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 12:19 am
It is currently Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:19 am
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30, 13 - JULY 31, 14

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 11 of 30 [ 7308 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 30  Next
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 10:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.

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


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

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Michael wrote:
If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.


But do a lot of murderers actually tell the truth? I would guess not, because they might want to keep some sense of power or, once they're incarcerated, privacy.
(I vaguely remember reading something to that effect somewhere, would have to look it up...)
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 Dec 11, 2013 12:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

That is true. But, I guess, I'm simply expressing my annoyance over the fact that they lie to us at every turn whilst at the same time claim to be upstanding citizens that are victims. Do upstanding citizens lie like there's no tomorrow?

I'm not simply talking about Sollecito and Knox, but their families also. Sollecito Sr has recently been standing in front of the media and repeatedly telling them barefaced lie after barefaced lie about his son's movements. At the same time, he expects us to take him at his word on the facts of the case. Knox's family is no better.

_________________
"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 Dec 11, 2013 1:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Sollecito Sr is smart enough to not lie to the media. What I believed happened is that hearing the news that his son had left Italy Francesco called Raffaele and demanded he return. Raffaele likely told his dad that he would return on the next flight and so Francesco told the media his son was back in Italy. Raffaele despite agreeing to return took off to DR. Francesco is not a nice man but he is smart and knows there is no point in lying about something like this. Francesco would only tell the media that his son had returned if he believed the son was on his way back.

There has been a lot of friction between these two. The GoFundMe was Raffaele's attempt to free himself of dad's control but that failed to raise any money. Francesco had more control over his son until he handed over the $250,000 to the defense lawyers. Now that Raffaele does not need dad's money for the immediate future he is back to being the hard to control spoiled brat. Raffaele can't survive without his dad's financial support so eventually he'll have to start doing what Francesco wants.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:14 pm   Post subject: ON SIMPLE HUMANITY   

Every once in a while someone writes something so transcendentally beautiful, like the Bard did at ORG, I just had to bring it over. http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewto ... 66#p151866

Re: XXXIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 -

Quote:
Post by The Bard » 10 Dec 2013, 23:38

Quote:
hugo wrote:
A thing that does puzzle me, which comes from people who think the pair are guilty, is the comment I've seen a few times in different versions, along the lines of, 'I so wanted to believe they were innocent, but I was reluctantly forced to conclude they're guilty.'

Why? Why would anyone actively wish to believe that two innocent people were wrongly detained by police, wrongly accused, wrongly tried and wrongly imprisoned? Would that make things all right? Would that make Meredith any less dead? Why would that be a 'nice' or comforting thing to think, something one would boast of as a proper emotion?

Because the defendants are white and middle-class, 'people like us'. And because the police are 'common' and 'not like us'. And because bien-pensants would rather believe that 'the black guy did it', because black guys are 'them' and are 'not like us', so that's all right then.

This is why it goes across the political spectrum, as Finn notes. Bien-pensants may treat themselves to silly quasi-feminist notions that Knox was traduced by the press (not something I ever noticed -- I never saw those stories, and wouldn't have paid any attention if I had), but they prefer to think that 'crime' is always something to do with 'them' and not 'us'. That's all that's about.



This is a really interesting question, and I admit that I was initially (seven years ago) of this mind. Wanting them to be innocent. But I don't think it is as black and white as you say hugo. I don't think it was for race reasons at all. It's not to do with race, more to do with humanity. I don't want Rudy to be guilty either, and find the notion of him being so equally as abhorrent.

I have discussed this at some length with Machine, who has periodically kicked my ass for it. But he encapsulated it recently, when he said words to the effect "Part of you doesn't want to think they are guilty because you don't want to think any human being is capable of something like that', suggesting that it kind of shook my world view. I actually think this is much nearer the mark, and if we are to be a little more forgiving, then perhaps it is behind they general urge that some have to 'wish they were innocent'. I agree this is a ridiculous stance on paper. Wishing and hoping and investing in this issue is of no import. But on a human level, there was in the early days, part of me that just saw four young people whose lives were over before they had begun. I regret that as a human being, looking at other human beings. I wish it was not so. I just do. It's not about feeling I would 'rather it be someone else' or someone 'other' at all, because I simply do not regard people in this way. That underpins my world view - Nobody is other.

Rudy is no different to Knox or Sollecito. He is a young man who had hopes and dreams and made mistakes. The 'otherness' for them all is that they crossed a line from their mistakes being mistakes to them being vicious, murderous and monstrously deceitful. They have othered themselves. They can no longer be considered to be like everyone else. This is what I think redemption is about, although I am not religious, so I don't know what that word really means. Saving your soul? But in this context I use the word to mean that we want them to confess, and tell the truth and pay penance. This in order to show compassion for the family of the victim and to show true remorse. Somebody with a conscience, who did this, may be accepted back into the herd at some unspecified future date. Those who do not, and insodoing perpetuate the suffering of the victim's family, can never be accepted back. They can never be redeemed.

I see this issue for me more one of regret that anyone could wish to put themselves ahead of the suffering of others when they have done wrong. It goes against everything I believe in, which is that people are fundamentally good, and that nobody is born bad. Nobody is beyond redemption, unless they choose to put themselves beyond redemption. The human urge is to bring them back into the fold, not reject them. Redemption is possible for everyone. I think so.

I believe that it is precisely the opposite to wanting to 'other' anyone for this crime. It is wanting them back into the fold. Wanting them to confess, show remorse, show compassion, show grace, ask forgiveness, explain, make sense of it all. For pity's sake. For the sake of Meredith's grieving family. Just for them to show some humanity. Rudy, towards whom we are often accused of behaving more favourably (nonsense), has at the very LEAST shown some compassion in his words, and a degree of remorse. Maybe people just see some hope when they look at him. Perhaps that is all it is. He's still got a chance. But Amanda and Raffaele simply won't. They are determined on their lonely path to otherness, through a monstrous act of stubbornness, borne of an overwhelming sense of entitlement. They are monsters. They are other. And we no longer want them back.

All this waffling and un-Fionaesque lack of clarity it just to say that it is not, for me, about race and othering. It is more about me, and my compulsion to see the very best that people could be first, and that if they fall short then the hope that they will make amends, because of the goodness in their hearts. That is what I want to believe. That nobody is evil, that they didn't do this thing, and if they did that they will seek forgiveness by telling the truth.

But they have done it. They haven't told the truth and their actions in recent months have done nothing but deepen the grief and pain that the Kerchers already bear. Those actions - the website, the expressed wish for the Kerchers to take her to Meredith's grave, Raffaele's visit to the grave - these are acts of those who have totally lost their way. If they were innocent they would be monstrous acts. Since they are guilty they are acts of total inhumanity. That was the point I came to realise the order of human being we are dealing with. Those acts were what finally shook my world view. I had some hope before that point. But I cannot imagine anything more cruel and pitiless for them to have done to the Kerchers. They are disgusting, amoral and lost individuals, cunning and currently totally beyond redemption. The verdict cannot come soon enough.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:29 pm   Post subject: Raffaele creates 3D Avatar to compete his prison time!   

So, it looks now as if Raffaele won't be returning to take his final exam in Verona after all. Even after completing his exam remotely, didn't he claim to Oggi he still has a final project due which he plans to complete while in the Dominican Republic ? Wonder what RS's final project for his degree in computer science, with a specialty in virtual reality, will be? Maybe Raffaele will create a 3D avatar that can complete his prison time in his place ... or, maybe RS can develop a communications process to update all his social media sites while not leaving any digital crumbs or digital fingerprints to pinpoint his location as he evades justice -- this can already be done, but RS probably doesn't know how.

This guy is a riddle, or a trip, as we old fogies used to say. Neither RS nor AK appear to be capable of feeling any guilt . I continue to be amazed at how restrained AK has been since returning to Seattle -- but since she can legally smoke pot there, she may be perfectly content to stay in her little apartment with her two cats and blowing enough smoke to keep all three of them high all the time; in that case AK never has to face the reality of what she's done, or how UNtalented she really is.

la_) staying high and in the clouds all the time -- GREAT! Maybe AK will be too high to hear the US Marshals when they come to lock her sorry backside up.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

More confusion about the latest Oggi "exclusive".

Raffaele Sollecito denies on his FB page that he has spoken with the Oggi magazine:
https://www.facebook.com/raffa.sollecito/posts/388460777954870

Raffaele Sollecito wrote:
Those [words] written in OGGI are not my words ... I don't understand why ... I have not spoken to the newspaper just this once.
For the rest, a lot of smoke ...


He is right about one thing: there's a lot of smoke and mirrors from his Entourage.

In a comment under the Oggi article, someone has asked the Editor-in-Chief (direttore) of Oggi for clarification:

Quote:
Raffaele wrote on facebook that this photo is a fake. I cannot understand. Can the editor explain it?


Livio Colombo, "vicedirettore" (deputy editor) of Oggi has just replied:

Quote:
There are no false statements or photographs published in Oggi today. These are not Raffaele's statements, they came to us through his father. Raffaele in Santo Domingo prepares for a university exam, promises to return to Italy in January and, as happens to anyone who is on vacation on the Caribbean island, is approached by a few girls with whom it is not forbidden to make friends.
Regards, Livio Colombo, Deputy Editor, OGGI


OGGI

Make of it what you will...
Top Profile 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 9:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Hey guermantes, interesting catch ... these antics would be a laugh riot if the reason we're interested in these characters wasn't so heartbreaking.

Along with so many of Meredith's supporters, I continue to do my best to gauge how Americans might react to the near certain verdict of guilty against these two murderers. It seems apparent, looking back, that AK lost much of her home-country support when she interviewed so poorly, didn't seem the least bit genuine, and also appeared as exactly the type of person who was capable of committing a murder and then trying to lie her way out of it. Can't accuse AK of being authentic can we?

The book bombed miserably, especially considering how much media attention she received. And I never did understand exactly who the book's target markets were meant to be? Young people considering travelling abroad, their parents, or university staff responsible for keeping tabs on their foreign exchange programs? Whoever it was meant for, it missed the mark, and desperate media headlines promising a book that would 'shock you to your core,' then promising all manner of sexual sensationalism didn't much help sales either.

It appeared to me that AK's sympathy took a noticeable dive when late-night comedians began taking pot-shots at her, especially when 'Saturday Night Live' listed her name among a list of notable murderers during a skit. Shaming for us Americans, isn't it, when our comedians have more of an impact and influence on our culture, attitudes, and beliefs than our supposed 'Fourth Estate' -- the media, where we're supposed to get our news and important information.

ff) Take that, worthless media.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .



Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

So what's RS up to? Getting ready to dig in or just trying to enjoy freedom while he still can? Either way it's guaranteed to look bad at home (he manages it every time) and makes a liar of his father (yet again)
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks, SqueakE. Who knew when I first commented on the case in 2010 where it would lead me? Yes, the case brought together all sorts of people, but in the end, it was the nastiest PR campaign I have ever observed. Chris Mellas, Frank Sfarzo, Judge Heavey, and Steve Moore seemed to revel in this dirty fight.

One day, they will have to look back and ask, was it worth it? Did it help the case at all? Somehow, I feel they are, and always will be, singularly unaware.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline ttrroonniicc


Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:12 pm

Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:27 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .

Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.

The amount of money the little fraudster had off our old friend 'nobody' was thousands. 'nobody' was onside .... Sfarzo the face of the FOA - their spokesman to the BBC. After getting that money out of 'nobody', Sfarzo wanted more. Threw a tantrum when refused.

nobody wrote:
I spent some time talking with Chris Mellas during the get-together on Vashon Island. Chris knew that I would be hosting Frank next and cautioned me that Frank was a difficult house-guest. Candace D. was sitting on my other side and may have caught bits of the conversation.

After the police showed up I advised them that my wallet and phone were missing. They did a quick search of Frank's room and could not find either item. I located the phone the next day underneath some items stored under Frank's bed. I found the wallet 2 days later behind my washing machine with only the cash missing. I did not place these item where I found them and I had no other visitors. So judge yourself.
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 8:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

McCall wrote:
Sollecito Sr is smart enough to not lie to the media. What I believed happened is that hearing the news that his son had left Italy Francesco called Raffaele and demanded he return. Raffaele likely told his dad that he would return on the next flight and so Francesco told the media his son was back in Italy. Raffaele despite agreeing to return took off to DR. Francesco is not a nice man but he is smart and knows there is no point in lying about something like this. Francesco would only tell the media that his son had returned if he believed the son was on his way back.

There has been a lot of friction between these two. The GoFundMe was Raffaele's attempt to free himself of dad's control but that failed to raise any money. Francesco had more control over his son until he handed over the $250,000 to the defense lawyers. Now that Raffaele does not need dad's money for the immediate future he is back to being the hard to control spoiled brat. Raffaele can't survive without his dad's financial support so eventually he'll have to start doing what Francesco wants.


As I was reading about the friction between father and son, I was reminded of Joran van der Sloot's relationship with his parents. That too was an on-going struggle. Joran also had to see a psychologist as a teenager, but it was due to violent outbursts and temper. Sollecito was pre-occupied with bestiality and Japanese anime. Joran developed an entitled attitude and threw money around, always needing more money. He didn't want to work or study. He wrote sweet poetry for his first girlfriend. In Joran's case, the psychologist couldn't fix him. I doubt that treatment was any more successful with Sollecito. With van der Sloot, it was only a matter of time (five years to the day) until it happened again. Sollecito will be more careful if he does it again, but I suspect the problems he had as a youth still plague him.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

McCall wrote:
Sollecito Sr is smart enough to not lie to the media. What I believed happened is that hearing the news that his son had left Italy Francesco called Raffaele and demanded he return. Raffaele likely told his dad that he would return on the next flight and so Francesco told the media his son was back in Italy. Raffaele despite agreeing to return took off to DR. Francesco is not a nice man but he is smart and knows there is no point in lying about something like this. Francesco would only tell the media that his son had returned if he believed the son was on his way back.

There has been a lot of friction between these two. The GoFundMe was Raffaele's attempt to free himself of dad's control but that failed to raise any money. Francesco had more control over his son until he handed over the $250,000 to the defense lawyers. Now that Raffaele does not need dad's money for the immediate future he is back to being the hard to control spoiled brat. Raffaele can't survive without his dad's financial support so eventually he'll have to start doing what Francesco wants.



Your argument here is well thought out, rational, logical and makes perfect sense. But, therein, lies the problem...certainly insofar as the accused or their family members are concerned. Their whole campaign from the onset, in practice, has been illogical. The lies they have all been willing to tell, almost every time a camera or tape recorder has been shoved under their noses or whenever they've been given a platform online or in print, have regularly been jaw dropping in their audacity. It, to me anyway, is completely illogical to publicly tell such blatant lies that are so easily proven false, yet all the same, they are told with alarming regularity and continue to be. For their plan or script or whatever you want to call it, reason is not a requirement, it depends wholly on smoke, mirrors and chaos.

You may be absolutely right, it may simply be that Sollecito Sr has lost all control and knowledge of his son. However, I don't think that we can divine that with any certainty solely by means of attempting to look at their behaviour with logical eyes under the assumption that they too are acting in a logical manner. In short, just because it would be illogical for Sollecito Sr to stand there and tell blatant lies to the media, doesn't in and of itself rule out that he would do so. This is especially true when one considers that the specific media that he's lying to are his allies and clearly in his pocket and always add a biased and sympathetic spin when reporting on their behaviours, presenting them in the best possible light.

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


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

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Like with the supposed mortgages taken out by the Knox/Mellas families, we do not know for sure how the Sollecitos paid for the last tranche of legal fees to the lawyers. Did Raffaele sell his share in his mother's properties, or did daddy bail him out again?

I think Francesco is bound to continually cover up and lie for his son because he's family. Joran Van Der Sloot certainly was enabled by his father, it was his mother that cut him off. I wonder how Raffaele's mother would have reacted to see her son like that? Poor soul, she already was a fragile being. That might have something to with Sollecito Sr. He's bound by feelings of guilt, which Jr. plays upon, that his family owes him.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:07 pm   Post subject: FOA faithful are examples of the worst people on earth!   

Ergon wrote:
Thanks, SqueakE. Who knew when I first commented on the case in 2010 where it would lead me? Yes, the case brought together all sorts of people, but in the end, it was the nastiest PR campaign I have ever observed. Chris Mellas, Frank Sfarzo, Judge Heavey, and Steve Moore seemed to revel in this dirty fight.

One day, they will have to look back and ask, was it worth it? Did it help the case at all? Somehow, I feel they are, and always will be, singularly unaware.


Because I know how bravely and persistently you've battled these kooks, thought you might get a good laugh from a particular nutjob I've seen posting for years now in public forums and in comment sections. You've probably run across this close friend of Chris Mellas before, his name is Joe Starr, from Seattle of course, and his comments are the among the vilest of the vile. Here are a few examples from him, but none of these come close to his typical profanity-laced, seriously unbalanced and paranoid posts:

JLS1950 wrote:
And the truth here is that Rudy Guede was working for either Mignini or else Monica Napoleoni, and that he was sent into that cottage either to steal Filomena Romanelli's computer with its precious legal documents from her employment - or else simply to murder someone whom Napoleoni felt was a "threat" to her already broken marriage. Was Napoleoni's ex frequenting Le Chic where the quirky, flirty American girl worked? Curious thought, that. We do know now that Napoleoni has a penchant for sending "proxies" out to intimidate and threaten her "enemies" - spray-painting death threats on her ex's home and slashing the tires of a car connected to a psychologist who sided with the ex in a child custody case. And we do know that Napoleoni was going through a particularly acrimonious divorce just about the time of this murder.

And we here in the Northwest are frankly too tragically aware of just how unhinged a police chief or officer can become over marital issues: the murder of Krystal Brame by her police-chief husband being fresh in our memories as likewise the murder of Sherri Rasmussen by LAPD detective Stefanie Lazarus. Yes, women can do that too.


When called out for being who he is, JLS1950 typically accuses Meredith's supporters of working for Mignini and being an active participant in the 'framing' of AK.

JLS1950 wrote:
So which of the players are you? Monica? Anna Donnino? Rita? What was your part in all this that you are so desperate now to see covered up?
huh-)

JLS1950 wrote:
Knox will never be extradited, as you know, but the ECHR may make things very difficult for Italy soon. And the revelations of death threats and property damage will not be easy to scapegoat onto Knox.

stup-)

JLS1950 wrote:
Actually, I have never met either Mellas or Knox - any of them.

I am sure that you are very familiar with the correct spelling of the prosecutor's name - and also that you are familiar with the stated requirements of your own justice system. However, it is you who is continually cherry-picking fake "evidence".

Actually, it is part of the major weakness of the Italian system that it does require that a "motive" be explained for every crime. Motives do not matter, because "motivations" do not tell us whether a person actually committed the crime. What is going on here is circular "logic": first it is assumed that AK & RS committed the crime, then an elaborate "motive" is fashioned and presented as an "hypothesis", and then that is combined with a bunch of at-best circumstantial evidence to "prove" what is loosely called "guilt". It is exactly the same process used to "convict" several seismologists of "manslaughter" because they "failed to predict" a deadly earthquake! This is like convicting someone of a crime because they did not fly like Superman to save a victim from an accidental death! is)

The fact is that your vaunted Italian justice system has not changed much since medieval times when it "convicted" Galileo of "falsely" claiming that Earth moves around the sun. The system is much too centered around protecting "vested interests" and "dignities" through false convictions and charges of "calunnia".
wtf)

JLS1950 has been at this for years, at least five that I know of ... this guy is just one of the faithful; another horrible example of the depths some people will sink to defend a murderer. nnn-))
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Michael wrote:
McCall wrote:
Sollecito Sr is smart enough to not lie to the media. What I believed happened is that hearing the news that his son had left Italy Francesco called Raffaele and demanded he return. Raffaele likely told his dad that he would return on the next flight and so Francesco told the media his son was back in Italy. Raffaele despite agreeing to return took off to DR. Francesco is not a nice man but he is smart and knows there is no point in lying about something like this. Francesco would only tell the media that his son had returned if he believed the son was on his way back.

There has been a lot of friction between these two. The GoFundMe was Raffaele's attempt to free himself of dad's control but that failed to raise any money. Francesco had more control over his son until he handed over the $250,000 to the defense lawyers. Now that Raffaele does not need dad's money for the immediate future he is back to being the hard to control spoiled brat. Raffaele can't survive without his dad's financial support so eventually he'll have to start doing what Francesco wants.



Your argument here is well thought out, rational, logical and makes perfect sense. But, therein, lies the problem...certainly insofar as the accused or their family members are concerned. Their whole campaign from the onset, in practice, has been illogical. The lies they have all been willing to tell, almost every time a camera or tape recorder has been shoved under their noses or whenever they've been given a platform online or in print, have regularly been jaw dropping in their audacity. It, to me anyway, is completely illogical to publicly tell such blatant lies that are so easily proven false, yet all the same, they are told with alarming regularity and continue to be. For their plan or script or whatever you want to call it, reason is not a requirement, it depends wholly on smoke, mirrors and chaos.

You may be absolutely right, it may simply be that Sollecito Sr has lost all control and knowledge of his son. However, I don't think that we can divine that with any certainty solely by means of attempting to look at their behaviour with logical eyes under the assumption that they too are acting in a logical manner. In short, just because it would be illogical for Sollecito Sr to stand there and tell blatant lies to the media, doesn't in and of itself rule out that he would do so. This is especially true when one considers that the specific media that he's lying to are his allies and clearly in his pocket and always add a biased and sympathetic spin when reporting on their behaviours, presenting them in the best possible light.



Seen from an angle that appears initially to be entirely divorced from what you are saying Michael and even Mc too, it does make sense, and the angle, one of a few related to actual effect is seen in, among other places, translation.

One must never, or rarely, translate anything literally, sentence structure has to be put into the way/order it would be if the text had been written in that target language, and the way of saying a thing in one language when translated to another makes no sense simply because people just do not say things that way in the target language, so in general the main thing in certain types of translation is the actual effect, for instance, in advertising this becomes even more important than keeping anywhere near what was originally written, whenceforth, one enters the area of partial copywriting, and one of the main areas translation this happens in, is indeed in advertising.

One cannot do the above in technical translation; there is in that particular section of work a line and one can only move to the left and right in very tight lines and terminology must be absolutely (officially) correct (as used in actual practice and this researched through specialised terminology lists, journals, specialised translation lexicons and own lists compiled over time as well as online checks of various companies looking therein to monitor whether their own language use is up to scratch before adopting it yourself, meaning one cannot just blindly trust that they are right on the basis of them being a bona fide successful company, even where their field is very specialised (even at governmental level, etc., because if they've already had stuff translated it may have happened in-house by Fred or Sally who says he or she thinks to be able to do it, but cannot) and consistent in each job.

This notwithstanding, with advertising --as seen these days on websites-- the main thing is to have catchy text, that the reader will absorb; sober texts do not work to achieve the actual aim, which is not to be flash or whatever with writing but to sell the product.

A text may have been written in a certain way but the experienced translator will know what the real aim of the client is (know what the client really meant even though he/she said it poorly), and on purpose deviate entirely from what is written though still say more or less the same, but by translating it into a real-life way or as the language is actually used will improve the original work, raising it often above the level of the original, linguistically and stylistically; sometimes things that got changed in the target language job, will be mirrored later on by the client changing their own source language and upgrading it, having picked up on what happened in the translation.

If you know you changed something and you did it on purpose, you will be sensitive to changes made because of your actions, picking up on what they did later on because of your own work and input, that is one of the few things to be proud of, like changing people's old-fashioned writing style that is genderized (gender-based distinctions), as in he then goes here and then he, he, he did that, whereas, these days, and not just these days, but for years already, women have been working, it's just the language is still often like something from the Bible/remained un-updated/fails to move with the times, certainly in this gender area, because it is deeply embedded in the societal psyche. So then you get he/she said, the individual said, but repetitive outdated use of ''he said'', just because men ruled the world in days of old.

Mr Marriot has experts in their relative fields and they know as a team what their powers are and Marriot himself knows what the joint force translates to. He knows it does not matter that they repeat lie after lie, what is important to them is the content of what they keep on saying, repeating it thousands of times so that the effect of it is more or less to hypnotise people into just accepting/adopting it as fact without thinking too much or at all (call it brainwashing), and that is exactly why he has been using that, it's one of the strategies; people are lazy these days and as many have said elsewhere, resources are not abundant, people are afraid of losing their jobs, are overworked, are told for you a hundred others, so then they forget about sticking to what they actually believe in as way of conviction and just go with the flow in order to survive.

Therefore, I do solemnly conclude, there is absolutely nothing that Mr Marriot is unaware of as regards strategy, this includes direct and indirect input.

Over on .ORG, someone made a remark about the idea of him not being involved in the online campaigns, well I disagree, for it is definitely he who has issued instructions that should be followed if they wish to achieve their objectives, I'm certain of it. The issuing of instructions, as regards an approach, is one of the main things involved in wide-stretching PR campaigns, and that is serious because what the final intended effect is, relates to creating a product which is distinctively unambiguous in content, all of the segments must match up, not have different spokespersons saying different things, in this case they couldn't achieve that but I believe they were instructed that: You must say that there is no evidence (etc.), and based on that certain people have got online and just repeated it over and over, in fact, I think there are not as many involved as some think, just one or two very fanatical little helpers who spend day and night and every waking hour seeking out forums to troll, comment sections to screw up with their bad, bad vibes.
I notice one of these as being particularly aggressive, abrasive and nasty, all over the internet, the same person the same tone, that's why I decided that can only be the work of a single individual. This means what those troublemakers get up to by bombarding every single comments section is intended to make adult and civil debate impossible, whilst changing the primary openness to closed shop and angry words without any justified basis, the sole aim being destruction.
It is robotic.
Even though on those comment sections their take may not get accepted it does however mean people cannot talk normally because of those individuals who spend all day telling commenters off, belittling them, insulting them, trying to upset them, so they stop debate, or they try since obviously not everyone has the mouth taped up that way quite so easily.

Still, getting drawn into all of that South Parky argumentation does make people deviate away from what they might have said or wanted to say.

The power of Marriot and firms like the one he has, lies in the not appearing to be involved, he's hardly ever been seen and has hardly said a word for the record (in public) but is still more responsible than any of them (on Knox's behalf) for the effect of their adopted strategy, because it definitely was adopted by the family & support, that's why they called PR up, in fact, the truth of it may be that they did not even need to call up because Marriot's firm (took the initiative seeing money through free advertising) is hugely involved in advertising and marketing (and the politics of it and how it works) and getting what people want by hook and mostly crook (< I'd say), and so he would have been very up on what is a free marketing tool, because mark my words those in need of getting a thing done often do not care about how it gets done as long as they cannot be arrested for it, and will then go along with what the directors at a PR firm insist.

He would have seen right away that instead of getting paid fees, the marketing of the own company would be advertising he could not pay for even if he wanted to, that's why I have never believed it cost Knox's family those huge amounts, I'd say in terms of fees Mr Sollecito was hit way harder, until he too got in on the act to some extent, I would think he did but then again he hasn't actually been in such a wide range of shows and news spreads, some but nothing compared to Knox, nevertheless separate from dad's activities, son Sollecito imitated Knox and I would imagine she actively informed him about what he should and could do as regards to getting magazines and news set-ups to pay, not just agree to stuff. We all know nobody with any sense does anything for the media on the basis of a sandwich and cup of tea.

All in all, loose from Knox and Sollecito, their colluders, I find, are totally undeserving of any type of mitigation with respect to their chosen behaviour.

They were fully aware of what they were doing, no mistakes were made through naivety.

They should be held fully accountable for their chosen paths when the under-soil activities are shown by the light of day.

_________________
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 Dec 12, 2013 5:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Michael wrote:
McCall wrote:
Sollecito Sr is smart enough to not lie to the media. What I believed happened is that hearing the news that his son had left Italy Francesco called Raffaele and demanded he return. Raffaele likely told his dad that he would return on the next flight and so Francesco told the media his son was back in Italy. Raffaele despite agreeing to return took off to DR. Francesco is not a nice man but he is smart and knows there is no point in lying about something like this. Francesco would only tell the media that his son had returned if he believed the son was on his way back.

There has been a lot of friction between these two. The GoFundMe was Raffaele's attempt to free himself of dad's control but that failed to raise any money. Francesco had more control over his son until he handed over the $250,000 to the defense lawyers. Now that Raffaele does not need dad's money for the immediate future he is back to being the hard to control spoiled brat. Raffaele can't survive without his dad's financial support so eventually he'll have to start doing what Francesco wants.



Your argument here is well thought out, rational, logical and makes perfect sense. But, therein, lies the problem...certainly insofar as the accused or their family members are concerned. Their whole campaign from the onset, in practice, has been illogical. The lies they have all been willing to tell, almost every time a camera or tape recorder has been shoved under their noses or whenever they've been given a platform online or in print, have regularly been jaw dropping in their audacity. It, to me anyway, is completely illogical to publicly tell such blatant lies that are so easily proven false, yet all the same, they are told with alarming regularity and continue to be. For their plan or script or whatever you want to call it, reason is not a requirement, it depends wholly on smoke, mirrors and chaos.

You may be absolutely right, it may simply be that Sollecito Sr has lost all control and knowledge of his son. However, I don't think that we can divine that with any certainty solely by means of attempting to look at their behaviour with logical eyes under the assumption that they too are acting in a logical manner. In short, just because it would be illogical for Sollecito Sr to stand there and tell blatant lies to the media, doesn't in and of itself rule out that he would do so. This is especially true when one considers that the specific media that he's lying to are his allies and clearly in his pocket and always add a biased and sympathetic spin when reporting on their behaviours, presenting them in the best possible light.


There should be a distinction between the Knox family and the Sollecito family. They are both terrible but in very different ways. The majority of the blatant lying has come from the Knox camp. With the exception of Raffaele himself the Sollecito family has been much more reserved. In the few interviews I've watched with Francesco he is very literal and in doing so deceptive but he rarely crosses the line into outright lying. When absolutely cornered like on the question of did the police offer Raffaele a deal as he claims in his book Francesco just answered that it was not true and he doesn't know why his son choose to include that in the book. If that was a Knox parent they would have just said it is true. I don't believe Francesco would lie about something he knew would be discovered in days. If he knew Raffaele was out of the country he would have instead said my son has the right to go where he pleases until the court orders otherwise.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Like with the supposed mortgages taken out by the Knox/Mellas families, we do not know for sure how the Sollecitos paid for the last tranche of legal fees to the lawyers. Did Raffaele sell his share in his mother's properties, or did daddy bail him out again?

I think Francesco is bound to continually cover up and lie for his son because he's family. Joran Van Der Sloot certainly was enabled by his father, it was his mother that cut him off. I wonder how Raffaele's mother would have reacted to see her son like that? Poor soul, she already was a fragile being. That might have something to with Sollecito Sr. He's bound by feelings of guilt, which Jr. plays upon, that his family owes him.


The properties Raffaele owned have been sold or transferred to dad early in this. Even if Francesco had sufficient wealth to pay for everything and no interest in taking his son's inheritance the fact that a civil judgement is coming would incentivize moving Raffaele into a judgement proof status. It is the clear strategic decision. I’d say those properties have not been in Raffaele’s name since before Massei.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks, Slade :oops: (blushing, not 'embarassed')

Yes, I've met Joe Starr a few times on Twitter (I'm @manfromatlan there) and that certainly is his 'language', which always gives me a laugh. His other thing is outing people, are you sure he posts as JLS1950? JLS1950 and AngloLawyer used to delight in warning me of 'waves of lawsuits' until they learned to desist ("Bill Williams" was another) so I looked up JLS1950 and he is indeed a lawyer, though one practicing in another state than "Joe Starr" resides in.

Some sock or the other, probably the same Joe Starr, has publicly accused me at various times of being a) Harry Rag b) John Kercher and c) Meredith's uncle (I said I came from the same city as Arline Kercher) all of which would be an honour if it were true, but it ain't true.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

@zorba, what you said. I believe Francesco Sollecito was one of those who financed Frank Sfarzo (though he did get commissions through OGGI as well) to help influence public perception. Funny how he hung out with Raffaele in Seattle and tried to hook up over New Year's Eve in New York (what, no court appearance in Seattle that day?) and was always protective of Raffaele, while (secretly) calling Amanda a 'slut'.

But I did observe both of them in Rome, and Frank, while hanging out with all the reporters, never once approached Francesco or Bongiorno or any of the defense lawyers in the scrums that entire day, which I thought was odd. Then the next day, both of them did a bunk, and did not show up in court to listen to the verdict. Odd.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .



Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.

Hi...I have to disagree a little. I do feel for people Frank has abused. Not everyone was a rabid Knoxer...not even his Mother. Smile
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

ttrroonniicc wrote:
SqueakEMouse wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .

Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.

The amount of money the little fraudster had off our old friend 'nobody' was thousands. 'nobody' was onside .... Sfarzo the face of the FOA - their spokesman to the BBC. After getting that money out of 'nobody', Sfarzo wanted more. Threw a tantrum when refused.

nobody wrote:
I spent some time talking with Chris Mellas during the get-together on Vashon Island. Chris knew that I would be hosting Frank next and cautioned me that Frank was a difficult house-guest. Candace D. was sitting on my other side and may have caught bits of the conversation.

After the police showed up I advised them that my wallet and phone were missing. They did a quick search of Frank's room and could not find either item. I located the phone the next day underneath some items stored under Frank's bed. I found the wallet 2 days later behind my washing machine with only the cash missing. I did not place these item where I found them and I had no other visitors. So judge yourself.



Fair do's. I just see the main players and their outpourings. It must have been a nasty shock for the foot soldiers who had taken a lot on faith to be confronted with the manipulative reality. But I suppose manipulative people are successful for a time (sometimes a LONG time) because they can be convincing. When the facade cannot be held there is always intimidation to take up the slack. I wasn't being smug. I do tend to see red at the names of these main players and what they have been up to and nuance and charity go out the window. But we're all human and no doubt some of the foot soldiers are themselves victims of the fraud and the lies without being of the same ilk themselves. The story gained adherents because of its appeal to our basic sense of justice and desire to correct wrongs (even if imaginary ones generated by deliberate propaganda)

I signed on to the website of our local paper to leave a tribute at the time of the funeral as many others did. I was horrified and disgusted to the bottom of my soul by the vilification that had already started. People who were clearly American posting vile entries and accusations in a small South London paper's site of which they could not possibly have heard of before. It was clearly orchestrated. What kind of people do that on an item on a murdered girl's funeral where people are paying their respects and their farewells? I called the paper's office to tell them to check the stuff being posted and close the comments. We all have the ability to judge people by their actions as well as their sweet words and the actions of the Knox crowd in the press on both sides of the Atlantic was plain for all to see. Apart from the aggression and vilification, it was always a very flaky story at heart and constantly changing to suit circumstances. To my mind that's the reason why it has never gained great traction despite having major media outlets willing to run the sanitised and propaganda version. Which brings us to what may be the major villain; the mainstream media whose job it is to report responsibly but who instead went after money, ratings and sensationalism and have misled and lied directly and by omission to multitudes of people. We tend to trust the 'respectable' press so inevitably people only exposed to that carefully crafted line get a jaundiced view. People are quick to accuse the public of cynicism about politicians and gutter press. I turn it around; it is the cynicism of politicians and the gutter press (broadsheets and the more-liberal-than-thou tomes are just as much of the gutter as the red tops in this sense) that generates public disquiet and distrust.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Thanks, Slade :oops: (blushing, not 'embarassed')

Yes, I've met Joe Starr a few times on Twitter (I'm @manfromatlan there) and that certainly is his 'language', which always gives me a laugh. His other thing is outing people, are you sure he posts as JLS1950? JLS1950 and AngloLawyer used to delight in warning me of 'waves of lawsuits' until they learned to desist ("Bill Williams" was another) so I looked up JLS1950 and he is indeed a lawyer, though one practicing in another state than "Joe Starr" resides in.

Some sock or the other, probably the same Joe Starr, has publicly accused me at various times of being a) Harry Rag b) John Kercher and c) Meredith's uncle (I said I came from the same city as Arline Kercher) all of which would be an honour if it were true, but it ain't true.


Take a look at this photo from 'The Seattle Times' and tell me, Ergon, if you think this is the same Joe Starr who uses a photo of his much younger self for his Twitter account? I think it's the same Joe Starr from the news article published in 2011.

http://seattletimes.com/html/theblotter/2016387763_amanda_knox_supporters_on_edge.html

JLS1950 is from Seattle, his birth year is 1950 making his age early 60's. He uses similar attack tactics, and syntax, also very intent on finding out the name of the person who's posting, and is a nutjob. He has posted he works as an engineer or technician in information technology, and of course, he claims he doesn't know Chris Mellas. bricks-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Here's another article with photos of Joe Starr!

http://seattletimes.com/html/theblotter/2016387763_amanda_knox_supporters_on_edge.html
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 11:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Slade wrote:


Nondescript old pudgy guy was exactly what I expected him to look like.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Hi, Slade, it was my mistake, took a while to check my memory :)

I think you are right, that "JLS 1950" probably is the infamous Joe Starr, though I can't quite read the name tag on the photo.

I confused that with "BMF 1950", another member we had, who is indeed, a pro-Knox attorney.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Hi, Slade, it was my mistake, took a while to check my memory :)

I think you are right, that "JLS 1950" probably is the infamous Joe Starr, though I can't quite read the name tag on the photo.

I confused that with "BMF 1950", another member we had, who is indeed, a pro-Knox attorney.


Ergon, the second URL links to another article with larger photos of Joe Starr which includes captions naming him,; for your convenience I'll include it again:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2044902/Amanda-Knox-verdict-Supporters-Seattle-burst-applause-released.html

Maybe five or six years ago when Joe Starr originally started posting things about AK he decided to use this other JLS1950 'handle' rather than his own name so he could claim he had no connection to Chris Mellas. Ya think? sun-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:31 pm   Post subject: AK doesn't want those 'White Knights' to get too close.   

McCall wrote:
Slade wrote:


Nondescript old pudgy guy was exactly what I expected him to look like.


Amusing isn't it, how so many of AK's supporters have a similar look about them. You nailed the description of that 'gang' some time ago. Bet most of the guys consider themselves to be knights coming to the rescue of sweet & innocent AK, but if they were to get too close to AK she would probably react like this: eee-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Michael wrote:
If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.


Sometimes a young female does decide it's time to tell a little truth; a Montana bride on trial for pushing her husband of eight days off a 200-foot cliff pleaded guilty Thursday to second-degree murder just before closing arguments were set to begin.

Jordan Linn Graham, 22, agreed that shoving Cody Johnson, 25, while the two argued on a narrow ledge at Glacier National Park was a "reckless act," the Missoulian newspaper reported. She had originally been charged with first-degree murder and making false statements to police. There was no DNA evidence at all and the circumstantial case against her included her false statements, mobile phone records, false e-mails she sent herself, her behavior, and asking another to lie for her. Less evidence against Graham than against AK & RS, yet six years later, those two murderers are still trying every tactic imaginable to get away with murder. :twisted:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Someone remind me, were Sollecito's parents divorced?

If Sollecito embarked on a course of study anno 2002, 5 years before the murder, 23 at the time of his arrest, he was just 18 when he left the family, his mother dying in 2005, 2 years before the murder.

But, what I cannot remember is whether Sollecito's parents were divorced or when if they were, I now think it is important when trying to get a picture of Sollecito JR's frame of mind, or possible frame of mind.


Ergon, I think you could be right about dad funding Sfarzo, yet if he did, I think Dad would have wised up or got put off real fast once Sfarts started being demanding (and hearing it from another Italian = Dad Sollecito, I reckon Sfarts would have shut up right away knowing exactly where he stood, because I reckon Sfarts has been playing on ignorance which probably doesn't work in Italy on other Italians, he doesn't get away with as much, I mean even Knox's lot couldn't take him.

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

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks, Slade, and just in time because I'm finishing Part III of the SfarzoGate Papers :) but it is good to have his mug up and match to his online presence. Yes, I remember the same syntax in the worst of the anti-Italy comments at Huffington Post, yet he never used that handle there. Likely, a sock account every time a new Amanda Knox story came up.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Slade wrote:
Michael wrote:
If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.


Sometimes a young female does decide it's time to tell a little truth; a Montana bride on trial for pushing her husband of eight days off a 200-foot cliff pleaded guilty Thursday to second-degree murder just before closing arguments were set to begin.

Jordan Linn Graham, 22, agreed that shoving Cody Johnson, 25, while the two argued on a narrow ledge at Glacier National Park was a "reckless act," the Missoulian newspaper reported. She had originally been charged with first-degree murder and making false statements to police. There was no DNA evidence at all and the circumstantial case against her included her false statements, mobile phone records, false e-mails she sent herself, her behavior, and asking another to lie for her. Less evidence against Graham than against AK & RS, yet six years later, those two murderers are still trying every tactic imaginable to get away with murder. :twisted:


It would do Knox such a lot of good to get it off her chest.

You could ask her on her blog or whatever it is she is using; I saw on .ORG that someone asked her a few things, which based on acquired facts and knowledge, she lied about in her reply.

I know it seems like people who kill can just deal with it but I'm not sure, a certain brand can that's for sure, like ordinary rules do not apply, they could perhaps kill their granny, a child and never feel a pang of guilt or ever get afraid, it seems anyhow, but in general, I do believe people cannot deal with having such stuff on their conscience, I mean I sometimes have some nightmares wake up thinking I did away with someone, and like in the nightmare you are already terrified because they are going to renovate and dig up that place where the bones are stashed, horrifying but these images on TV and everywhere do get into your head, since I have, as far as I know, never done away with anyone, yet if you have, crikey, how do you get on with yourself, wouldn't a Knox wake up in the night sweating then wanting to think it was all a bad dream realise no, it really did happen, surely that would waste a person away? (with time).

And the only way I can imagine it does not is if a person is truly demonic.

However, maybe it is not all that difficult, it's just it happened and such people just do not want to go to prison, they know therefore exactly what they are doing, know exactly what they did and why they did it. That's maybe the cold-blooded realm right there, knowing full well what you did and why and denying it.

_________________
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: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
@zorba, what you said. I believe Francesco Sollecito was one of those who financed Frank Sfarzo (though he did get commissions through OGGI as well) to help influence public perception. Funny how he hung out with Raffaele in Seattle and tried to hook up over New Year's Eve in New York (what, no court appearance in Seattle that day?) and was always protective of Raffaele, while (secretly) calling Amanda a 'slut'.

But I did observe both of them in Rome, and Frank, while hanging out with all the reporters, never once approached Francesco or Bongiorno or any of the defense lawyers in the scrums that entire day, which I thought was odd. Then the next day, both of them did a bunk, and did not show up in court to listen to the verdict. Odd.


Frank calls women bitches or sluts. Bitches include, Edda, Janet Huff, his sisters, amanda, Bongiorno ,
Andrea Vogt, me, the woman who served Frank coffee, margaret Thatcher, Joan of Arc... pp-(
I think sluts are just women he wants to know better.
Top Profile 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
Slade wrote:
Michael wrote:
If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.


Sometimes a young female does decide it's time to tell a little truth; a Montana bride on trial for pushing her husband of eight days off a 200-foot cliff pleaded guilty Thursday to second-degree murder just before closing arguments were set to begin.

Jordan Linn Graham, 22, agreed that shoving Cody Johnson, 25, while the two argued on a narrow ledge at Glacier National Park was a "reckless act," the Missoulian newspaper reported. She had originally been charged with first-degree murder and making false statements to police. There was no DNA evidence at all and the circumstantial case against her included her false statements, mobile phone records, false e-mails she sent herself, her behavior, and asking another to lie for her. Less evidence against Graham than against AK & RS, yet six years later, those two murderers are still trying every tactic imaginable to get away with murder. :twisted:


It would do Knox such a lot of good to get it off her chest.

You could ask her on her blog or whatever it is she is using; I saw on .ORG that someone asked her a few things, which based on acquired facts and knowledge, she lied about in her reply.

I know it seems like people who kill can just deal with it but I'm not sure, a certain brand can that's for sure, like ordinary rules do not apply, they could perhaps kill their granny, a child and never feel a pang of guilt or ever get afraid, it seems anyhow, but in general, I do believe people cannot deal with having such stuff on their conscience, I mean I sometimes have some nightmares wake up thinking I did away with someone, and like in the nightmare you are already terrified because they are going to renovate and dig up that place where the bones are stashed, horrifying but these images on TV and everywhere do get into your head, since I have, as far as I know, never done away with anyone, yet if you have, crikey, how do you get on with yourself, wouldn't a Knox wake up in the night sweating then wanting to think it was all a bad dream realise no, it really did happen, surely that would waste a person away? (with time).

And the only way I can imagine it does not is if a person is truly demonic.

However, maybe it is not all that difficult, it's just it happened and such people just do not want to go to prison, they know therefore exactly what they are doing, know exactly what they did and why they did it. That's maybe the cold-blooded realm right there, knowing full well what you did and why and denying it.


Interesting you mentioned nightmares -- I had a horrible nightmare about Meredith's case two evenings following Crini's closing arguments. In it, AK had been found guilty at her appeal trial but was still free -- I suppose awaiting CoC's final ruling -- I was in California attending this huge concert, which I learned after arriving was a fundraiser for AK to help pay for her extradition fight (dreams rarely make sense). Then suddenly, I was standing with others who were waiting in a room which held people concert promoters were considering letting backstage during the concert, and I saw from the doorway all these A-list celebrities surrounding AK while she was tuning her guitar, apparently AK was preparing to do some singing at her fundraising concert (imagine how horrible that would be having to listen to). AK was laughing and having a great time being admired by all these idiot celebrities who claimed she was innocent.

The sight of AK (in my nightmare) made me so angry, I start screaming, 'Murderer, murderer! AK is a murderer!' Then two burly guys came and dragged me out telling me there were no guilters allowed at AK's concert. I was so angry, I woke myself up ready to punch someone. s-((

Like you said, wonder if AK ever wakes up from a nightmare reliving how she participated in a horrendously brutal murder -- committed while looking into Meredith's face. IMO only a person capable of repeating such a murder could sleep peacefully at night.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Slade wrote:
zorba wrote:
Slade wrote:
Michael wrote:
If they can't even tell the truth about ordinary things (like when and where Sollecito will be taking his exams or be back from Santa Domingo), then what hope is there of getting any kind of truth from them about important things, like their involvement in a murder?

These same people for whom lying is a way of life, are the ones who constantly whine about the Kerchers, the authorities and public not believing them.


Sometimes a young female does decide it's time to tell a little truth; a Montana bride on trial for pushing her husband of eight days off a 200-foot cliff pleaded guilty Thursday to second-degree murder just before closing arguments were set to begin.

Jordan Linn Graham, 22, agreed that shoving Cody Johnson, 25, while the two argued on a narrow ledge at Glacier National Park was a "reckless act," the Missoulian newspaper reported. She had originally been charged with first-degree murder and making false statements to police. There was no DNA evidence at all and the circumstantial case against her included her false statements, mobile phone records, false e-mails she sent herself, her behavior, and asking another to lie for her. Less evidence against Graham than against AK & RS, yet six years later, those two murderers are still trying every tactic imaginable to get away with murder. :twisted:


It would do Knox such a lot of good to get it off her chest.

You could ask her on her blog or whatever it is she is using; I saw on .ORG that someone asked her a few things, which based on acquired facts and knowledge, she lied about in her reply.

I know it seems like people who kill can just deal with it but I'm not sure, a certain brand can that's for sure, like ordinary rules do not apply, they could perhaps kill their granny, a child and never feel a pang of guilt or ever get afraid, it seems anyhow, but in general, I do believe people cannot deal with having such stuff on their conscience, I mean I sometimes have some nightmares wake up thinking I did away with someone, and like in the nightmare you are already terrified because they are going to renovate and dig up that place where the bones are stashed, horrifying but these images on TV and everywhere do get into your head, since I have, as far as I know, never done away with anyone, yet if you have, crikey, how do you get on with yourself, wouldn't a Knox wake up in the night sweating then wanting to think it was all a bad dream realise no, it really did happen, surely that would waste a person away? (with time).

And the only way I can imagine it does not is if a person is truly demonic.

However, maybe it is not all that difficult, it's just it happened and such people just do not want to go to prison, they know therefore exactly what they are doing, know exactly what they did and why they did it. That's maybe the cold-blooded realm right there, knowing full well what you did and why and denying it.


Interesting you mentioned nightmares -- I had a horrible nightmare about Meredith's case two evenings following Crini's closing arguments. In it, AK had been found guilty at her appeal trial but was still free -- I suppose awaiting CoC's final ruling -- I was in California attending this huge concert, which I learned after arriving was a fundraiser for AK to help pay for her extradition fight (dreams rarely make sense). Then suddenly, I was standing with others who were waiting in a room which held people concert promoters were considering letting backstage during the concert, and I saw from the doorway all these A-list celebrities surrounding AK while she was tuning her guitar, apparently AK was preparing to do some singing at her fundraising concert (imagine how horrible that would be having to listen to). AK was laughing and having a great time being admired by all these idiot celebrities who claimed she was innocent.

The sight of AK (in my nightmare) made me so angry, I start screaming, 'Murderer, murderer! AK is a murderer!' Then two burly guys came and dragged me out telling me there were no guilters allowed at AK's concert. I was so angry, I woke myself up ready to punch someone. s-((

Like you said, wonder if AK ever wakes up from a nightmare reliving how she participated in a horrendously brutal murder -- committed while looking into Meredith's face. IMO only a person capable of repeating such a murder could sleep peacefully at night.



Wow, now that IS a nightmare.

Yes that's what I also find so nuts about dreaming, having nightmares, the being one place one second then somewhere else the next and it all meshing together yet while asleep knowing or thinking huh, what happened, where'd that go, how am I here.

I do not always remember dreaming, but when I have a recurring one, sometimes over a long period with years in between and recall that fact, I really do need to get up, make coffee to get a grip and then know, ah, thank God, it wast real.

I recalled today just a glimpse of what I dreamt, I was somewhere and someone had allowed me to be crossing a border with a lot of cash and it was all in Irish Euros but I had no excuse or reason for having those Irish notes and was, in the dream, panicking, trying to work out what to say, whereupon I woke up which was good, as I did not even know why I had the money.

Sometimes I think dreams can offer a glimpse of something that in an ordinary waking state one cannot get to, because of own in-built censors, we do not want to see it all, at least our censors are telling us we don't, because maybe it'd be handy sometimes to get a glimpse, to see what is what.

So then I got to thinking it's like one's mind is a fantastic computer, able to put a lot of things together that the in-built lags just stop us from doing when awake, the asleep state can help to show something that will happen, the blocks are temporarily removed (even though most of the dreaming is a mess, sometimes it is not) only I hope for you that you are not about to wind up at a Knox show.

And it is yet another coincidence, you mentioning music, seeing others talk of Knox on .Org, like about her blog or whatever it is she is up to, I was just thinking today: I really hope she doesn't start putting her songs up.

I'm allergic to her voice (spoken or singing, never head her singing though and never want to as I know I will not feel nice), Sollecito's too and others to do with them, it's like I just do not want their voices in my head (reading their stuff is bad enough), so even though at times I may have wanted to know what they said, I could not allow myself to be exposed to their terrible vibes, that's why I switched nearly all of it off. Voices do remain in one's head, for years, even after people are dead, I mean I can remember my father's voice too.

In your nightmare then, in a way, it's allowed you to manage to say something that really makes sense since all of the media spin is not a lot different, what you describe is after all what these filmmakers getting into making films about the case but then saying it's not about the case have been up to, are they going to be inviting Knox and Sollecito to come and inform them like they did with Nadeau (which I also did not like seeing Nadeau do), all I can think of is, why would you need to choose this particular case, there are so many things from the past, so many things that have happened, and all I can come up with then, is that they too are exploiting Meredith's murder since it is in the news and may sell better, they think.

Personally, all as I can think is that people are acting like vultures, only vultures wait until someone is dead, this case is not dead, not spent, not done, yet everyone is cashing in, I ask myself are the books really necessary, do the writers donate money to Meredith's family who are still tangled up in the case let alone the death of their daughter/sister which is for always, full of integrity not agreeing to talk shows for pay, pretty much penniless, and ill at the same time, and so for these reasons, I find it something like a person digging up a grave in the night, I will never watch these films, and this is why I haven't read any of the books either, I do not trust people's motives, though reading here and there about things Follain found out and compiled, I started thinking he may really be all right, he appears to have carried out thorough research (but was it humanity based, Meredith's family based as in being of benefit to them, or was it though good, something to benefit him alone, as in financially), but have people written books to help out or to line their pockets, that's the problem, the thing that worries me.

If everything is done and dusted, though I would probably never read any of the books or watch any of the films, at least the case would be done with and so what people do might be slightly more tolerable.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sat Dec 14, 2013 1:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.


I agree, in my opinion, even giving her chums any attention is a step too far but actually talking to her, no way, the only place she ought to be sent to aside from prison, is coventry.

_________________
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 Dec 14, 2013 2:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Just seen the additional Oggi photos. I can't make out if Sollecito is actually taking his pick of the prostitutes or he meant he is going to become a pimp, all I know is it sure looks all wrong, you are up for murder and there you are acting like it does not exist, I mean if he hoped for more donations, one would think it'd be necessary at least to look like you were seriously working on your defence.

No, how would he be returning, if he cannot know whether it is straight back to prison, I think a judge may have the power, if finding him and Knox guilty, to impose a restriction, taking away his passport, placing him under house arrest, if he does return I hope they do that, I think he will not return, there will be a lame excuse. Of all the places in the world, why would he otherwise choose there? So far away and highly corruptible. If he doesn't watch out, he'll end up getting kidnapped, there are desperate people in such countries, more desperate than he is. Poverty breeds criminality.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.

Is there any evidence that it is actually her? If it was her then she just taunting again. 'Drugged up tart' was something that Guede mentioned in his diary when Meredith was mad at Knox, although I am not sure how he said it in Italian but it was translated like that. So here then Knox is actually referring to Meredith calling her that. This makes me sick.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.

Is there any evidence that it is actually her? If it was her then she just taunting again. 'Drugged up tart' was something that Guede mentioned in his diary when Meredith was mad at Knox, although I am not sure how he said it in Italian but it was translated like that. So here then Knox is actually referring to Meredith calling her that. This makes me sick.


I think Mal knew about that Max, as most of us do, but if it is Knox, and she did say this, I think she's reading these boards; we were just recently talking about Guede and his calling her that.

Anyway she can try to muddy the water again only thing is, it is not about what anyone things of her now, it is about what she supposedly said and has nothing to do with her being a drugged up tart now, it is all about her being a drugged up tart THEN.
And as I explained recently, even in a time of horror Meredith, in using those particular words, would have been trying to appeal to Knox, to humour her, it is something that can be said deadly serious though still with an element of humour in it. That choice of words doesn't actually condemn someone, to say you f .. ing vile drug user, that is different, to say give us a break you silly daft cow, you silly drugged up tart is different, depending on the volume, the inflexion and everything together upon delivery, friends call one another tarts. Only thing is, Knox wouldn't have GOT IT, whereas British people would get it, exactly, exactly the way it is meant.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:45 pm, edited 2 times 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 Dec 14, 2013 10:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.

Is there any evidence that it is actually her? If it was her then she just taunting again. 'Drugged up tart' was something that Guede mentioned in his diary when Meredith was mad at Knox, although I am not sure how he said it in Italian but it was translated like that. So here then Knox is actually referring to Meredith calling her that. This makes me sick.



Either then, it's an interesting insight showing us that she's gone out of her way to seek out and read Rudy's diary, or she hasn't read it and that is an incriminating slip-up on her part.

And if Knox "has" read his diary, then it's interesting that she hasn't made it available on her website, either the translation or the original Italian. But, that would be in line with a common fact that has always existed, one that exists by design. Neither the media nor the pro-Knox sites have made that document available for download, with or without an announcement of the fact. It is a strategy intended to deny Guede any form of voice that may allow the public to gain any insights into the kind of man Rudy REALLY is, leaving him a complete blank. That then, allows them to publicly paint whatever cartoon caricature of him that best serves their agenda over his blank profile. It is in fact, to the same ends, that they also deny Meredith and the Kerchers a voice. They don't want to give the victims too much exposure, as that reminds the public that it is Meredith and family that are the true victims, not Amanda Knox.

And I agree strongly with the sentiment of the poster upthread. I would implore members and visitors sympathetic to the true victims to PLEASE resist any urge to post questions or comments on Knox's trophy site. It lends it a dignity it does not deserve, increases it's profile and will not in any way help Meredith or her family. Let Knox shout in the dark. Knox's conviction will be confirmed soon and her sentence increased. No amount of websites will save her from that. If anyone should fail to resist, then I beg you at least to NOT be in any way abusive (although, I know that none of our posters would ever dream of it).

ETA: I don't think it really matters whether it's actually Knox or someone socking for her, the effect is the same. Whatever, the site has Knox's endorsement and it's in her name and that makes her fully responsible for what appears on 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 McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
Someone remind me, were Sollecito's parents divorced?

If Sollecito embarked on a course of study anno 2002, 5 years before the murder, 23 at the time of his arrest, he was just 18 when he left the family, his mother dying in 2005, 2 years before the murder.

But, what I cannot remember is whether Sollecito's parents were divorced or when if they were, I now think it is important when trying to get a picture of Sollecito JR's frame of mind, or possible frame of mind.


Ergon, I think you could be right about dad funding Sfarzo, yet if he did, I think Dad would have wised up or got put off real fast once Sfarts started being demanding (and hearing it from another Italian = Dad Sollecito, I reckon Sfarts would have shut up right away knowing exactly where he stood, because I reckon Sfarts has been playing on ignorance which probably doesn't work in Italy on other Italians, he doesn't get away with as much, I mean even Knox's lot couldn't take him.


Sollecito's parents were divorced. The reason for the divorce appears to have been infidelity on the part of Francesco.

The interesting part of the mother's death is that Sollecito tells Knox that his mother committed suicide while the official story is that she died of a heart condition. Sollecito could be just weird enough to lie about the cause of his mother's death for no reason but I suspect he is telling the truth here. Since Vatican II the restrictions on church burials for suicides has been removed but it is still considered shameful to the family especially among older Italians. This would be double so if the reason for the suicide could be traced back to Francesco's adultery. To me it seems like Raffaele is telling the truth about the cause of his mother's death and that the family covered it up and lied about the cause of death. The issue if irrelevant to the trial but it appears in the testimony of Antonio Galizia the Commander of the Carabinieri station of Giovinazzo who is present to testify about Sollecito's drug possession and give general background on Sollecito but goes off on a tangent to correct the suicide claim.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.


I did not see the comment but I read about it on .org. It was very inappropriate. If people want to challenge Knox on the evidence that is fine but attacks about drug use and sex are not acceptable. I was going to say something on .org but the topic changed and so it was not worth bringing back.

The blog is maintained by Amanda Knox herself.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Slade


Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Posts: 79

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
max wrote:
malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.

Is there any evidence that it is actually her? If it was her then she just taunting again. 'Drugged up tart' was something that Guede mentioned in his diary when Meredith was mad at Knox, although I am not sure how he said it in Italian but it was translated like that. So here then Knox is actually referring to Meredith calling her that. This makes me sick.


I think Mal knew about that Max, as most of us do, but if it is Knox, and she did say this, I think she's readuing these boards; we were just recently talking about Guede and his calling her that.

Anyway she can try to muddy the eater again only thing is, it is not about what anyone things of her now, it is about what she supposedly said and has nothing to do with her being a drugged up ttart now, it it all about her being a drugged up tart THEN.
And asa I explained recently, even in a time of horror Meredith, in using those particular words, would have been trying to appeal to Knox, to humour her, it is something that can be said deadly serious though stuill with an element of humour in it. That choice of words doesn't actually condemn someone, to say you f .. ing vile drug user, that is different, to say give us a break you silly daft ciow, you silly drugged up tart is different, depending on the volume, the inflexion and everything together upon delivery, friends call one another tarts. Only thing is, Knox ewould'nt have GOT IT, whereas British people would get it, exactly, exactly the way it is meant.


Good question: is the person writing the blog, uploading documents, reading and responding to comments on AK's web site, actually her, or someone else? AK probably does have some direct involvement, but who knows how much. I wouldn't post a comment there expecting any truth from her at any time. But, think Zorba is right, that occasionally AK does read the PMF, TJMK, and TMoMK boards -- if I was in her place, I would.

Some time ago the folks at .org who live in the Seattle area were asked what would they do if they saw AK, and were close enough to speak to her, would they? Most said 'no' I'd not engage her at all; therefore I'm glad I don't live anywhere near her, b/c I think I'd 'snap,' call her a few nasty names, maybe like 'quirky' and see if she'd throw a punch. At the very least, I'd try to spit in her hair behind her back. Yeah, it's a nasty passive-aggressive thing to do, but hell, it's nowhere near as evil as stabbing your housemate in the neck and leaving her to die. :twisted:

Sometimes Meredith's supporters are overly sensitive about being too critical of AK, believing doing so makes Meredith's supporters no better than AK's supporters. I tend to believe AK needs the jolts of reality strong criticism must bring her -- and besides, needling AK to the point she comprehends how many people see her for being a murderer might encourage her to face up to what she's already done. Perhaps I just talked myself into commenting on AK's blog. co-)


Note
Just a Note.
~ There is content in your post that is unacceptable. I have responded to your post here: viewtopic.php?p=115775#p115775 and it is important that you and everyone else read it!!!~
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

One person writes a nasty comment about Amanda Knox, Doug Prestone will write a whole e-book about us 'haters' :)

Not that I care, one way or the other. It was important, at one time, to respond to every thing, the whole if you allow a lie to stand thing. But even on Huffington Post, I saw how a dozen posters could drive the comments counter to 2000+ for every article, (and I was a great help :)

HP enjoyed it because of the click throughs, and the perception it was of great public interest. Yes, but that interest is very shallow in the most part, (hence the poor book sales) and yes, we all would like to see how it turns out.

There also are, a lot of secrets waiting to come out still, so something about the case, holds us still.

Best wishes to all in the new year.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

McCall wrote:
zorba wrote:
Someone remind me, were Sollecito's parents divorced?

If Sollecito embarked on a course of study anno 2002, 5 years before the murder, 23 at the time of his arrest, he was just 18 when he left the family, his mother dying in 2005, 2 years before the murder.

But, what I cannot remember is whether Sollecito's parents were divorced or when if they were, I now think it is important when trying to get a picture of Sollecito JR's frame of mind, or possible frame of mind.


Ergon, I think you could be right about dad funding Sfarzo, yet if he did, I think Dad would have wised up or got put off real fast once Sfarts started being demanding (and hearing it from another Italian = Dad Sollecito, I reckon Sfarts would have shut up right away knowing exactly where he stood, because I reckon Sfarts has been playing on ignorance which probably doesn't work in Italy on other Italians, he doesn't get away with as much, I mean even Knox's lot couldn't take him.


Sollecito's parents were divorced. The reason for the divorce appears to have been infidelity on the part of Francesco.

The interesting part of the mother's death is that Sollecito tells Knox that his mother committed suicide while the official story is that she died of a heart condition. Sollecito could be just weird enough to lie about the cause of his mother's death for no reason but I suspect he is telling the truth here. Since Vatican II the restrictions on church burials for suicides has been removed but it is still considered shameful to the family especially among older Italians. This would be double so if the reason for the suicide could be traced back to Francesco's adultery. To me it seems like Raffaele is telling the truth about the cause of his mother's death and that the family covered it up and lied about the cause of death. The issue if irrelevant to the trial but it appears in the testimony of Antonio Galizia the Commander of the Carabinieri station of Giovinazzo who is present to testify about Sollecito's drug possession and give general background on Sollecito but goes off on a tangent to correct the suicide claim.


Thank you Mc for the details.

The reason I was thinking about these angles, is in relation to Sollecito's apparent labile character, unstable, shifting from one thing to another.

Actually seeing the details as provided by you, makes me think even more about the possible mental state he had, and how it may be the case that he has been able to get away with so much from his father, because the person you mentioned, Antonio Galizia, who went out of his way to set it straight, well he may not have known the truth either and the truth may be that it really was suicide.

The facts may be important, not in court but in trying to understand these people, if dad was playing around, then, after all those years, ending in divorce, it means mother wasn't young anymore, and perhaps she was destroyed by it, impossible to know the truth on this though unless someone who knows them reveals it, maybe mother was devastated and it had something or lots to do with the suicide, that could mean Son Sollecito didn't even have to play into any possible guilt his dad had, dad may have just felt guilty, even blaming himself for his son losing the plot, using drugs and getting involved with Knox.

Without drugs, Sollecito JR could just as well have become involved with Knox, it's what he wound up doing that makes the difference, dad may think then, had some been stable, he would not have allowed himself to be influenced by Knox.

I guess Mc, that suicide in a family, or anywhere, family or not, is still a big no no, as far as people wanting to reveal it to others.

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

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 6:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Sollecito's mother was in a care facility when she died, and she was being treated for depression/ a manic disorder. Lots of guilt to go around.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Slade wrote:
zorba wrote:
max wrote:
malvern wrote:
I read the comment left on Amanda's blog about her drug use. She answered you think I'm a drugged up tart bla bla. The poster made no mention of her sex life nor called her a tart. My guess is Amanda will use her site to try to promote they unfairly charged me because of my sex life. I remain persecuted poor me. Best to avoid leaving any comments.

Is there any evidence that it is actually her? If it was her then she just taunting again. 'Drugged up tart' was something that Guede mentioned in his diary when Meredith was mad at Knox, although I am not sure how he said it in Italian but it was translated like that. So here then Knox is actually referring to Meredith calling her that. This makes me sick.


I think Mal knew about that Max, as most of us do, but if it is Knox, and she did say this, I think she's readuing these boards; we were just recently talking about Guede and his calling her that.

Anyway she can try to muddy the eater again only thing is, it is not about what anyone things of her now, it is about what she supposedly said and has nothing to do with her being a drugged up ttart now, it it all about her being a drugged up tart THEN.
And asa I explained recently, even in a time of horror Meredith, in using those particular words, would have been trying to appeal to Knox, to humour her, it is something that can be said deadly serious though stuill with an element of humour in it. That choice of words doesn't actually condemn someone, to say you f .. ing vile drug user, that is different, to say give us a break you silly daft ciow, you silly drugged up tart is different, depending on the volume, the inflexion and everything together upon delivery, friends call one another tarts. Only thing is, Knox ewould'nt have GOT IT, whereas British people would get it, exactly, exactly the way it is meant.


Good question: is the person writing the blog, uploading documents, reading and responding to comments on AK's web site, actually her, or someone else? AK probably does have some direct involvement, but who knows how much. I wouldn't post a comment there expecting any truth from her at any time. But, think Zorba is right, that occasionally AK does read the PMF, TJMK, and TMoMK boards -- if I was in her place, I would.

Some time ago the folks at .org who live in the Seattle area were asked what would they do if they saw AK, and were close enough to speak to her, would they? Most said 'no' I'd not engage her at all; therefore I'm glad I don't live anywhere near her, b/c I think I'd 'snap,' call her a few nasty names, maybe like 'quirky' and see if she'd throw a punch. At the very least, I'd try to spit in her hair behind her back. Yeah, it's a nasty passive-aggressive thing to do, but hell, it's nowhere near as evil as stabbing your housemate in the neck and leaving her to die. :twisted:

Sometimes Meredith's supporters are overly sensitive about being too critical of AK, believing doing so makes Meredith's supporters no better than AK's supporters. I tend to believe AK needs the jolts of reality strong criticism must bring her -- and besides, needling AK to the point she comprehends how many people see her for being a murderer might encourage her to face up to what she's already done. Perhaps I just talked myself into commenting on AK's blog. co-)




The thing you mention now Slade, I get, about being angry in disgust, but nobody should ever act in any way aggressive, or you are then on board Knox and Sollecito's ship.

This thing where they tried translating Italian words in Google and failed, as there are no exact equivalents, shows the level they are mainly at.

Like his stuff:

Innocentisti e Colpevolisti

Colpe is the root word, it means guilt.
It is easier to see the connections between Italian and English from Latin when one says culpable (culpevole = guilty, answerable, etc.

So I think the particular word in Italian doesn't translate using a single word in English and that is why they thought it funny to keep using that own made up word guilter and the other innocenters, I think I've seen that too...

Doing that only shows how stupid they are, because it is not English.


It's like:
a) Those who think they are guilty (colpevolisti)
= can't say this in one word in English = so some idiot started writing guilter and they all copied it.

b) Those who think they are innocent (innocentisti).

The way Italian works, you often only need one word to make it clear what the tense is, the gender, the verb, the adjective, all in one go, with so many words and situations, etc., whereas in English we need to write a whole sentence, not always but vastly more often than is the case in Italian.
There are Italian teachers who frown upon English, they say English is inferior.

Try Google translating innocentisti e colpevolisti; the machine fails to provide options.

The sti on the end turns guilty/culpable into: those who THINK that....

That's why Knox's supporters started making up own words in English.

And haters well, that may have existed, right, but where, where mainly, yeah where people who cannot talk try to blanket smother others out.
Hatred is something in direct relationship to the murder, not to those who detest those vile acts.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sun Dec 15, 2013 1:45 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: Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Sollecito's mother was in a care facility when she died, and she was being treated for depression/ a manic disorder. Lots of guilt to go around.



Yes remember that a bit now you say it, that explains in part, the way Sollecito seemed to be at the time of the murder, labile disposition, shifting from one thing to another, and yes, easily led, nonetheless, it's hardly an excuse for murder.

It feels to me like dad does see it somehow as part of why his son lost the plot and explains in a way why he has been taking so much shit from his son even if family in Italy does have all of those traditional ties.

_________________
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 Dec 14, 2013 7:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
One person writes a nasty comment about Amanda Knox, Doug Prestone will write a whole e-book about us 'haters' :)

Not that I care, one way or the other. It was important, at one time, to respond to every thing, the whole if you allow a lie to stand thing. But even on Huffington Post, I saw how a dozen posters could drive the comments counter to 2000+ for every article, (and I was a great help :)

HP enjoyed it because of the click throughs, and the perception it was of great public interest. Yes, but that interest is very shallow in the most part, (hence the poor book sales) and yes, we all would like to see how it turns out.

There also are, a lot of secrets waiting to come out still, so something about the case, holds us still.

Best wishes to all in the new year.


The traffic generated would be one of my main reasons for saying, don't go there.

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

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Agreed. Let her fade away. No one there but the usual socks. And even those, one or two comments per blog.
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 Dec 14, 2013 11:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Slade wrote:
Some time ago the folks at .org who live in the Seattle area were asked what would they do if they saw AK, and were close enough to speak to her, would they? Most said 'no' I'd not engage her at all; therefore I'm glad I don't live anywhere near her, b/c I think I'd 'snap,' call her a few nasty names, maybe like 'quirky' and see if she'd throw a punch. At the very least, I'd try to spit in her hair behind her back. Yeah, it's a nasty passive-aggressive thing to do, but hell, it's nowhere near as evil as stabbing your housemate in the neck and leaving her to die.


I look to the Kerchers as setting the standard of conduct. I am as close to certain as I can be, that were they to bump into Knox they would not bate her but would quickly take avoiding action. Neither, I am also almost certain, were they ever to find themselves behind her, would they spit in her hair (although, I reckon they'd stay "behind" her, as one certainly doesn't want Knox behind them if they're wise). We here, who are constantly (justifiably) critical of the behaviour of the perps and their supporters, claim the moral high ground and if we do that, we must always ensure we are standing on it and I don't mean merely paying lip service to it. I don't see how talk of spitting in Knox's hair (which is not only disgusting, it would also constitute a criminal assault were it to happen and mere talk of it may constitute threatening behaviour in the eyes of the law) puts us in the gutter. I require that in future 1) you keep any such thoughts to yourself and your priest 2) you certainly never act on such thoughts or encourage anyone else to do so 3) that you actually stop and think whether you actually should post what you intend to post before doing so, as you really don't ever seem to! Whatever Knox has done, the process is still ongoing and until it is complete and she starts her rehabilitation in Italy, she has the absolute right to go about her lawful daily business without fear of assault or molestation. It is also, NOBODIES place to attempt to inflict some warped form of personal justice on her! They are not her victims, her actual victims (who are many) are pursuing justice legally via the courts or/and simply sitting back and allowing the courts to do their work.

Michael (Admin, PMF.Net)

_________________
"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 Dec 14, 2013 11:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

I don't think Spade would really do that though Michael, it's the frustration he is expressing.

After reading that, I thought about it, and, i realised, for the millionth time, that if you carry out the kind of behaviour that is at the level of those you despise, then they've got YOU, because they've managed to get you down to their level, meaning you are not a hair better.

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 12:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATE:

December 14 2013 Last updated at 17:13
Perugia , a police officer under investigation for unauthorized access to the computer system : the Supreme Court annuls the suspension

Fra . Mar.

The Supreme Court set aside the order issued by the court of review in Perugia on the suspension of the superintendent of the flying squad of Perugia, Stephen Gubbins . The Supreme Court therefore upheld the appeal filed by his lawyer Michael Nannarone . The agent is being investigated as part of an investigation coordinated by the prosecutor Giuseppe Petrazzini on charges of unauthorized access to the computer system .

The decision of the investigating judge Even the investigating judge of Perugia Carla Giangamboni did not accept the request for disqualification made ​​by the prosecutor. The magistrate , however, had appealed to the court of review in Perugia , who had accepted the request of deputy prosecutor . At that point , it was the agent's lawyer to appeal to the Supreme Court .

And he wrote in the appeal proceedings , inter alia, the reason why , in his view, his client has not implemented any action with intent. " Today's recurring - said the lawyer Michele Nannarone in the application - poured into the innocent belief that access to information asked by my colleague might be necessary for the performance of activities of organization ."

In the Supreme Court , for the defense also not met even the precautionary requirements listed by the Court of Review , as the agent was assigned to another office and , as he had also written the investigating judge Carla Giangamboni " the unlawful conduct is totally casual and not likely to recur .



UMBRIA 24

_________________
"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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 12:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
I don't think Spade would really do that though Michael, it's the frustration he is expressing.

After reading that, I thought about it, and, i realised, for the millionth time, that if you carry out the kind of behaviour that is at the level of those you despise, then they've got YOU, because they've managed to get you down to their level, meaning you are not a hair better.


One can express frustration without posting fantasies of what nasty things they would like to do to Knox (or anyone else in the case). And it cannot be let stand without strong challenge as that would make it appear that PMF condones the posting of what may be read by some, as incitement for physical attacks on Amanda Knox, or at least, that in the event of such an attack actually taking place in the future, PMF would have little or no objection. It also may give the impression to some, that all or many amongst us also may harbour fantasies of doing such things to Knox. I certainly never have! Neither have I ever seen a single indication any other member has, until now. At the very least, posting shit like that is a GIFT to a pro-Knox propaganda machine that has unceasingly sort to present Knox as a victim and pro-truth and justice communities such as ours, as "haters". Finally, as you say, it brings us down to their level. In any case, is there not more then enough unpleasantness in this case already?

_________________
"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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 12:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Michael wrote:
zorba wrote:
I don't think Spade would really do that though Michael, it's the frustration he is expressing.

After reading that, I thought about it, and, i realised, for the millionth time, that if you carry out the kind of behaviour that is at the level of those you despise, then they've got YOU, because they've managed to get you down to their level, meaning you are not a hair better.


One can express frustration without posting fantasies of what nasty things they would like to do to Knox (or anyone else in the case). And it cannot be let stand without strong challenge as that would make it appear that PMF condones the posting of what may be read by some, as incitement for physical attacks on Amanda Knox, or at least, that in the event of such an attack actually taking place in the future, PMF would have little or no objection. It also may give the impression to some, that all or many amongst us also may harbour fantasies of doing such things to Knox. I certainly never have! Neither have I ever seen a single indication any other member has, until now. At the very least, posting shit like that is a GIFT to a pro-Knox propaganda machine that has unceasingly sort to present Knox as a victim and pro-truth and justice communities such as ours, as "haters". Finally, as you say, it brings us down to their level. In any case, is there not more then enough unpleasantness in this case already?


Yes I agree with that Michael, because if everyone starts saying stuff like that, it's exactly what Knox's lot would love, and anyway, it's something, if one thinks such things, to keep to yourself.

And that what you said about Meredith's parents, they show the way to go, who wants to be anything like those that killed Meredith, not me.

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .



Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.

Hi...you don't sound cruel...but, I would like to tell you that most of Franks donors were decent people. I was one, and I never typed a vicious word. You have every right to your opinion.
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

What Michael said; I agree 100%, and if I weren't run off my feet this month would have caught it myself and said so. We've been very good about this all along, and we must keep it that way.

Not that has ever stopped Bruce Fischer, of course. He just posted a member of TJMK's address and phone number, on the public thread because of something he wrote about Amanda Knox. He did this two years ago about the same person, on a specious claim that he made 'death threats'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 6:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

So Monday or Tuesday the RS defense do their closings and we have RS himself back in the DR. What was the point of him showing up last month in court if he is not even there during his own defense closings. I am no lawyer but doesn't it make more sense to show up when your own defense is closing as compared to last month when they were talking about DNA testing? I fail to see the logic. Oggi is not doing RS any favors with their reporting of him in the DR. Already a fugitive.
Top Profile 

Offline chami


Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:36 pm

Posts: 166

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 7:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
... Poverty breeds criminality.


I strongly disagree.

On the other hand, money fuels greed for more money. I also hope you will agree that criminality is a social concept that is defined around the actions of poor people...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

chami wrote:
zorba wrote:
... Poverty breeds criminality.


I strongly disagree.

On the other hand, money fuels greed for more money. I also hope you will agree that criminality is a social concept that is defined around the actions of poor people...


Tha'ts your right, I can show you millions of examples how it DOES create criminality.

What do you think about slums and gangs in America?

Chami, when I say a thing I do not hope anything, or much, as everyone is entitles to their opinions.

It's a fact that people without means are forced, more or less, into criminality. They have little choice.
That or starve.
Maybe not everywhere, because in some countries areas are so poor there's nothing to steal, war is often the result, but in Western and developed countries, those shut out one way or the other, from mainstream society, where they are pretty much and as a kind of tradition held back as a kind oif tradition, like attached to racism, etc., then as we all know, people like that, turn, very often, though not all of them do, to crime, and it is not only in America, but countries held down by the most developed countries, namely those in underdeveloped countries, look at all of South America, where there is so much heavy duty crime and mobs. Look at South Africa with so many murders.

Look at South Italy, the mentality leading to so much heavy duty crime, organised crime, surely did not come about because all of those people (who entered and still do enter organised crime) came and come from well-off families?

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 9:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

chami wrote:
zorba wrote:
... Poverty breeds criminality.


I strongly disagree.

On the other hand, money fuels greed for more money. I also hope you will agree that criminality is a social concept that is defined around the actions of poor people...



Criminality can ALSO and LIKEWISE be bred by abundance, neither rich nor poor has the tender on crime.

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 10:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

tamale wrote:
SqueakEMouse wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Part II The Rise And Fall Of “Frank Sfarzo” And His Disastrous Trip To The US And Canada is now up on the True Justice For Meredith Kercher Website .



Hat off to you Ergon. When you put all this guys antics together there is enough for a book all on its own. That guy is just one unremitting sleazebag and seems quite unbalanced. You couldn't make it up could you, one of the mainsprings in the campaign to support Knox is himself a rather unhinged waster and parasite with delusions of fame, a short fuse and no compunction about blackmail and violence against women. Oh boy does she attract them.

It may sound cruel but I don't have any sympathy for the people he has been shaking down; they were all quite happy to join in a vicious campaign of slander and vilification with the aim of undermining an ongoing court case. Naïve support after being taken in by some cheap propaganda and xenophobia is one thing but many had financial motives and hopes of advancement of their own. Now it's bitten them on the rear end.

Hi...you don't sound cruel...but, I would like to tell you that most of Franks donors were decent people. I was one, and I never typed a vicious word. You have every right to your opinion.



I've posted a PM with a little more nuance and elaboration. I went off scattergun fashion and slightly unfairly when not making clear who the targets were.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline chami


Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:36 pm

Posts: 166

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
chami wrote:
zorba wrote:
... Poverty breeds criminality.


I strongly disagree.

On the other hand, money fuels greed for more money. I also hope you will agree that criminality is a social concept that is defined around the actions of poor people...



Criminality can ALSO and LIKEWISE be bred by abundance, neither rich nor poor has the tender on crime.


I always thought that it is the inequality that can be called the driving force for crime. The old Les Miserable theory. But a system in which all are equal is not stable. The society runs on inequality. A slum is a slum only when it is surrounded by vulgar affluence.

I hope you will understand what I am trying to say.

What I am trying to say is that the crime is a "property" or "characteristic" of the society and it has nothing to do with an individual. If you exterminate all the criminals (example of a gedanken), crime will not be abolished and the nature abhors vacuum and "good" people will come to fill the void- left by the criminals! Crime is like sex: it takes two to tango.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
So Monday or Tuesday the RS defense do their closings and we have RS himself back in the DR. What was the point of him showing up last month in court if he is not even there during his own defense closings. I am no lawyer but doesn't it make more sense to show up when your own defense is closing as compared to last month when they were talking about DNA testing? I fail to see the logic. Oggi is not doing RS any favors with their reporting of him in the DR. Already a fugitive.


Aside from his statement to the court, he only appeared there afterwards to talk to the cameras and butt in on Bongiorno :)

But there will be closing arguments for the defense, and announcement of the verdict in January. Will he show up then?
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Re the debate on poverty contributing to crime, or crime as a function of a breakdown of society, v. interesting, but I gotta go out and shovel another foot of snow :(

See you later!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

chami wrote:
zorba wrote:
chami wrote:
zorba wrote:
... Poverty breeds criminality.


I strongly disagree.

On the other hand, money fuels greed for more money. I also hope you will agree that criminality is a social concept that is defined around the actions of poor people...



Criminality can ALSO and LIKEWISE be bred by abundance, neither rich nor poor has the tender on crime.


I always thought that it is the inequality that can be called the driving force for crime. The old Les Miserable theory. But a system in which all are equal is not stable. The society runs on inequality. A slum is a slum only when it is surrounded by vulgar affluence.

I hope you will understand what I am trying to say.

What I am trying to say is that the crime is a "property" or "characteristic" of the society and it has nothing to do with an individual. If you exterminate all the criminals (example of a gedanken), crime will not be abolished and the nature abhors vacuum and "good" people will come to fill the void- left by the criminals! Crime is like sex: it takes two to tango.



Yes but in saying criminality is driven by poverty doesn't mean that the individual is inherently bad, it means that need drives what comes about, if you have no choice, you are probably going to do what you have to do in order to survive. I don't see American ghettos as being full of inherently bad people, I see them too as victims of inequality, but you cannot say those who already have and want more are also victims of inequality, or can you?

Look at the American situation, where traditionally, coming from a scene that was no different from apartheid, black Americans could either get ahead by getting lucky by starring in a film (very few in terms of relative figures) become a musician (you people have got such good rhythm) or a sports person, every step of the way being discriminated against, even in the aforesaid occupations, apart from any others, something that still persists today in America and not just America, but America --being a main country of former slavery, the black population being derived from that-- being a most important example of this, which, as a country continued longest with segregations, etc., we see that in order to escape a ghetto upbringing, it is very difficult indeed to this day, the poverty then, where there is almost no opportunity to survive other than becoming part of what is going on, means the poverty does breed the criminality, the reasons behind why there is poverty is a relative but different issue.

I do not think mafia, an extreme example, become the criminals they become through greed alone, I'd say it's originally from the other end of the spectrum, poverty thus, there's a huge divide still today between north and south Italy, north well-off, south not so much at all.

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

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Do you know Charles Bradley? He released his debut album at age 63...

"Why Is It So Hard"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 7:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
Do you know Charles Bradley? He released his debut album at age 63...

"Why Is It So Hard"



Hi no never heard of him Ava, will take a listen

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 7:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

He's good, sounds like he didn't have an easy time either.

_________________
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: Sun Dec 15, 2013 8:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Torture never stops; Cara whatshername, now out mixing drinks in Perugia and being photographed doing it

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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
max wrote:
So Monday or Tuesday the RS defense do their closings and we have RS himself back in the DR. What was the point of him showing up last month in court if he is not even there during his own defense closings. I am no lawyer but doesn't it make more sense to show up when your own defense is closing as compared to last month when they were talking about DNA testing? I fail to see the logic. Oggi is not doing RS any favors with their reporting of him in the DR. Already a fugitive.


Aside from his statement to the court, he only appeared there afterwards to talk to the cameras and butt in on Bongiorno :)

But there will be closing arguments for the defense, and announcement of the verdict in January. Will he show up then?

I don't know the exact schedule, but I think the defense is already up on Tuesday (or maybe Monday after Maresca is finished?) which might very well be Bongiorno (never know when she shows up either..lol) but they do continue in January so he might show up then. I doubt he will show up for the verdict. I don't know. The real question is will he be in Italy when the arrest warrant is issued which I understand can be another year. It would be better if they would take his passport right after the guilty verdict because this DR 'vacationing' is kind of silly. No matter what, the clock is ticking and justice is coming :)
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
What Michael said; I agree 100%, and if I weren't run off my feet this month would have caught it myself and said so. We've been very good about this all along, and we must keep it that way.

Not that has ever stopped Bruce Fischer, of course. He just posted a member of TJMK's address and phone number, on the public thread because of something he wrote about Amanda Knox. He did this two years ago about the same person, on a specious claim that he made 'death threats'.


My silly little opinion sez let's take the high road...I am certain they will implode of their own accord. pp-(
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
So Monday or Tuesday the RS defense do their closings and we have RS himself back in the DR. What was the point of him showing up last month in court if he is not even there during his own defense closings. I am no lawyer but doesn't it make more sense to show up when your own defense is closing as compared to last month when they were talking about DNA testing? I fail to see the logic. Oggi is not doing RS any favors with their reporting of him in the DR. Already a fugitive.

Max...he could be in Bogota for all we know. They lie about everything.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

tamale wrote:
max wrote:
So Monday or Tuesday the RS defense do their closings and we have RS himself back in the DR. What was the point of him showing up last month in court if he is not even there during his own defense closings. I am no lawyer but doesn't it make more sense to show up when your own defense is closing as compared to last month when they were talking about DNA testing? I fail to see the logic. Oggi is not doing RS any favors with their reporting of him in the DR. Already a fugitive.

Max...he could be in Bogota for all we know. They lie about everything.



Last I heard he set off in the night disguised as a crocodile, it's got 4 in-built rotor paddles, had it made on the cheap, heading up the Amazon they say!

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

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
@zorba, what you said. I believe Francesco Sollecito was one of those who financed Frank Sfarzo (though he did get commissions through OGGI as well) to help influence public perception. Funny how he hung out with Raffaele in Seattle and tried to hook up over New Year's Eve in New York (what, no court appearance in Seattle that day?) and was always protective of Raffaele, while (secretly) calling Amanda a 'slut'.

But I did observe both of them in Rome, and Frank, while hanging out with all the reporters, never once approached Francesco or Bongiorno or any of the defense lawyers in the scrums that entire day, which I thought was odd. Then the next day, both of them did a bunk, and did not show up in court to listen to the verdict. Odd.

I don't agree with that (totally)...I heard Frank say Raffy was responsible for Amandas incarceration. Maybe Raff does not know how his friend trashes him behind his back. also, the two have acted in concert a far as some of the the propaganda. I think he was sliming Raff behind his back. Why?
Top Profile 

Offline tamale


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:13 pm

Posts: 615

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Re the debate on poverty contributing to crime, or crime as a function of a breakdown of society, v. interesting, but I gotta go out and shovel another foot of snow :(

See you later!


Get busy...snow doesn't shovel itself (so glad I no longer shovel). Haha
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

tamale wrote:
Ergon wrote:
@zorba, what you said. I believe Francesco Sollecito was one of those who financed Frank Sfarzo (though he did get commissions through OGGI as well) to help influence public perception. Funny how he hung out with Raffaele in Seattle and tried to hook up over New Year's Eve in New York (what, no court appearance in Seattle that day?) and was always protective of Raffaele, while (secretly) calling Amanda a 'slut'.

But I did observe both of them in Rome, and Frank, while hanging out with all the reporters, never once approached Francesco or Bongiorno or any of the defense lawyers in the scrums that entire day, which I thought was odd. Then the next day, both of them did a bunk, and did not show up in court to listen to the verdict. Odd.

I don't agree with that (totally)...I heard Frank say Raffy was responsible for Amandas incarceration. Maybe Raff does not know how his friend trashes him behind his back. also, the two have acted in concert a far as some of the the propaganda. I think he was sliming Raff behind his back. Why?


He said that when pitching to Amanda's friends, and to Daddy, he said it was Amanda's fault. Also said nasty things about Amanda at the beginning.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
tamale wrote:
Ergon wrote:
@zorba, what you said. I believe Francesco Sollecito was one of those who financed Frank Sfarzo (though he did get commissions through OGGI as well) to help influence public perception. Funny how he hung out with Raffaele in Seattle and tried to hook up over New Year's Eve in New York (what, no court appearance in Seattle that day?) and was always protective of Raffaele, while (secretly) calling Amanda a 'slut'.

But I did observe both of them in Rome, and Frank, while hanging out with all the reporters, never once approached Francesco or Bongiorno or any of the defense lawyers in the scrums that entire day, which I thought was odd. Then the next day, both of them did a bunk, and did not show up in court to listen to the verdict. Odd.

I don't agree with that (totally)...I heard Frank say Raffy was responsible for Amandas incarceration. Maybe Raff does not know how his friend trashes him behind his back. also, the two have acted in concert a far as some of the the propaganda. I think he was sliming Raff behind his back. Why?


He said that when pitching to Amanda's friends, and to Daddy, he said it was Amanda's fault. Also said nasty things about Amanda at the beginning.



Yes if anyone STARTED blaming, I remember it was him, not her.
I did not think of all of the inconsistencies, etc. At that very moment he had attempted to dump her, only he found out it wasn't going to be quite that easy.

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


Last edited by zorba on Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Imagine all that carry on, making faces, kissing, acting in a sexualised way at that very moment, horrendous for others at the cop shop too, I watched my granddad die right in front of me, I wasn't even 10, he wasn't even murdered, and we couldn't do any laughing, there's no excuse for 20 year olds acting like chimps, as if they would not have realised, picture it, everyone is shredded, and there's Knox and Sollecito doing all of that which they did, as reported by Meredith's FRIENDS.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

So, I'm curious about the way Bongiorno will, I think, put on her usual show, and also about the way in which the judge will perhaps shut her down, when she makes those claims without substantiating them.

Of course lawyer are obliged to defend a client to the best of their ability, however some do back out of defending some clients, and even though you see Bongiorno hands and arms in the air, jubilant when Knox & Sollecito got set free, I have always wondered what she really thinks of Sollecito, it's something she is not going to be revealing of course, I'm sure with her experience she understood exactly what is what, as long as the client doesn't say I did do it you know, then the lawyer may know but is obliged to carry on, only some in some particularly awful cases have backed out, of course they do not say the reason why, with Bongiorno I'm sure she looked at Sollecito, and saw exactly the same as Napoleoni saw, you can just see her looking straight through Knox and Sollecito, they may have been talking and avoiding her eyes, but she was not avoiding anyone or anything.


The pair could have had a chance at salvaging something of their lives by owning up, but the same stupid vibe that permeated their minds when Meredith was murdered persisted even until now, they've been unapproachable, had they not been into their mind games, they could have owned up and there would have been mitigation, but now, what mitigation is there for them, after everything they've been up to. It would always have been them alone having to deal with having a murder on the conscience, however, I'm sure they were not going to be serial killers, there could have been mitigation, they took a different road.

I know that Carlos Castaneda turned out to be fiction, but, that about, there are two paths, one with heart and one without, they both lead to the same place, I liked that.

Nowadays though, the bit about lead to the same place, I'm not sure, maybe I'm more pessimistic as I do not think they lead to the same place, but there are two paths.

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


Last edited by zorba on Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 4:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

T. Lobsang Rampa turned out to be fiction, but he was still, inspirational.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Good morning everyone :)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 9m
Meredith process, today the harangue of the family lawyer

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4s
Waiting for the start of the hearing, process Meredith

Image
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Morning. I wonder who comes after Maresca (somebody from defense I assume), and if that will be today or tomorrow.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 13s
Meredith process, the lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Amanda and Raffaele - definitely guilty" ("Certain they are guilty")

Image

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 18m
Meredith process, the hearing has begun. The lawyer Vieri Adriani [sic] speaks

I believe his name is Vieri Fabiani: http://aziende.virgilio.it/1017204/vieri-fabiani
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 48s
Meredith process, the lawyer Adriani [sic] (Kercher): "Phoney contamination of the bra clasp"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8s
Meredith process, the lawyer Adriani [sic] (Kercher): "On the knife found at Sollecito's house was the victim's DNA"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 55s
In Florence, Kercher family attny urges jury in #amandaknox appeal to "judge not with your hearts, but with your head, using logic."
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
Morning. I wonder who comes after Maresca (somebody from defense I assume), and if that will be today or tomorrow.


Hi max, we don't know yet what's on the agenda, but all three lawyers for the Kercher family (Maresca, Perna, Fabiani) are expected to speak in court today.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Meredith process, the lawyer Fabiani (Kercher), "Amanda knew the details (the modality) of murder"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Meredith process, the lawyer Fabiani (Kercher): "The judgment of the Supreme Court overwhelms (overturns) the acquittal of appeal"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher family): "The lack of motive is irrelevant, there is evidence of homicidal intent (will to commit a murder)"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 49s
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox is not the same sensuality as Meredith" [?]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox have had extreme sexual experiences"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "An escalation of violence has led to crime"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "It is not sustainable that Rudy Guede is the only murderer"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Fabiani (Kercher) "Amanda and Raffaele got excited and this triggered the rampage"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks G. I didn't know there were 3 :oops:
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attoney Fabiani (Kercher), "Motive irrelevant, proved the presence of the accused at the scene"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher), "Amanda knew the mode of the crime because she was present"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "All the elements lead to the guilt of the two defendants"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Meredith process, Next: after the lawyer Vieri Fabiani, avvocatessa Serena Perna, for the victim's family

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher), "The medico-legal aspects confirm that Rudy Guede is not the only murderer"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "The body of Meredith [had] 43 ​​injuries "
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "Meredith was restrained by her attackers."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "On Meredith's body so many different (diverse) injuries. Impossible to inflict by a single attacker."

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "Two knives were used against Meredith."
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 41s
Process Meredith, lawyer Perna (Kercher): "The footprints found at the crime scene are Amanda and Raffaele's"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Meredith process, Francesco Maresca, the lawyer for the victim's family, is next
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 6m
Kercher attny Serena Perna: Meredith's many wounds in many places (from bare hands,from knife, yet not defensive) = multiple attackers.

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 40m
Kercher attny: Motive, or lack thereof, is absolutely irrelevant.1000 different problems could have led to fatal escalation of violence.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Popular judges, forget alignments [line-ups] and controversy outside the courtroom"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 17s
Meredith process, the lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Forget the declarations of Sollecito in recent hearings"
cl-)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 17s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Forget Amanda's statements on our judicial system"
cl-) cl-)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "It's intolerable that Amanda Knox "collects" funds for victim".

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Forget about those statements on TV of people who have not read the documents"
cl-) wor-))
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 5m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox's & Sollecito's appeal trial:"While we are here, Sollecito is in Santo Domingo"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4m
Meredith process, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "You cannot say that the trace of Meredith's DNA is not there"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 57s
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:""You can not say that the trace of Meredith's DNA does not exist"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "I do not know whether it is freedom of the press, in some cases, freedom of delirium."
cl-)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "No one speaks of the victim anymore and the pain of her family"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 3m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:""You can not judge without seeing the mangled corpse of Meredith"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "Popular judges, remember [other] judgments/sentences"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 1m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeals court:"About forty judges have assessed the Sollecito and Knox in one way"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 10m
Meredith process, Maresca (Kercher), "Only the appeals court in Perugia evaluated differently"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 3m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"The (Hellmann appeal) sentencing was done by judges inexperienced in criminal trials"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets now
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"The(Hellmann) appeal verdict in Perugia is a rundown shack that's burned to the ground"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 2m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"Total failure of the alibis of the two defendants. Fake alibi"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 1m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court: "It's necessary to say Basta to this talk of contamination of the exhibits"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 9m
Maresca: "While we're here in trial, Sollecito in Santo Domingo & Knox in US taking online donations for victim she's accused of killing."
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

An answer to your question, max: :)

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 10m
@wileypost1 Right now lawyers for the civil parties (specifically Kercher family) giving closing args. Defense is to follo[w].
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 50s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Amanda accused Lumumba to throw the murder investigation off track"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 3m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"When Amanda accused Lumumba she did it to sidetrack the investigation"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 31s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca: "Amanda Knox said to her mother 'I was there' "

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Simulation of theft is the cornerstone to understanding the defendants' responsibility"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Break until 2 pm.

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 7s
Meredith process, interruption of the hearing. It will resume at 14 (2 PM)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Murder Meredith, Kercher family lawyers: "It's a crime committed with clear conscience and desire'

...In the opening of his speech, Maresca asked the Court "to forget the opposing sides and all that is foreign to the process," ie, the media coverage of the controversy coming from the U.S. in the legal defense of Knox, as well as to forget the statements made in court a few weeks ago by Raffaele Sollecito, who returned from a vacation in Santo Domingo." Maresca has also pointed the finger at Knox for her book for which she signed 'multi-million dollar contracts' and that she also employs "a person to handle public relations." Finally, he invited the Court to forget "those journalists who are inspired by the freedom of delirium and not the freedom of the press."

Elements to confirm the sentence. "We have no doubts about the guilt of the accused - said Maresca - there are so many elements to confirm the sentence." The family of Meredith Kercher, said the lawyer, will be in Florence on the day of the judgment of the appeal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of the young British student.

Heinous crime committed knowingly. "We ask the Court for truth and justice for a heinous crime committed with precise awareness and desire," said instead the lawyer Vieri Fabiani, one of the lawyers of the Kercher family, speaking in the courtroom of the Assize Court of Appeal in Florence. For the lawyer, the defendants Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede, already convicted [for the murder], when they killed Meredith Kercher, were "in the grip of excitement and this triggered the murderous rage," because, with drugs and alcohol taken, "their minds were free of inhibitions."


UMBRIA24

To be continued....
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Cont'd

Rudy. The lawyer Fabiani focused in particular on Rudy Guede, convicted for the murder of Meredith, reminding that the judgment was delivered after the first degree trial in Perugia. Fabiani stated that in the verdict against Guede, he was sentenced in complicity with the other two that 'accidentally' have been identified as Sollecito and Knox, whose responsibility is documented and the presence on the scene of the crime is proven. The attorney Fabiani called Sollecito and Knox persons of 'high criminal capacity' and has rejected the image of a crime without motive. The authors of the murder were "in the grip of excitement and this triggered the horrendous crime." A murderous rage to which also the intake of drugs and alcohol by Meredith's attackers contributed.

Reconstruction. After the murder, "the fear, the terror takes over - continued the lawyer Fabiani in his reconstruction - and then you get the simulation of a theft, the accusation of Patrick Lumumba, to mystify, however clumsily, to banish from their minds the crime committed. Fabiani argued that, in any case, the presence of the two defendants in the house on Via della Pergola, that evening, and their willingness to kill, had been demonstrated; "the lack of motive becomes irrelevant," even if it can be identified "in issues between Amanda and Meredith, which evolve into a sort of punishment of the victim, in an escalation."


UMBRIA24
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7m
Meredith process, the hearing has resumed with the second part by lawyer Maresca (Kercher family)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "It was a crime not programmed"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 2m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"It wasn't a planned crime"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The motive may be in the fact that they all were known by the victim"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Fake and false alibis of the two defendants"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets now
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"Misleading and false alibis of the two defendants"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 1m
Courtroom nearly empty for closing args of lawyer representing #meredithkercher family. Not much interest in their quiet suffering.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thank you, Guermantes, for all of your updates/ translations!
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 11s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The two accused had no alibi for the evening [of the murder]"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 4s
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"For the whole evening, the two defendants have no alibi"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 1:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Quote:
The lawyer representing the family of slain British student Meredith Kercher has called the appellate court decision vacating a guilty verdict against American defendant Amanda Knox "science fiction."

Francesco Maresca urged the Florence appeals court on Monday to find Amanda Knox and Italian Raffaele Sollecito guilty of Kercher's bloody 2007 murder. He backed prosecutors' demands for sentences of 26 years.

Maresca identified two "fulcrums" in the case against Knox and Sollecito: Knox's false accusation against a Congo-born bar owner and a staged robbery, both of which Maresca said were aimed at sidetracking the investigation. Knox has been convicted of slander for the false accusation.

The case was being tried for a third time after Italy's highest court vacated an appellate court ruling throwing out their lower-court murder conviction.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... r-21230989
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Jackie wrote:
Thank you, Guermantes, for all of your updates/ translations!


All I do in this forum is update and translate. Be my guest. :)
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 24s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The footprint on the bath mat is Sollecito's"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "As is the DNA on the clasp of Meredith's bra"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 1m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:""Also, the DNA on Meredith's bra clasp is Sollecito's"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8s
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The tracks indicate the presence of Knox and Sollecito at the scene of the crime"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Isn't Kermit just translating the tweets as well? Or is he there?
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher), "Weaknesses in the expert report on the genetic traces in the appeal process"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The experts on genetic traces were met with objections on appeal"

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 3s
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court: "The genetic sample experts in the (Hellmann) appeal ended up being rejected" ((rough translation))

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 5m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "The courts of appeals have delegated the experts in motivating the judgment" [?]


Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 44s
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court: "The(Hellmann) appeal judges designated the experts in their sentencing report"


La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "On the knife found in Sollecito 's house the DNA of the victim "
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

This bit
Processo Meredith, avvocato Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox non ha la stessa sensualità di Meredith" #meredithnazione

Process Meredith, attorney Fabiani (Kercher): "Amanda Knox does not have the same sensuality as Meredith" #meredithnazione

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
Isn't Kermit just translating the tweets as well? Or is he there?


He's translating the La Nazione tweets on Twitter. He is NOT in the courtroom.

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 1m
Maresca to #AmandaKnox appeal court:"The (Hellmann) appeal judges designated/delegated/focused on the experts in their sentencing report"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

I think this: Processo Meredith, avvocato Maresca (Kercher): "I giudici di appello hanno delegato i periti nel motivare la sentenza

amounts to this;

The judges at the court of appeal used the experts' (C&V) findings in motivating the judgment.

[there was no sentence because they were released; one cannot be sentenced to freedom]

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks Z for correcting some of the imperfect translations.

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "No one remembers Meredith, while the defendants write books and are famous"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "We ask for punishment of Knox and Sollecito in accordance with the laws"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) cites St. Augustine: "Punishment is justice for the unjust"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Meredith process, the hearing ends. It resumes tomorrow at 9.30 am with the defense closing arguments
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Thanks Z for correcting some of the imperfect translations.

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher): "No one remembers Meredith, while the defendants write books and are famous"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Maresca (Kercher) : "We ask for punishment of Knox and Sollecito in accordance with the laws"



That's okay Guer, Kermit's version is a literal translation of sentenza, in the Italian, they only ever speak of motivation, never a sentencing report, the thing is, if the word is one that is in Italian (or any language) already so close to the English, there is no reason to go and use a very different word, one that can have an entirely different angle to it when viewed in English. There is a process, a trial, procedure, a ruling/judgment comes, if found guilty there is a sentence, if not guilty there is no sentence, so it is always motivational report, their motivations, not their sentencing report, even if there is a guilty finding, sentencing report is misleading, the word is motivation.

That's the only reason I've said something about that one.

The other, where it refers to sensuality, I thought that is necessary to get straight.

They are referring to something about Knox's ways, which were very different to Meredith's, and that ties into a far more substantial setting out of what they think Knox is all about than given in the few words now in court, elsewhere though, they have obviously made all of it crystal clear, in court they are having to speak in Twitter-length bits, almost anyhow, in relation to limits on time length.

So I think the sensuality bit ties into how they have reasoned out that Knox had something going on indeed attached to kicks and thrills whereas Meredith was NOT like that.

All of this my opinion nothing else.

I'm pleased they made a point of making it very clear how out of line it is for Sollecito and Knox to be asking for donations and Knox asking for donations (if I've understood this correctly as I steer well-clear of her blog like I would a village contaminated with the plague) for the victim (Meredith).


a) Meredith forgotten,
b) the pair of them writing books and
c) raking in fortunes
d) and now famous
e) while Sollecito (defendant) is back on the island in the sun
f) Knox (defendant) asks for donations for the victim
g) while she herself is a defendant accused of that victim's murder

= gruesome, ghastly.

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

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

What's Next In Amanda Knox Murder Trial
By COLLEEN BARRY 12/16/13 05:32 AM ET EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/1 ... _ref=world

This is almost funny (are they dreaming?):
"The case could be further bogged down if Knox and her legal team appeal any guilty verdict to the European Court of Human Rights, whose rulings would be binding on Italy. If it rules that the Italian justice system did anything in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, then the court could in theory order a retrial, or tell Italy to change its laws."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
...
I'm pleased they made a point of making it very clear how out of line it is for Sollecito and Knox to be asking for donations and Knox asking for donations (if I've understood this correctly as I steer well-clear of her blog like I would a village contaminated with the plague) for the victim (Meredith).


a) Meredith forgotten,
b) the pair of them writing books and
c) raking in fortunes
d) and now famous
e) while Sollecito (defendant) is back on the island in the sun
f) Knox (defendant) asks for donations for the victim
g) while she herself is a defendant accused of that victim's murder

= gruesome, ghastly.



zorba, this is from the abc article max posted upthread:

"Knox is soliciting donations on her website for her defense as well as a separate, as yet-unspecified project in Kercher's memory."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thank you Ava.

I never read the link provided by Max as I can't stand ABC since seeing the level of reporting they put out.

It's something isn't it, where here and on.ORG, we all were saying how both defendants showed no regard at all for the victim, they then suddenly come out with, we will visit the grave, I have visited the grave and, now wouldn't it be a superb idea if we all moved on, became pals and all went and visited Meredith's grave together, with some invisible writing on the end saying something like Knox did about forgiving Patrick only this time forgiving Meredith's parents for thinking they are the murderers, it defies belief, the stupidity and callousness involved.

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


Last edited by zorba on Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Sometimes it seems as if their stupidity protects them in a way. It's just so unbelievable.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 6:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
What's Next In Amanda Knox Murder Trial
By COLLEEN BARRY 12/16/13 05:32 AM ET EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/1 ... _ref=world

This is almost funny (are they dreaming?):
"The case could be further bogged down if Knox and her legal team appeal any guilty verdict to the European Court of Human Rights, whose rulings would be binding on Italy. If it rules that the Italian justice system did anything in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, then the court could in theory order a retrial, or tell Italy to change its laws."



I agree Ava, only, funny while suffering from an awful toothache!

Imagine if the person who wrote this had to sit an examination in which there could be no room for mistakes, well, based on this, I doubt that person would even get to sit said exam.

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Here's a full recap of today's closing arguments:

Amanda Knox Appeal II / Meredith Kercher Murder
Update: Dec. 16, 2013
By Andrea Vogt

Direct, quickly translated quotes/highlights from court as civil parties (the Kercher family lawyers) made their closing arguments to the jury. ... Most chairs were empty. Giulia Bongiorno was also not in attendance. There was less than a dozen observers in the public area and you could count the journalists on one hand.


THE FREELANCE DESK
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda Knox Retrial: ‘Drugs and Alcohol Frenzy Led to Meredith Kercher Murder’
By Umberto Bacchi

"We have no doubt that the accused are guilty," Maresca told the court. "Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede had fallen a pray to excitement that sparked the murderous rage, also because drugs and alcohol had deprived their minds of inhibitory impulses."
...
In his closing arguments Maresca slammed Knox, who has refused to attend the retrial and remains in the US, for soliciting donations in Kercher's memory.

Maresca told judges that the American student had exploited worldwide notoriety from the case for personal gain, while her victim "has fallen into total oblivion".

"She [Knox] has become a well-known person. You know she signed contracts for millions of dollars for her book. She has someone who takes care of her public relations," Maresca said.


IBTIMES
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione videos:

QUOTIDIANO.NET

La Nazione photo gallery (Francesco Maresca, arriving in court this morning):

LA NAZIONE
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Meredith process, the civil party: "Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, must be punished. Alcohol and drugs behind the murderous rampage"
By Roberto Davide Papini

On the question of the motive [for the murder], during the break in the hearing, the lawyer Luciano Ghirga, Amanda Knox's defense, said: "They say that the motive does not matter, but the truth is that Amanda and Raffaele had no reason to unleash so much violence".

:roll:

LA NAZIONE
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Victim's lawyer seeks Knox conviction for murder

Knox is soliciting donations on her website for her defense as well as a separate, as yet-unspecified project in Kercher's memory.

Knox's lawyer, Carlo Dalla Vedova, said after the hearing that she was doing so out of the friendship she felt for Kercher, and that the criticism of her actions was irrelevant to the case.

:roll:

MSN NEWS
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Appeal Session #6: Case For Knox’s & Sollecito’s Guilt - The Civil Parties
Posted by Peter Quennell

TJMK
Top Profile 

Offline jaybee51


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:19 pm

Posts: 112

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Good video of Maresca - with English sub titles.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... urder.html
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Meredith process, the civil party: "Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, must be punished. Alcohol and drugs behind the murderous rampage"
By Roberto Davide Papini

On the question of the motive [for the murder], during the break in the hearing, the lawyer Luciano Ghirga, Amanda Knox's defense, said: "They say that the motive does not matter, but the truth is that Amanda and Raffaele had no reason to unleash so much violence".

:roll:

LA NAZIONE



Might as well talk to a wall eh, he just doesn't get it at all.

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

Offline jaybee51


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:19 pm

Posts: 112

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

hugz-) Thanks guermantes for your stirling effort in translating the tweets.
Much appreciated.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Knox defense gets to present their closing arguments first (tomorrow):

Tomorrow should start the pleadings of the defense, starting with that of Amanda Knox, who is in the United States and has not participated in any hearing, while Raffaele Sollecito was in the courtroom on several occasions: spontaneous declarations issued and heard before the indictment by the PG. Absent today, Sollecito's father, Francesco, who so far had not missed any hearing. Raffaele is located in Santo Domingo; should be back in court on January 9, the day of the arguments of his defense team.


IL MESSAGGERO
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

"No one remembers Meredith, while the two defendants write books, speak to the press and earn money," said lawyer Francesco Maresca, the Kercher family lawyer during the hearing. "Meredith was killed and her suffering had been incalculable ," he added remembering "the 43 lesions on her face, eyes, mouth, neck ... ". Maresca also stressed "the composure of her family, who lives in silence and grief."


It was the conclusion of the family lawyer, the lawyer Francesco Maresca : "The punishment that we ask - he said after quoting St. Augustine - I think that will do justice in accordance with the law."


"Antipathy, intolerance and incompatibility between Amanda and Meredith lead to a violent sexual approach, then there is a loss of control." So the "tension between the girls" was joined to the "sexual motive."


Maresca then requested 25 million Euro in damages for the Kercher family from the three accused, Sollecito, Knox and Guede.


ANSA
Top Profile 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks from me too, guermantes
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks guermantes for all the tweets and extra video's . Lets see what tomorrow brings.n
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Maresca made it clear the Kerchers were aware of Amanda's miserable website. The additional anguish this must have caused them. It is just one more way Amanda has shown extreme arrogance and indifference towards the family's pain. Amanda has fallen victim herself to the false belief she is an author and a person of interest outside of her crime. All those who have cheered her on online in someway will have contributed to the hard fall she is about to face.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Guermantes, thank you so much for your updates and translations. You have made such a huge contribution towards ensuring that the English speaking population can understand not only the facts, but also some of the intricate undertones of the case. It is very much appreciated!
Top Profile 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 7:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Are we on yet?
How's the weather in Perugia this morning?
How does Julia look?
Starting with Knox's defence statement?
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Yah starting now. They are talking about an email from Knox.

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 29s
Processo Meredith, si discute se ammettere la lettura della mail di Amanda Knox #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Processo Meredith, viene letta una mail di Amanda Knox
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Processo Meredith, Amanda: "Sono stata sottoposta a interrogatorio illegale, mi hanno estorto una confessione falsa" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 5m
Processo Meredith, Amanda: "Non ho ucciso, stuprato, rubato, non ero sulla scena del delitto" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 8m
Processo Meredith, la mail di Amanda: "Sono innocente, ma non sono al processo perché ho paura" #meredithnazione
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 48s
Processo Meredith, Amanda alla corte: "Sono innocente, mettete fine a questa enorme ingiustizia" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Processo Meredith, Amanda: "Non sono il mostro che è stato dipinto in questi anni" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 39s
Processo Meredith: Amanda: "Non conoscevo Rudy Guede" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Processo Meredith, Amanda: "Non sono un'assassina, accusa e parte civile sbagliano, vogliono una condanna senza prove" #meredithnazione

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Processo Meredith, Amanda: "Io e Meredith siamo sempre state amiche, non abbiamo mai litigato" #meredithnazione
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Starting now with lawyer Ghirga for Knox

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Processo Meredith, comincia l'arringa di Luciano Ghirga, difensore di Amanda Knox #meredithnazione
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Knox says she is innocent but she is afraid to be convicted...lol...

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
ProcessoMeredith, Amanda:"Sono innocente, ma non sono al processo perché ho paura che la veemenza dell'accusa vi convinca"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:15 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks max for preserving the first tweets. :) I'm back in action and sorry I'm 1/2 hour late this morning/night.

Same old, same old from Knox. How unimaginative of her:

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 21m
Meredith process, an email by Amanda Knox is read

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 28m
Meredith process, discussion on whether to admit reading the email of Amanda Knox

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 25m
Amanda's email: “I'm innocent, but I am not [takng part] in the trial because I'm afraid”

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 23m
Amanda: "I have not killed, raped, robbed, I was not at the scene of the crime"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 23m
Amanda: "I was subjected to an illegal interrogation, they extorted a false confession from me"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 23m
Amanda: "Meredith and I have always been friends, we never had a fight"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

The Nation @ qn_lanazione 21m
Process Meredith, Amanda: "I'm not a killer, the prosecution and civil parties are wrong, they want a conviction without evidence"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26m
Process Meredith: Amanda: "I did not know Rudy Guede"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26m
Process Meredith, Amanda: "I'm not the monster I have been portrayed over the years"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26m
Process Meredith, Amanda to the court: "I ​​am innocent, put an end to this enormous injustice"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26m
Meredith process, Luciano Ghirga, Amanda Knox's defense, begins his speech

Yes, this one is funny:

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26m
Process Meredith, Amanda : "I'm innocent, but I am not at the trial because I fear that the prosecution's vehemence will convince you"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Latest tweet from La Nazione:

The Nation @ qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "The knife found at Sollecito's house is not the murder weapon"
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:25 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks G. Here is one from Nadeau.

Barbie Latza Nadeau ‏@BLNadeau 1h
#amandaknox day in court in Florence (minus #amandaknox) Will her lawyers explain why she is soliciting funds in #meredithkercher memory?
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 2m
In Florence, #amandaknox lawyer holds up large knife to jury: "Starch was on the knife. It was not cleaned. It was in domestic use."
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "The expertise that gives traces of Meredith on the knife is unreliable" (can't be trusted)

Kermit ‏@Kermittweets 27s
Meredith trial, lawyer Ghirga(#AmandaKnox):"Expert report showing Meredith's DNA on the knife can't be trusted"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "On the blade of the knife there is no blood and no trace of Meredith"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "In this trial, the motive is constantly changing"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:50 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 38s
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "We challenged from the outset the murder weapon"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Ghirga (Knox): "The witness Curatolo is unreliable"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

US student Knox declares innocence in email to court, says fear keeps her away from trial
By Associated Press
December 17, 2013 - 4:49 am EST

FLORENCE, Italy — U.S. student Amanda Knox declared her innocence in her British roommate's brutal 2007 murder in an email to the court hearing the case against her, and said she was staying away from the trial out of fear of being wrongly convicted.

Knox wrote in the letter submitted by her lawyers Tuesday before their closing arguments: "I didn't kill Meredith." She added: " I am not in court because I am afraid" that prosecutors would "blind" the court to her innocence.

Presiding Judge Alessandro Nencini read into the record the email, written in Italian, noting it was highly unusual given Knox's absence.

The case was being tried for a third time after Italy's highest court vacated a 2011 appellate court ruling throwing out murder convictions against Knox and her Italian co-defendant.


THE REPUBLIC
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 5s
Meredith process, the lawyer Ghirga (Knox) has finished speaking (before the court)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Meredith process, lawyer Carlo Dalla Vedova (Knox defense) begins his speech

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 31s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Meredith killed in this manner is a defeat for all"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 10s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "This story has been in the headlines for months"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 32s
Carlo dalla Vedova: We know #amandaknox is innocent. As time passes we're even more tranquil.There are many more doubts than certainties.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Wah, Ghirga is done in an hour and a half and his speech produced just a handful of tweets. Then again, he was only part of the team to cuddle Knox so he is probably just bored now :roll:
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

;)
Machiavelli ‏@Machiavelli_Aki 17h
No Machiavelli... no party!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda Knox says she is 'afraid' to appear in court
17/12/2013
'I didn't kill Meredith,' American student writes in email

Amanda Knox said Tuesday that she is "afraid" to attend the trial into murder charges she and her ex-boyfriend face in the death of British student Meredith Kercher. "I am not in the courtroom because I'm afraid," Knox, who denies the charges, wrote in an email to the court from the United States, where she is a student. "I fear that the vehemence of the accusations will impress you, will pull the wool over your eyes and will blind you," she said in a message to the third trial into the murder in November 2007 of Kercher in the Italian city of Perugia. The President of the Court of Assizes Alessandro Nencini, said such an email message from an accused person was "irregular". In her message, Knox also said defended her relationship with Kercher, who was her roommate, and suggested she would have had no reason to hurt the British student. "I didn't kill Meredith," Knox said in her email. "Meredith was my friend," she added. "She was nice, she helped me, she was generous and funny. She never criticized".


GAZZETTA DEL SUD
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "Imaginative (fantastic, invented) reconstruction of the prosecution"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "Absurd that the knife used for the murder was brought home"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 21s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "A murder without a motive is fallacious (a fallacy)"

----
Fallacious - based on a mistaken belief, containing a mistake, not true or accurate
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Weak arguments from Dalla Vedova:

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 7s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "In this process there is no evidence"
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 4m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Barbie Latza Nadeau ‏@BLNadeau 1m
Florence court unimpressed by #amandaknox email read by defense, judge says if you want to talk, come to court ANSA: http://bit.ly/1hgijbT

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 5m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "Without connections between clues, the value of evidence is zero"
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

17/12/2013
Amanda scrive una mail ai giudici:
ho paura, contro di me abuso maligno

http://www.lastampa.it/2013/12/17/itali ... agina.html

"The email that Amanda Knox has sent to the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Florence " is irregular . "Who wants to talk in the process comes to the process", said the President of the Court of Assizes Alessandro Nencini before reading the email sent by Amanda Knox. "Those are no spontaneous declarations " , said Nencini talking to Knox's lawyers. The President of the Court also pointed out that it were the lawyers who attributed the text to Amanda: "I've never seen her, I do not know her.""


Last edited by Ava on Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:06 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda Knox, email ai giudici di Firenze: “Non vengo in Italia, ho paura”
Pubblicato il 17 dicembre 2013 11.20 | Ultimo aggiornamento: 17 dicembre 2013 11.25
http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/cronaca-i ... a-1746860/

The email:

”Non sono presente in aula perché ho paura. Ho paura che la veemenza dell’accusa vi impressionerà, che il loro fumo negli occhi vi accecherà”. Parlando delle accuse Amanda le definisce un ”abuso ingiusto e maligno”.

“Meredith era la mia amica. Lei mi era simpatica, mi aiutava, era generosa e divertente. Non mi ha mai criticata. Non mi ha mai dato neppure un’occhiataccia. L’accusa – continua Amanda – afferma che una rottura era avvenuta fra me e Meredith per la pulizia. Questa affermazione è una deformazione dei fatti. Nel periodo breve che Meredith e io eravamo coinquiline e amiche non abbiamo mai litigato”.

“Nessuno ha mai visto o sentito dire che Meredith e io avevamo mai litigato, disputato, discusso. Nessuno ha mai detto che Meredith fosse una maniaca antagonistica della pulizia o che io fossi una maniaca antagonistica dello sporco. L’accusa vi farebbe credere che questo è il motivo dell’omicidio. Ma questa è una deformazione inquietante dei fatti”.

“Dobbiamo riconoscere che una persona possa essere portata a confessare falsamente perché torturata psicologicamente“, scrive riferendosi alla calunnia nei confronti di Patrick Lumumba. Amanda racconta anche di quando la portarono in questura:

“Mi hanno mentito, urlato, minacciata, dato due scappellotti sulla testa. Mi hanno detto che non avrei mai più visto la mia famiglia se non avessi ricordato cos’era successo a Meredith quella notte”.

“Il mio comportamento dopo la scoperta dell’omicidio indica la mia innocenza. Mai avrei pensato o immaginato che avrebbero usato la mia ingenua spontaneità per supportare i loro sospetti. Non ho nascosto i miei sentimenti: quando avevo bisogno di conforto Raffaele mi abbracciava, quando ero arrabbiata bestemmiavo e facevo osservazioni insensibili”.

“Non ho mai dimostrato un comportamento antisociale, aggressivo, violento o psicopatico. Non sono tossicodipendente o ossessionata di sesso. Quando sono stata arrestata mi hanno analizzata per droga e sono risultata negativa”.

Accusa e parti civili “vogliono che pensiate che io sia un mostro perché è facile condannare un mostro”. Amanda, riferendosi al coltello che avrebbe usato per l’omicidio parla di “prova inventata” e definisce quelli dell’accusa “argomenti teatrali” e “indizi sconclusionati e inattendibili” e anche “inquietante e inaccettabile deformazione dei fatti”.

“L’accusa e le parti civili – aggiunge – stanno commettendo delle ingiustizie contro di me perché non riescono ad ammettere, anche a se stessi, che hanno sbagliato terribilmente. Non ho ucciso. Non ho stuprato. Non ho tramato. Non ho istigato. Non c’ero e non avevo niente a che fare. Sono innocente – conclude Amanda – Raffaele è innocente. Meredith e la sua famiglia meritano la verità. Vi prego di porre fine a questa enorme ed estenuante ingiustizia”.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "Constantly changing motive is an element of weakness of the prosecution"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Absurd that Amanda would join in an attack on a friend"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks Ava for the full text of Knox's email! She talks about those 'scappellotti" (again). Sigh.

Amanda Knox wrote:
"They lied to me, yelled at me, threatened me, gave me two slaps on the head. They told me that I would never see my family if I did not remember what had happened to Meredith that night."
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:20 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 5m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.



CdV would flunk first year crim law on this side of the Atlantic.

Proof of motive is not a required element in any common law jurisdiction you can name.

In 2009, CdV did not appear to understand that a cross-examination is comprised of a series of leading questions (Massei had to explain this to him), and now he comes up with this gem.

I remember reading somewhere that CdV's background was in corporate law and that, before landing Knox as a client, he'd never handled a criminal case.

Is that correct?
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda's email in googletrans:

"I am not present in the courtroom because I'm afraid . I fear that the vehemence of the prosecution will impress you , that their wool over your eyes will blind you . " Speaking of the accusations Amanda defines an " unfair and malicious abuse ."

"Meredith was my friend. She was nice to me , helped me , was generous and funny. She never criticized me. I was never even given a look. The prosecution - she continues - states that a rupture had taken place between me and Meredith for cleaning. This statement is a distortion of the facts. In the short period that Meredith and I were roommates and friends we never quarreled . "

"No one has ever seen or heard that Meredith and I had fought, quarrelled, discussed . Nobody ever said that Meredith was a freak antagonistic cleaning or that I was a freak antagonistic dirt . The prosecution would have you believe that this is the reason for the murder. But this is a disturbing distortion of the facts . "

"We need to recognize that a person can be brought to confess falsely because she psychologically tortured," she writes , referring to the slander against Patrick Lumumba. Amanda also tells of when they took her to the police station :

"They lied to me, yelled at me, threatened me, given me two slaps on the head. They told me that I would never see my family if I had not remembered what had happened to Meredith that night ."

"My behavior after the discovery of the murder indicates my innocence. I never thought or imagined that they would use my naive spontaneity to support their suspicions . I have not hidden my feelings when I needed comfort Raffaele hugged me when I was angry and I was making insensitive remarks ."

"I never showed antisocial, aggressive,violent or psychopathic behavior. I'm not addicted or obsessed with sex. When I was arrested I was tested for drugs and are found to be negative."

The Prosecution and civil parties "want you to think I'm a monster because it is easy to condemn a monster." Amanda, referring to the knife that she is supposed to have used for the murder, calls it an "invented evidence" and defines the prosecutions arguments as "theatrical arguments", "evidence inconclusive and unreliable" and also "disturbing and unacceptable distortion of the facts."

"The prosecution and civil parties - she adds - are committing injustices against me because they can not admit, even to themselves, that they have done terribly wrong. I did not kill. I have not raped. I have not plotted. I have not instigated. I was not there and had nothing to do with it. I am innocent - concludes Amanda - Raffaele is innocent. Meredith and her family deserve the truth. Please put an end to this enormous and exhausting injustice."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The declarations of Amanda between 5 and 6 November are unusable"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Prosecution and civil parties' leverage of Amanda's statements unusable"
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Barbie Latza Nadeau ‏@BLNadeau 1m
Florence court unimpressed by #amandaknox email read by defense, judge says if you want to talk, come to court ANSA: http://bit.ly/1hgijbT


Ouch. I wonder: Is she getting bad advice or is she refusing to follow good advice?
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

The key points of Amanda's 'argumentation':

Il motivo dell'omicidio - the murder motive
La tortura psicologica - psychological torture
Le prove inventate - invented evidence
"Sono innocente“ - "I'm innocent"

http://notizie.tiscali.it/articoli/cron ... ttera.html
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "There has been judicial harassment against Amanda"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

He is repeating the same old tired lines using the same old game; reversing what is really what, truth is HE has nothing, nothing to bring in, to repeal what the superior court said and all as the prosecution did was tighten up what they already had and had put forward in the first place, if he wanted to convince anyone, he needed to come up with SOMETHING, as it is he comes up with an email, duh,

Dear Sir, I cannot come to the classroom today for I have had a headache, the headache started after I murdered Meredith Kercher and you are so mean, leave me alone signed.... millionaire, award winning writer...

Signed again,

Your/s Superior

PS: I hereby enclose 10 euros that I collected for the victim to show how much I care. PSS: I just discovered I can't attach moiney to the email, sorry

Appendix 1, 2 & 3 = If I probably did it

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "There has been judicial harassment against Amanda"



Bull's shite

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "Lumumba shoud not have been arrested, in 12 confirmed the alibi" (in 12 confermavano l'alibi)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 55s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The handprint of Guede on the pillow right now is the signature of the crime"
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Amanda Knox says she is 'afraid' to appear in court
17/12/2013
'I didn't kill Meredith,' American student writes in email

Amanda Knox said Tuesday that she is "afraid" to attend the trial into murder charges she and her ex-boyfriend face in the death of British student Meredith Kercher. "I am not in the courtroom because I'm afraid," Knox, who denies the charges, wrote in an email to the court from the United States, where she is a student. "I fear that the vehemence of the accusations will impress you, will pull the wool over your eyes and will blind you," she said in a message to the third trial into the murder in November 2007 of Kercher in the Italian city of Perugia. The President of the Court of Assizes Alessandro Nencini, said such an email message from an accused person was "irregular". In her message, Knox also said defended her relationship with Kercher, who was her roommate, and suggested she would have had no reason to hurt the British student. "I didn't kill Meredith," Knox said in her email. "Meredith was my friend," she added. "She was nice, she helped me, she was generous and funny. She never criticized".


GAZZETTA DEL SUD


Less than a week before she was murdered, Meredith sent a message to her sister saying that she'd "quarrelled" with her "American flatmate" (Follain, p. 49).
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The declarations of Amanda between 5 and 6 November are unusable"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Prosecution and civil parties' leverage of Amanda's statements unusable"


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: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Basically Knox's defence has always been to blame those who blame her, what's with that, and the now-president will be fully aware of that little game, because when she tries to blame the judiciary she actually means the now-court too, because no one is spared when that gal gets ta blamin other people.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "It was necessary to immediately admit the mistake made by the investigators' (Investigators should have immediately admitted their mistake)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 44s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "30 hours of recordings of Amanda's conversations with parents in prison were heard"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 25s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "From Amanda's conversations in prison nothing has emerged, the sum of evidence is zero"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "Lumumba shoud not have been arrested, in 12 confirmed the alibi" (in 12 confermavano l'alibi)

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 55s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The footprint of Guede on the pillow right now is the signature of the crime"



Again, he (has) fail/s(ed) to (have) listen(ed) to a word of what the Supreme Court said and he has failed, so it seems, to understand a word of what it all meant and the instruction it formed as to procedure to follow in this 2nd appeal, here, yet again he refuses to acknowledge the plethora of trace elements and to put them together in a logical way, in the logical way they fit together, which is not that hard to so if lawyer has anything other than a boiled egg for a brain, even if lawyer cannot put the jig saw TOGETHER AND THE 9-YEAR-OLD beats him, still he is not allowed to do no putting together of at all of what has been acknowledged as facts of evidence; this man might just as well go home, his input is nihil, the effect and damage caused by him is minus 100 on the richter scale.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The declarations of Amanda between 5 and 6 November are unusable"


Why can't they use her "present" to Detective Ficarra?

According to Follain, Knox got the equivalent of a Miranda warning from Mignini some 6 hours BEFORE she voluntarily penned that incriminating statement subsequent to her "midday" arrest on Nov. 6.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

'I didn't kill Meredith': Amanda Knox declares innocence in email to court
Colleen Barry, The Associated Press
Published Tuesday, December 17, 2013 6:27AM EST
http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/i-didn-t-ki ... -1.1596697

Maybe she's planning to go into poetry now:
"I didn't kill. I didn't rape. I didn't rob. I didn't plot. I didn't instigate. I didn't kill Meredith," Knox wrote.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "Amanda was told in prison that she had AIDS, but it turned out to be a mistake"
wa-))
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

The Nation @ qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "In prison Amanda was told that she had AIDS, but it turned out to be a mistake."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 26s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "Without connections between clues, the value of evidence is zero"



Yes and it is exactly him who has failed to come up with any explanation at all ever for the connections that DO obviously exist, as ascertained by the Supreme Court and saying this is nothing other than absolutely bonkers in thw face of the aforementioNed instructions from that Supreme Court, it is he who should put forward a compelling and believable alternative scenario or set of sequences as to how the clues do not incriminate Knox and Sollecito, but there is no way to do that and that is why he and Bongiorno, etc., haven't been able to do it and do not do it for that reason.

A lot of money could have been saved on lawyers' fees here if instead of these a bunch of traffic wardens and ice cream vendors had been rounded up and hauled in to sit as LAWYERS,. THEY MIGHT HAVE AT LEAST COME UP WITH something> ANYTHING.

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
Maybe she's planning to go into poetry now:
"I didn't kill. I didn't rape. I didn't rob. I didn't plot. I didn't instigate. I didn't kill Meredith," Knox wrote.


:)
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
The Nation @ qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "In prison Amanda was told that she had AIDS, but it turned out to be a mistake."



Good for her, alas the prison people were not there on the night Meredith was murderd so this is totally irrelevant

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
Ava wrote:
Maybe she's planning to go into poetry now:
"I didn't kill. I didn't rape. I didn't rob. I didn't plot. I didn't instigate. I didn't kill Meredith," Knox wrote.


:)




No it's an opera singer she has in her sights, she'll need to eat a lot more doughnuts though or just dough, the nuts ingredient is in abundance already

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

[quote="guermantes"]La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox), "Lumumba shoud not have been arrested, in 12 confirmed the alibi" (in 12 confermavano l'alibi)

Oh dear DVedova, ya should-nee keep reminding everyone as everyone is now well-aware that he was only arrested as a result of Knox's statements, which were ALL her OWN WORK.

Oh and don't forget sir to mention that the emailer ain't done paid the man from her stack of money received in relation to the profits she has made from this murder either, so there.

If it had been up to Knox, she may, allegedly, a source says, have been happy to see Patrick Lumumba hang and still refused to pay a penny for his funeral from her profit making corporate venture called murderprofits.com


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 Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Er, I've heard her sing on the Diane Sawyer show I believe. Not exactly opera...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

If we're going to do opera, do it right

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0cKnC3UvWU

at 44 seconds


Last edited by Jester on Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

From the article linked by Ava above:

Presiding Judge Alessandro Nencini read into the record the email, written in Italian and submitted by Knox's lawyers before their closing arguments, noting it was not normal procedure given Knox's absence, and did not have the same legal standing as a spontaneous declaration made in person.

"Who wants to speak at a trial, comes to the trial," Nencini said, adding that he had to take it at the word of her lawyers that the email, printed over five pages, originated with Knox. "I never saw her, I don't know her," the judge said pointedly.

"I am not in court because I am afraid. I am afraid that the vehemence of the prosecution will make an impression on you, that their smoke will get in your eyes and blind you," Knox said. "I am not afraid of your powers of discernment, but because the prosecution has succeeded already in convincing a court comprised of responsible and perceptive adults to convict innocent people, Raffaele and me."

She said she was following the case closely, "given that my life is at stake."

Knox, in the email, said she falsely accused Patrick Lumumba under pressure from police, who made her sign a false confession "that made no sense and should not have been considered legitimate evidence." She said she was denied a lawyer during 50 hours of interrogation over four days in Italian, a language she said she barely knew at the time.

"They lied to me, yelled at me, threatened me, and gave me two slaps on the head," she wrote.


CTV NEWS
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
Er, I've heard her sing on the Diane Sawyer show I believe. Not exactly opera...



I'm pleased I did not hear it, reason I say that even though I'm a musician and love music is because in light of murder it is not exactly appropriate and I just do not want the voices of these people getting into my memory banks amen, there's no soap or bleach with which to get rid of said tones

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Jester wrote:
If we're going to do opera, do it right

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0cKnC3UvWU

at 44 seconds


lovely with afternoon coffee

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

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

L'ennesima provocazione di Amanda Knox: invia mail ai giudici di Firenze, 17 dicembre 2013
http://www.perugiatoday.it/cronaca/fire ... udici.html


The latest provocation from Amanda Knox : sends email to the judges of Florence

"More than just a clever bit is yet another provocation from Foxy Knoxy ( the bad fox ), aka Amanda Knox who sits quietly in the U.S. while in Florence they are trying to determine if she is the killer of the poor Meredith Kercher , brutally murdered in Perugia, along with Raffaele Sollecito. La Knox sent an email to the Court of Appeals to plead not guilty but without appearing in court , out of fear, if found guilty , to return to prison."


Last edited by Ava on Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, President Nencini asks if there are certificates on AIDS tests done to Amanda, but there are ... [none?]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 45s
Meredith process, one-hour break

I feel like making myself a nice cup of tea..........to wake myself up completely........
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

"ma non ci sono"...none, no?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Processo Meredith, pausa di un'ora #meredithnazione

lunch break.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
I feel like making myself a nice cup of tea..........


You should :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now

ProcessoMeredith, President Nencini asks if there are certificates on AIDS tests done to Amanda, but there are ... [none?]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 45s
Meredith process, one-hour break

I feel like making myself a nice cup of tea..........to wake myself up completely........




Good idea, yes you are right, there are NONE (certificates)



Process Meredith: President Nencini asks if any certificates exist from the AIDS test performed on Amanda, but there are none!

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Processo Meredith, avvocato Dalla Vedova; "Assurdo che il coltello usato per l'omicidio sia riportato a casa" #meredithnazione

Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova, "Absurd that the knife used for the murder was brought home" # meredithnazione


Now steady on old boy, is it really so strange to bring a great big knife back home, I see, in your eyes the killers should have disposed of it or left it at the scene of the crime, sorry sir but your reasoning is more than a trifle faulty, were they to leave it there? or trudge about town before finding a spot to hide it? and hope that it would never be found with the abundance of their traces all over it.
Come on old chap get real.

Taking that knife back to his place was absolutely the logical step to take, it fits entirely into what a killer would do unless murdering someone on board a ship in the middle of one of the oceans where dumping a knife would mean it's gone for good. According to Vedova then, I imagine, he thinks killers would trudge about all over town, then dump that whacking great knife in someone's trash only to have it discovered down at the waste disposal plant in the sorting that takes place these days, great chance of metal objects being found because for that it is easy to scan with metal detectors because they wish to recycle metals, they don't scan for wate in the form of milk cartons, or drawers or even bloodied cloths.
DUH


Advice to Vedova. Do better, do much much better or go to jail with a not get out of jail card free.
In fact, for your reasoning Mr Vedova, you yourself deserve a jail sentence, as it is simply pathetically poor what you have put forward. He's doing the old la la la la la fingers in the ears, hands over ears, head, eyes chimpy set, because he did not listen to a word the supreme Court said, is he that stupid?

Sicuro

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

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Jackie wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 5m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.



CdV would flunk first year crim law on this side of the Atlantic.

Proof of motive is not a required element in any common law jurisdiction you can name.

In 2009, CdV did not appear to understand that a cross-examination is comprised of a series of leading questions (Massei had to explain this to him), and now he comes up with this gem.

I remember reading somewhere that CdV's background was in corporate law and that, before landing Knox as a client, he'd never handled a criminal case.

Is that correct?


Hi, Jackie, his background is in civil law but yes, he never tried a criminal case before. (Barbie Nadeau, Angel Face, p. 74) Edda Mellas hired him because the embassy recommended him and he spoke English. Luciano Ghirga does have criminal trial experience and did most the work, whereas Della Vadova missed some trial dates because he was working on deals with the Saudis in Rome.

He seems to not really believe in his client's innocence. Ghirga on the other hand was more the true believer, I wonder how he feels now?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LUFC1972


User avatar


Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:36 pm

Posts: 81

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Thanks for the updates all. Very disrespectful of AK to email the court and doesn't seem to have gone down well with Nencini.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

"I never saw her, I don't know her" says the judge :mrgreen:

This judge has by far the best sense of humor of all.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

max wrote:
Wah, Ghirga is done in an hour and a half and his speech produced just a handful of tweets. Then again, he was only part of the team to cuddle Knox so he is probably just bored now :roll:


Yeah, I'm sure he misses her presence in the court room...and her 'sincere friendship'...

Image
Top Profile 

Offline chami


Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:36 pm

Posts: 166

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Jackie wrote:

Hi, Jackie, his background is in civil law but yes, he never tried a criminal case before. (Barbie Nadeau, Angel Face, p. 74) Edda Mellas hired him because the embassy recommended him and he spoke English. Luciano Ghirga does have criminal trial experience and did most the work, whereas Della Vadova missed some trial dates because he was working on deals with the Saudis in Rome.

He seems to not really believe in his client's innocence. Ghirga on the other hand was more the true believer, I wonder how he feels now?


One of the famous lawyer joke: a good lawyer knows the law but a great lawyer knows the judge.

Good lawyers value a good night's sleep! They really don't care if their client is innocent or not.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

The trial hearing has resumed after lunch break:

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 12m
Meredith process, Carlo Dalla Vedova, Amanda Knox's defense, resumes his speech

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 12m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The alibi of Amanda is accurate and unchanged in her depositions"

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 12m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The alibi of Amanda is the same type as that of her roommates"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 1:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 6m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Amanda didn't name Lumumba to sidetrack the investigation"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 4m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Do not trust the testimony of the witness Quintavalle"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Either witness Curatolo is unreliable or he is our/her alibi. You decide"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 13s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Guede never talks about Amanda"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Guede never says that Amanda was in the house, even outside the ranks"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 12m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The alibi of Amanda is the same type as that of her roommates"


This is yet another murder, this time of truth, her alibi, lack of alibi is ENTIRELY different in nature to the alibis of Meredith's friends and the other housemates.

This guy isn't asking for a lot is he when he asks the lay judges to disregard the shopkeeper but believe Knox, a proven liar and accuser of the innocent, who disrespects Meredith's family and collects money, supposedly for Meredith, an act of sheer brutality when she knows full well what Meredith's family think of her.

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The mother of Meredith says she and Amanda were friends"

Whaaat???

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 18s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Impossible for Amanda and Raffaele to commit a crime in 50 minutes"
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

I believe she once said in an interview that they were friendly?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
I believe she once said in an interview that they were friendly?


Yes, she did say that at a press conference years ago, but not recently. That didn't mean they were the best of friends.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione @ qn_lanazione 35m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "There are only traces of Rudy Guede at the crime scene"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 34m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Guede told a friend in chat that Amanda had nothing to do with the murder"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "War between consultants is like 'The War of the Roses', where everyone hates [each other]"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
I believe she once said in an interview that they were friendly?



Yeah and clever dick Vedova has taken it entirely out of context, were friendly AT FIRST

Of course should YOU go and live in a house, and share that house, you are hardly going to set about being unfriendly, initially, unless something happens, everyone in that initial how are you I'm living here too where ya from situation is initially going go have a walk around town, have a coffee, go to a bar one time, but as things went it seems Meredith soon backed out of doing things with Knox and Knox resented that, resented Meredith's real friends, clearly friends and that is PART OF WHY Knox spoke so harshly to Meredith's friends down at the cop shop.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Aranavachi


User avatar


Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 7:14 pm

Posts: 88

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now

ProcessoMeredith, President Nencini asks if there are certificates on AIDS tests done to Amanda, but there are ... [none?]

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 45s
Meredith process, one-hour break

I feel like making myself a nice cup of tea..........to wake myself up completely........




Good idea, yes you are right, there are NONE (certificates)



Process Meredith: President Nencini asks if any certificates exist from the AIDS test performed on Amanda, but there are none!


How is this incident in jail relevant to a murder that took place beforehand and her innocence?

Also I remember reading that HIV tests can show false positives. A second test is required to confirm HIV. This test was negative for Knox. My question is, how is this the fault of Italians if she was just unlucky and got a false positive?! Its not like they made a fake report for her - I dont see her lawyer claiming any fraudulent test results or havent heard of anyone being punished for intentionally and with knowledge telling her she is positive.

This is what a found with a quick search this morning: When your blood is tested for HIV, the lab first performs what is known as an EIA or ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay). A negative ELISA means that no antibodies were found in the blood and that the person is HIV-negative. A positive result is confirmed with a second ELISA. If the second ELISA is positive, a Western Blot must be done to ensure that the antibodies detected in the ELISA test are really HIV antibodies. The Western Blot test can come back positive, negative, or inconclusive.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 14s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The window with the broken glass was the easiest to use to enter the house"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 14s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The window with the broken glass was the easiest to use to enter the house"


Yet again he ignores what the Supreme Court said, trying to put this again as if the crimes were carried out by a sole perpetrator, the supreme Court stated that the connections must be observed this is him saying he refuses to act on what the Supreme Court says, refuses or just is incapable of doing so, he cannot bring anything in, so talks nonsense, what use is this going to be to his client when NENCINI IS taking what the Supreme court said into consideration (as he knows he is obliged to do so under strict instructions from aforesaid authority (authority higher than anyone in this court; to ignore those instructions is sheer folly) and issuing instructions to the lay judges as to how these parts MUST be processed in accordance with the Supreme Court's findings, failure to do so will only lead to any potential not guilty finding being thrown out again. Thus a total waste of time, that's why Nencini will never rule positively on a total bunch of bollocks from Vedova, and or Bongiorno.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

zorba wrote:
Ava wrote:
I believe she once said in an interview that they were friendly?



Yeah and clever dick Vedova has taken it entirely out of context, were friendly AT FIRST

Of course should YOU go and live in a house, and share that house, you are hardly going to set about being unfriendly, initially, unless something happens, everyone in that initial how are you I'm living here too where ya from situation is initially going go have a walk around town, have a coffee, go to a bar one time, but as things went it seems Meredith soon backed out of doing things with Knox and Knox resented that, resented Meredith's real friends, clearly friends and that is PART OF WHY Knox spoke so harshly to Meredith's friends down at the cop shop.


Yes, it's taken out of context. Iirc, it was the answer to a journalist's question about what Meredith told her mom after she had moved in or what Arlene Kercher's general impression was or something like that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The alleged footprint of female shoe on the pillow, is a fold on the pillowcase"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 54s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Absurd that only traces of Amanda and Raffaele were removed"
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
zorba wrote:
Ava wrote:
I believe she once said in an interview that they were friendly?



Yeah and clever dick Vedova has taken it entirely out of context, were friendly AT FIRST

Of course should YOU go and live in a house, and share that house, you are hardly going to set about being unfriendly, initially, unless something happens, everyone in that initial how are you I'm living here too where ya from situation is initially going go have a walk around town, have a coffee, go to a bar one time, but as things went it seems Meredith soon backed out of doing things with Knox and Knox resented that, resented Meredith's real friends, clearly friends and that is PART OF WHY Knox spoke so harshly to Meredith's friends down at the cop shop.


Yes, it's taken out of context. Iirc, it was the answer to a journalist's question about what Meredith told her mom after she had moved in or what Arlene Kercher's general impression was or something like that.


Thanks Ava, good that you know these things. We are not as forgetful as the defendants (when it suits them to be)
Where the lay judges are faced by the lawyers, what do they think when Vedova says things that they can easily see is not the casre? All as it will mean is he will gain no friends because to use this this way is no better than what Knox does with her forcing herself on Meredith's family, it is so ill-mannered of him to say this for it is an absolute insult to the intellect of the lay judges.

The lay judges may be called lay, but they are not taking this insult to their intellects while lying down.

Vedova thinks he is live in ancient Pompei; he's feeding them nuts instead of grapes

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:
La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The alleged footprint of female shoe on the pillow, is a fold on the pillowcase"



Clutching at straws is all well n good but what is the straw that will break the camel's back; saying Meredith's mother said they were friends when the lay judges KNOW this is not the case?

He wants to watch his stupid claims, it's going to lose him more than he could ever hope to gain from such callous lies/misleading and brutally unkind statements.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 54s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Amanda knew that Meredith's throat had been cut because she was told by a policeman"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda Knox claims she was forced into confession
By Nick Squires

THE TELEGRAPH
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The bra clasp on November 2nd was white, 40 days later - gray"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 27s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The bra clasp of Meredith is not a genuine evidence [find, artifact]"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "For Amanda and Raffaele, Rudy Guede was a stranger"
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione now
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "The victim was attacked from the front, not from behind"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 11s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Room too small for the participation of more people in the crime"
:roll:

------------
He is putting me to sleep with his old, washed-out arguments. p-(((
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 9s
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "On the motive pm sank [ran aground] as did the Costa Concordia at Giglio"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "There is no evidence, no doubt you have to acquit Amanda Knox"
Top Profile 

Offline McCall


Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 3:38 pm

Posts: 291

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Jackie wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 5m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.



CdV would flunk first year crim law on this side of the Atlantic.

Proof of motive is not a required element in any common law jurisdiction you can name.

In 2009, CdV did not appear to understand that a cross-examination is comprised of a series of leading questions (Massei had to explain this to him), and now he comes up with this gem.

I remember reading somewhere that CdV's background was in corporate law and that, before landing Knox as a client, he'd never handled a criminal case.

Is that correct?


I believe CDV is an international lawyer. He has no criminal law experience. His involvement was the result of Edda wanting a lawyer that not only spoke some English but was fluent in English so someone gave her CDV's name.

The motive statement is wrong but it wouldn't be the first time a lawyer says something that he knows to be wrong in a close. They don't have much to work with. The defense close has to be weak and desperate.

My expectations of CDV were low but as I read the transcripts I was satisfied with his performance. The big surprise was GB. Based on people saying she is a super star lawyer and rumors that her hourly is €800 I expected better. Even with the difficult starting position of defending someone who has insurmountable evidence of his involvement a super star lawyer should do better. GB is very ineffective. She gets confused easily. More than once she manages to increase the strength of a prosecution witness during cross-examination. Her hourly has to be justified by political connections as it certainly is not justified by her litigation ability.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 1m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "There is shortage [lack, absence] of evidence"

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 2m
Process Meredith, lawyer Dalla Vedova (Knox): "Acquit Amanda Knox"

I believe he's finished...

La Nazione ‏@qn_lanazione 3s
Meredith process, the hearing ends. The next hearing January 9
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 3:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

guermantes wrote:

I believe he's finished...




Yes, I prayed he would.

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

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Oh my I ventured over to her site to see if there was an update on her blog. Sure enough she responded to Maresca's harsh criticism over the memorial links to the Kercher fund. She wants to hear from the family before removing anything!!!! She was her friend after all. You will not believe the narcissistic entitlement . I for one think she is answering and those are her sick words.
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

McCall wrote:
Jackie wrote:
guermantes wrote:
Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 5m
Carlo dalla Vedova to #amandaknox appeal jury: If there is no murder motive, you must acquit.



CdV would flunk first year crim law on this side of the Atlantic.

Proof of motive is not a required element in any common law jurisdiction you can name.

In 2009, CdV did not appear to understand that a cross-examination is comprised of a series of leading questions (Massei had to explain this to him), and now he comes up with this gem.

I remember reading somewhere that CdV's background was in corporate law and that, before landing Knox as a client, he'd never handled a criminal case.

Is that correct?


I believe CDV is an international lawyer. He has no criminal law experience. His involvement was the result of Edda wanting a lawyer that not only spoke some English but was fluent in English so someone gave her CDV's name.

The motive statement is wrong but it wouldn't be the first time a lawyer says something that he knows to be wrong in a close. They don't have much to work with. The defense close has to be weak and desperate.

My expectations of CDV were low but as I read the transcripts I was satisfied with his performance. The big surprise was GB. Based on people saying she is a super star lawyer and rumors that her hourly is €800 I expected better. Even with the difficult starting position of defending someone who has insurmountable evidence of his involvement a super star lawyer should do better. GB is very ineffective. She gets confused easily. More than once she manages to increase the strength of a prosecution witness during cross-examination. Her hourly has to be justified by political connections as it certainly is not justified by her litigation ability.


Hi, McCall,
CDV is quite a good business lawyer, enough to broker many international deals. But he missed many trial dates. So did GB, whose reputation is overinflated, based on her very junior participation in the trial of the late Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti. Also due to being more involved in politics, though not too successful lately, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazio_regi ... tion,_2013
Top Profile E-mail 

Online Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7180

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Note from La Knox's blog December 17, 2013:

Quote:
The Kercher family’s civil attorney, Francesco Maresca, in his closing arguments yesterday, claimed I have been collecting unspecified funds in the name of Meredith and her family. He left the impression that I was deceiving the public and collecting those funds for myself.

Please visit the Meredith Kercher Murder page and scroll down to the Donation section to discover that I have simply added a link to the Kercher family’s own website where they solicit donations for their ongoing struggle through this heartbreaking legal process.

I have been solicited by Mr. Maresca to remove from my site anything I have done to honor her memory or show support to her family. My response was that no one but the Kercher family has any right to make such a request. As I await direct contact from the family of my murdered friend, I will continue to honor her and show support.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Mmn, Ergon,

drawing up contracts, scanning agreement proposals to make sure the client gets a good deal, acting as a corporate lawyer is hardly comparable to this, I know exactly what his line of work involves.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

So, where's Michael?

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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4860

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Fast Google trans

Roberto Davide Papini's report for La Nazione:

Meredith process, the defense of Amanda: "There is no evidence, when in doubt , you have to acquit ." And she wrote to the judges : "I'm innocent , but I'm afraid that the prosecution will impress you"

After the reading of Knox's email, began the speech of the lawyer Luciano Ghirga, defender of Amanda Knox, who explained that the decision not to attend the appeal trial should be attributed to her emotional state, very upset. In his speech, Ghirga is insisting that in the opinion of the defense "knife found at Sollecito's house is not the murder weapon" and questioning the validity of the report that in the first instance had given the victim a genetic trace on the blade, in particular because the latest techniques were not used and because a single amplification was made with respect to a result that was not enough: "That knife is not the murder weapon and on the blade there is no trace of blood, there is no trace of Meredith." Ghirga, then, insists that the knife in question may not be what caused the fatal wound to the neck " because the wound is not deep enough, the knife would go from side to side."

After Ghirga, another defender of Amanda Knox, Carlo Dalla Vedova spoke, who insisted on the absence of evidence and motive: "On the motive, the Attorney General did as little 'as when the Costa Concordia hit a rock at Giglio. "

" Absurd - continues Dalla Vedova - to use your knife as the murder weapon , and not only for genetic issues , but because it is unthinkable that a murderer uses a knife and then instead of throwing it away brings it home , washes it and puts it back in the drawer." Dalla Vedova said that "as a clue we can not infer a fact, unless the findings are serious , precise and consistent . Here we must add the various elements and the sum of many zeros is always a zero." To Dalla Vedova , " the continuous change in the motive is a weakness of the prosecution ." The defender continues: " Amanda and Meredith were friends , absurd in the face of aggression by Rudy Guede , Amanda instead of defending would join an attacker of her friend. It's 'illogical'.

Emphasizing the big media pressure of the case from the outset, Dalla Vedova has repeatedly said that the investigators would have to immediately recognize their mistakes , that Lumumba should not have been arrested (" from the beginning there were twelve o'clock witnesses who confirmed his 'alibi' ) that the handprint found on the pillow next to the body of the victim , belonging to Rudy Guede , was from the beginning ,"the signature of the crime" and that there was no evidence , however, against Amanda and Raffaele .

The lawyer of Amanda then expressed his amazement at the reference made by the prosecution and by the civil parties to statements of Knox made ​​at dawn on November 6 , noting that the Supreme Court deemed those statements unusable , " because Amanda was not informed of her status change from witness to suspect , because her declaration were made ​​without a lawyer , not knowing fluent Italian " .

Dalla Vedova then reported a rather obscure episode: Amanda, once in prison would have been subjected to blood tests and twice would have been found a seropositivity to the AIDS virus. Circumstance that has obviously scared a girl, up to a third certification , however, that confirmed her negative status and the error of the first two certificates. An episode exposed in an unclear way and then the president Nencini, to clear up misunderstandings , sought clarification and in particular whether there were written certifications and if the defense of Amanda Knox considers these to be falsified certificates of seropositivity. Dalla Vedova responded that he didn't think they were fake and he didn't have, however, copies of these certificates, but wanted to emphasize that this episode was the same as Amanda described in her diary.

The defender of Amanda then talked about an alibi of his client, arguing that it is the same type ( "I spent the evening and night with my boyfriend " ) as those of roommates in the apartment on Via Della Pergola, where Meredith Kercher was killed. " The story of Amanda is accurate and unchanged in its various depositions ," emphasizes Dalla Vedova .

With regard to witnesses, Dalla Vedova defines unreliable witness Quintavalle (the dealer who said he saw Amanda Knox early in the morning after the murder , while the girl has always said that she had slept until 10 o'clock at the home of Raffaele ) " because he spoke out only at the time of the indictment and of Amanda recognized only a picture . " About Curatolo , the homeless man who was stationed in the Grimana square, for Dalla Vedova " he is either unreliable or is our alibi ." Dalla Vedova retraces some outlandish claims and deems Curatolo unreliable , but in the first interrogation, the lawyer says , " Curatolo said he saw the night of the murder , Amanda and Raffaele from 9pm to midnight , and then places them outside the house of the crime . "

Chapter important to Rudy Guede , the Ivorian who has been convicted by a final 17 years ( expedited ) for participating in the murder . "On the scene of the crime , there are only traces of Rudy Guede and Guede does not mention Amanda, never inside the house. Indeed , speaking in a chat with a friend, he says 'Amanda has nothing to do with the murder'. Dalla Vedova back on the knife found at Sollecito's house and repeats it can not be the murder weapon " because it is absurd that instead of throwing it away, Amanda and Raffaele brought back to his home and then washed and used again in the kitchen" and because "there are traces of Meredith and the one highlighted in the first report is totally unreliable for the methods with which it was taken , so do not talk about it anymore ."

Regarding the fact that Amanda knew about the scream made ​​by the victim and the death by a cut to the throat , Dalla Vedova stressed the fact that the scream " is not mentioned within statements of 5:45am 6 November " and that "it was a policeman who told Amanda, who was outside the cottage, that Meredith's throat had been cut."

Dalla Vedova concluded his speech by saying that "there is a lack of evidence , the evidence is insufficient and no doubt Amanda Knox should be acquitted ."


LA NAZIONE
Top Profile 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ergon wrote:
Note from La Knox's blog December 17, 2013:

Quote:
The Kercher family’s civil attorney, Francesco Maresca, in his closing arguments yesterday, claimed I have been collecting unspecified funds in the name of Meredith and her family. He left the impression that I was deceiving the public and collecting those funds for myself.

Please visit the Meredith Kercher Murder page and scroll down to the Donation section to discover that I have simply added a link to the Kercher family’s own website where they solicit donations for their ongoing struggle through this heartbreaking legal process.

I have been solicited by Mr. Maresca to remove from my site anything I have done to honor her memory or show support to her family. My response was that no one but the Kercher family has any right to make such a request. As I await direct contact from the family of my murdered friend, I will continue to honor her and show support.


There is definitely something very wrong with her. And it seems to get wronger each time...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Amanda Knox in email to Italian court: 'I am not a psychopath'
By Alastair Jamieson, NBC News
Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:07 PM EST
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=454&start=2500

"The email was signed-off: "Yours faithfully, Amanda Marie Knox.""
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:

There is definitely something very wrong with her. And it seems to get wronger each time...



Exactly what I was about to write, the weirdest bit is her apparent sheer thickness, in thinking or not realising how bad it sounds when she keeps on, I mean persists, in referring to Meredith as her friend, nobody talks that way. By repeating this she just shows that the opposite is true, they were not friends.


And how weird than nobody in her family pulls her up and says listen, stop saying that line every trime because it really sounds crap.


That saying: If that's a friend who needs enemies
could hardly be more true than now,
what kind of friend is it that murders you?

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

Ava wrote:
Amanda Knox in email to Italian court: 'I am not a psychopath'
By Alastair Jamieson, NBC News
Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:07 PM EST
http://www.perugiamurderfile.net/viewto ... start=2500

"The email was signed-off: "Yours faithfully, Amanda Marie Knox.""


If you adress a letter to a Dear Mr Jones, by name thus, it should end with Yours Sincerely.

If it begins with Dear Sir (impersonal), it should end with Yours Faithfully

Don't know who she addressed it to (??????????)

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXVIII. MAIN DISCUSSION, SEPT 30 -   

ANDREA VOGT:

UPDATE DEC. 17, 2013
The court hearing began with a letter from Amanda, reported here in the Messaggero, which Knox’s lawyers read aloud. However the letter appeared to annoy the presiding judge, who was quoted as saying: “Those who want to speak at the trial should come to the trial.” He declined to consider the letter a spontaneous declaration, saying that he could not ascertain if she was the true author of hte letter. I’ve never seen her. I do not know her.Then Ghirga began his closing remarks.

_________________
Ignorantia juris non excusa ~
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Top Profile 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 11 of 30 [ 7308 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 30  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ergon and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

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


29,150,146 Views