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: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:28 pm
It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:28 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 - June 19, 10

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 42 of 42 [ 10274 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42
Author Message

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:06 am   Post subject: m   

Don Paulo wrote:
According to all the information gathered by Barbie, there will be further mitigation because of the drug/alcohol influence under which at least Amanda and Raffaele were supposed to have acted.
However, like I agree with many of my correspondents, among them Italian lawyers and other insiders, drug+alcohol might lead to strange and atypical behaviour, but there is an important inhibition when it comes to rape and murder. If there is no natural predisposition, they can't perform such acts.
I know, many people lose their inhibition when they are under group pressure, but WHO did put pressure on them? Rudy? There is no real proof of his guilt; petting is not a crime. Raffaele? He is not the guy to rape or kill somebody, and Amanda is just a normal American chick who wants to have fun, but in a non-violent way. She has other ways to shake it out...
I see only that there are 3 scapegoats: a black guy who acted foolishly, a white naive American chick who acted foolishly too, and an Italian nerd who doesn't really understand what is happening to him.
Something happened to Amanda during her sojourn in jail. It started with her thanking the Tribunal for all they had done, and these days again with her regret that she was mis-understood, despite the fact that even Lumumba admitted to have been mistreated in Questura. Amanda reminds me more and more Jack Nicholson in his movie "One flew over the cuckoo's net", ending with his lobotomization, thus death. Therefore I am very worried for Amanda, and about what will happen to her next
...


There's a nutty poster around the web named Harry Wilkens who feels exactly as you do! He is absolutely in love with AK and convinced that she and her friends are innocent and, well, you'll have to ask him as it gets quite bizarre.

As for your friends, the insiders of Italy, and their views on what drugs and alcohol do and don't inhibit, they seem to be hopelessly out of touch with the annals of crime and drug-related crime over the last, let's say, ten thousand years or so.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Don Paulo


Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:10 pm

Posts: 45

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:23 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

I am curious to hear the opinion of the other posters of this site, provided they viewed the video http://www.la7.tv/richplayer/?assetid=50182491
This video did upset me, because it's no fair play. They are making "reconstitutions" there that resemble the Hongkong or Taiwan made manga once posted here and elsewhere.
Their argumentation is very weak to have recourse to such methods...
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:27 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Don Paulo wrote:
I am curious to hear the opinion of the other posters of this site, provided they viewed the video http://www.la7.tv/richplayer/?assetid=50182491
This video did upset me, because it's no fair play. They are making "reconstitutions" there that resemble the Hongkong or Taiwan made manga once posted here and elsewhere.
Their argumentation is very weak to have recourse to such methods...



It's an excellent piece of work and I look forward to the rest of the series. The producer is very well-respected and I know that a lot of research has gone into it. These methods you speak of are used all over the world, including the US.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:10 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Don Paulo wrote:
even Lumumba admitted to have been mistreated in Questura.


Hi Don,

Umm, did he?

What happened to the media report saying the mistreatment allegations were a media exaggeration and misquoting?

Have I missed a report somewhere?


---

On the matter of altered and/or defective minds:

I remember the Italian Penal Code makes specific provision for those who want to rely on "the drugs made me do it" defence.

It says (I remember) that the act of taking intoxicants includes within it the responsibility for everything that happens after, or words to that effect. Do you want me to research that again?


---


You might be thinking along the lines of the psychological/intentional part of a crime.

A proper defence (and subsequent mitigation plea) in this area has two possible legs to stand on

(1) no memory of the event:
- it can be argued that punishment can only work where the punishee is self-aware of the event (e.g., Alzheimer's patients may no longer remember the war crimes they are accused of), and the therefore truthful claim, "I didn't do it" (it was some other mind or mental state that "did" it);

- in the alternative, if the penal institutions are geared towards rehabilitation and protection of the public, then the punishment aspect is irrelevant and other solutions will be sought, in which the lack of memory, and the reasons for the choices leading to it, will be only one component among many.


(2) an infantile/juvenile/adolescent understanding of the world (e.g., it wasn't the strangulation, suffocation or knife cuts that caused the death, it was the loss of blood, compounded with breathing blockage, that led to the death: therefore, there was no murder, therefore innocent, and the truthful claim, "I didn't do it" (i.e., the "cause" was not my action).

- in the alternative, something "innocent" (or innocent enough) slid into an area where the participants had no prior training or exposure to, and therefore no moral training on how to deal with (other than movies, perhaps?), and so their decisions were naive and unsophisticated in the extreme -- but this is basically what the prosecution surmised (and it is, to be fair, the most kind interpretation that can be applied to the events: the common or garden-variety planned malice of an Agatha Christie or Midsomer Murder seems to be the exception in real life, rather than the norm -- where emotions are involved in murders, that is; the relgious fervour used as justification for assassination is a different kettle of fish, belonging to the ephemeral world of mental instability).

Overlapping these two legs are two what-we-might-call "arms":

- If someone is already uninhibited in their natural state, the effect of taking disinhibiting substances lowers their inhibitions further down than would happen with a person not so naturally uninhibited to start with, and it could even take their inhibition level down to zero (to be kind), where anything can, and usually does, happen -- and the result is not explainable precisely because it it not "understandable" by people applying the "natural inhibitions level apply here" test.

- The implied lack of supervision goes back to responsibility of the authority roles (parents, teachers, universities, exchange program supervisors, etc etc) and the consequent liabilities attached to those roles. If there is no responsibility, then there is no need for what are usually called a "tightening of the proceures/requirements" -- whereas here there have been, so someone is feeling responsible (for future students and their families). That action amounts to a true and heartfelt apology, at the social and emotional levels.


There are also "head" and "heart" components of this case, neither of which the PR campaign employ.


:) In certain aspects, the automatic knee-jerk reaction of any fan base can be attributed metaphorically (and in some cases, literally) to another portion of the anatomy, one with "a mind of its own"! Hence, a "magnetic flockability index (MFI)" can be designed that strongly predicts the likelihood of attracting the type of posters Skep mentions above.
Top Profile 

Offline Don Paulo


Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:10 pm

Posts: 45

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:26 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Yes, Lumumba told so. And it's normal - in most police stations of the world - that they hit you more or less slightly to make you admit, so that they can go home, after a long night.
Therefore there is no need or Amanda to apologize like she did this week when there was her hearing in the libel charge...

If somebody does no more remember anything that happened during his/her intoxication, what can you do? It happened to me once when I took a medicament (Xanax) in office. During the time I left my office and I came back home, let's say during about at least 1 hour, I had lost completely my memory and acted very strangely. I couldn't believe it and we did reconstitute it bit by bit, and it was true.. So I am very skeptical when it comes to this issue. Little is known about it!
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:38 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Don Paulo wrote:
Yes, Lumumba told so. And it's normal - in most police stations of the world - that they hit you more or less slightly to make you admit, so that they can go home, after a long night.
Therefore there is no need or Amanda to apologize like she did this week when there was her hearing in the libel charge...

If somebody does no more remember anything that happened during his/her intoxication, what can you do? It happened to me once when I took a medicament (Xanax) in office. During the time I left my office and I came back home, let's say during about at least 1 hour, I had lost completely my memory and acted very strangely. I couldn't believe it and we did reconstitute it bit by bit, and it was true.. So I am very skeptical when it comes to this issue. Little is known about it!



It's a good thing you didn't kill anyone. How lucky for you. Or end up in a police station, where they might have hit you, though you would not remember it, so no harm done I guess.

I would recommend never mixing xanax and alcohol. That's pretty much a no-brainer.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:40 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Don Paulo wrote:
Yes, Lumumba told so.


Hi Don,

For your homework, show me the news video link where he said "No, it was not so." (you can use "Search", if you like - it is not hard.)

Otherwise, you are confusing me, because Patrick is not a liar. :)
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:41 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Catnip wrote:
Don Paulo wrote:
even Lumumba admitted to have been mistreated in Questura.


Hi Don,

Umm, did he?

What happened to the media report saying the mistreatment allegations were a media exaggeration and misquoting?

Have I missed a report somewhere?


---

On the matter of altered and/or defective minds:

I remember the Italian Penal Code makes specific provision for those who want to rely on "the drugs made me do it" defence.

It says (I remember) that the act of taking intoxicants includes within it the responsibility for everything that happens after, or words to that effect. Do you want me to research that again?


---


You might be thinking along the lines of the psychological/intentional part of a crime.

A proper defence (and subsequent mitigation plea) in this area has two possible legs to stand on

(1) no memory of the event:
- it can be argued that punishment can only work where the punishee is self-aware of the event (e.g., Alzheimer's patients may no longer remember the war crimes they are accused of), and the therefore truthful claim, "I didn't do it" (it was some other mind or mental state that "did" it);

- in the alternative, if the penal institutions are geared towards rehabilitation and protection of the public, then the punishment aspect is irrelevant and other solutions will be sought, in which the lack of memory, and the reasons for the choices leading to it, will be only one component among many.


(2) an infantile/juvenile/adolescent understanding of the world (e.g., it wasn't the strangulation, suffocation or knife cuts that caused the death, it was the loss of blood, compounded with breathing blockage, that led to the death: therefore, there was no murder, therefore innocent, and the truthful claim, "I didn't do it" (i.e., the "cause" was not my action).

- in the alternative, something "innocent" (or innocent enough) slid into an area where the participants had no prior training or exposure to, and therefore no moral training on how to deal with (other than movies, perhaps?), and so their decisions were naive and unsophisticated in the extreme -- but this is basically what the prosecution surmised (and it is, to be fair, the most kind interpretation that can be applied to the events: the common or garden-variety planned malice of an Agatha Christie or Midsomer Murder seems to be the exception in real life, rather than the norm -- where emotions are involved in murders, that is; the relgious fervour used as justification for assassination is a different kettle of fish, belonging to the ephemeral world of mental instability).

Overlapping these two legs are two what-we-might-call "arms":

- If someone is already uninhibited in their natural state, the effect of taking disinhibiting substances lowers their inhibitions further down than would happen with a person not so naturally uninhibited to start with, and it could even take their inhibition level down to zero (to be kind), where anything can, and usually does, happen -- and the result is not explainable precisely because it it not "understandable" by people applying the "natural inhibitions level apply here" test.

- The implied lack of supervision goes back to responsibility of the authority roles (parents, teachers, universities, exchange program supervisors, etc etc) and the consequent liabilities attached to those roles. If there is no responsibility, then there is no need for what are usually called a "tightening of the proceures/requirements" -- whereas here there have been, so someone is feeling responsible (for future students and their families). That action amounts to a true and heartfelt apology, at the social and emotional levels.


There are also "head" and "heart" components of this case, neither of which the PR campaign employ.


:) In certain aspects, the automatic knee-jerk reaction of any fan base can be attributed metaphorically (and in some cases, literally) to another portion of the anatomy, one with "a mind of its own"! Hence, a "magnetic flockability index (MFI)" can be designed that strongly predicts the likelihood of attracting the type of posters Skep mentions above.



:lol: :lol:

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:42 am   Post subject: New weight-loss technique   

Orso Di Pietra (“Stonebear”), over at [ Opinions ] this morning, has noticed that journalists have been focusing on murderers’ sexy beauty, their hairdresser hair and fresh-faced relaxed demeanour (Franzoni, Corona, De Nardo, Knox), “not to mention mentioning those who have lost kilos (US: pounds)” (Ricucci, Anemone, De Santis) “the natural way, without having to take medicines or go on fantastical and dangerous diets."

"In sum, according to certain journalists from the big dailies, it seems there is nothing better than a stint in prison for a return to health and full form. More or less for free. What do you say to us organising an appropriate incarcerated sojourn of at least three months each for these legal reporters so fascinated by those bars? They’ll lose the weight. And also their silly pomposity!”


There is, as with everything, some truth in that. :)
Top Profile 

Offline Skeptical Bystander


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:36 pm

Posts: 7006

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:48 am   Post subject: Re: New weight-loss technique   

Catnip wrote:
Orso Di Pietra (“Stonebear”), over at [ Opinions ] this morning, has noticed that journalists have been focusing on murderers’ sexy beauty, their hairdresser hair and fresh-faced relaxed demeanour (Franzoni, Corona, De Nardo, Knox), “not to mention mentioning those who have lost kilos (US: pounds)” (Ricucci, Anemone, De Santis) “the natural way, without having to take medicines or go on fantastical and dangerous diets."

"In sum, according to certain journalists from the big dailies, it seems there is nothing better than a stint in prison for a return to health and full form. More or less for free. What do you say to us organising an appropriate incarcerated sojourn of at least three months each for these legal reporters so fascinated by those bars? They’ll lose the weight. And also their silly pomposity!”

There is, as with everything, some truth in that. :)


Their silly pomp-ass-ity might resist even the most draconian of prison diets. It can be pretty stubbornly embedded, like the love handles on a middle-aged, starry-eyed poet.

_________________
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point; on le sait en mille choses.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:58 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

The Machine wrote:
Version 2:
“I can’t remember if my friend Meredith was there or if she came later. We were all separate,” she said.

This version interests me a lot since you can deduct a lot of things from it, although it is merely speculative.
"“I can’t remember if my friend Meredith was there or if she came later. We were all separate,” she said."

This tells me they all arrived separately. Going by (very vague) CCTV images, we have MK arriving first, followed by AK. There is only 2 minutes difference between those CCTV images. Logically, MK would arrive, turn on the lights, take off her coat and call her mother. Since AK arrives very shortly after her, the arrival of AK is the reason why MK doesn't follow through with her phonecall to her mother. Interestingly RG describes the arrival of MK rather precisely. He might have been there and did indeed meet MK when she arrived. But would MK call her mother when she had let RG in the house? Unlikely. More likely is that MK did not let RG in, but that AK only 2 minutes later did let RG into the house. I can imagine MK would not be too happy.

Why does AK go alone to the cottage? Probably just to get some clothes for their trip the next day. Maybe even a mop. Who knows? RS is busy on the computer and agrees to pick her and her stuff up with his car shortly after. From his computer activity, it shows that he left a little later. The tow truck guy sees RS's car parked outside the gate, with the gate left open. This indicates that RS was not planning on partying. He just went there to quickly pickup AK. (Him leaving on the computer could also be an indication that he wasn't off to a party, but I am not sure how normal this is for RS.)

So overall, this scenario describes a normal start of the night, and there was no plan for anything bad. AK and RG started drinking (drugging maybe) and RS joined the party a little later.


Last edited by max on Sat Jun 19, 2010 5:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 5:00 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Hi Don Paulo

Don Paulo wrote:
According to all the information gathered by Barbie, there will be further mitigation because of the drug/alcohol influence under which at least Amanda and Raffaele were supposed to have acted.


Do you have the original quote on this because my reaction was "no, there really won't be"? Mitigation is something that takes away from the culpability of someone for an offence where the mitigation has been pleaded by the defence. Since Amanda and Raffaele are clearly not admitting the crime, based on the appeals we can see being posted, there won't be any mitigation of the offence being put forward on their behalf. Baffling suggestion.


Don Paulo wrote:
I know, many people lose their inhibition when they are under group pressure, but WHO did put pressure on them? Rudy? There is no real proof of his guilt; petting is not a crime. Raffaele? He is not the guy to rape or kill somebody, and Amanda is just a normal American chick who wants to have fun, but in a non-violent way. She has other ways to shake it out...
I see only that there are 3 scapegoats: a black guy who acted foolishly, a white naive American chick who acted foolishly too, and an Italian nerd who doesn't really understand what is happening to him.


Ignoring the evidence for a second, you seem to have missed that a first-time murder is an extraordinary, completely unprecedented event in 100% of murderers' life experiences. For the vast majority of 'normal' murders, they will be carried out by people who know the victim. And a very large number of those people will have no previous clear indications of violence. You cannot read back the pre-murder lives of 'normal' murderers and say "therefore she didn't do it". There is a huge body of convicted murderers who show you how compltely false that mistaken idea is in the real world.

It's the cuddly-bear theory of "this good girl couldn't have done it" which typifies FOA focus. It's the safe-area of "the world conforms to my understanding of it" which it may well do in every part of their experience of it to date. But it doesn't mean everyone else acts like it in any way shape or form as hundreds of thousands of unlucky people find out each year on a global basis as they become the victims or homicide, serious life changing assaults and sex crimes conducted by previously apparently normal people. If you can't get that, you shouldn't be discussing a case like this because your perspective simply can't be balanced enough to understand how these things can happen and therefore you start doing read-backs like your theory here which is proven wrong time and again every day of the year, several times a day in the categories of crime I have listed.

If you can, then you can start looking at the evidence as to whether they did it or not. There is a ton of evidence against them. You can read it soon since you clearly haven't read it yet.

Don Paulo wrote:
Something happened to Amanda during her sojourn in jail. It started with her thanking the Tribunal for all they had done, and these days again with her regret that she was mis-understood, despite the fact that even Lumumba admitted to have been mistreated in Questura. Amanda reminds me more and more Jack Nicholson in his movie "One flew over the cuckoo's net", ending with his lobotomization, thus death. Therefore I am very worried for Amanda, and about what will happen to her next...


McMurphy is a hero in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Amanda Knox is no hero. She's a very messed up girl who is desperately trying to avoid the fate she created for herself like all human beings in a corner. The only difference between now and before is that she is better stage-managed on her appearance and demeanour in photos and in court. However, she's still playing for the gallery in her "overheard" quotes in court about "why are they always picking on me". It's a ridiculous quote when she has been discussing the basis of the charge for 2 and a half years. Palpably said for public effect. She's also never uttered any words of remorse in court for Patrick, despite the fact that we know she recognised her responsiblity from the "I fucked up so bad and I'm so sorry" screenshot of her letter to Madison Paxton.

And of course she's still never managed to utter any words of proper remorse for Meredith.

And of course she's still willing to ruin her sister Deanna's college career and her families' lives by continuing to be unable to take responsibility for what she did.

No-one put Amanda where Amanda is except Amanda. And she still can't face up to what she did and it doesn't matter to her what effect that is having on any number of people who are deeply damaged by it. Because Amanda was, is and will always be all about Amanda.

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 6:47 am   Post subject: Perugia News Digest 17 June 2010   

Perugia News Digest 17 June 2010



Amanda is in court (n1) again (n2), this time for slander (n3) and to object to Judge Claudia Matteini being the Preliminary Hearing Magistrate (the GUP) in her slander case against 12 police officers. (n4)

Matteini was the magistrate overseeing the initial investigations (the GIP) who signed Amanda's continued detention order and refused her house arrest. (n5)

Matteini refused the defence request to stand aside in the slander case, and the defence formalised the objection with an appeal lodged with the Court of Appeal of Perugia. (n6)

"I only wanted to defend myself. (n7) I'm sorry that the matter has arrived at this point," (n8) Amanda said to the appeal judges, Magrini, Pierucci and Ligori (n9), in brief spontaneous declarations (n10).

The Court of Appeal, hearing an objection against Judge Claudia Matteini sitting on the slander case, (n11) has reserved its decision (n12) and will hand it down within five days (n13).

Public Prosectuor Razzi had requested the court to refuse the defence request. (n14)

It was said that Amanda wore brown slacks and a light T-shirt (n15).


In a letter to the Fondazione Italia-USA (Italy-US Foundation) (n16) Amanda "pardons" the city of Perugia, while re-affirming that her 26-year prison sentence is a "judicial error" against "which she must fight" (n17): "I think," wrote Amanda, "that the position taken by Mike James [president of the twinning between Seattle and Perugia] (n18) is correct: it is not against the city of Perugia I have to fight, but against a judicial error. (n19) I hope something positive will start to come out, to recover that friendship that ought to be found everywhere." (n20)



Notes
n1 -- 1
n2 -- 1,4,6
n3 -- 6
n4 -- 1,3
n5 -- 2,3,7
n6 -- 3,7
n7 -- 1,2,3,4,6,7
n8 -- 1,2,3,4,6,7
n9 -- 2
n10 -- 3
n11 -- 2
n12 -- 2
n13 -- 1,2,3,4,7
n14 -- 2
n15 -- 3,7
n16 -- 5
n17 -- 5
n18 -- 5
n19 -- 5
n20 -- 5


References

1 - “Amanda Knox: volevo solo difendermi”(Amanda Knos: I wanted only to defend myself) [ANSA] 17 June 2010
2 - “Meredith/ Amanda: Sono sempre pronta a difendermi”(Amanda: I’m ready to defence myself) [Virgilio] 17 June 2010
3 - “Meredith. Amanda accusata di calunnia da alcuni poliziotti: ‘Volevo solo difendermi’ ”(Amanda accused of slandering police: “I wanted only to defend myself”) [Blitz] 17 June 2010
4 - “PERUGIA: AMANDA KNOX ACCUSATA DI CALUNNIA SI GIUSTIFICA, VOLEVO SOLO DIFENDERMI”(Amanda Knox charged with calumny justifies herself: I wanted only to defend myself) [Iris Press] 17 June 2010
5 - “Meredith/ Amanda 'assolve' Perugia come città”(Amanda ‘forgives’ the city of Perugia) [Virigilio] 14 June 2010
6 - “Amanda Knox: volevo solo difendermi”(Amanda Knox: I wanted only to defend myself) [Tutto Sport] 17 June 2010
7 - “OMICIDIO KERCHER - AMANDA ANCORA IN AULA, VOLEVO SOLO DIFENDERMI”(Amanda in court again, I wanted only to defend myself) [Umbria Journal] 17 June 2010
Top Profile 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 7:36 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

The Bard wrote:
Fiona wrote:
To be honest I do not really think some of them share a set of assumptions about the nature of debate. I think that folk like MaryH and Bruce Fisher are engaged in something quite different


Totally agree. I have given up reading over there as it seems to be a pointless exercise (with all due respect to yourself and stilicho and Fulcanelli).


I know I'm late to the party, but I just had to respond to this discussion. I spent a couple days reading several pages of exchanges over at jref marveling at the dedicated efforts of our local heroes. It brought to mind an online comic that I often think of when I am tempted to get engaged in such ventures:



Edited to add a link to the xkcd homepage for your future enjoyment: http://xkcd.com/
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:35 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Any of our encyclopaedic members be able to tell / remind me quickly of the date that Amanda came to Europe (her 'I'm gone' post on myspace is August 14th so it is around this time) and the approximate date she would have left on (completion of full study course)? Thanks SA

Edit: To correct calling her study 'erasmus' per Nicki

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.


Last edited by SomeAlibi on Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline nicki

Forensics Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:27 am

Posts: 847

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:45 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

SomeAlibi wrote:
Any of our encyclopaedic members be able to tell / remind me quickly of the date that Amanda came to Europe and the approximate date she would have left on (completion of full Erasmus course)? Thanks SA

Amanda was NOT an Erasmus student

_________________
"A pensare male si fa peccato, ma molto spesso ci si azzecca" mike
Top Profile 

Offline SomeAlibi


User avatar


Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:23 pm

Posts: 1932

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 9:53 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

nicki wrote:
SomeAlibi wrote:
Any of our encyclopaedic members be able to tell / remind me quickly of the date that Amanda came to Europe and the approximate date she would have left on (completion of full Erasmus course)? Thanks SA

Amanda was NOT an Erasmus student


Thanks - lazy Saturday morning wording

_________________
What it is is spin lent credence because it's from the mouth of a lawyer. We've seen how much gravitas they can carry merely by saying something is or is not so when often they are speaking as much rubbish as anyone else.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 10:23 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Bruce Fisher seems to think that Filomena kept her clothes on the floor:

"If the clothes were thrown on the floor to stage a break in, tell me where the clothes came from. Where were they? There is no logical place for them to go. They were on the floor to begin with."

If he had read an accurate translation of the judges' sentencing report, he would have known that the clothes were in the closet. It must be a nightmare for Bruce and his gang to rely on Google Translate.
Top Profile 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 10:27 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Mr Fisher has photographic evidence which satisfies him that Filomena's room was not disturbed: it started out that way. He takes this as a fact and he expects it to be accepted, as he does with most of his views.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:00 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Fiona wrote:
Mr Fisher has photographic evidence which satisfies him that Filomena's room was not disturbed: it started out that way. He takes this as a fact and he expects it to be accepted, as he does with most of his views.


Bruce Fisher can't possibly know what state Filomena's room was in on 1 November 2007 or how tidy she is.

From the judges' report:

1. Filomena is very tidy.

2. Filomena testified that "everything was all over the place..."

3. Various objects had been scattered on the floor.
Top Profile 

Offline Catnip


User avatar


Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:43 am   Post subject: Itinerary   

SomeAlibi wrote:
Any of our encyclopaedic members be able to tell / remind me quickly of the date that Amanda came to Europe (her 'I'm gone' post on myspace is August 14th so it is around this time) and the approximate date she would have left on (completion of full study course)? Thanks SA


Hi, SA: Vague recall (so may be incorrect), no specific dates:

late August-early September: AK sees Filomena and Laura's rent flyer while enrolling for courses at UpS; AK falls in love with the cottage; AK makes arrangements to move in after holiday trip to Germany

early September: MK finds cottage and moves in

up-to-mid-September: AK goes to visit relatives in Germany for two weeks, then back to Perugia

mid-September: AK & MK first meet

mid-October: AK & MK go to Eurochocolate together

late October: the free concert where RS & AK "click"


As for the end of the stay, the language courses and creative writing courses are not all that long. Free-spirit, free-wheeling, come-what-may, hippie atmosphere, see-what-happens. It could have been the most wonderful time of her life (and is, for a lot of students).


Do you remember a Helen Bonham Carter character (was it Absolutely Fabulous?) saying, about her plans for the future after finishing school: "Oh, I don't know -- bum around Europe for a few years?" That sort of course.
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:44 am   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Michael wrote:
bucketoftea wrote:
Did Amanda actually say "underpants"? I thought she said she borrowed "pants" from Raff, which I think she meant trousers. Isn't pants American for trousers? As in pantsuit? It's not American to call underpants pants, I'm pretty sure.



Yes, she wore them...while on her period as I recall,


Sorry I don't mean to discuss AK menstrual cycle, but if she had her period just following the murder, we have another "risk" factor for her......PMS. Just sayin'.
Top Profile 

Offline bucketoftea


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:09 pm

Posts: 1377

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 12:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XVI. MAIN DISCUSSION, March 5 -   

Don Paulo wrote:
Yes, Lumumba told so. And it's normal - in most police stations of the world - that they hit you more or less slightly to make you admit, so that they can go home, after a long night.
Therefore there is no need or Amanda to apologize like she did this week when there was her hearing in the libel charge...

If somebody does no more remember anything that happened during his/her intoxication, what can you do? It happened to me once when I took a medicament (Xanax) in office. During the time I left my office and I came back home, let's say during about at least 1 hour, I had lost completely my memory and acted very strangely. I couldn't believe it and we did reconstitute it bit by bit, and it was true.. So I am very skeptical when it comes to this issue. Little is known about it!


I think we can more-or-less be CERTAIN that AK and RF hadn't taken a sleeping pill!
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 12:43 pm   Post subject: LOCKING THREAD   

picture of a pumpkin
This topic has been locked by a Moderator
Reason: I am now locking this thread. For the continuing discussion, please migrate to the brand new main discussion thread: XVII. MAIN DISCUSSION, June 19 -

_________________
"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 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 42 of 42 [ 10274 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], CommonCrawl [Bot] and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

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


29,446,081 Views