This past March 26, 2013, the Italian Supreme Court overturned the Italian jury verdict of innocence and ordered a new trial for both Knox and Sollecito.


Oh goodie, another presentation by Judge Heavey and Steve Moore in the same basement room room in Congress wot they hire out to voters who want to investigate 9/11 and birth certificates. Doubt Sen Cantwell will be there, but possibly the video, for those who want to watch, will be on C-Span, or, You Tube :)

Confession: I haven't watched the latest Knox interviews, nor do I plan to, or read another interview. Onward to Florence.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:41 pm   Post subject: POOR DIO, WE KNEW YE WELL   

If I want a dose of awful/be entertained, there's Fischer's Forum, guaranteed to deliver. PMF Boycott?

Poor Dio had just been advised by Clive Wismayer of the vote to boycott us a year ago. Poor Diocletian didn't know about the diktat, sorry.

The inimitable corksoaker said:

Quote:
Re: Let's Vote On It
Post by corksoaker »

What we should vote on is whether or not Amanda and Raffiale should get married.

"Earlier reports said Knox was planning to stay in the U.S. rather than return to Italy to face justice. Sollecito, an Italian, has no choice but to return."

By marrying an American citizen, Raffiele could become a resident alien and Italy could not get him.
They're in New York now. They don't take marriage seriously in N.Y. , they even let 2 gay men marry each other there
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:15 am   Post subject: Re: POOR DIO, WE KNEW YE WELL   

Ergon wrote:
If I want a dose of awful/be entertained, there's Fischer's Forum, guaranteed to deliver. PMF Boycott?

Poor Dio had just been advised by Clive Wismayer of the vote to boycott us a year ago. Poor Diocletian didn't know about the diktat, sorry.

The inimitable corksoaker said:

Quote:
Re: Let's Vote On It
Post by corksoaker »

What we should vote on is whether or not Amanda and Raffiale should get married.

"Earlier reports said Knox was planning to stay in the U.S. rather than return to Italy to face justice. Sollecito, an Italian, has no choice but to return."

By marrying an American citizen, Raffiele could become a resident alien and Italy could not get him.
They're in New York now. They don't take marriage seriously in N.Y. , they even let 2 gay men marry each other there


Thanks. I needed that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Michael wrote:


It's a press release from Sharlene Martin:

Quote:
Update from Sharlene Martin:

EXPERTS WILL PROVIDE UPDATE AND BRIEFING TO CONGRESS OF AMANDA KNOX AND RAFFAELE SOLLECITO CASE.
(Seattle, WA)– September 25, 2013. A panel of experts will address congressional members and staff on the third trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito during “Update and Briefing on the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito Case,” a congressional briefing hosted by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA9) at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Room SVC 203, on Wednesday, October 2, 2013 from 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. The trial is scheduled to begin on September 30, 2013 in Florence, Italy.

The experts will feature both legal and criminal experts. The three main speakers will be Judge Mike Heavey, a retired King County, Washington judge and co-founder of Judges for Justice, who will give an overview of the case and its legal considerations; Steve Moore, a retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent and criminal investigator, who will discuss the failures of the Italian police investigation and the evidence in the case; and John Douglas, a former FBI Special Agent, legendary criminal profiler and author of his most recent book, Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice, which includes an extensive analysis of the Knox-Sollecito case.

Also in attendance will be famed litigator John Q. Kelly, Esq., who has been retained to act as Raffaele Sollecito’s attorney/spokesman in the United States, and Mark Olshaker, a New York Times best-selling nonfiction writer, and Mr. Douglas’ co-author of Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice.

Additionally, these experts are available throughout the trial to comment for media reporting on this case as it proceeds through November. A verdict is expected prior to Christmas, 2013.

In 2009, American student Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend, Italian student Raffaele Sollecito, were found guilty of the murder in Perugia, Italy of Knox’s roommate, Meredith Kercher from England. In 2011, both Knox and Sollecito’s sentences were overturned by a jury and they were found innocent. They were released from prison after spending nearly four years incarcerated. This past March 26, 2013, the Italian Supreme Court overturned the Italian jury verdict of innocence and ordered a new trial for both Knox and Sollecito.


Oh goodie, another presentation by Judge Heavey and Steve Moore in the same basement room room in Congress wot they hire out to voters who want to investigate 9/11 and birth certificates. Doubt Sen Cantwell will be there, but possibly the video, for those who want to watch, will be on C-Span, or, You Tube :)

Confession: I haven't watched the latest Knox interviews, nor do I plan to, or read another interview. Onward to Florence.



Hey but wait, didn't they hire John Wayne, let me know about that Ergon, is Wayne likely to show?

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


Last edited by zorba on Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

If anyone ought to show, it's the ghost of John Wayne, zorba :) No one would be more pissed at crooked politicians and murderers trying to get away with it than John Wayne.

And Napia5, I still have a smile on my face from your "maybe the cat let them in" quip :) :) :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
If anyone ought to show, it's the ghost of John Wayne, zorba :) No one would be more pissed at crooked politicians and murderers trying to get away with it than John Wayne.

And Napia5, I still have a smile on my face from your "maybe the cat let them in" quip :) :) :)


Cannot get over it Judges for Justice

What the hell were judges supposed to be doing then before the judge reprimanded for misconduct set up his own line therein?

_________________
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: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hire a judge, buy one get one free

_________________
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: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If anyone ought to show, it's the ghost of John Wayne, zorba :) No one would be more pissed at crooked politicians and murderers trying to get away with it than John Wayne.

And Napia5, I still have a smile on my face from your "maybe the cat let them in" quip :) :) :)


Cannot get over it Judges for Justice

What the hell were judges supposed to be doing then before the judge reprimanded for misconduct set up his own line therein?


They can barely use the plural on Judges since it is just two of them in the entire association. People mistakenly believe it looks better if they are associated with a group so they make one. That just shows a lack of experience. Groups are only useful if you can get impressive members. If you have one other person who is willing to join your group then you look pathetic. Maybe some of the fake British lawyers this discussion attracts would be willing to play fake British judges instead so that they could pad the numbers.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If anyone ought to show, it's the ghost of John Wayne, zorba :) No one would be more pissed at crooked politicians and murderers trying to get away with it than John Wayne.

And Napia5, I still have a smile on my face from your "maybe the cat let them in" quip :) :) :)


Cannot get over it Judges for Justice

What the hell were judges supposed to be doing then before the judge reprimanded for misconduct set up his own line therein?


They can barely use the plural on Judges since it is just two of them in the entire association. People mistakenly believe it looks better if they are associated with a group so they make one. That just shows a lack of experience. Groups are only useful if you can get impressive members. If you have one other person who is willing to join your group then you look pathetic. Maybe some of the fake British lawyers this discussion attracts would be willing to play fake British judges instead so that they could pad the numbers.


Hence the term "Groupie." You DID say pathetic, didn't you?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:34 am   Post subject: Re: POOR DIO, WE KNEW YE WELL   

Ergon wrote:
If I want a dose of awful/be entertained, there's Fischer's Forum, guaranteed to deliver. PMF Boycott?

Poor Dio had just been advised by Clive Wismayer of the vote to boycott us a year ago. Poor Diocletian didn't know about the diktat, sorry.

The inimitable corksoaker said:

Quote:
Re: Let's Vote On It
Post by corksoaker »

What we should vote on is whether or not Amanda and Raffiale should get married.

"Earlier reports said Knox was planning to stay in the U.S. rather than return to Italy to face justice. Sollecito, an Italian, has no choice but to return."

By marrying an American citizen, Raffiele could become a resident alien and Italy could not get him.
They're in New York now. They don't take marriage seriously in N.Y. , they even let 2 gay men marry each other there


And I have it on good authority that all of the straight men in New York who wanted to marry each other are infuriated and planning a protest.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Zopi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:52 pm

Posts: 317

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


You are so right, me too, and I always wondered if some of the posters do notice that. But what they get it is a sword without hilt.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox's 'rubbish' is making her look guilty
Seattle : WA : USA | Sep 26, 2013 at 3:43 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 Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox’s play to the US State department?

AKLEWEI

_________________
"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 Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Amanda Knox’s play to the US State department?

AKLEWEI


Quote:
As for “double jeopardy”, Knox’s own lawyer reportedly has already indicated to the Toronto Sun that double jeopardy does not apply, as this is a ‘continuation of the case on appeal.’ The Toronto Sun also reports the comments from a legal expert that the courts have heard this type of double jeopardy defense in the past, and those claims have been denied. (It is noted that a Canadian news source has better reporting than the US media on the US legal system).


Hahhah-I posted the link and quote to the Toronto Sun article on Huffington Post two days ago. Good to see the PMF community pick that up :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Zopi wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


You are so right, me too, and I always wondered if some of the posters do notice that. But what they get it is a sword without hilt.


It is hard to use other people to test their arguments when their arguments are all founded on ignorance of the facts and ignorance of science. The only way to know the evidence and criticize it is to read the testimony. None of the Groupies have so they base their arguments on a shared delusion of what the testimony contains. You can't argue with them because if the facts actually were what the Groupies believe they are you would have a weaker case. You still would not acquit them but the level of confidence in their guilt would decrease. Even under the shared Groupie delusion you can only acquit them if you accept the additional argument that a larger number of loosely related individuals all decided to conspire to frame Knox. No sane person will accept this required premise.

Once you know the evidence you then need to be able to understand it. Some of the evidence requires knowledge of science which clearly no one on that side of the argument has. Every time a qualified scientist reviews the evidence they conclude that there is sufficient evidence to find them guilty. This happened just recently with an Oxford scientist but I'm not sure if the Groupies are aware of this as they lack the ability to read and process any information that contradicts their shared delusion. The Groupies rely on Halkides for their science knowledge and since they know even less than he does he comes off as convincing. It is really the only place anyone takes Halkides seriously and what happens when they leave their bubble is that they look like fools. If I was Diocletian I'd be pretty angry and asking Chris why he didn't tell me that the reason processing stopped was because the blood came back as being not human. It is right there on the documentation for Rep.199 so did Halkides not understand what that meant or did he lie because he knew they wouldn't understand?

I don't know the origins of the Tuesday rule or what purpose it is supposed to serve. If the goal is to resolve differences between our understanding and theirs then there is no point. Their understanding of the evidence is not based on reality but rather faith. If someone believes the earth is 4000 years old no amount of reason will ever convince them otherwise. If the objective is just to have some levity and watch a fool get slapped around then certainly.
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 26, 2013 2:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 2:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Zopi wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. 'Bout right?


Honest question for the home team: Has anyone ever learned something from one of these people that wasn't really you enriching your own knowledge hunting around to find the basis for the false claim and then rebutting it with more information? The result of all this bad-faith argumentation has been the creation of an army of Guilters who are positively encyclopedic on every detail -- if the superfans knew then that this would be the outcome, would they have tried a different approach?

Question for Diocletian: How is it you've given the case this much time and attention but are still wrong about it?


Personally, I have long suspected that they use the knowledgeable people on this and other sites to do their legal research for them. They test out their arguments and we find the holes for them.


You are so right, me too, and I always wondered if some of the posters do notice that. But what they get it is a sword without hilt.


It is hard to use other people to test their arguments when their arguments are all founded on ignorance of the facts and ignorance of science. The only way to know the evidence and criticize it is to read the testimony. None of the Groupies have so they base their arguments on a shared delusion of what the testimony contains. You can't argue with them because if the facts actually were what the Groupies believe they are you would have a weaker case. You still would not acquit them but the level of confidence in their guilt would decrease. Even under the shared Groupie delusion you can only acquit them if you accept the additional argument that a larger number of loosely related individuals all decided to conspire to frame Knox. No sane person will accept this required premise.

Once you know the evidence you then need to be able to understand it. Some of the evidence requires knowledge of science which clearly no one on that side of the argument has. Every time a qualified scientist reviews the evidence they conclude that there is sufficient evidence to find them guilty. This happened just recently with an Oxford scientist but I'm not sure if the Groupies are aware of this as they lack the ability to read and process any information that contradicts their shared delusion. The Groupies rely on Halkides for their science knowledge and since they know even less than he does he comes off as convincing. It is really the only place anyone takes Halkides seriously and what happens when they leave their bubble is that they look like fools. If I was Diocletian I'd be pretty angry and asking Chris why he didn't tell me that the reason processing stopped was because the blood came back as being not human. It is right there on the documentation for Rep.199 so did Halkides not understand what that meant or did he lie because he knew they wouldn't understand?

I don't know the origins of the Tuesday rule or what purpose it is supposed to serve. If the goal is to resolve differences between our understanding and theirs then there is no point. Their understanding of the evidence is not based on reality but rather faith. If someone believes the earth is 4000 years old no amount of reason will ever convince them otherwise. If the objective is just to have some levity and watch a fool get slapped around then certainly.


Michael generously allows them a platform to do this once a week.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 2:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If anyone ought to show, it's the ghost of John Wayne, zorba :) No one would be more pissed at crooked politicians and murderers trying to get away with it than John Wayne.

And Napia5, I still have a smile on my face from your "maybe the cat let them in" quip :) :) :)


Cannot get over it Judges for Justice

What the hell were judges supposed to be doing then before the judge reprimanded for misconduct set up his own line therein?


They can barely use the plural on Judges since it is just two of them in the entire association. People mistakenly believe it looks better if they are associated with a group so they make one. That just shows a lack of experience. Groups are only useful if you can get impressive members. If you have one other person who is willing to join your group then you look pathetic. Maybe some of the fake British lawyers this discussion attracts would be willing to play fake British judges instead so that they could pad the numbers.


It's just the one judge then, the one almost kicked out, and who also refused to acknowledge what it was he'd done wrong, like attracts alike, you know, Moore is hardly a judge.

_________________
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: Thu Sep 26, 2013 2:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hey, so Sollecito is upset with OGGI, yeah, he very busy trying to do his PR thang, all of his interviews,trying to create a certain woe is me imagine, andthere he is staying in a luxurious hotel, I mean would OGGI say that, would they, who have been doing all of these so-called interviews met Knox and him, lie like that? I doubt it, and so now he's stating at one of his most dear, beloved, friend's home. Why would he bne so upset if it was'nt a matter of being caught out, sharking the waters of public sympathy, sat drinking cocktails in the morning, noon, afternoon, evening and midnight sun, if there is such a thing.


New donation button.
I mean, how do you go on.

Hey we all support you, you poor thing, don't you worry about those haters.

Yeah but let's get something straight, what IS hate?

Hate is something attached to great levels of violence,
some resulting in death.

In this matter it concerns the great vilolence of mind resulting in Meredith's death.

Violence furthermore, is that which is generated by a vicious publicity compaign generated by the families of the accused of the aforesaid ultimate levels of violence = murder,
and yes, people do not believe in the innocence of the pair.

What is so macabre, is not just the families trying to force people to believe what they want them to believe, worse, Knox even thinks it is okay to try to FORCE Meredith's parents and family to accept their (her) take on matters.

Given the fact that the families of the accused have not played fair at all, what else can one do but support the person and the family that truly deserves it, which is Meredith and her family.

Nobody is about to revert to violence, and hate, well that's a relative term, for the sentiments shared by people frequenting this site HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GENRE OF HATE GENERATED BY MURDER AND CASHIED IN UPON BY THOSE, WHO IN SO MANY CASES, SEEM TO BE MENTALLY RETARDED.

_________________
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: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Mr Sollecito, in all fairness, suffers I think, from a Mother Complex, unlike Knox who suffers I think, with a Father complex.

He is not a leader because his sense of longing has nothing to do with rejection but with lack of presence, wherein he then felt rejected even though he knew he was not, so he was in fact lost, alone, and he obviously did not want to be that way, the mix up he is in, as regards his mind, is the mixture of the good things that existed within him, but the terrible things he allowed himself to get tangled up in, his entire demeanour is full of that, the position from which he just cannot escape, because he wants to be the guy who was not all wrong (self-deluding in the proces like Knox seems to be so far so that they seem to believe thei own liues, it's their only way to survive), just decadent, through the things that hurt him, so he was unable to stand on his own two feet, then he wakes up in his own-created nightmare and wants rid of it, obviously, however, you cannot blame the missingof your mother on all the mistakes you make, wven if you were damaged, it's too late.

Sollecito I think feels deep loss abou his mother and you can say people get over things and yes they do or can but it depends, and esp4ecially the childhood things are so vibrant and hurt so bad, if you are lost you could end up anywhere, on drugs, an alcoholist or norh of these, or a totyallky nasty persomn traking your pain outon others.

The way for him to proceed is to go home to Italty, to attend court, and to own up, and then try to salvage whatever can be salvaged, and, would that then make you acceptable to me, or others who know the story, no, but, at least I'd have compassion, no matter how wicked, and that in no way means I would or could like the individual but in this life so many people do so many bad things, so I'd rather have a person see what is what, accept responsibility, get help and then be no further danger to anyone else. And as awful as it is, I personally do not want to see a person suffering more than they have to, the things they've done they have to deal with as regards living with it, which to my mind, as me, would be more than enough, I am guessing were it me I'd wake up and need to either go back to sleep or get tranquillizers because I could not deal with having done such wrong, you know even when you drank to much and woke up feeling awful and wondering what you actually did, and regret whatever it is you did and you cannot even remember, so very odd behaviour can only be expected from a person hiding so much, I think Sollecito will go up the wall, he looks like he is now already. Knox keeps even more out of the public eye except for her own mental TV show-ups, but her idea of safety is but an illusion, she is no more distant to the Florence courtroom than io Sollecito.

As long as the pair are alive, they are a liabilty to one another's position.
Therefore, seeing them a kissing and a (as Knox speaks) cuddling it up (read: smoking it up) is also fake, for in truth each one would be better off iof the other was dead, in realtionship to the threa they pose to one another, each one can reveal what happened, if one is dead then the other is fully responsible for revealing the truth.

I sincerely hope they own up, and see what can be done, in this, they could never be allowed to just walk away, but looik at it now, now they've done far more than murder alone, they've been try to murder reputations, careers, people's lives, this is bound to cause even more dislike, thoroughly so.
Me, I think there's wickedness and I would like/prefer to see them dealing with coming out with the truth, it would be very hard for them, buty then at least Sollecito could say he has a grain of honor, as it stands he has none at all.

Still, considering events past, I see these fancy ideas never happening, they'd rather spend 10 in prison before helping themselves out.

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:42 pm   Post subject: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:48 pm   Post subject: Re: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Ergon wrote:
Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.


I've been following the posts on HuffPo. I was surprised to see the number of his comments. When I got to the one where he quotes the SC decision, verbatim, and then proceeds to explain what it says, incorrectly, I just shook my head. How he thinks he can follow ITALIAN evidence and procedures when he can't even understand English is beyond me.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Hey, so Sollecito is upset with OGGI, yeah, he very busy trying to do his PR thang, all of his interviews,trying to create a certain woe is me imagine, andthere he is staying in a luxurious hotel, I mean would OGGI say that, would they, who have been doing all of these so-called interviews met Knox and him, lie like that? I doubt it, and so now he's stating at one of his most dear, beloved, friend's home. Why would he bne so upset if it was'nt a matter of being caught out, sharking the waters of public sympathy, sat drinking cocktails in the morning, noon, afternoon, evening and midnight sun, if there is such a thing.


New donation button.
I mean, how do you go on.

Hey we all support you, you poor thing, don't you worry about those haters.

Yeah but let's get something straight, what IS hate?

Hate is something attached to great levels of violence,
some resulting in death.

In this matter it concerns the great vilolence of mind resulting in Meredith's death.

Violence furthermore, is that which is generated by a vicious publicity compaign generated by the families of the accused of the aforesaid ultimate levels of violence = murder,
and yes, people do not believe in the innocence of the pair.

What is so macabre, is not just the families trying to force people to believe what they want them to believe, worse, Knox even thinks it is okay to try to FORCE Meredith's parents and family to accept their (her) take on matters.

Given the fact that the families of the accused have not played fair at all, what else can one do but support the person and the family that truly deserves it, which is Meredith and her family.

Nobody is about to revert to violence, and hate, well that's a relative term, for the sentiments shared by people frequenting this site HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GENRE OF HATE GENERATED BY MURDER AND CASHIED IN UPON BY THOSE, WHO IN SO MANY CASES, SEEM TO BE MENTALLY RETARDED.


Well, I can see why he's upset with Oggi. Didn't he tell them in his interview that appeared on the 10th that he was planning on remaining in the United States? I'll look for the link to a post guermantes made. It's on the 10th.
First he is interviewed on the 4th in England, then, where was he when he interviewed with Oggi? Back in the states? Now he is 'finding some peace' on the beach? Didn't he look for any at the Burning Man last year? First, California, then Burning Man, and then home and then back to New York for New Years' Eve, wasn't it? then back to italy, and off to Switzerland, then back to relatives in NJ, then England, oh, please stop........The airfares.

ETA: viewtopic.php?p=111874#p111874
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Michael wrote:


It's a press release from Sharlene Martin:

Quote:
Update from Sharlene Martin:

EXPERTS WILL PROVIDE UPDATE AND BRIEFING TO CONGRESS OF AMANDA KNOX AND RAFFAELE SOLLECITO CASE.
(Seattle, WA)– September 25, 2013. A panel of experts will address congressional members and staff on the third trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito during “Update and Briefing on the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito Case,” a congressional briefing hosted by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA9) at the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, Room SVC 203, on Wednesday, October 2, 2013 from 9:30 to 11:30 a.m. The trial is scheduled to begin on September 30, 2013 in Florence, Italy.

The experts will feature both legal and criminal experts. The three main speakers will be Judge Mike Heavey, a retired King County, Washington judge and co-founder of Judges for Justice, who will give an overview of the case and its legal considerations; Steve Moore, a retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent and criminal investigator, who will discuss the failures of the Italian police investigation and the evidence in the case; and John Douglas, a former FBI Special Agent, legendary criminal profiler and author of his most recent book, Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice, which includes an extensive analysis of the Knox-Sollecito case.

Also in attendance will be famed litigator John Q. Kelly, Esq., who has been retained to act as Raffaele Sollecito’s attorney/spokesman in the United States, and Mark Olshaker, a New York Times best-selling nonfiction writer, and Mr. Douglas’ co-author of Law & Disorder: The Legendary FBI Profiler’s Relentless Pursuit of Justice.

Additionally, these experts are available throughout the trial to comment for media reporting on this case as it proceeds through November. A verdict is expected prior to Christmas, 2013.

In 2009, American student Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend, Italian student Raffaele Sollecito, were found guilty of the murder in Perugia, Italy of Knox’s roommate, Meredith Kercher from England. In 2011, both Knox and Sollecito’s sentences were overturned by a jury and they were found innocent. They were released from prison after spending nearly four years incarcerated. This past March 26, 2013, the Italian Supreme Court overturned the Italian jury verdict of innocence and ordered a new trial for both Knox and Sollecito.


Oh goodie, another presentation by Judge Heavey and Steve Moore in the same basement room room in Congress wot they hire out to voters who want to investigate 9/11 and birth certificates. Doubt Sen Cantwell will be there, but possibly the video, for those who want to watch, will be on C-Span, or, You Tube :)

Confession: I haven't watched the latest Knox interviews, nor do I plan to, or read another interview. Onward to Florence.

See how easy it is not to watch Amanda? Looking to Florence.
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Ergon wrote:
Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.


cl-)
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Hey, so Sollecito is upset with OGGI, yeah, he very busy trying to do his PR thang, all of his interviews,trying to create a certain woe is me imagine, andthere he is staying in a luxurious hotel, I mean would OGGI say that, would they, who have been doing all of these so-called interviews met Knox and him, lie like that? I doubt it, and so now he's stating at one of his most dear, beloved, friend's home. Why would he bne so upset if it was'nt a matter of being caught out, sharking the waters of public sympathy, sat drinking cocktails in the morning, noon, afternoon, evening and midnight sun, if there is such a thing.


New donation button.
I mean, how do you go on.

Hey we all support you, you poor thing, don't you worry about those haters.

Yeah but let's get something straight, what IS hate?

Hate is something attached to great levels of violence,
some resulting in death.

In this matter it concerns the great vilolence of mind resulting in Meredith's death.

Violence furthermore, is that which is generated by a vicious publicity compaign generated by the families of the accused of the aforesaid ultimate levels of violence = murder,
and yes, people do not believe in the innocence of the pair.

What is so macabre, is not just the families trying to force people to believe what they want them to believe, worse, Knox even thinks it is okay to try to FORCE Meredith's parents and family to accept their (her) take on matters.

Given the fact that the families of the accused have not played fair at all, what else can one do but support the person and the family that truly deserves it, which is Meredith and her family.

Nobody is about to revert to violence, and hate, well that's a relative term, for the sentiments shared by people frequenting this site HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GENRE OF HATE GENERATED BY MURDER AND CASHIED IN UPON BY THOSE, WHO IN SO MANY CASES, SEEM TO BE MENTALLY RETARDED.


Well, I can see why he's upset with Oggi. Didn't he tell them in his interview that appeared on the 10th that he was planning on remaining in the United States? I'll look for the link to a post guermantes made. It's on the 10th.
First he is interviewed on the 4th in England, then, where was he when he interviewed with Oggi? Back in the states? Now he is 'finding some peace' on the beach? Didn't he look for any at the Burning Man last year? First, California, then Burning Man, and then home and then back to New York for New Years' Eve, wasn't it? then back to italy, and off to Switzerland, then back to relatives in NJ, then England, oh, please stop........The airfares.

ETA: http://www.perugiamurderfile.net/viewto ... 74#p111874


Yes indeed, the airfares alone, that's what I thought yesterday on reading him in his breakdown --in reaction to seeing that OGGI had published his Caribbean fun in the sun location-- saying or rather, denying, that he had spent any donation money (well, that or the book deal stealings/takings it has to be) or does dad pay all the fares?

Poor ol' dad. NOT

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

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2306

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Channel 5 in Britain are going to broadcast a documentary about the case this evening at 10.00pm GMT. From what I’ve read about the programme, it seems there is going to be a very superficial look at a fraction of the evidence a la Hellmann and the documentary team will conclude there are alternative innocent explanations e.g. it was possible for Guede to have killed Meredith by himself.

The programme makers have looked at couple of pieces of evidence in isolation rather than evaluated them in a global and unified perspective. Channel 5 should stick to broadcasting trashy programmes like Home and Away and Neighbours. I’m not surprised no-one takes Channel 5 seriously in Britain.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

You can sends tweets to Channel 5 Press:

@Channel5Press

https://twitter.com/Channel5Press
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Yes it is, BUT, please keep in mind the new readers, anyone stopping by whose interest has been newly piqued by the current publicity. I believe there is a gentleman, new posting on .org, who stated that, up until March of this year, he believed they were innocent.... until he started reading. What you showed here, with the 'debate' on Tuesday, is the simple matter of smoke and mirrors that casual readers run into on almost all articles where comments are posted by the Groupies. They personally attack and try to intimidate anyone who attempts to ask a reasoned question. People give up. And that's what they're hoping for.

While some find it unpleasant and unnecessary, I share a different view. Seeing a debate like this in progress, where our site and other sites like it can post sources, links, and facts, while the Groupies do whatever the heck it is they do, is a real eye opener. Watch and learn.
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 26, 2013 7:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Ouch :D I did see that.

I never thought of it like tho... mostly I get em) .
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

But, dg, to me, that's the point. Most people get mad, and give up. And that's what I believe the campaign was counting on. Did you ever click onto a Yahoo! article or some of the other news sites and read the comments about anything other than this case? When the verbal attacks start, people drop out, either mad or intimidated or frustrated, and eventually the thread dies.

What I believe the Internet Campaigners weren't counting on was the absolutely astonishing level of intelligence it ran into with its intimidation smoke-and-mirrors campaign. I personally consider their fiasco the most bit-them-in-the-ass, backlash campaign ever run. People with intelligence got MAD. And, they didn't back off. At first, i think egos were involved with some people. I know mine was. I asked a simple, well-reasoned question, and BOOM, the moron, hater, you-don't-know-what-you're talking about piled in on me like a ton of bricks.
At first, I got mad. I'm not used to people accusing me of being stupid. And it was my anger that originally started my quest to figure out what happened. Those first days it wasn't about Meredith. Not for me, I'm embarrassed to admit. After all, I didn't know her and murder is hardly news, which is about the saddest comment I can make. But it's true. And then I started to read. And from that point, Meredith and her wonderful family became real to me. And my own ego became unimportant. It became about them, and the absolute travesty that had overtaken a completely innocent family.

So, yes, I get mad at those buffoons. Their total dishonesty sickens me. And it makes me angry. But, for Meredith's sake I try to suck it up. I'm not doing this, posting, reading, explaining, for me. It quit being an exercise of nursing my bruised ego in the first few days. And that's the truth.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:51 pm   Post subject: Re: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Napia5 wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.


I've been following the posts on HuffPo. I was surprised to see the number of his comments. When I got to the one where he quotes the SC decision, verbatim, and then proceeds to explain what it says, incorrectly, I just shook my head. How he thinks he can follow ITALIAN evidence and procedures when he can't even understand English is beyond me.


I told him he was relying on a bad translation and he got all Clintonescue on me :)
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: Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

A certain Astrologer also has an artistic talent. Raffaele's trip to the Caribbean through a lens:

https://twitter.com/astrology8/status/3 ... to/1/large

_________________
"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 Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:02 pm   Post subject: Re: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.


I've been following the posts on HuffPo. I was surprised to see the number of his comments. When I got to the one where he quotes the SC decision, verbatim, and then proceeds to explain what it says, incorrectly, I just shook my head. How he thinks he can follow ITALIAN evidence and procedures when he can't even understand English is beyond me.


I told him he was relying on a bad translation and he got all Clintonescue on me :)


And thus the mystery of Knox in the blue dress in the Sawyer interview is solved. hbc)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:50 pm   Post subject: DNA GUY JUST CAN'T BE QUIT OF ME   

Heading up to the 200+ mark is our own very Chris Halkides, now bangin' away on Huffington Post:

Quote:
The Committee to Protect Journalists, having been misled by you and your friends false claims, are not rushing to defend Frank Sfarzo or Mario Spezi this time around are they? Seeing as how they were burned by their donor Doug Preston? So, who's been grandstanding, making insinuations, or ad homs, hmm? Seeing as how your 100+ output in just this one thread is available for all to see?

Why don't you go ahead with your dog and pony show conducted in a sound stage, and call it proof of what happened in Perugia 6 years ago? A sorry saga that is coming to an end in Italy, yet here you are banging away in chat forum, lol.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Yes it is, BUT, please keep in mind the new readers, anyone stopping by whose interest has been newly piqued by the current publicity. I believe there is a gentleman, new posting on .org, who stated that, up until March of this year, he believed they were innocent.... until he started reading. What you showed here, with the 'debate' on Tuesday, is the simple matter of smoke and mirrors that casual readers run into on almost all articles where comments are posted by the Groupies. They personally attack and try to intimidate anyone who attempts to ask a reasoned question. People give up. And that's what they're hoping for.

While some find it unpleasant and unnecessary, I share a different view. Seeing a debate like this in progress, where our site and other sites like it can post sources, links, and facts, while the Groupies do whatever the heck it is they do, is a real eye opener. Watch and learn.


I think you are referring to Don Murphy. He is a famous producer. I have a feeling once the Groupies figure out how to use IMDB there will be a scathing Ground Report article in the works. Maybe a coordinated effort to give the next Transformers movie a series of one star reviews? Their capacity to bring down people has no bounds.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:22 am   Post subject: Re: DNA GUY JUST CAN'T BE QUIT OF ME   

Ergon wrote:
Heading up to the 200+ mark is our own very Chris Halkides, now bangin' away on Huffington Post:

Quote:
The Committee to Protect Journalists, having been misled by you and your friends false claims, are not rushing to defend Frank Sfarzo or Mario Spezi this time around are they? Seeing as how they were burned by their donor Doug Preston? So, who's been grandstanding, making insinuations, or ad homs, hmm? Seeing as how your 100+ output in just this one thread is available for all to see?

Why don't you go ahead with your dog and pony show conducted in a sound stage, and call it proof of what happened in Perugia 6 years ago? A sorry saga that is coming to an end in Italy, yet here you are banging away in chat forum, lol.


Halkides is going to get worse as this progresses. Knox will be convicted and she will be extradited but in the gap between the Florence conviction and extradition he is going to go full throttle.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Yes it is, BUT, please keep in mind the new readers, anyone stopping by whose interest has been newly piqued by the current publicity. I believe there is a gentleman, new posting on .org, who stated that, up until March of this year, he believed they were innocent.... until he started reading. What you showed here, with the 'debate' on Tuesday, is the simple matter of smoke and mirrors that casual readers run into on almost all articles where comments are posted by the Groupies. They personally attack and try to intimidate anyone who attempts to ask a reasoned question. People give up. And that's what they're hoping for.

While some find it unpleasant and unnecessary, I share a different view. Seeing a debate like this in progress, where our site and other sites like it can post sources, links, and facts, while the Groupies do whatever the heck it is they do, is a real eye opener. Watch and learn.


I think you are referring to Don Murphy. He is a famous producer. I have a feeling once the Groupies figure out how to use IMDB there will be a scathing Ground Report article in the works. Maybe a coordinated effort to give the next Transformers movie a series of one star reviews? Their capacity to bring down people has no bounds.


I followed that discussion on .ORG, where ColScott ambiguously states he is Don Murphy, and .ORG and I-A get all tingly, yet when I located his blog ColScott and found where he says he is NOT Don Murphy, got a little smile going :)

If it is he, that would be great, since he does have a taste of the macabre. He sued Quentin Tarantino for $ 5 million once, and reportedly gave the money to charity. But barring confirmation, no I won't ask him, since I went Hollywoody once, and once is enough in a person's life :) (though I do have a screenplay)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:30 am   Post subject: Re: I TALK TO PEOPLE, SOMETIMES THEY BITE ON HOOK   

Ergon wrote:
Has anyone seen "DNA guy" Chris Halkides write 104 posts in 48 hours on ANY of his forums? I have, on Huffington Post :) At stake is his claim that Bruce Budowle offered to testify before the Italian court, which I think is not true. My latest reply, and I thought I'd stop after I wrote a lot too:

Quote:
Excuse me if I don't believe your statement that his offer to speak to the court was rejected (by whom?) until you can provide corroboratable evidence. I think he (and you) are just grandstanding, because he could well have offered his expertise to the defense, and did it through back door channels, THAT is what is known, and being investigated. Beyond that, you seem a person whose admiration of people you like colors your objectivity. Spezi's trial is continuing, and he created the bed he decided to lie down in. If I thought Mignini was the corrupt liar you portray him to be, I'd be on your side. But I think it's the malicious Mr. Spezi (and Frank Sfarzo and others) that deserve to be on trial.


Hi, Ergon, Ol' Chris now states that it was Hellman that nixed ol' Budowle from showing up in court, but went with C&V instead. Seriously? These people are so delusional, they expect unsourced assertions to pass unchallenged?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Yes it is, BUT, please keep in mind the new readers, anyone stopping by whose interest has been newly piqued by the current publicity. I believe there is a gentleman, new posting on .org, who stated that, up until March of this year, he believed they were innocent.... until he started reading. What you showed here, with the 'debate' on Tuesday, is the simple matter of smoke and mirrors that casual readers run into on almost all articles where comments are posted by the Groupies. They personally attack and try to intimidate anyone who attempts to ask a reasoned question. People give up. And that's what they're hoping for.

While some find it unpleasant and unnecessary, I share a different view. Seeing a debate like this in progress, where our site and other sites like it can post sources, links, and facts, while the Groupies do whatever the heck it is they do, is a real eye opener. Watch and learn.


I think you are referring to Don Murphy. He is a famous producer. I have a feeling once the Groupies figure out how to use IMDB there will be a scathing Ground Report article in the works. Maybe a coordinated effort to give the next Transformers movie a series of one star reviews? Their capacity to bring down people has no bounds.


I didn't know or care about the name. Just liked his style of writing. but I will tell you something. I am living with the world's biggest Ironhide fan from the Transformer series. I will bring the collective wrath of a whole new generation down on the groupies if they mess with these movies.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DoEENyBTWL54

This is the Youtube copy of the Channel 5 Documentary. I haven't watched it yet. I have been reading various comments, though, and it doesn't sound like it's worth watching.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

jhansigirl wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Iodine wrote:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Genetic_Test_Results -- Returning to this while Diocletian gets his paperwork in order.

The first few pages of results (~pg 24 to 35 in the pdf, thereabouts anyway) do identify cat's blood but that's the end of the road for the samples; the technicians, wisely, don't bother to amplify them. As Diocletian's humancat sample is excluded from the forensic results, we must assume it was suppressed but only after giving Bongiorno a copy. '

They amplified all of the cats blood. Successfully in 16 of 22 instances. You can see the results in the PCR records. They even made some egrams from their amplifications. Its just that we don't have them.



Is this person trying to claim that Meredith was murdered by a cat?
:?


ETA: My cat has a solid alibi for that night. tou-)

Cats always get blamed unfairly.... pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Amanda Knox Trial: 5 Key Questions (Channel 5 documentary)

http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DoEENyBTWL54

If prompted, enter your date of birth to view.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Knifeboy wants every one to know he did not spend any of the moneys suckers sent him: GoFuckMe

See? The clock's still stuck at $22,270 :)

Quote:
Come si può facilmente notare, tutti...Come si può facilmente notare, tutti i soldi che le persone hanno donato sono intatti e non è stato ancora prelevato nulla, proprio perchè serviranno alle spese che affronterò quando partirà il processo.
Raffaele Sollecito


Google translate:
As you can easily see, all ... As you can see, all the money that people have donated are intact and has not been taken yet nothing will serve just because the costs will take up when it will start the process.
Raffaele Sollecito
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DoEENyBTWL54

This is the Youtube copy of the Channel 5 Documentary. I haven't watched it yet. I have been reading various comments, though, and it doesn't sound like it's worth watching.

Lot of FOA talking points and the 'prosecution woman' agreeing. Mostly PR stuff for the defence.

- Single attacker unlikely. Can't restrain a girl completely if you have a knife in your hand.
- Window likely broken from outside. That can be done from the inside but they never consider that. They do mention glass on top of clothes and call it a mystery.
- Climbing the wall. Strong guy doing some gymnastic to stretch to the top window. Keeps saying it is so easy. When trying to pull up from the ledge he fails (insisting it is easy...lol). They don't mention lack of marks while guy touches the wall with his shoes several times. Silly stuff.
- Bra clasp. Laughable. DNA powder. Whatever.
- Bathmat footprint. Difference between walking and standing print. What is the point? Nobody was running on the bathmat. Could have done so much more.
- Hearing running on metal stairs. Guys says she couldn't have heard it. Stairs have been repaired. Different weather. Guy running calmly. Not measured from directly by the window (where Capazella was standing) Useless test.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:14 am   Post subject: Testing   



Now, just click on "View on You Tube"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:39 am   Post subject: TUESDAYS   

I'll be taking a break Tuesday, plan on washing my hair :)
The Groupies were cock a hoop a while back because an anonymous technician (most likely Carla Vecchiotti) snuck a folder full of unverifiable data about 'mistakes' made in Stefanoni's lab. Next, we have Diocletian come by with a whole Argumentum amentibus about said data. Of course, we will be knowing Monday what exactly will be redone, and expectations are very high the knife will be retested. At least, Halkides seems like the Energizer Bunny to be trying to rebut any DNA that might show up, so he seems to think it worthwhile to prove contamination and cast doubts
beforehand.

So, my response to Professor Blue Shorts Never Won Fair Maiden was
Quote:
You mean you're hoping The Florence Court won't order the retesting of the knife? Vecchiotti is posting anonymous screeds on the net about Stefanoni to your good selves?


I think I'll mow the lawn, defrag my computer etc till court convenes. Taking a break from arguing with idiots.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DoEENyBTWL54

This is the Youtube copy of the Channel 5 Documentary. I haven't watched it yet. I have been reading various comments, though, and it doesn't sound like it's worth watching.

Lot of FOA talking points and the 'prosecution woman' agreeing. Mostly PR stuff for the defence.

- Single attacker unlikely. Can't restrain a girl completely if you have a knife in your hand.
- Window likely broken from outside. That can be done from the inside but they never consider that. They do mention glass on top of clothes and call it a mystery.
- Climbing the wall. Strong guy doing some gymnastic to stretch to the top window. Keeps saying it is so easy. When trying to pull up from the ledge he fails (insisting it is easy...lol). They don't mention lack of marks while guy touches the wall with his shoes several times. Silly stuff.
- Bra clasp. Laughable. DNA powder. Whatever.
- Bathmat footprint. Difference between walking and standing print. What is the point? Nobody was running on the bathmat. Could have done so much more.
- Hearing running on metal stairs. Guys says she couldn't have heard it. Stairs have been repaired. Different weather. Guy running calmly. Not measured from directly by the window (where Capazella was standing) Useless test.


I am at a loss to understand why the groupies try to revive the single attacker theory.

Not only is there evidence of more than one attacker, there is evidence of who these people were. The staged crime scene is key in my view.

No matter what opinion one holds regarding the likeliness of scaling the wall and entering the house through Filomena's window, it cannot be ignored that the cleaned blood points away from Rudy Guede and directly to Knox.

Why on earth would Guede clean up any bloody? He left his palm print and shoe prints intact, so why would he be concerned about a simple blood stain in Filomena's room? This blood revealed with Luminol yielded a mixed specimen from Amanda Knox and Meredith Kercher. Why would Rudy Guede go back to Filomena's room, take the time to wipe away the blood, but not take any valuables?

The groupies are so caught up with their propaganda against Guede, they overlook the most obvious.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

They could have put this cartoon totally over the top if they had only reconstructed the bathmat boogie.
I watched parts of this with the sound off. Didn't see any inside shutters. And they threw the rock from inside with the shutters open. And on, and on.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Don't really understand what is the point of the latest PR in the British media. I am amazed that it is even possible (same with the US media) but what is the point? Is this the closest they can get to Italy (Oggi is not really 'helping' lately..lol) and therefore they try whatever they can? Sollecito, Knox and now this. As if Italian judges are going to watch all that. Weird.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:21 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Whenever I hear the term American-Italo, I always seem to see persons who cannor even speak Italian, who may rant on abbout their Italian heritage, yet are as un-Italian as it gets, we saw a steady procession of them here, Ciolino, Topolino (or whatever his name was) then the Italian hating Densekey, there must be more but the inclusion of the bit Ital has absolutely no value.

Reminds me of that baker in New York who is now often on the TV, he's not all bad but he never stops going on about being Italian tyet he cannot even speak Italian, what he does is speak English and then do it with an Italian accent, his English, well he has a very thick New York accent, a couple of the much older fqnmily members, do say an Italian word now and then. Anyhow, one show saw him visiting Italy with the family then going nuts saying he could make a better pizza, he then proceeds to demand ask to use the kitchen whereupon he makes his pizza, then they all (American Italians) agree that was better than trhe one they'd have made by the Italians, he put everything you can imagine on his pizza, which is not the weay Italians do things, they accentuate specific tastes, so you even get onion pizza in Italy which I've never ever seen anywhere else, yo get it because it's about the onion, so you could dump pork scratchings, beef stroganoff on it, pineapples and stuff and call it whatever you like... but it ain't Italian.

We then have the phenomenon of the gentlemen, yes, to be depicted or portrayed as some kind of Sherlock Holmes lookalike, top hat, cane, long cape, emerging out of the London morning mist, to solve the crimes, he goes under the over the top English (NON)sounding names of Very English Cup of Tea, George Oswald Mine Union Man, Harry I Beg Your Pardon Sir, Frederick Park Lane, Mr Hyde Park, Reginald London Underground, yes, all of these experts.

____________________________________

Hey Ergon, yes I did see Raffaele Crusoe Sollecito's immediate online statements about having retained all monies appropriated from his followers, yes, but wasn't the gathering of monies actually and most probably an exercise in trying to create a certain poor woe is me image, and in having money from his book and TV and newspaper career in blood, there was never going to be any sign of any shift in amounts on his fund me account, for he could have made an own deposit methinks, into his own account, exceeding the total he collected many times multipled by 10.

So there he is, thinking he'd been working, as HEthinks his now PR activities are, he obviously views this activity as a job and after inning his earning, ah, a holiday and at least out of the reach for a while of the Italians, for if he was so well in America and cocksure of himself, surely he could have remained there, but no, he went, it seems, to a destination that would provide him with more security. Perhaps a poor country like DR is going to be easier to corrupt by means of the tempters called money paid to get things done, as is the case in many countries with extreme difficulties, I mean even Russia; apparently you cannot get anything done eithout paying all kinds of people (OFF).

Whatever the real story is, he can hardly rightly be getting upset when he has so much to hide. Such as his whereabouts.

If I were innocent, and had not done all sorts of dishonest things like discredit those who are responsible for bringing me to justice, I would hold my head up high, no matter whether or not I decided to take a break in Thailand or Nova Scotia, however, this is not like that, for he never had all of these woes before, they only started (were invented) later on.

These problems with the actual institutions started after his missions visits to America.

It seems being briefed there on strategy, he was made to believe the best defence is no defence.

No defence, it is better instead to try to switch the roles around so instead of you being the one who did something wrong, it's all of those OTHERS who are responsible for bringing you to justice who are BAD.

Bringing to justice guilty or not means;
if you have nothing to hide and if NO-HOW did your DNA land up on someone's underwear, someone who was murdered,
and you had nothing to do with anyhow,
hardly knew could hardly have seen often in a week(as is also well-known, for Knox and Sollecito spent most of their time alone at his place), and certainly were not intimate with
if you had not admitted to telling lies,
had not told stories which clashed with those of your co-defendant,
had not said you were doing a certain thing (interacting with your computer the one you always used and the one that was not damaged) but it was proven that you in no way was busy all of that time that you claimed you were on your computer,
had not gone so far over the top with making wild accusations which are certainly not difficult to discount and disprove,
where if you had not stated things that your father had to refute on television....

then what would you be so scared of, I wouldn't, if I had not done it,
I would go to court and each question asked I'd have an answer for, and I would not first have to pause for a counted and rehearsed number of seconds before reeling off my pre-arranged statement learned off by heart and please don't interrupt my flow as I recite on any single thing, I would not have to divert my eyes, look up, make faces as though to say, god those people are mad for accusing me

I'd stand up for myself and be ready to do so instead of saying that I've been wronged, instead of repeatedly copying what people say who breach every single rule of jurisdiction, taking nothing into account in the manner prescribed by law.

If 2 persons are accused, and both contradicted the other's words, repeatedly, then to ignore that fact would also be breaking the law, it MUST be followed up.
Where did it go from there?
It then went to Sollecito's immediate statements, showing him, on audio, saying things that sounded very suspicious, besides this, he also stated at the murder scene, immediately, that nothing was missing. This would imply Sollecito had an inventory, drawn up in writing the day before and submitted to him, from all house dwellers, listing all of their possessions.
This leads to the obvious question: how could he in hell know what was and weas not missing.

So now we are already getting to and two is four but here it makes five if you listen to him.
Yet the clues and the traces, and all of the evidence added up, which is 2 and 2, by those with no intention of failing their exam on maths, makes 4 (four).

With the accused it's always been a 5.

Therefore, you get, conflicting statements, at the very murder scene to start off with, and that was just the beginning; there could be no need to make conflicting statements that were immediately dismissed by those who knew and could know and this means dismissed on the spot, by those with absolutely no reason whatsoever to tell lies: The two Italian housemates.

They tried to smash Meredith's door in because they were so worried about where she was and thought something bad had happened to her.


Five minutes later Knox is recorded as saying to the police that Meredith always locked her door, which would then have implied that there was NO NEED TO WORRY.

This tale from Knox was dismissed by those who knew and those who knew were the two remaining housemates.


Once Meredith's room had been opened and she was discovered dead on the floor, the scene became a crime scene and was then closed off accordingly.

Yet before this, even though apparently according to Sollecito and Knox he had tried to smash Meredith's door in, they were out of the way, they did not remain in the vicinity during the door breaking process.


Thus, they were not actually keen on getting to see anything inside that room and this leads me to; they ALREADY KNEW WHAT WAS IN THERE!!!!


And once that door had been opened and Meredith discovered there is no way the police were going to say well come on in ya all and have a look here, so no way did Knox overhear anything, yet she declared that she had heard, whilst Meredith's real friends from Britain declared they had heard Knox declaring how she had FOUND Meredith and that her THROAT had been CUT, and that she bled to death.


If that is no evidence I cannot think what having actual evidence means, yet the above is but a fragment of what there is against them, and they have been busy adding even more to the stockpile of evidence by continually making false accusations against the Italian authorities. The only reason someone would make such wild accusations about every single part of every single thing in every single avenue of Italian life could be someone who cannot defend themselves against the evidence that IS there and stands AGAINST them.

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


Last edited by zorba on Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:57 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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.

_________________
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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DoEENyBTWL54

This is the Youtube copy of the Channel 5 Documentary. I haven't watched it yet. I have been reading various comments, though, and it doesn't sound like it's worth watching.


It is not worth watching. For the window ascent they use a guy who is a professional climber and then having built the replica of the cottage to current specifications allow him to use the bars to pull himself up. If you search the internet you can find videos of this climber teaching rock climbing exercises and he has developed the strength to lift his entire body with just the tip of his fingers. Guede had no such training. The correct way to do the experiment would have been to pick an average twenty year old that was in good physical shape but not a professional climber. The experiment also ignores issues of how the ascent could be made without disturbing the glass. This has always been the primary issue with the claim that anyone entered that window. It makes entry impossible so they ignored it.

The DNA transfer is just as bad. First they had some "expert" on who claimed that DNA transfer is the same as transferring dust if you cover you hands in it. This is not correct and anyone with a smidgen of science in their backgrounds would stop listening there. They then set up a secondary transfer experiment despite any claims of contamination on the bra clasp requiring a never before seen occurrence of tertiary transfer. They also failed to address the lack of source DNA. The entire DNA section was just nonsense by some hack who operates a consulting firm. I imagine the "expert" will use the excuse that this was a consulting job for a TV program and not for testimony to explain his low quality of work but anyone who watches that segment will never respect anything that he or his firm says about DNA in the future.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
McCall wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
McCall wrote:
dgfred wrote:
No... it is not to resolve differences. It is to show them (where they can't post foolishness) how stupid their theories are. Not one has had an honest and fact-based debate. Every one has gone away with their tail between their legs. Tell the truth... didn't you enjoy bashing Dio's theories/analysis to pieces?


I enjoy a good match but that was like beating up on a child.


Yes it is, BUT, please keep in mind the new readers, anyone stopping by whose interest has been newly piqued by the current publicity. I believe there is a gentleman, new posting on .org, who stated that, up until March of this year, he believed they were innocent.... until he started reading. What you showed here, with the 'debate' on Tuesday, is the simple matter of smoke and mirrors that casual readers run into on almost all articles where comments are posted by the Groupies. They personally attack and try to intimidate anyone who attempts to ask a reasoned question. People give up. And that's what they're hoping for.

While some find it unpleasant and unnecessary, I share a different view. Seeing a debate like this in progress, where our site and other sites like it can post sources, links, and facts, while the Groupies do whatever the heck it is they do, is a real eye opener. Watch and learn.


I think you are referring to Don Murphy. He is a famous producer. I have a feeling once the Groupies figure out how to use IMDB there will be a scathing Ground Report article in the works. Maybe a coordinated effort to give the next Transformers movie a series of one star reviews? Their capacity to bring down people has no bounds.


I followed that discussion on .ORG, where ColScott ambiguously states he is Don Murphy, and .ORG and I-A get all tingly, yet when I located his blog ColScott and found where he says he is NOT Don Murphy, got a little smile going :)

If it is he, that would be great, since he does have a taste of the macabre. He sued Quentin Tarantino for $ 5 million once, and reportedly gave the money to charity. But barring confirmation, no I won't ask him, since I went Hollywoody once, and once is enough in a person's life :) (though I do have a screenplay)


I haven't really been able to follow lately, but I'd be very surprised if it was him.
It always seems to work though, doesn't it? :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

On another note, I've been reading quite often recently that AK claiming she is not a murderer somehow indicates she didn't inflict the fatal stab wound because in her mind that would mean she didn't murder anyone.
To me it's just the other way around. She says she's not a murderer because she knows perfectly well she did murder her 'friend' (including the fatal blow).


Last edited by Ava on Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ava wrote:

I haven't really been able to follow lately, but I'd be very surprised if it was him.
It always seems to work though, doesn't it? :)


He reports that he has been engaged in a back and forth with Nina Burleigh and has posted some of that interaction. Burleigh has financial issues and the messages that the new poster attributes to Burleigh reveal that they were written by someone in the same state of mind as Burleigh. That makes me think he is real or at least that Burleigh believes he is real and has been messaging him. It is unlikely an obscure detail like that would get included in a joke.
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 27, 2013 12:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:



appeal
Meredith Kercher murder, Patrick Lumumba in the classroom in Florence. It will be a civil party against Amanda Knox
Fri, 27/09/2013 - 14:22 - The Editors


Sara 'in the courtroom Monday' next with his lawyer Patrick Lumumba, initially accused by Amanda Knox of the murder of Meredith Kercher and then acquitted because 'recognized totally unrelated to the crime. For the American student 'was in fact finally confirmed the sentence for slander against the Congolese musician, but the Supreme Court has referred to the courts of Florence examination dell'aggravante it was to obtain impunity' of the crime of murder. Lumumba - represented as a civil party lawyer Carlo Pacelli - do not want to comment on the announced Knox's absence from the hearing. "We'll see if indeed there will be '- ANSA said today - she and' clever ...". And on the continued court case related to the crime in Via della Pergola, the musician says that "you do not need to do things quickly." "It is to seek the truth 'about what happened - he says - and are therefore not agree more that go well'"



IL SITO FIRENZE

_________________
"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 Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.


Yes!!

And, did you notice that he seems more angry over the Oggi reveal than he gets when people call him a murderer?
Seems like someone from Oggi or their sources did a bit of a flip on him. I smell a rat. Or a S-fart-zo, perhaps.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

IL SITO FIRENZE

Unofficial translation by me

Patrick Lumumba will be in the courtroom next Monday with his lawyer, he was initially accused by Amanda Knox of the murder of Meredith Kercher and then acquitted because it was recognised that he was totally unrelated to the crime.

The sentence issued to the American student (Amanda Knox) for committing calumnia against the Congolese musician has already been definitively confirmed but the Supreme Court has referred the case to the courts of Florence to examine the aggravated acts and how they were considered in order to procure impunity (exemption from punishment) for the crime of murder.

Lumumba - represented as a civil party by lawyer Carlo Pacelli - did not wish to comment on the announcement made regarding Knox's absence from the hearing. "We'll see if she will indeed be absent, she is sly," he told ANSA today.
And on the continued court case related to the crime in Via della Pergola, the musician says that "You do not need to do things quickly. It is to seek the truth about what happened, and therefore I agree with the way things proceed."

_________________
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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.


Yes!!

And, did you notice that he seems more angry over the Oggi reveal than he gets when people call him a murderer?
Seems like someone from Oggi or their sources did a bit of a flip on him. I smell a rat. Or a S-fart-zo, perhaps.



Hey yeah, but that would be extraordinary if it became evident that Sfarzkopf is employed by OGGI, however, perhaps the fellow does have a few pals there, it in't as if they are cham,pions of truth and justice.

Yeah, Robinson Sollecito did already look sore in his snapshots from the beach, but it seems maybe a dame had a wee camera stuffed down her bikini top, or perhaps in a fake flower in her hair, with camera inside, and he didn't see anyone doing it, usually you can see people are aware of photos being taken, like celebrities, except for when the pics are real grainy and look like they were taken from a ship a hundred miles out at sea and then enlarged. So they secretly took pics of him, they didn't interview him and why ever not, we thought they were his home team, dear o dear he is upset that they double-crossed him after he was all nice giving them those interviews. So they go along with everything he says, seeming to support him then ditch him in the harbour if they can pull a scandal out of the hat. As it is scandalous that he says he's scared to bits and that everyone is corrupt and that he is so in need of a job, etc., then is pictured at yet another faraway location, while others have to work. Not that I imagine his array of supporters care, as they appear to be as fake and weird as Robinson is.

Tell ya, he's nore upset about his apple cart of image making grandeur containing his noble intentions and honesty and oh how they mistreated me, than anything else; he thought he was doing a fine job with his media CAMP PAIGN, but all as it was was a pain and very camp.

_________________
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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Worth a read: http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2013/ ... mment-4712

_________________
"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 27, 2013 2:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
IL SITO FIRENZE

Unofficial translation by me

Patrick Lumumba will be in the courtroom next Monday with his lawyer, he was initially accused by Amanda Knox of the murder of Meredith Kercher and then acquitted because it was recognised that he was totally unrelated to the crime.

The sentence issued to the American student (Amanda Knox) for committing calumnia against the Congolese musician has already been definitively confirmed but the Supreme Court has referred the case to the courts of Florence to examine the aggravated acts and how they were considered in order to procure impunity (exemption from punishment) for the crime of murder.

Lumumba - represented as a civil party by lawyer Carlo Pacelli - did not wish to comment on the announcement made regarding Knox's absence from the hearing. "We'll see if she will indeed be absent, she is sly," he told ANSA today.
And on the continued court case related to the crime in Via della Pergola, the musician says that "You do not need to do things quickly. It is to seek the truth about what happened, and therefore I agree with the way things proceed."




Thanks, Zorba!!! :)

_________________
"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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Haha Z... 'Robinson Sollecito' ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 3:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.


Yes!!

And, did you notice that he seems more angry over the Oggi reveal than he gets when people call him a murderer?
Seems like someone from Oggi or their sources did a bit of a flip on him. I smell a rat. Or a S-fart-zo, perhaps.



Hey yeah, but that would be extraordinary if it became evident that Sfarzkopf is employed by OGGI, however, perhaps the fellow does have a few pals there, it in't as if they are cham,pions of truth and justice.

Yeah, Robinson Sollecito did already look sore in his snapshots from the beach, but it seems maybe a dame had a wee camera stuffed down her bikini top, or perhaps in a fake flower in her hair, with camera inside, and he didn't see anyone doing it, usually you can see people are aware of photos being taken, like celebrities, except for when the pics are real grainy and look like they were taken from a ship a hundred miles out at sea and then enlarged. So they secretly took pics of him, they didn't interview him and why ever not, we thought they were his home team, dear o dear he is upset that they double-crossed him after he was all nice giving them those interviews. So they go along with everything he says, seeming to support him then ditch him in the harbour if they can pull a scandal out of the hat. As it is scandalous that he says he's scared to bits and that everyone is corrupt and that he is so in need of a job, etc., then is pictured at yet another faraway location, while others have to work. Not that I imagine his array of supporters care, as they appear to be as fake and weird as Robinson is.

Tell ya, he's nore upset about his apple cart of image making grandeur containing his noble intentions and honesty and oh how they mistreated me, than anything else; he thought he was doing a fine job with his media CAMP PAIGN, but all as it was was a pain and very camp.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this Oggi article a complete and total flip of the story they generally present? Where's the sympathy? Is it possible that they have picked up the change in the air?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Pelerine


User avatar


Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:19 pm

Posts: 414

Highscores: 2

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 4:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I wonder if and when the media discovers that the guilty pair brings more attention than that the innocent-meme. My 2 cents are on the tabloids because they have no "expert-reputation" to loose

_________________
r-(( Rest in Peace Meredith Kercher r-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   



The comment section is certainly worth the read. Seriously, you need to add a 'thumbs up' smilie for me. tt-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

While I'm at it, a h/t to extrashot over at .org for reminding me of the word scuri for the inside shutters.
These shutters were a big factor to me in deciding that the break in was staged. Closed outside shutters, locked window and closed scuri. Three obvious obstacles to a break in. If Guede climbed up and opened the outside shutters, he would have had to check to see if the window was open at that time. Who would be stupid enough to climb up once, only to open outside shutters and NOT check to see if he needed to climb back down for a rock.
OK, so window is locked. BUT, what about the scuri? He can't reach through the locked window to determine if the scuri are locked, so what, the guy is going to climb back down and throw a rock at a window and HOPE it will penetrate the inside shutters also? He can no way know if these shutters are locked because he can't get at them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Pelerine wrote:
I wonder if and when the media discovers that the guilty pair brings more attention than that the innocent-meme. My 2 cents are on the tabloids because they have no "expert-reputation" to loose


This is already starting and by the time the trial ends I expect the media will have come full circle. The media getting things wrong is annoying but it has no impact on what is going to happen. Knox will be convicted and she will be extradited. This will happen if the media started reporting the truth or if the media continues to report inaccurately.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
But, dg, to me, that's the point. Most people get mad, and give up. And that's what I believe the campaign was counting on. Did you ever click onto a Yahoo! article or some of the other news sites and read the comments about anything other than this case? When the verbal attacks start, people drop out, either mad or intimidated or frustrated, and eventually the thread dies.

What I believe the Internet Campaigners weren't counting on was the absolutely astonishing level of intelligence it ran into with its intimidation smoke-and-mirrors campaign. I personally consider their fiasco the most bit-them-in-the-ass, backlash campaign ever run. People with intelligence got MAD. And, they didn't back off. At first, i think egos were involved with some people. I know mine was. I asked a simple, well-reasoned question, and BOOM, the moron, hater, you-don't-know-what-you're talking about piled in on me like a ton of bricks.
At first, I got mad. I'm not used to people accusing me of being stupid. And it was my anger that originally started my quest to figure out what happened. Those first days it wasn't about Meredith. Not for me, I'm embarrassed to admit. After all, I didn't know her and murder is hardly news, which is about the saddest comment I can make. But it's true. And then I started to read. And from that point, Meredith and her wonderful family became real to me. And my own ego became unimportant. It became about them, and the absolute travesty that had overtaken a completely innocent family.

So, yes, I get mad at those buffoons. Their total dishonesty sickens me. And it makes me angry. But, for Meredith's sake I try to suck it up. I'm not doing this, posting, reading, explaining, for me. It quit being an exercise of nursing my bruised ego in the first few days. And that's the truth.

I get mad...but I try never to show it on board, because if the Brucies get a whif of anger, they know they have gained control. Then they will(try) drive you anywhere they want. personally, insulting their ethics and intelligence is good enough for me. I leave the big kids to do the heavy lifting, for I am a pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.


Yes!!

And, did you notice that he seems more angry over the Oggi reveal than he gets when people call him a murderer?
Seems like someone from Oggi or their sources did a bit of a flip on him. I smell a rat. Or a S-fart-zo, perhaps.



Hey yeah, but that would be extraordinary if it became evident that Sfarzkopf is employed by OGGI, however, perhaps the fellow does have a few pals there, it in't as if they are cham,pions of truth and justice.

Yeah, Robinson Sollecito did already look sore in his snapshots from the beach, but it seems maybe a dame had a wee camera stuffed down her bikini top, or perhaps in a fake flower in her hair, with camera inside, and he didn't see anyone doing it, usually you can see people are aware of photos being taken, like celebrities, except for when the pics are real grainy and look like they were taken from a ship a hundred miles out at sea and then enlarged. So they secretly took pics of him, they didn't interview him and why ever not, we thought they were his home team, dear o dear he is upset that they double-crossed him after he was all nice giving them those interviews. So they go along with everything he says, seeming to support him then ditch him in the harbour if they can pull a scandal out of the hat. As it is scandalous that he says he's scared to bits and that everyone is corrupt and that he is so in need of a job, etc., then is pictured at yet another faraway location, while others have to work. Not that I imagine his array of supporters care, as they appear to be as fake and weird as Robinson is.

Tell ya, he's nore upset about his apple cart of image making grandeur containing his noble intentions and honesty and oh how they mistreated me, than anything else; he thought he was doing a fine job with his media CAMP PAIGN, but all as it was was a pain and very camp.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this Oggi article a complete and total flip of the story they generally present? Where's the sympathy? Is it possible that they have picked up the change in the air?

Sfarzo can take the pulse of the public and (try) to make money from it.
Raff, I warned you twice to get away from Frank .He will drop you like a hot potato if he smells $$ in another direction. You have no clue!!
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

tamale wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
REASONING

I am willing to attend court if you all agree to find me not guilty beforehand.


Yes!!

And, did you notice that he seems more angry over the Oggi reveal than he gets when people call him a murderer?
Seems like someone from Oggi or their sources did a bit of a flip on him. I smell a rat. Or a S-fart-zo, perhaps.



Hey yeah, but that would be extraordinary if it became evident that Sfarzkopf is employed by OGGI, however, perhaps the fellow does have a few pals there, it in't as if they are cham,pions of truth and justice.

Yeah, Robinson Sollecito did already look sore in his snapshots from the beach, but it seems maybe a dame had a wee camera stuffed down her bikini top, or perhaps in a fake flower in her hair, with camera inside, and he didn't see anyone doing it, usually you can see people are aware of photos being taken, like celebrities, except for when the pics are real grainy and look like they were taken from a ship a hundred miles out at sea and then enlarged. So they secretly took pics of him, they didn't interview him and why ever not, we thought they were his home team, dear o dear he is upset that they double-crossed him after he was all nice giving them those interviews. So they go along with everything he says, seeming to support him then ditch him in the harbour if they can pull a scandal out of the hat. As it is scandalous that he says he's scared to bits and that everyone is corrupt and that he is so in need of a job, etc., then is pictured at yet another faraway location, while others have to work. Not that I imagine his array of supporters care, as they appear to be as fake and weird as Robinson is.

Tell ya, he's nore upset about his apple cart of image making grandeur containing his noble intentions and honesty and oh how they mistreated me, than anything else; he thought he was doing a fine job with his media CAMP PAIGN, but all as it was was a pain and very camp.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this Oggi article a complete and total flip of the story they generally present? Where's the sympathy? Is it possible that they have picked up the change in the air?

Sfarzo can take the pulse of the public and (try) to make money from it.
Raff, I warned you twice to get away from Frank .He will drop you like a hot potato if he smells $$ in another direction. You have no clue!!


I have mixed emotions about this, tamale. on the one hand, I know at one time you believed that the two of them were innocent. On the other hand, I think they deserve each other.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.

_________________
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: Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.


Hi, Zorba. Eventually he will become known as Convict #454954 or whatever, so it will become moot.
I liked Michael's typo where he referred to him as Taffaele. Mandy and Taffy. Wouldn't hurt a fly. People are another matter.
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 27, 2013 11:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Just a word to everyone, and I'm sorry to be the one to put a damper on things.

Everybody is terribly excited that the Appeal starts on Monday (understandably). However, please all bear in mind this is the Italian system and such, on the first day the court will almost certainly adjourn the process for weeks or even months and so, things proper will probably not get really started for some time. What IS really important about this Monday is its symbolic value...the process has started again, Knox and Sollecito will meet justice, Meredith will have hers. The wait is over, the case being in the hands of shills is over, the time for Meredith at last having a voice has begun.

The end game for all this? That at last, finally, the Kerchers will feel that they can put a headstone on Meredith's grave. That's all. So little, but so much.

R.I.P Meredith Kercher. Hopefully, at the end of this process, we can say that and it will mean something.

PMF

_________________
"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 Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

The day that this happens, I intend to release a white balloon, with a white feather tied to it with ribbon.
Small gesture, profound meaning for me.

RIP, Meredith Kercher
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:



appeal
Meredith Kercher murder, Patrick Lumumba in the classroom in Florence. It will be a civil party against Amanda Knox
Fri, 27/09/2013 - 14:22 - The Editors


Sara 'in the courtroom Monday' next with his lawyer Patrick Lumumba, initially accused by Amanda Knox of the murder of Meredith Kercher and then acquitted because 'recognized totally unrelated to the crime. For the American student 'was in fact finally confirmed the sentence for slander against the Congolese musician, but the Supreme Court has referred to the courts of Florence examination dell'aggravante it was to obtain impunity' of the crime of murder. Lumumba - represented as a civil party lawyer Carlo Pacelli - do not want to comment on the announced Knox's absence from the hearing. "We'll see if indeed there will be '- ANSA said today - she and' clever ...". And on the continued court case related to the crime in Via della Pergola, the musician says that "you do not need to do things quickly." "It is to seek the truth 'about what happened - he says - and are therefore not agree more that go well'"



IL SITO FIRENZE

this hit me like a ton of bricks...Amandas Gift. Scroll down, Question #2 "Why did I think of patrick"?, proving the police did not force idea on her. Head slap.
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 27, 2013 11:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:



Stephanie Kercher on "hunt" by Amanda Knox: "Leave Meredith's grave in peace"

Posted September 27 2013 20:49 | Last updated: September 27, 2013 20:49

PERUGIA - Stephanie Kercher calls for respect (so do not want Amanda Knox) for her sister Meredith at least now that she is in her grave: "Her grave is now her safe place to rest in peace and be with us. I hope this is respected by all. "Stephanie spoke in a statement released by the family lawyer, the lawyer Francesco Maresca.

In recent days, she had appeared on Today interview - that Stephanie does not cite - in which Amanda Knox has expressed a desire to go to the grave with the Meredith family of British student (who was killed in Perugia).

"It took almost five years until, as a family, we felt ready to bury Mez - Stephanie says - and today is still extremely painful. However, now she has a place where we can go and her friends to bring flowers and spend a bit 'of time. "

"I hope she can continue to rest in peace - she adds - in spite of the court case is going forward. However, for Mez, we will fight to the end. "

"On November 6, 2007 - Stephanie remembers - it was the hardest day of my life. Coming to Italy and identify my little sister, lying there, cold and lifeless. I would not wish on anyone, is a memory that never leaves me. My mother and I we were the last to caress Mez, that day, to let her know we were there and that we had come to take her home. "



BLITZQUOTIDIANO



Can someone please kindly give us a proper translation of this?

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I have not watched the latest aired "docu", but I have read many comments from people who have.

Here is one from piktor published on .org.

piktor wrote:
Hammerite wrote:
hugo wrote:
stilicho wrote:
I watched it about ten times and he didn't use the new bars on the window to pull himself up.


Give it an eleventh go, or more if necessary, and use freeze-frame so you're only seeing a moment at at time. In the few seconds at 18:42 going on 18:43, he does the fingertip pull-up and then, to gain the ledge, he grabs the bars of the new grille that didn't exist in 2007. The fingertip pull-up is impressive and, as PK777 says, the lunge to get his fingertips on the ledge in the first place is impressive, but he does not get his arse on that ledge without gripping the nice handy bars that didn't exist at the time.

He doesn't simulate shivving the scuri. He pokes his hand through the lower right square of the new grid to show how you could 'easily' move glass off the sill -- the very thing that the 'phantom burglar' neglected to do. And when he drops down to do the shutters thing (meaningless as the shutters don't jam nowadays), he again uses the bars to get back up. He says, probably because the director told him between takes to say it, that you don't need to use the bars -- but he always uses the bars, and he doesn't let go of them for a moment while he's sitting there.

Note the climb is shown from two camera set-ups and, of course, they only had one camera. It's a montage. It's not real. It''s multiple takes edited together, and he probably did a number of practice climbs to make sure he could do it really fast and nice when they went for a take. But he still uses the bars that weren't there at the time.


Hi Hugo,

Yes he does use the metal bars on Filomena’s window to climb up to the window ledge. On a first scan of the documentary there is no video footage of the climber getting up to the window ledge without using the metal grid on FR’s window; which was not there on 1 November 2007. Maybe someone can point out the time slot on the video if I got this wrong please.

This still view from the documentary also shows the degree of accuracy needed to throw a 4 kg rock from the parking bay balustrade through FR’s window.

Lucky shot to get it just right on the first effort, especially in the dark!!!

H


I noticed the lower window frame is not flat against the wall. The climber can actually plant one or both feet on it.

He can then push himself up onto Filomena's window ledge with little effort because he's standing on the moulding.


Piktor's post came with two pictures that I will add as attachments, click on the link above to see the original comment. Underlining is mine.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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 28, 2013 1:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
The day that this happens, I intend to release a white balloon, with a white feather tied to it with ribbon.
Small gesture, profound meaning for me.

RIP, Meredith Kercher


I have spent too much time on Twitter. I automatically was looking for the fav button when I read your comment.

I am looking forward to the new appeal and justice for Meredith Kercher.
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 28, 2013 1:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Just a word to everyone, and I'm sorry to be the one to put a damper on things.

Everybody is terribly excited that the Appeal starts on Monday (understandably). However, please all bear in mind this is the Italian system and as such, on the first day the court will almost certainly adjourn the process for weeks or even months and so, things proper will probably not get really started for some time. What IS really important about this Monday is its symbolic value...the process has started again, Knox and Sollecito will meet justice, Meredith will have hers. The wait is over, the case being in the hands of shills is over, the time for Meredith at last having a voice has begun.

The end game for all this? That at last, finally, the Kerchers will feel that they can put a headstone on Meredith's grave. That's all. So little, but so much.

R.I.P Meredith Kercher. Hopefully, at the end of this process, we can say that and it will mean something.

PMF


It has been reported that a verdict is expected in December this year. Somehow I get the feeling that this appeal could be a swift matter and for me the message is that this time around the defence teams have to focus on the important issues instead of inviting half of the prison population to testify their thoughts on the matter for a diversion.
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
ktor's post came with two pictures that I will add as attachments, click on the link above to see the original comment. Underlining is mine.



The guy also used the bars, that weren't there when the murder took place, to help himself up.

The whole thing is a straw man anyway. It was never maintained the climb up to the window was impossible, only extremely difficult and highly unlikely. What we HAVE maintained, is that such a climb and entry was impossible without being heard, without being seen and without leaving forensic traces. That combined with the glass on top of clothing and the glass lining up on the outer sill with the inside of the outer shutter, demonstrating the outer shutters were closed when the window was broken. That in addition, there were far easier and more obvious entry points into the cottage that genuine burglars would have used and indeed did, twice. This evidence has to be taken as a whole package and looked at in terms of probability, not one element of it taken in isolation to demonstrate that that element alone is possible. That method will tell you only that "anything" is "possible" and allow you to say whatever you want the evidence to say. But that has nothing to do with finding the truth.

The program's treatment of the evidence was superficial and focused on cherry picked elements in isolation. That's not how one investigates a murder case. It was nothing more then 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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
Just a word to everyone, and I'm sorry to be the one to put a damper on things.

Everybody is terribly excited that the Appeal starts on Monday (understandably). However, please all bear in mind this is the Italian system and such, on the first day the court will almost certainly adjourn the process for weeks or even months and so, things proper will probably not get really started for some time. What IS really important about this Monday is its symbolic value...the process has started again, Knox and Sollecito will meet justice, Meredith will have hers. The wait is over, the case being in the hands of shills is over, the time for Meredith at last having a voice has begun.

The end game for all this? That at last, finally, the Kerchers will feel that they can put a headstone on Meredith's grave. That's all. So little, but so much.

R.I.P Meredith Kercher. Hopefully, at the end of this process, we can say that and it will mean something.

PMF


It has been reported that a verdict is expected in December this year. Somehow I get the feeling that this appeal could be a swift matter and for me the message is that this time around the defence teams have to focus on the important issues instead of inviting half of the prison population to testify their thoughts on the matter for a diversion.



It all depends on what/how many tests/retests, if any, the Judge agrees 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 Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Nell wrote:
ktor's post came with two pictures that I will add as attachments, click on the link above to see the original comment. Underlining is mine.



The guy also used the bars, that weren't there when the murder took place, to help himself up.

The whole thing is a straw man anyway. It was never maintained the climb up to the window was impossible, only extremely difficult and highly unlikely. What we HAVE maintained, is that such a climb and entry was impossible without being heard, without being seen and without leaving forensic traces. That combined with the glass on top of clothing and the glass lining up on the outer sill with the inside of the outer shutter, demonstrating the outer shutters were closed when the window was broken. That in addition, there were far easier and more obvious entry points into the cottage that genuine burglars would have used and indeed did, twice. This evidence has to be taken as a whole package and looked at in terms of probability, not one element of it taken in isolation to demonstrate that that element alone is possible. That method will tell you only that "anything" is "possible" and allow you to say whatever you want the evidence to say. But that has nothing to do with finding the truth.

The program's treatment of the evidence was superficial and focused on cherry picked elements in isolation. That's not how one investigates a murder case. It was nothing more then infotainment.


Exactly. The most difficult part of the break-in is not taken into account by this experiment either: To heave your body through the window without disturbing the glass on the windowsill and without leaving any traces of yourself. Also note all the big pieces of glass that were still firmly fixed in the window frame and which would have made such an entry very difficult.

The problem remains, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito chose the wrong window - the least accessible one - to simulate the break-in.
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Well, as I argued a long time ago, they really had no choice but to use that window for their staging. There were very good reasons why they couldn't use any of the other windows. Their hope was and had to be, that nobody would think about the window too much and just go running off after the phantom lone intruder. If their simulation actually inside of Filomen'a room had been better (no glass on top of clothing etc,) it may even have worked. But, since they were novice burglars, it was a novice simulation.

_________________
"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 zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.


Hi, Zorba. Eventually he will become known as Convict #454954 or whatever, so it will become moot.
I liked Michael's typo where he referred to him as Taffaele. Mandy and Taffy. Wouldn't hurt a fly. People are another matter.



Yes, you know what seeing him in the holiday pictures shows him more as he probably is, because he has been putting on an act all the time up until now, his nice boy facey wacey, but on his holiday, I know he is afraid, afraid of having to pay up, but whatever, he had one ugly mean looking face.

I believe what they did was so awful, I mean in the way it all happened, that they could not own up, but I do not think they even ever considered owning up, it looked like Knox saw it as some big kind of joke, and the reasons behind why it happened has allowed her to carry on and in her mind, she is exactly the same aa she was on the night Meredith's life was extinguished, the argument that happened, it's that which Knox still thinks she was right about and so as in when fights happen, the one who wins often will be unable to feel any upset at what happened to the other, as the one that hurts another, in a fight, says, it was either me or him, etc, and he wanted to hurt me.

Only, obviously Meredith was never about fighting and being nasty, and the argument involved he standing up for herself and that in the face of bullying.

Now if as a rest of Knox's actions, bullying has not been gebnerated, after the murder, through her words, her actions, her lies, then I do not know what has. It's easy to see that it is all about bullying, and it never stopped, Knox sowed a seed and her own family got involved in the same thing as they are stupid, and hard, and selfish.

They are selfish because more than her, they care about themselves, because they love her, as most families do, love heir own, however the sign of an evolved human being is the one that in spite of everything, feels a greater type of love, totally unrelated to sex, and who will not only bestow that love on own family, but be fair and try to love more than the own, because the easiest thing on earth to do, is to love the own, but to love thy neighbour, and to love those that it is hard to love, is the point love becomes all-embracing, so the righteous person, though hurt, would be evolved enough to get beyond own pain, and accept that a loved one did something awful, as it is clear that that is the truth, and so in the face of truth, not go doing all kinds of wicked things in order to force the issue because they cannot deal with the pain they will feel if they do accept the truth.

So what is a family that says it supports the own, that child, or the family member, no matter who, this limited to own family and friends (but mostly less for friends) yet all the time that individual who is guilty is in a terrible state, because to do such things, and to have nobody (who does supposedly love you), support you by making you face your demons, means, what they think is love is not love at all, it is selfishness and ignorance, and it is totally void of support, the more they support them in their lies, the more they make sure that the heart is rotted away with the infestation of hatred. Because all I know is that acts of murder leave the murderer unable to have love anymore, certainly not as long as they do not own up and deal with the consequences.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:31 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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

It also must be noted, that the guy who did the climb was not only a professional climber, but he did the climb in perfect conditions...dry and sunny. Guede is supposed to have done this in the dark and when everything was damp (so slippery). A lot of things are easy on a bright sunny afternoon.

_________________
"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 Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.


Hi, Zorba. Eventually he will become known as Convict #454954 or whatever, so it will become moot.
I liked Michael's typo where he referred to him as Taffaele. Mandy and Taffy. Wouldn't hurt a fly. People are another matter.



Yes, you know what seeing him in the holiday pictures shows him more as he probably is, because he has been potting on an act all the time up until now, his nice boy facey wacey, but on his holiday, I know he is afraid, afraid of having to pay up, but whatever, he had one ugly mean looking face. I believe what they did was so awful, I mean in the way it all happened that they could not own up, but I do not think they even ever considered owning up, it looked like Knox saw it as siome big kind of joke, and the reasons behind why it happened has allowed her to carry ion and in her min, she is exactly the same aa she was ont he ight Mereduith's life was extinguished, the argument that happened, it's that which Knox still thinks she was right about and so as in when fights happen, the one who wins often will be unable to feel any upset at what happened to the other, as the one thart hurts another, in a fight, says, it was either me or him, etc, and he wabnted to hurt me. Only, obviously Meredith was never about fighting and being nasty, and the argument involved he standing up for herself abnd that in the face of bullying. Now if as a rest of Knox's actions, bullying has not been gebnerated, after the murder, through her words, her actions, her lies, then I do not know what has. It's easy to see that it is all about bullying, and it never stopped, Knox sowed a seed and her own family got involved in the same thing as they are stupid, and hard, and selfish. They are selfish because more than her, they care about themselves, because they love her, as most families do, love heir own, however the sihn of an evolved human being is the one that in spite of everything, feels a greater type of love, totally unrelated to sex, and who will not only bestow that love on own family, but be fair and try to love more than the own, because the easiest thing on earth to do, is to love the own, but to love thy neighbour, and to love those that it is hard to love, is the point love becomes all-embracing, so the righteous person, though hurt, would be evolved enough to get beyond own pain, and accept that a loved one did something awful, id it is clear that that is the truth, and so in the face of truth, not go doibng all kinds of wicked things in order to force the issue because they cannot deal with the poain they will feel if they do accept the truth.

So what is a family that says it supports the own, that child, or the family member, no matter who, but the own family, but all the time that individual is in a terrible state in truth, because to do such things, and to have nobody who does supposedly love you, support you by making you face your demons, means, what they think is love is not love at all, it is selfishness and ignorance, and it is totally void of support, the more they support them in their lies, themore they make sure that the heart is rotted away with the infestation of hatred. Because all I know is that acts of murder leave the murderer unable to have love anymore, certainly not as long as they do not own up and deal with the consequences.



Ah, but the Kerchers. For almost six long years, the world has watched their grief, their agony and struggle to deal with the loss of their loved one. Never, that I have seen, have they lashed out, lost control, shown anything other than their quiet dignity, their resolve to seek justice for Meredith. I'm often reminded of the picture of Stephanie, leaving the church that day. Totally consumed with grief. And yet...never by look or word or deed have any of them publicly faltered under the weigh of it. Out of respect and love for their sister, their daughter. This is their memorial to her. And I see this, I think it, and I am left to ask: Knox, Mellas, Sollecito, what have you shown the world for the love of your daughter/son?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Michael wrote:
Just a word to everyone, and I'm sorry to be the one to put a damper on things.

Everybody is terribly excited that the Appeal starts on Monday (understandably). However, please all bear in mind this is the Italian system and as such, on the first day the court will almost certainly adjourn the process for weeks or even months and so, things proper will probably not get really started for some time. What IS really important about this Monday is its symbolic value...the process has started again, Knox and Sollecito will meet justice, Meredith will have hers. The wait is over, the case being in the hands of shills is over, the time for Meredith at last having a voice has begun.

The end game for all this? That at last, finally, the Kerchers will feel that they can put a headstone on Meredith's grave. That's all. So little, but so much.

R.I.P Meredith Kercher. Hopefully, at the end of this process, we can say that and it will mean something.

PMF


It has been reported that a verdict is expected in December this year. Somehow I get the feeling that this appeal could be a swift matter and for me the message is that this time around the defence teams have to focus on the important issues instead of inviting half of the prison population to testify their thoughts on the matter for a diversion.


I also tend to think it will be a swift trial. The court has already issued a schedule of hearings going from September through November, with an anticipated decision by December. (Around Meredith's birthday December 26 would be nice :) Given that the defense had to file any requests within 45 days of the motivations report the court has had enough time to think whether it will allow for some new evidence to be heard, and quite frankly, given the SC ruling, don't expect too much more to be allowed. It will not be a new trial, but a review of the evidence so far from Massei. The only item that may take time would be the retesting of the knife and that would not take two months. So it could well fit within the announced schedule, and I am quite optimistic that we will hear the results by December, January tops but that is a slim chance.

It is the final Supreme Court decision that might go into the end of 2014 early 2015, but, we shall see, as we will in Florence.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:


The comment section is certainly worth the read. Seriously, you need to add a 'thumbs up' smilie for me. tt-)


Just made a comment there, Napia5, which may or may not make it through, or be edited for 'civility', which is what happened to McCall :)

Quote:
Hi, JMRJ, if I may, and speaking for myself. There are so many reasons I feel strongly about the, excuse me, case of the murder of Meredith Kercher. It appeals to me on many levels, intellectually, spiritually, professionally. And I believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty of sexually aggravated murder.

It may be that people who get involved, on both sides of the debate, are the type who feel strongly about many things. The type that cares about causes, be it the environment, progressive or conservative values, the types that just comment on blogs or, are activists for their cause(s). The danger occurs when they lose their objectivity and display biased thinking.

Having studied both sides, I feel there are people who genuinely believe in the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. I dislike generalizations about either side, but am sure they have commonalities :)

It might even be that lawyers of the defense oriented persuasion are more inclined to believe in the innocent victimhood of 'young' people (as if such do not commit crimes) but I don't know your reasons, of course.

However, since you admit to not knowing much about the case, or the Italian legal system, in your blog http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/ , that you relied on 'occasional news report and-mostly the Hellman court decision that acquitted Knox and Sollecito then you ought to know this particular translation you read was written by a group of Knox sympathizers who aren't even professional translators. No wonder you found "the translation is awkward" though I guess it did not prevent you from forming an opinion, which is your right. However, and since you state you are a lawyer, then I find it astounding you no where tell us where you read the original trial reports by judges Matteini, Micheli, and Massei that sentenced Knox and Sollecito, or the Supreme Court decision that overturned the Hellmann acquittal. Since you want to be fair and all, shouldn't you at least read those decisions as well, before you know for sure? As most of us on the other side do?

I also find it interesting that you state that evidence was planted, after the decision to prosecute was made, and that "I thought the case that the main prosecutor, Magnini (sic), is a psychopath was pretty strong, but I’d be interested to see anything you have suggesting otherwise." Seriously? OK, that's your opinion, just as it is the opinion of many that the case that Amanda Knox is a psychopath is "pretty strong".


Catch the misspelling of 'Mignini'. This guy definitely reads reads Bruce's blog, no wonder...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
I have not watched the latest aired "docu", but I have read many comments from people who have.

Here is one from piktor published on .org.

piktor wrote:
Hammerite wrote:
hugo wrote:
stilicho wrote:
I watched it about ten times and he didn't use the new bars on the window to pull himself up.


Give it an eleventh go, or more if necessary, and use freeze-frame so you're only seeing a moment at at time. In the few seconds at 18:42 going on 18:43, he does the fingertip pull-up and then, to gain the ledge, he grabs the bars of the new grille that didn't exist in 2007. The fingertip pull-up is impressive and, as PK777 says, the lunge to get his fingertips on the ledge in the first place is impressive, but he does not get his arse on that ledge without gripping the nice handy bars that didn't exist at the time.

He doesn't simulate shivving the scuri. He pokes his hand through the lower right square of the new grid to show how you could 'easily' move glass off the sill -- the very thing that the 'phantom burglar' neglected to do. And when he drops down to do the shutters thing (meaningless as the shutters don't jam nowadays), he again uses the bars to get back up. He says, probably because the director told him between takes to say it, that you don't need to use the bars -- but he always uses the bars, and he doesn't let go of them for a moment while he's sitting there.

Note the climb is shown from two camera set-ups and, of course, they only had one camera. It's a montage. It's not real. It''s multiple takes edited together, and he probably did a number of practice climbs to make sure he could do it really fast and nice when they went for a take. But he still uses the bars that weren't there at the time.


Hi Hugo,

Yes he does use the metal bars on Filomena’s window to climb up to the window ledge. On a first scan of the documentary there is no video footage of the climber getting up to the window ledge without using the metal grid on FR’s window; which was not there on 1 November 2007. Maybe someone can point out the time slot on the video if I got this wrong please.

This still view from the documentary also shows the degree of accuracy needed to throw a 4 kg rock from the parking bay balustrade through FR’s window.

Lucky shot to get it just right on the first effort, especially in the dark!!!

H


I noticed the lower window frame is not flat against the wall. The climber can actually plant one or both feet on it.

He can then push himself up onto Filomena's window ledge with little effort because he's standing on the moulding.


Piktor's post came with two pictures that I will add as attachments, click on the link above to see the original comment. Underlining is mine.


I most certainly did not see that moulding in March when I was there. All the photos I've seen from the crime scene showed pretty showed pretty flat moulding. Something's fishy here.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.


Hi, Zorba. Eventually he will become known as Convict #454954 or whatever, so it will become moot.
I liked Michael's typo where he referred to him as Taffaele. Mandy and Taffy. Wouldn't hurt a fly. People are another matter.



Yes, you know what seeing him in the holiday pictures shows him more as he probably is, because he has been potting on an act all the time up until now, his nice boy facey wacey, but on his holiday, I know he is afraid, afraid of having to pay up, but whatever, he had one ugly mean looking face. I believe what they did was so awful, I mean in the way it all happened that they could not own up, but I do not think they even ever considered owning up, it looked like Knox saw it as siome big kind of joke, and the reasons behind why it happened has allowed her to carry ion and in her min, she is exactly the same aa she was ont he ight Mereduith's life was extinguished, the argument that happened, it's that which Knox still thinks she was right about and so as in when fights happen, the one who wins often will be unable to feel any upset at what happened to the other, as the one thart hurts another, in a fight, says, it was either me or him, etc, and he wabnted to hurt me. Only, obviously Meredith was never about fighting and being nasty, and the argument involved he standing up for herself abnd that in the face of bullying. Now if as a rest of Knox's actions, bullying has not been gebnerated, after the murder, through her words, her actions, her lies, then I do not know what has. It's easy to see that it is all about bullying, and it never stopped, Knox sowed a seed and her own family got involved in the same thing as they are stupid, and hard, and selfish. They are selfish because more than her, they care about themselves, because they love her, as most families do, love heir own, however the sihn of an evolved human being is the one that in spite of everything, feels a greater type of love, totally unrelated to sex, and who will not only bestow that love on own family, but be fair and try to love more than the own, because the easiest thing on earth to do, is to love the own, but to love thy neighbour, and to love those that it is hard to love, is the point love becomes all-embracing, so the righteous person, though hurt, would be evolved enough to get beyond own pain, and accept that a loved one did something awful, id it is clear that that is the truth, and so in the face of truth, not go doibng all kinds of wicked things in order to force the issue because they cannot deal with the poain they will feel if they do accept the truth.

So what is a family that says it supports the own, that child, or the family member, no matter who, but the own family, but all the time that individual is in a terrible state in truth, because to do such things, and to have nobody who does supposedly love you, support you by making you face your demons, means, what they think is love is not love at all, it is selfishness and ignorance, and it is totally void of support, the more they support them in their lies, themore they make sure that the heart is rotted away with the infestation of hatred. Because all I know is that acts of murder leave the murderer unable to have love anymore, certainly not as long as they do not own up and deal with the consequences.



Ah, but the Kerchers. For almost six long years, the world has watched their grief, their agony and struggle to deal with the loss of their loved one. Never, that I have seen, have they lashed out, lost control, shown anything other than their quiet dignity, their resolve to seek justice for Meredith. I'm often reminded of the picture of Stephanie, leaving the church that day. Totally consumed with grief. And yet...never by look or word or deed have any of them publicly faltered under the weigh of it. Out of respect and love for their sister, their daughter. This is their memorial to her. And I see this, I think it, and I am left to ask: Knox, Mellas, Sollecito, what have you shown the world for the love of your daughter/son?



Hi Napski,

I have to work right now, I edited what I wrote, maybe you can requote by placing the edited version (typos out).

Yes, when I saw Stephanie yesterday, it had me in tears, what she said; how terrible for her and mother to have to go through that. Unbearable.

The abrasive nature of all of wht Knox's family appear to stand for, the horrid characters Knox and Sollecito appear to have, is not anything Meredith's family have ever, or will ever, take on board and just as if Knox and Sollecito had never heard of rubbing salt in wounds, they got some strange idea it would make them look innocent by announcing they'd just love to have a get together with the victim's family and visit Meredith's grave; are these people totally stupid? Did they never see that they come across as macabre of nature and very scary?

Did they imagine that afterwards they might all go for an Italian meal, Knox and Sollecito paying from the earnings they made from giving dozens of ferociously, wickedly deranged TV interviews, newspaper and magazine interviews? Brazen-faced is far too weak a wording. Calculated, demeaning, sly, dishonest and devious too.

It's like Knox and Sollecito are trying to force the issue by forcing Mredith's family to say, let's all live happily ever after.

There are so many reasons to seek a restraining order against both Sollecito and Knox in light of such statements to the public.

_________________
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 28, 2013 10:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
It also must be noted, that the guy who did the climb was not only a professional climber, but he did the climb in perfect conditions...dry and sunny. Guede is supposed to have done this in the dark and when everything was damp (so slippery). A lot of things are easy on a bright sunny afternoon.




The value of their operations is equal to them saimply calling the Fire Deparment and have them pop round with a ladder.

Signs that any scheme could never be good

1) the use of the word American-Italo (always used for that selection of people with the Italian sounding names but who cannot even speak Italian and all of whom are evidently as un-Italian as a Siberian)

as it is it seems one of those found in the defandant's glossary of terms

Hater is also a word that is not in dfact the same as to hate. Brecause why in the world should someone, even a person most kind and gentle, absolutely hate the guts of those who did this to Meredith, of course, what are people supposed to love them for the actions they chose to undertake.

Haters thought is something from The Street Yobs' Dictionary of Poor English, made up and nit proper English, it's like what delingent adolescents might use, it's just American slang and has no real value because it seeks to portray people as simply being nasty, but who when a murder has been committed is nasty, those who hate murderers, or the murderers themselves?

I know which one is the right answer but yeah, for the juvenille delinquents and the adults with little understanding or education, the answer is the murderers. Those who hate them and detest them do so because of the awful acts they committed.

Those who defend murderers by lying and twisting and paying to deceiver the general public are the real haters, they hate the truth, they hate to face the music, they hate to face what will happen to them when they accept the truth, it means they will be shattered by the truth about what their loved ones did, and that's why they are unwilling to faer the truth. Now they live in denial, like a cow with toothache and no dentist in sight, all as is said is mooh and nobody can understand that type of talk.

_________________
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:


The comment section is certainly worth the read. Seriously, you need to add a 'thumbs up' smilie for me. tt-)


Just made a comment there, Napia5, which may or may not make it through, or be edited for 'civility', which is what happened to McCall :)

Quote:
Hi, JMRJ, if I may, and speaking for myself. There are so many reasons I feel strongly about the, excuse me, case of the murder of Meredith Kercher. It appeals to me on many levels, intellectually, spiritually, professionally. And I believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty of sexually aggravated murder.

It may be that people who get involved, on both sides of the debate, are the type who feel strongly about many things. The type that cares about causes, be it the environment, progressive or conservative values, the types that just comment on blogs or, are activists for their cause(s). The danger occurs when they lose their objectivity and display biased thinking.

Having studied both sides, I feel there are people who genuinely believe in the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. I dislike generalizations about either side, but am sure they have commonalities :)

It might even be that lawyers of the defense oriented persuasion are more inclined to believe in the innocent victimhood of 'young' people (as if such do not commit crimes) but I don't know your reasons, of course.

However, since you admit to not knowing much about the case, or the Italian legal system, in your blog http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/ , that you relied on 'occasional news report and-mostly the Hellman court decision that acquitted Knox and Sollecito then you ought to know this particular translation you read was written by a group of Knox sympathizers who aren't even professional translators. No wonder you found "the translation is awkward" though I guess it did not prevent you from forming an opinion, which is your right. However, and since you state you are a lawyer, then I find it astounding you no where tell us where you read the original trial reports by judges Matteini, Micheli, and Massei that sentenced Knox and Sollecito, or the Supreme Court decision that overturned the Hellmann acquittal. Since you want to be fair and all, shouldn't you at least read those decisions as well, before you know for sure? As most of us on the other side do?

I also find it interesting that you state that evidence was planted, after the decision to prosecute was made, and that "I thought the case that the main prosecutor, Magnini (sic), is a psychopath was pretty strong, but I’d be interested to see anything you have suggesting otherwise." Seriously? OK, that's your opinion, just as it is the opinion of many that the case that Amanda Knox is a psychopath is "pretty strong".


Catch the misspelling of 'Mignini'. This guy definitely reads reads Bruce's blog, no wonder...


I had only scanned the blog or I never would have posted. The guy who maintains it is a complete loon. There is no point in engaging people like him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
1) I always object to seeing people refer to him her as Raff because Raff is a nickname and so who then is pally with him, not me that's for sure.

2) Talking to him as if he is here and as if he is a friend, I mean he is not in any way a friend, and this needs to be made clear, this board is not for providing Sollecito or Knox with advice as though he is some kind of a good guy, he is a murderer the last time I looked.


Hi, Zorba. Eventually he will become known as Convict #454954 or whatever, so it will become moot.
I liked Michael's typo where he referred to him as Taffaele. Mandy and Taffy. Wouldn't hurt a fly. People are another matter.



Yes, you know what seeing him in the holiday pictures shows him more as he probably is, because he has been potting on an act all the time up until now, his nice boy facey wacey, but on his holiday, I know he is afraid, afraid of having to pay up, but whatever, he had one ugly mean looking face. I believe what they did was so awful, I mean in the way it all happened that they could not own up, but I do not think they even ever considered owning up, it looked like Knox saw it as siome big kind of joke, and the reasons behind why it happened has allowed her to carry ion and in her min, she is exactly the same aa she was ont he ight Mereduith's life was extinguished, the argument that happened, it's that which Knox still thinks she was right about and so as in when fights happen, the one who wins often will be unable to feel any upset at what happened to the other, as the one thart hurts another, in a fight, says, it was either me or him, etc, and he wabnted to hurt me. Only, obviously Meredith was never about fighting and being nasty, and the argument involved he standing up for herself abnd that in the face of bullying. Now if as a rest of Knox's actions, bullying has not been gebnerated, after the murder, through her words, her actions, her lies, then I do not know what has. It's easy to see that it is all about bullying, and it never stopped, Knox sowed a seed and her own family got involved in the same thing as they are stupid, and hard, and selfish. They are selfish because more than her, they care about themselves, because they love her, as most families do, love heir own, however the sihn of an evolved human being is the one that in spite of everything, feels a greater type of love, totally unrelated to sex, and who will not only bestow that love on own family, but be fair and try to love more than the own, because the easiest thing on earth to do, is to love the own, but to love thy neighbour, and to love those that it is hard to love, is the point love becomes all-embracing, so the righteous person, though hurt, would be evolved enough to get beyond own pain, and accept that a loved one did something awful, id it is clear that that is the truth, and so in the face of truth, not go doibng all kinds of wicked things in order to force the issue because they cannot deal with the poain they will feel if they do accept the truth.

So what is a family that says it supports the own, that child, or the family member, no matter who, but the own family, but all the time that individual is in a terrible state in truth, because to do such things, and to have nobody who does supposedly love you, support you by making you face your demons, means, what they think is love is not love at all, it is selfishness and ignorance, and it is totally void of support, the more they support them in their lies, themore they make sure that the heart is rotted away with the infestation of hatred. Because all I know is that acts of murder leave the murderer unable to have love anymore, certainly not as long as they do not own up and deal with the consequences.



Ah, but the Kerchers. For almost six long years, the world has watched their grief, their agony and struggle to deal with the loss of their loved one. Never, that I have seen, have they lashed out, lost control, shown anything other than their quiet dignity, their resolve to seek justice for Meredith. I'm often reminded of the picture of Stephanie, leaving the church that day. Totally consumed with grief. And yet...never by look or word or deed have any of them publicly faltered under the weigh of it. Out of respect and love for their sister, their daughter. This is their memorial to her. And I see this, I think it, and I am left to ask: Knox, Mellas, Sollecito, what have you shown the world for the love of your daughter/son?



Hi Napski,

I have to work right now, I edited what I wrote, maybe you can requote by placing the edited version (typos out).

Yes, when I saw Stephanie yesterday, it had me in tears, what she said; how terrible for her and mother to have to go through that. Unbearable.

The abrasive nature of all of wht Knox's family appear to stand for, the horrid characters Knox and Sollecito appear to have, is not anything Meredith's family have ever, or will ever, take on board and just as if Knox and Sollecito had never heard of rubbing salt in wounds, they got some strange idea it would make them look innocent by announcing they'd just love to have a get together with the victim's family and visit Meredith's grave; are these people totally stupid? Did they never see that they come across as macabre of nature and very scary?

Did they imagine that afterwards they might all go for an Italian meal, Knox and Sollecito paying from the earnings they made from giving dozens of ferociously, wickedly deranged TV interviews, newspaper and magazine interviews? Brazen-faced is far too weak a wording. Calculated, demeaning, sly, dishonest and devious too.

It's like Knox and Sollecito are trying to force the issue by forcing Mredith's family to say, let's all live happily ever after.

There are so many reasons to seek a restraining order against both Sollecito and Knox in light of such statements to the public.


I'm all for the possibility of rehabilitation and so forth, and I know they were still relatively young and had no criminal records at the time of the murder.
But their behavior after their (provisional) acquittal in 2011 makes it hard for me to find mitigation acceptable this time. I can't imagine the book tours, interviews etc. won't be taken into consideration by the judges at the re-appeal in Florence.
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Sollecito asked the collection for the process : a month ago to vacation in the Caribbean


Raffaele wanted $ 500K for " Goliath fight " and defend himself against the murder of Meredith . Photographed in the tropical paradise is controversy

By Roberta Catania

He asked for money to fight in court against " the giant Goliath ," at least " $ 500,000 for expert opinions expensive ," but now we see him soak in the Caribbean Sea . Raffaele Sollecito , that next Monday will be back on trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher , left for a holiday in Bayahibe , one of the most beautiful beaches in the South - east of Santo Domingo. And it is there, in a report in the weekly magazine Oggi , that the defendant " has decided to stay at least one month in residence Casa Caribe Tamarindo ."

The idea of starting a collection on-line to get paid court costs had not been very well received by the people of the Internet. Now, however , the boy Puglia is really under attack. People flooded her blog and her Facebook page asking if the money would be used in going to take a little ' sun or - even worse - to escape abroad before ending again under fire following the judgment of the Supreme Court which had annulled the acquittal of the two sweethearts of Perugia. Moreover there is already Amanda Knox has made it known that they will not return to Italy because distrustful towards a justice system that does not consider right and "for fear of ending up in prison again ."

As soon as the pictures of the tropical vacation they started to be posted on the Social network , Raffaele intervened to defend themselves. At 19 yesterday ( Italian time ) attempted to give an explanation on Facebook. "For all those who wonder where I get the money to go to the Dominican Republic ," he responded by attacking the week: "I never gave my consent to release my photos and personal information. Who did it should be ashamed , because it is an act lowest and petty. I have nothing to hide if you do not protect my privacy. I am a guest of a friend of Sassuolo who invited me ... she is an advocate and I'm glad to have good people who believe in me and in the end I deserve it. The collection for legal fees is still intact and certainly do not use that money for my travel, they are working or not. I will use that money when I have to pay just the cost of the new process and if ever something will advance to the end of it all , I'll give the rest to charity for research . " Words that do not convince the "friends " on the Net Apart from a native girl of Bisceglie who defends , Sollecito receiving many attacks from other patrons of the Internet. More sedate her father, to explain. By agreeing to talk to the Ansa, Francesco Sollecito has first ensured that " Raffaele will soon return to Italy 'and states : " We have an absolute respect for the institutions and my son does not intend to flee. We are working tirelessly to prove his innocence in court . " Regarding "the short vacation," the trader explained that the child, " staying in a holiday home which has been provided free of charge by a pair of Italian supporters. He's trying to find himself and a bit ' of serenity after the terrible events of recent years . "

The photos anticipated by Today they tune in the minds of those who remembered the call for funds launched by Raffaele in mid-June. A request for money accompanied by a heartfelt plea of ​​the young man, who explained that he " did not find right of having to give up a good defense only to the economic aspect ."

The stress of the process that is recovering in Florence was heard and the weekly reports that in Santo Domingo Raffaele is regenerating : "Young Bari sleeps late ," reads , " runs with the inseparable computer constantly in search of Wi-Fi area and became acquainted with several fellow residents , including a bunting moved there for work and a Roman businessman with several deals in the tourism sector . "


SIGNORAGGIO

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
I most certainly did not see that moulding in March when I was there. All the photos I've seen from the crime scene showed pretty showed pretty flat moulding. Something's fishy here.


It wasn't there, it's a recent addition. Something they neglected to mention on the Channel 5 Doc.

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
I also tend to think it will be a swift trial. The court has already issued a schedule of hearings going from September through November, with an anticipated decision by December...


Yes, but all trials and appeals publish a tight provisional schedule in advance, but they don't really mean very much.

It should be remembered that Sollecito has a very canny defence team who are going to work as hard as they can to delay and draw out the process for as long as possible. Delay works in the favour of the defence.

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Is Amanda Knox ready to face justice?
Seattle : WA : USA | Sep 28, 2013 at 5:56 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 Stan


User avatar


Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:35 am

Posts: 130

Highscores: 5

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I most certainly did not see that moulding in March when I was there. All the photos I've seen from the crime scene showed pretty showed pretty flat moulding. Something's fishy here.


It wasn't there, it's a recent addition. Something they neglected to mention on the Channel 5 Doc.


There is no moulding over the window. There is some staining on the concrete which makes it look like there is a moulding in the vidoe clip.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I most certainly did not see that moulding in March when I was there. All the photos I've seen from the crime scene showed pretty showed pretty flat moulding. Something's fishy here.


It wasn't there, it's a recent addition. Something they neglected to mention on the Channel 5 Doc.


Can you clarify? Are we talking DOWNSTAIRS window?
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Stan wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
I most certainly did not see that moulding in March when I was there. All the photos I've seen from the crime scene showed pretty showed pretty flat moulding. Something's fishy here.


It wasn't there, it's a recent addition. Something they neglected to mention on the Channel 5 Doc.


There is no moulding over the window. There is some staining on the concrete which makes it look like there is a moulding in the vidoe clip.


Hi Stan, how are you?

Okay, thanks for clearing that up!!! :)

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Okay, everyone, the Meredith community will have our own reporter in the courtroom in Florence and as far as I'm aware, she'll be there for the duration of the appeal. If you have a Twitter account, be sure to follow: @kathleengadalof

:)

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 3:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:


Meredith , back in the classroom Monday, the appeals process a
September 28, 2013


On September 30 in Florence opens the new procedure, after the annulment by the Court of Cassation 's ruling on appeal that he had acquitted Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito of murder . The American student will not be present


The trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher , the British student murdered in Perugia in 2007 , back in the classroom. Monday, September 30 in Florence will open the new appeal , after the annulment by the Supreme Court 's ruling on appeal by the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Perugia, which had acquitted Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito . Already in the first hearing , the judges may decide to reopen the Florentine hearings and have new appraisals . To indicate that the road is the reasoning of the Supreme Court , which suggests to analyze the third track of DNA found on the knife seized in Sollecito's house - the prosecution believes that it is the murder weapon - and to call again to testify Luciano Aviello , the former associate justice who first accused of murdering his brother and then recanted ending investigated for slander. Even in the full-bodied pleadings filed by the defenses there is a demand replay of witnesses and to order new scientific investigations .

The dates - If the Court decides to reopen the hearing , the commission for the new valuations could be given at the second hearing , on October 4. Then about twenty days to know the results, which are illustrated in the classroom on 23 and 24 October . The other dates are scheduled for now 6, 7 , 25 and 26 November. In short, there may be judgment for December . Already 300 journalists are accredited to describe a process that will be followed on TV from around the world. So " to ensure a smooth conduct of the trial " the Court has ordered strict measures of behavior in the classroom where, among the ' other , you can not stand up and you can not call .

Amanda and Raffaele will not be in the classroom - Amanda Knox will not be in the classroom and insists has already said he will not return to Italy and insists on defending his decision not to return to Italy claiming that the polygraph would confirm his innocence. Even the parents of Meredith , John and Arline , for health reasons Monday there will be . As well as their other daughter , Stephanie , who will stand with them. " The tomb of Mez is now his safe place to rest in peace and be with us. I hope this is respected by everybody ," said Stephanie in a statement released by the family lawyer , the lawyer Francesco Maresca , a few days after the interview that Amanda has expressed a desire to go to the tomb of Meredith . Who will be in the courtroom Monday , as a civil party , is Patrick Lumumba , initially charged with the murder and then acquitted by Amanda .

The judges - In this new appeal , the prosecution will be supported by Assistant Attorney General Alexander Horsehair , who investigated the crimes of the ' monster ' of Florence and the mafia massacres in 1993-1994 . The presiding judge , the second section dell'assise of Appeal of Florence , is Alessandro Nencini . Among its rulings , the one with which , in March 2009, condannò27 people for the environmental damage caused by the work in Mugello for the high speed . Associate judge is Luciana Cicerchia , former President of the Assize Court that in Arezzo condemned the militant of the new Br Nadia Desdemona Lioce . Their task will be to make a " comprehensive examination and unitary clues ," wrote the judges of the Supreme Court , which will be crucial to demonstrate whether the two defendants were present in the "locus delicti commissi ."

The murder of Meredith Kercher - Meredith Kercher was murdered in her bedroom, in the house on Via della Pergola in Perugia on the night between 1 and 2 November 2007. The police stopped the murder of Mez 's roommate , Amanda Knox , the boyfriend of this last , Raffaele Sollecito and Congolese musician Patrick Diya Lumumba . Lumumba is the employer of Amanda . She ' to designate this as the perpetrator of the crime . But soon a Swiss teacher tells the police that he was in the pub the night of the murder of Lumumba and confirm the alibi of the Congolese musician . Rudy Hermann Guede , 21 , originally from the Ivory Coast is referred to as the ' fourth man ' . The police stands an international arrest warrant . Lumumba was set free while Guede is blocked by the police on the train Koblenz -Mainz , Germany. It is declared innocent. The preliminary hearing judge has to proceed with the process expedited for Guede sentenced to 16 years in prison for murder and sexual violence and indictments Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito asking for a life sentence . But 3 October 2011 the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Perugia absolves Amanda and Raffaele , convicted at first instance respectively to 26 and 25 years of imprisonment , from the charge of murdering Meredith Kercher . The Court of Assizes of Appeal of Perugia settles the reasons for judgment of acquittal but on March 25 of this year the Supreme Court to quash the decision of the second degree .



SKY TG24

_________________
"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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 3:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Meredith : Monday ' via new process , without Amanda and Raffaele


( ASCA ) - Florence , 28 September - Opens Monday ' next before the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Florence, the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito , who are accused of the murder of Meredith Kercher , the British student murdered in her house of Perugia on the night between the first and 2 November 2007 . the girl , according to the findings at autopsy , was suffocated ( with fracture of the hyoid bone ) and hit with numerous stab wounds . Monday ' in the classroom there should be neither ' Amanda , returned to America after the acquittal on appeal, it ' Sollecito , this time on vacation. The process of Florence and ' the second appeal which is held against the two . The Supreme Court has in fact set aside the judgment of 5 December 2009 the Court of Appeal of Perugia had acquitted two of the crime of murder. The Supreme Court decided the case to a new trial on appeal, but that ' can not' more ' to be celebrated in the city' umbra.In first instance Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were sentenced respectively to 26 and 25 years of imprisonment . On appeal, however, ' the judges had reversed the judgment acquitting both the murder and condemning the only Amanda to three years ' imprisonment for the crime of defamation against Patrick Lumumba . The sentence ' but was ' canceled by the Supreme Court '' for multiple profiles highlighted the shortcomings , contraddittoriera ' and INCONSISTENCY ' manifests .'' The judges of the Supreme Court admitted that the evidence is circumstantial character '' no doubt '' but this does not mean that they have less '' attitude '' is representative of the direct evidence . And in the judgment of Appeals , the Supreme Court wrote , '' were sometimes drawn conclusions incompatible with the acquired data, in open violation of the principle of the completeness of the evaluation and the principle of non- contradictory ' , showing that he had overlooked significant evidence '' . Amanda , that is' always declared innocent , said he 's not coming back ' cause in Italy ' and 'already ' been unjustly imprisoned '' '' . Pero ' , interviewed by British broadcaster ITV , has ensured that '' I would be fine to be tested of the truth ' . I would do anything to prove my innocence. I do not think however, that ' it is necessary , but as I said , I'm doing everything I can to prove my innocence .'' As for Sollecito 's father Francesco ensures that it will ' in court hearings in key process and that it has no intention of '' escape '' . The boy did not participate ' in the early hearings, says the father ,' cause '' technical '' but will participate in ' when the process will enter '' ' '' in vivo . After the hearing on Monday ' the calendar already includes ' new dates to October 4 , 23 and 24 .



YAHOO ITALIA

_________________
"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 Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:08 pm   Post subject: MOULDING OR STAIN? YOU DECIDE   

(Courtesy of .ORG.)


Image


picture of a pumpkin
This Post has been edited by a Moderator
Details: Fixed forum width


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

zorba wrote:
There are so many reasons to seek a restraining order against both Sollecito and Knox in light of such statements to the public.



Ava wrote:
I'm all for the possibility of rehabilitation and so forth, and I know they were still relatively young and had no criminal records at the time of the murder.
But their behavior after their (provisional) acquittal in 2011 makes it hard for me to find mitigation acceptable this time. I can't imagine the book tours, interviews etc. won't be taken into consideration by the judges at the re-appeal in Florence.



Hi Ava, so am I, yet despite that, in this case, any good will went out of the window, through their continued ill-behaviour.

I too cannot see the court ignoring the things they've been doing, in fact I'm sure they will come down hard on it, they really so take a dim view of people who manipulate the media, because it is akin to the seriousness involved in calumnia, in that it takes away the the judiciary's power to uphold the law and to conduct the processes required by law. That Maria woman from North Italy who murdered her infant son, she caused what the Supreme Court called Media Mayhem, and so it is not as though this is an unknown phenomenon on Italy, no, it's instantly reconisable for what it is, and Knox and Sollecito created far more Media Mayhem that that woman did; she blamed her neighbours, and others before she started blaming the police, prosecutors and courts.

Nothing new under the sun.

_________________
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: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thank you,, Ergon and .org. The bottom window appears to have had a wider ledge attached to it in picture #1.
This is an original attempt by the defense which took place a few years ago, correct? It is a picture of the bottom window.

Pictures #2 and #3 are the reconstruction pictures, correct?

Picture #4 is also an original attempt made by the defense, correct?

If I am reading these properly, pictures #1 and #4 are from a few years ago and are of the bottom window.
The top of this window ledge is the ledge that appears to have an addition to it, yes?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Hi, zorba. Saw your note about the edit. i will attempt to do this.........later.

Also, have you noticed that the tone of all of the news articles being posted appears to be changing? These articles are NOT reading like cut and paste PR releases.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 5:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Regardless, the point is, even I could have made the same climb the climber did, and I'm nearly 64 :) But, using the bars to haul myself up. Not available in 2007, or 2009 when monkey lawyer tried, and he's 6 foot two, the picture shows how far he got. But throw a boulder that distance, with accuracy? Open the scuri from the outside? .ORG posted the lock mechanism photo, there is no way it could have been opened with a knife (which would have left marks along the edge BTW)

Still, this is all interesting till Monday. Good luck asking the Florence Court to view the Channel 5 infomercial as 'evidence' :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 5:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

((OT))
At the risk of being a buttinski (like that ever stopped me), for pastry dough to be perfect, you MUST have cold hands!
Butter or lard crumbles are solid. They create tiny pockets in the dough in unbaked form. Cold hands prevent them from melting before baking. When they heat up, they melt, leaving the flaky pockets behind. if you melt them beforehand with your warm hands, the dough will flatten, thus harden.

My mom taught me this. She also told me that I would NEVER make a good dough as long as I smoked. She was right.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Thank you,, Ergon and .org. The bottom window appears to have had a wider ledge attached to it in picture #1.
This is an original attempt by the defense which took place a few years ago, correct? It is a picture of the bottom window.

Pictures #2 and #3 are the reconstruction pictures, correct?

Picture #4 is also an original attempt made by the defense, correct?

If I am reading these properly, pictures #1 and #4 are from a few years ago and are of the bottom window.
The top of this window ledge is the ledge that appears to have an addition to it, yes?


You are welcome, Napia5. Yes, 1 and 4 are the failed defense attempt in 2009, and 2 and 3 the 2013 reconstruction. I think the widths of the ledge are the same, but appear different because distance and lens being not the same.

The top of all 4 (bottom) windows is what we are discussing. Hard to tell, but given the fuzziness of #2 and 3, now inclined to think it is an optical illusion formed by the stain.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Regardless, the point is, even I could have made the same climb the climber did, and I'm nearly 64 :) But, using the bars to haul myself up. Not available in 2007, or 2009 when monkey lawyer tried, and he's 6 foot two, the picture shows how far he got. But throw a boulder that distance, with accuracy? Open the scuri from the outside? .ORG posted the lock mechanism photo, there is no way it could have been opened with a knife (which would have left marks along the edge BTW)

Still, this is all interesting till Monday. Good luck asking the Florence Court to view the Channel 5 infomercial as 'evidence' :)

I think this is the most interesting part of the program for the reason that you start thinking if you can do it. I don't know if I could do it :( That stretching move from lower window to top window doesn't look so easy to me. I think if 'anybody' could do it they wouldn't have used a rock climber.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Thank you,, Ergon and .org. The bottom window appears to have had a wider ledge attached to it in picture #1.
This is an original attempt by the defense which took place a few years ago, correct? It is a picture of the bottom window.

Pictures #2 and #3 are the reconstruction pictures, correct?

Picture #4 is also an original attempt made by the defense, correct?

If I am reading these properly, pictures #1 and #4 are from a few years ago and are of the bottom window.
The top of this window ledge is the ledge that appears to have an addition to it, yes?


You are welcome, Napia5. Yes, 1 and 4 are the failed defense attempt in 2009, and 2 and 3 the 2013 reconstruction. I think the widths of the ledge are the same, but appear different because distance and lens being not the same.

The top of all 4 (bottom) windows is what we are discussing. Hard to tell, but given the fuzziness of #2 and 3, now inclined to think it is an optical illusion formed by the stain.


Thank you. my thought also. I would have expected all of those 'sciency' reconstructionists would have used a laser to measure these dimensions and given numbers. You know, it being an accurate depiction and all. Or, at the very least, a ruler or something. But what do I know?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 6:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Nell wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
The day that this happens, I intend to release a white balloon, with a white feather tied to it with ribbon.
Small gesture, profound meaning for me.

RIP, Meredith Kercher


I have spent too much time on Twitter. I automatically was looking for the fav button when I read your comment.

I am looking forward to the new appeal and justice for Meredith Kercher.


Funny Nell...now where did that fav button go...??? Me too.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Hi, zorba. Saw your note about the edit. i will attempt to do this.........later.

Also, have you noticed that the tone of all of the news articles being posted appears to be changing? These articles are NOT reading like cut and paste PR releases.


Hi Naps, yes, I did.

The man's reaction shows that he was more upset that all his hard work trying to create this impression of poor old me had been ruined, the money for funding wasn't ever about getting money, it was about looking like he had not taken blood money by means of the book, and was having a hard time, so each story contradicts the other.

1) He earned money on the book, and as there was lots of criticism that they were wicked for earning money on Meredith's dead back, they came up with a ploy to make them appear to be suffering, this is why they set up those accounts.

2) Having gone off to the Sunny Caribby Coconut Sea Shores, he would now have everyone believe that he didn't touch a penny of the donations, but in the first place, the donations were supposed to make it appear like they hadn't done well from writing books.

3) Yet, if he did not need to have money from donations, and did not get money from booky wooky, then how in hell can a guy who has never worked who says his daddio already paid millions for the trial, afford to be getting off to Burnin Man, flip flopping back n forth between Italy, Switzerland, London, America, and now the Caribbean?

I mean I'm working all the godawful time and haven't been on a weekend away since 2010, sometimes I earn a 1000 euros in a few days, I have money but no way could I do what he has been doing.
So who the hell does he think he is kidding?

He made money on the book, that's why he did not need donations.

4) He started the donation trip to garner sympathy from people, so it would fit in with their everyone is persecuting us lines.

5) This is the reason it freaked him out getting CAUGHT OUT, because he really imagined doing things like setting up DONATION accounts to make it appear like he was having a really hard time (and that the only way you could get justice was by paying for it) was going to convince/fool people.

And didn't Knox follow suit by setting up an account too? when in fact Meredith's death has turned into a business enterprise for the families, it would appear.

So her dad a business executive, what, he would not know how to cut a deal with news hungry media outlets keen to court them?

I really do not think so somehow, I think everything was paid for, and just as Sollecito tried to gain sympathy, in order to blind people to the truth, I think the families did this too with their tales of double mortgages, spending their pensions, and all the rest of it.

I mean as far as I know and am concerned neither Knox and or Sollecito paid a penny yet to anyone.

Knox parades around pen in mouth, as though she is some world famous author, who built a career, but crikey, is murder a career builder?

_________________
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 28, 2013 7:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

I'm not seeing the ledge that Piktor is seeing. I believe that discolouration on the concrete is giving the illusion of a ledge.

Image


picture of a pumpkin
This Post has been edited by a Moderator
Details: Fixed image to solve page widening.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:43 pm   Post subject: ABOUT PRESS PASSES   

Michael wrote:
Okay, everyone, the Meredith community will have our own reporter in the courtroom in Florence and as far as I'm aware, she'll be there for the duration of the appeal. If you have a Twitter account, be sure to follow: @kathleengadalof

:)


Glad to hear this Michael. Seeing as how I was able to get a press pass for myself in February I was asked to provide contact information for the Florence press office two weeks ago by a third party, and if this helped her in any way that's great. (Andrea Vogt posted the information shortly after too)

I had kept it a secret when I went there the last time, not wanting to be harassed by the likes of Michelle Moore and all the other crazies who have been infesting the case, about which more later, but yes their harassment went up several notches as their efforts to intimidate went no where. I will be naming names soon :)

I wonder why they made such a fuss about my being there? As if our own Stewart Home and others had not attended the Massei hearings, and got press passes too? I was only surprised not to see any Groupie around. They can only act from behind their computer screens and sock accounts? Easy to say I "lied" to get in, or call me a "crime tourist", no biggie, it is they who are cowards. Even their great hero Frank Sfarzo couldn't make eye contact with me in court, so why would I have any concerns about the likes of KPP, LD, or SAM? March 26 was a watershed moment in Rome, and they still are dazed and confused :)

I'm just glad that Kathleen is going there, and I believe there will be others. If I'd been able, I would have been there too. As it is, I just found out a week ago that my niece is in Florence for a conference. She's touring factories, not court houses, but will bring me press clippings. So there.

Above all, and speaking for all of us in the Meredith Kercher community, it was an honor to have helped.

RIP, Meredith Kercher
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

max wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Regardless, the point is, even I could have made the same climb the climber did, and I'm nearly 64 :) But, using the bars to haul myself up. Not available in 2007, or 2009 when monkey lawyer tried, and he's 6 foot two, the picture shows how far he got. But throw a boulder that distance, with accuracy? Open the scuri from the outside? .ORG posted the lock mechanism photo, there is no way it could have been opened with a knife (which would have left marks along the edge BTW)

Still, this is all interesting till Monday. Good luck asking the Florence Court to view the Channel 5 infomercial as 'evidence' :)

I think this is the most interesting part of the program for the reason that you start thinking if you can do it. I don't know if I could do it :( That stretching move from lower window to top window doesn't look so easy to me. I think if 'anybody' could do it they wouldn't have used a rock climber.


max, I know what you are saying. I see how such mass media manipulation techniques work on convincing the dumb masses, or 90% of them anyway. But their interest is superficial, and moves on to the next dog and pony show. I believe we should still meet it head on, and counter podunk shows with intelligent argument. Obviously only someone with sufficient upper body strength could make it, and knows a little about rock/tree climbing techniques and only by grasping the bars that weren't there in the first place.

But, no one could have got through that window.

Yes, people can be dumb. But the intelligent ones, tend to be reflected in most judges and juries. Remember the Sgt Pasquali rock throwing demonstration? He too was asked if he replicated all the conditions, and slunk out of the Massei Court tail between legs. And Judge Micheli looked at the cottage window, and said the so called break in was staged. An opinion buttressed by two Supreme Court decisions, let us not forget, and those who say those decisions were not intelligent, are not intelligent themselves.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Thanks for the window picture, jester. That clears things up quite nicely. I wonder if the climber had the same brand of sneakers that Guede wore.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Jester wrote:


You forgot "oopla" b-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

McCall wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:


The comment section is certainly worth the read. Seriously, you need to add a 'thumbs up' smilie for me. tt-)


Just made a comment there, Napia5, which may or may not make it through, or be edited for 'civility', which is what happened to McCall :)

Quote:
Hi, JMRJ, if I may, and speaking for myself. There are so many reasons I feel strongly about the, excuse me, case of the murder of Meredith Kercher. It appeals to me on many levels, intellectually, spiritually, professionally. And I believe that Knox and Sollecito are guilty of sexually aggravated murder.

It may be that people who get involved, on both sides of the debate, are the type who feel strongly about many things. The type that cares about causes, be it the environment, progressive or conservative values, the types that just comment on blogs or, are activists for their cause(s). The danger occurs when they lose their objectivity and display biased thinking.

Having studied both sides, I feel there are people who genuinely believe in the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. I dislike generalizations about either side, but am sure they have commonalities :)

It might even be that lawyers of the defense oriented persuasion are more inclined to believe in the innocent victimhood of 'young' people (as if such do not commit crimes) but I don't know your reasons, of course.

However, since you admit to not knowing much about the case, or the Italian legal system, in your blog http://strikelawyer.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/ , that you relied on 'occasional news report and-mostly the Hellman court decision that acquitted Knox and Sollecito then you ought to know this particular translation you read was written by a group of Knox sympathizers who aren't even professional translators. No wonder you found "the translation is awkward" though I guess it did not prevent you from forming an opinion, which is your right. However, and since you state you are a lawyer, then I find it astounding you no where tell us where you read the original trial reports by judges Matteini, Micheli, and Massei that sentenced Knox and Sollecito, or the Supreme Court decision that overturned the Hellmann acquittal. Since you want to be fair and all, shouldn't you at least read those decisions as well, before you know for sure? As most of us on the other side do?

I also find it interesting that you state that evidence was planted, after the decision to prosecute was made, and that "I thought the case that the main prosecutor, Magnini (sic), is a psychopath was pretty strong, but I’d be interested to see anything you have suggesting otherwise." Seriously? OK, that's your opinion, just as it is the opinion of many that the case that Amanda Knox is a psychopath is "pretty strong".


Catch the misspelling of 'Mignini'. This guy definitely reads reads Bruce's blog, no wonder...


I had only scanned the blog or I never would have posted. The guy who maintains it is a complete loon. There is no point in engaging people like him.


Sadly, you are correct. The site has been infected by the Friend of Fur and now remains permanently 'Bruised'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

It serves to expose a certain type: he says a) he is 'dispassionate' and 'intelligent' and b) Mignini is a psychopath'.

I love it when they reveal their innermost furriness :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
It serves to expose a certain type: he says a) he is 'dispassionate' and 'intelligent' and b) Mignini is a psychopath'.

I love it when they reveal their innermost furriness :)


Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum-Faux-Fur-Fraud! hbc)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Ergon wrote:
It serves to expose a certain type: he says a) he is 'dispassionate' and 'intelligent' and b) Mignini is a psychopath'.

I love it when they reveal their innermost furriness :)


I googled the guy after and he is some nut who fled to Canada because he thought the state was after him for some nonsense.

Hey maybe if he's white Bruce can feature him on crazy people do nothing to fight injustice.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Thanks for the window picture, jester. That clears things up quite nicely. I wonder if the climber had the same brand of sneakers that Guede wore.


I think it was suggested that Rudy wore trainers, but I have no idea what professional climber is wearing. Whatever shoes the professional climber is wearing, they're suitable for gripping onto a 25mm wide window ledge.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, MARCH 29 -   

Oops, I'll try again..........later.


Edited to fix pix.
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 20 of 21 [ 5060 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 0 guests

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 


29,150,091 Views