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: Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:47 pm
It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:47 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 - OCT 31, 12

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 10 of 12 [ 2830 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 2:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
This Jane V was in no way able to stand up to what Wendy was saying, all as Jane V did was shout nonsense.


As much as Jane coddled him in her own crazy way, Sollecito was thrown off his game in that interview. Maybe he met Wendy Murphy and Levi Page in the Green Room. Hopefully their bravery will inspire other journalists to actually look at the overwhelming case against Knox and Sollecito, rather than accepting as fact the media kit of the PR machines behind the two accused sex murderers.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 2:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I'm not sure today's soiree has been mentioned yet.



Before the guest list was hidden, Sollecito's father and sister had responded they would be attending.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 3:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
...however, check out who set up the interviews, and one will find that the chiefs/show organisers were drilled or scrutinized, meaning, chatted with to see whether they agreed with the idea of: Yeah, these 2 are innocent...

PR-person Sollecito gave the interviewer a dictatorial type list of how things are.


So true, zorba. Dull, decidedly boring interviews. Sollecito keeps repeating the same answers ... over and over. Is it possible all these interviewers are following the same script? Duh... Either CNN talk show hosts are dumb heads or sold out; CNN should be ashamed of themselves for giving credibility to this criminal and deceiving pretender.

Sollecito on Starting Point with Soledad O'Brien

No need to watch it unless you really want to. Or watch it without turning on the sound; it's interesting to look at his facial expressions.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 3:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

"Honor Bound: My Journey to Hell and Back with Amanda Knox"

Andrew Gumbel is the man who helped Raffaele Sollecito tell his side of the story.

He spoke with KOMO’s Jane Shannon and Tom Hutyler:

http://www.komonews.com/radio/shows/weisbaum-shannon/170417166.html
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 4:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
zorba wrote:
This Jane V was in no way able to stand up to what Wendy was saying, all as Jane V did was shout nonsense.


As much as Jane coddled him in her own crazy way, Sollecito was thrown off his game in that interview. Maybe he met Wendy Murphy and Levi Page in the Green Room. Hopefully their bravery will inspire other journalists to actually look at the overwhelming case against Knox and Sollecito, rather than accepting as fact the media kit of the PR machines behind the two accused sex murderers.


There's no way Wendy was going to be sitting on the same sofa as him, I expect the only way she was willing to be in a room with him, was directly opposite him.

Did me a lot of good listening to her.

_________________
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 Sep 23, 2012 4:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
I'm not sure today's soiree has been mentioned yet.



Before the guest list was hidden, Sollecito's father and sister had responded they would be attending.



I think they made a spelling mistake, his book was supposed to be called Boner Hound.

_________________
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 Sep 23, 2012 5:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
...however, check out who set up the interviews, and one will find that the chiefs/show organisers were drilled or scrutinized, meaning, chatted with to see whether they agreed with the idea of: Yeah, these 2 are innocent...

PR-person Sollecito gave the interviewer a dictatorial type list of how things are.


So true, zorba. Dull, decidedly boring interviews. Sollecito keeps repeating the same answers ... over and over. Is it possible all these interviewers are following the same script? Duh... Either CNN talk show hosts are dumb heads or sold out; CNN should be ashamed of themselves for giving credibility to this criminal and deceiving pretender.

Sollecito on Starting Point with Soledad O'Brien

No need to watch it unless you really want to. Or watch it without turning on the sound; it's interesting to look at his facial expressions.



I expect the poor infant child was decidedly unhappy after his Wendy thing, how could this have happened, you said, bla la bla.

I can imagine how Knox will react that really takes her up on stuff, without the protection of a court to stop you asking things, I reckon she could go bananas, I would love to see it, it'd how the real her, the part of her she is hiding. Basically, the raving lunatic and uncontrolled part of her.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
...however, check out who set up the interviews, and one will find that the chiefs/show organisers were drilled or scrutinized, meaning, chatted with to see whether they agreed with the idea of: Yeah, these 2 are innocent...

PR-person Sollecito gave the interviewer a dictatorial type list of how things are.


So true, zorba. Dull, decidedly boring interviews. Sollecito keeps repeating the same answers ... over and over. Is it possible all these interviewers are following the same script? Duh... Either CNN talk show hosts are dumb heads or sold out; CNN should be ashamed of themselves for giving credibility to this criminal and deceiving pretender.

Sollecito on Starting Point with Soledad O'Brien

No need to watch it unless you really want to. Or watch it without turning on the sound; it's interesting to look at his facial expressions.


What a coincidence you should say this about the sound, guermantes. I did exactly that with the Couric interview.
It's lengthy, but, so revealing. Especially Katie. Towards the end, the subtle change in her eyes and expression is priceless. She seems so involved in her thoughts, she forgets to acknowledge him at the end.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yes I too often set my volume control to zero, with many things but especially this. I may take another look as I haven't been able to stomach any of it in full, yet

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


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Ava wrote:
Didn't Wendy say AK's book would be out in a couple of weeks already?
I thought it was much later.


It was scheduled to be published in October, Ava. Strange how few people know it's been set back to after the SC hearing in March. Strange, but lucky for us that knife boy's memoir about how he doesn't remember wasn't also set back?




Yet, shortly after the appeal verdict, her family was claiming the book was practically written with all the journals she kept in prison. Her stepfather is said to have injured his back lugging out boxes of her writings.

Early on it was suggested by some Italian attorneys that Knox be evaluated for graphomania; this was rejected by her defense. Graphomania, also known as Hypergraphia, is an overwhelming urge to write, and can be associated with hypomania and mania in the context of bipolar disorder.

Maybe her confused and verbose writing style is playing a role in the delay of the book, not to mention her propensity for confessional writing and the legal edits this book is surely going through.

One can only imagine the editing process that would take place with a submission such as her Marie Pace confession:

"I turned and you were gone. Swam in the waves of warm bodies and wet with sweat and drink. I had to navigate to reach the wall with arms raised like a mast. I walked passing over the jackets, bags and in a corner there was a guy passed out. You were not in the kitchen, where a mountain of beer cans was on the floor. I was opening a window to get some air when I saw from the door smoke coming out. I approached, I knocked, I called you, I held the door handle and then when no one answered me, I opened the door. The smoke enveloped me and I thought of drowning in that burnt stink then I saw you lying on the ground, without a jacket and without shirt. At that moment I did not understand anything and while I was out of the house I remembered that with you there were other people who smoked, that were piercing. I didn't understand, you must believe me."

Of course it makes sense to delay the book until after Cassation rules, but was that the original plan? How long will Harper Collins ride this deal out assuming there is a retrial?



Dropped out of college to write her book

Ahahaha, yeah sure, let's face it, there's no way in real life that she can now interact with people, anyone asks her a few too many questions and there's no knowing what might happen, basically Knox would be freaking out and getting angry or avoiding people altogether, that is what she is doing = she couldn't handle her studies, she couldn't handle attending.

I really wonder if Sollecito is already setting about staying in the states, I think he is. He knows his dad and sister can come to see him, if he has to miss out on Italy, he'll prefer that to 25 years in jail. Anyhow, he will not miss his dad.

I bet those book people and so on are already helping him apply for a green card.

It's his only way out. Court doesn't look like his way out, and I expect he will not be as smiley after he reads what the prosecutors are entering in their files to the Supreme Court.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:05 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Yes I too often set my volume control to zero, with many things but especially this. I may take another look as I haven't been ale to stomach any of it in full, yet


Watch the screamers and fawners for light humor, Zorba. But, Couric's interview is different.
I have watched portions of some of her shows, just to get a feel for her interview style. This show does not appear to be a good fit for her. I believe the theme is one of 're-invention.' Sometimes, moving on after tragedy.
It's supposed to be about her own re-invention, going in a different direction in her own life.

Some shows, like the first, were not a good fit at all, IMO. A very wealthy celebrity losing weight is not on the same level as an amputee, who puts us all to shame with her determination.

There is sadness, as there was with the family of the murder victim, Yeardley Love. But, Couric appeared connected during these interviews, Empathetic. And I think that Sollecito's interview was supposed to be one about a man who is trying to reinvent his life after HIS tragedy. It just did not work. And you can clearly see this in comparison to her other interviews.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
What a coincidence you should say this about the sound, guermantes. I did exactly that with the Couric interview.


Hi Napia5, I did that with both Katie's and Anderson Cooper's interviews as well, especially with the AC360, wanting nothing more than to wipe that nasty smirk / grin off Sollecito's face.

By the way, both video segments have been uploaded to Youtube, by a fan for fans ;), i.e. by InjusticeinPerugia. The quality is not at all good and the video lost its sharpness; it's a bit blurry.

Katie Couric Interviews Raffaele Sollecito
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRUs9LGUlzU&feature=related

Anderson Cooper Interviews Raffaele Sollecito
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muKUQlPgFcU&feature=relmfu

All the usual suspects showing up and spouting off the typical "He seems a very sweet and sincere young man. I am so sorry this happened to him and to Amanda" in the comments below the videos.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I was hoping someone would transcribe the Gumbel Interview. Thank you to brmull from .org for doing this so fast for all of us; must have been a lot of work.

I hope you don't mind me posting the transcript here.

Ergon, I think it's time to prepare a new section in "Cast of Characters" dedicated to Andrew Gumbel (just a hint ;) )

Transcription: brmull
Original post: http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=121163#p121163

Transcript of KOMO Interview with Andrew Gumbel (9/19/2012)

[He spoke with KOMO’s Jane Shannon (JS) and Tom Hutyler (TH)].

AG: It was difficult for him to come to terms with his experience so soon after he'd come out of prison. He spent four years of his life behind bars, six of them in solitary confinement, the rest of it in a special protected wing where he was put in with the serious sex criminals, the child rapists, mafia members. It was a really horrific experience. So he wanted very badly to tell this story but he also wasn't especially well equipped to dredge back into his memory and call up everything in great detail. What became very helpful was we went through all the case files and made sure that everything was scrupulously documented and that helped his memory come back. He ended up telling really vivid stories about exactly how awful it had been and also his reaction to every stage of the legal process and how outraged he was that someone like him who, if you meet him, he's really--you can tell he wouldn't hurt a fly--he's a very gentle sweet young man, how he was depicted to be this devilish accomplice to Amanda Knox, who in turn was depicted as being some kind of depraved American she-devil. And the whole thing was colossally concocted from the beginning. It was fueled by the media, the prosecution became addicted to the coverage as much as it did to the evidence at hand, and the reality of the case, which is that this is a desperately sad but very simple break-in gone wrong turned into a murder--all of that was overlooked and these two young people who should never have been involved at all ended up paying very dearly for it.

TH: We understand this has created quite a firestorm in Italy because it really says that the police, the prosecutor--they're not painted in a very flattering light here, and they arrested him and put him in solitary confinement even though there had been no evidence tied to the crime [sic], so it sounds like he'd been kind of railroaded from the very beginning here.

AG: That's right. In Italy people are very smart. They understood what was going on but they're also afraid of the power of the prosecutor. Prosecutors in Italy are tremendously powerful. They're on a par with judges and they really answer to no one but themselves. They're in a position to arrest people, to accuse them of libel, to put them in prison, even without charge. And so there's a very cowed response. I think this book being published by a major American publisher is an opportunity to look at the case files and say this is the reality of what they did to these two young people. And it involves all kinds of strange and twisted things. One of the things that grabbed people's attention in Italy over the last couple of days is the existence--or the attempt--at a back-channel communication with the prosecution that became evident according to the lawyers who spoke to Raffaele's family, that the prosecution themselves didn't really believe that Raffaele was guilty. They were just holding him and treating him so badly with one purpose in mind which was to get him to turn on Amanda, change his testimony and say that he didn't know what she did the night of the murder or that he actively remembered her going out, and he refused to do that. And that was really the honorable stance that he took that ultimately set them free but at a terrible cost, you know, he lost four years of his life for that principled stand.

JS: Andrew, is Raffaele at all concerned about reaction in Italy to this book?

AG: Well I mean the case has been through two levels of the criminal courts. It's got one more level to go, which is the High Court, which will look at essentially the procedural correctness of what's gone before. He and his family I think they're nervous obviously, but mostly pretty confident that they will prevail there. And beyond that we were pretty careful in this book, he and I together, to base what we said on documentation, on what was on the record. Where we quoted the prosecutor it was times when he'd spoken in a context that was either official or it was in a recorded interview and we had access to the recording. So we really made sure that we just stated the facts as they were and you know there's no need to embellish anything in this story. It's quite awful enough just relying on the things we know to be true and can demonstrate to be true.


http://www.komonews.com/radio/shows/weisbaum-shannon/170417166.html
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Yes I too often set my volume control to zero, with many things but especially this. I may take another look as I haven't been ale to stomach any of it in full, yet


Watch the screamers and fawners for light humor, Zorba. But, Couric's interview is different.
I have watched portions of some of her shows, just to get a feel for her interview style. This show does not appear to be a good fit for her. I believe the theme is one of 're-invention.' Sometimes, moving on after tragedy.
It's supposed to be about her own re-invention, going in a different direction in her own life.

Some shows, like the first, were not a good fit at all, IMO. A very wealthy celebrity losing weight is not on the same level as an amputee, who puts us all to shame with her determination.

There is sadness, as there was with the family of the murder victim, Yeardley Love. But, Couric appeared connected during these interviews, Empathetic. And I think that Sollecito's interview was supposed to be one about a man who is trying to reinvent his life after HIS tragedy. It just did not work. And you can clearly see this in comparison to her other interviews.



I will take a look, according to your and Guermante's advice for viewing; it's like you need to use special protective goggles to look at these people!!!

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

There you go, guermantes. ANDREW GUMBEL, "HONOR BOUND" WRITER viewtopic.php?f=9&t=406

Just hit post reply and you can copy your original post there too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Added one for RAFFAELE SOLLECITO in "Cast of Characters" viewtopic.php?f=9&t=407

For now, if everyone who posted his media interviews do so there as well, please? Thanks.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Many thanks, Ergon. You are so fast ... you are faster than fast ... you are lightning! :)

I'll start off by posting Andrew Gumbel's credentials and the link to his other interview HERE in that brand-new thread. Thanks again.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

For those who haven't downloaded the Galati Costagliola Appeal from .ORG or TJMK yet, it's available here as well, with thanks.


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Note also that Amanda Knox's lawyers have filed a separate appeal to the Rome Court requesting the Hellmann court's upholding of the separate 3 year sentence for the crime of defamazione against Patrick Lumumba be struck down. Twist the truth as they might, Amanda Knox's defenders cannot escape the fact she accused an innocent man, and did not rescind her accusation until after Rudy Guede was apprehended. She still has a criminal record in Italy.


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Amazon reader reviews of Sollecito's book:

Customer Reviews Honor Bound
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
Amazon reader reviews of Sollecito's book:

Customer Reviews Honor Bound



I did take a look Guermantes, sound off, and all as I could see was Sollecito acting, and the interviewers asking no real questions, all as they did was facilitate his position, give him a platform, what I get from Sollecito is a very contrived manner, and his eyes too give his game away, as they look like those of a rat in the final throes of death, swollen with his troubled mind.

Now taking a swifty, the reviews, my God, they are all out, Knox's supporters, filling everyone in, with their spin, they will keep this up, anyhow, online reviews are pretty useless, because there is no control over who is writing them, and here, it definitely is team Knox in there, trying to make out the reviews are real, but no way.


We cannot truly speak of a team Sollecito, if I do use any such term, it is knowingly as a sideline to Knox, as everything that's happening to him, is primarily a result of those helping Knox to get away with the murder. They do not care about Sollecito.

And this constant, he IS a young boy, he was a young..... I mean come on the guy is 28, at what age does a man stop being a boy?


This addition of the word boy all the time is another fixed tactic, one to make them (Knox & Sollecito) seem oh so very lilly white.

_________________
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 Sep 24, 2012 1:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:

Dropped out of college to write her book

Ahahaha, yeah sure, let's face it, there's no way in real life that she can now interact with people, anyone asks her a few too many questions and there's no knowing what might happen, basically Knox would be freaking out and getting angry or avoiding people altogether, that is what she is doing = she couldn't handle her studies, she couldn't handle attending.

I really wonder if Sollecito is already setting about staying in the states, I think he is. He knows his dad and sister can come to see him, if he has to miss out on Italy, he'll prefer that to 25 years in jail. Anyhow, he will not miss his dad.

I bet those book people and so on are already helping him apply for a green card.

It's his only way out. Court doesn't look like his way out, and I expect he will not be as smiley after he reads what the prosecutors are entering in their files to the Supreme Court.


It's interesting, isn't it...what is Mandy actually doing these days? Having lots of chats with her ghostwriter? Going through her old diaries and filling new ones? Practicing dance moves with the classical guitar player? Hm.
I think you're right, Zorba, she couldn't handle University for some reason.
As for Raffaele, I believe the US would be a dangerous place for him in case of another conviction even with green card, or am I wrong?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ava wrote:
zorba wrote:

Dropped out of college to write her book

Ahahaha, yeah sure, let's face it, there's no way in real life that she can now interact with people, anyone asks her a few too many questions and there's no knowing what might happen, basically Knox would be freaking out and getting angry or avoiding people altogether, that is what she is doing = she couldn't handle her studies, she couldn't handle attending.

I really wonder if Sollecito is already setting about staying in the states, I think he is. He knows his dad and sister can come to see him, if he has to miss out on Italy, he'll prefer that to 25 years in jail. Anyhow, he will not miss his dad.

I bet those book people and so on are already helping him apply for a green card.

It's his only way out. Court doesn't look like his way out, and I expect he will not be as smiley after he reads what the prosecutors are entering in their files to the Supreme Court.


It's interesting, isn't it...what is Mandy actually doing these days? Having lots of chats with her ghostwriter? Going through her old diaries and filling new ones? Practicing dance moves with the classical guitar player? Hm.
I think you're right, Zorba, she couldn't handle University for some reason.
As for Raffaele, I believe the US would be a dangerous place for him in case of another conviction even with green card, or am I wrong?



Hi Ava,

Well, gaining the right to stay in America, would be just a thing to have in the meantime.

I would expect him to move to somewhere else afterwards, like later on.
I do not know if I really see him and Knox as two persons similar in behaviour to the very violent, woman harming/killing Joran Van de Sloot, though we cannot know.

We cannot because, look at what Sollecito is doing right now.

Let's assume, for a moment, that we know beyond a doubt, like let's even imagine it's some future time, moment in time, wherein, somehow the truth had come out, like he broke down or got caught out speaking to someone, and they taped it, you know let's just imagine we know then beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he and Knox really did murder Meredith, so that there's no more question about it, then, take a look at what he is doing now, and what do you see, what can you not avoid seeing? Well, what you cannot then avoid seeing is a truly wicked, twisted, lying murdering bastard, who cares nothing about others, who would even though having killed Meredith, go out like this, shamelessly continuing the disgusting behaviour, in fact, all of this being on TV, and lying, would be at least as bad as the actual murder.

My take on it? My take is that the above described situation is a reality, this is the way one ought to be able to view the situation.

So then we have this killer, going on TV, and where the murder hasn't been quite bad enough, or enough for him, he is lying even more now, about what the prison conditions were like, when anyone who actually knows how things go - which is all of those involved in the prison system whether running it or being confined in it - know then that if you are accused of murder, of sex crimes, you yourself would never WANT to be on any ordinary wing of a prison because everyone would be out to bash your brains in.

So Sollecito doing this, saying these things, yet again gives his game away, him being placed on a safe wing, would not be as a punishment and after all he never ever made a formal complaint but it is for a convict's own safety.
Is he saying he expected to be left on an ordinary prison wing?

Hardly, he'd have been dead now or in a wheelchair for the rest of his life, his face sliced up, whatever the other cons could do, when unseen, they'd do, to anyone like that.

People locked up on protection do not get to mix, much, they are all locked up for their own safety. It's just the way things go.

What he is doing is trying to make out he was given some extra harsh treatment, and what is worse, he is trying to present himself as some kind of a hero... hero?

How awful if you again view him as having been found out, you know, take it as being real for a moment, that it is really known that he did kill Meredith, then view him doing this, making out he is some kind of a hero, after having murdered Meredith.

Looking at it this way, one can realise just how twisted and awful the man is.

I feel he is heading for trouble, as he is going way too far, I mean who is the shitty writer who has gotten onto the case, why is he doing it, maybe more with the idea of getting famous than making money, for which idiot in the world could ever have assumed such a book was going g to be a bestseller? Nobody would assume that because it just will not be anything like that.
So the helper must have done it hoping to at least cash in on the fame bit, knowing the books will not sell.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ava wrote:
zorba wrote:

Dropped out of college to write her book

Ahahaha, yeah sure, let's face it, there's no way in real life that she can now interact with people, anyone asks her a few too many questions and there's no knowing what might happen, basically Knox would be freaking out and getting angry or avoiding people altogether, that is what she is doing = she couldn't handle her studies, she couldn't handle attending.

I really wonder if Sollecito is already setting about staying in the states, I think he is. He knows his dad and sister can come to see him, if he has to miss out on Italy, he'll prefer that to 25 years in jail. Anyhow, he will not miss his dad.

I bet those book people and so on are already helping him apply for a green card.

It's his only way out. Court doesn't look like his way out, and I expect he will not be as smiley after he reads what the prosecutors are entering in their files to the Supreme Court.


It's interesting, isn't it...what is Mandy actually doing these days? Having lots of chats with her ghostwriter? Going through her old diaries and filling new ones? Practicing dance moves with the classical guitar player? Hm.
I think you're right, Zorba, she couldn't handle University for some reason.
As for Raffaele, I believe the US would be a dangerous place for him in case of another conviction even with green card, or am I wrong?



Yes the university thing, it just goes to show that in real life, even in her hometown, things are nothing like what PR firm Knox has put out; no way is absolutely everyone going to simply welcome her with open arms, anyone with any sense is never going to entertain her and is going to avoid being friends with her, just like Meredith had started to do after finding out that the woman wasn't in order.

And Knox is bound to know all of this, even though her entire family has been putting out the idea that everyone thinks she is just swell.

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


Last edited by zorba on Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

A new pic of Sollecito reading excerpts from his book during yesterday's get-together in Seattle:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Amanda-Knox-and-Raffaele-Sollecito/106344459390034

Here is what he wrote about Maresca in Honor Bound:

Raffaele Sollecito wrote:
"December 2007
One thing I felt compelled to do, even though my lawyers would have advised against it, was to reach out to Meredith's family. Even though I had barely known her, I'd been living with the horror of her murder for more than a month and could not begin to imagine what her mother, father, brothers, and sister were going through. Thinking about it helped me me put my own predicament in some perspective; it made made me grateful that I was alive and still able to fight against those who were doing me harm.

I knew the Kerchers had hired an Italian lawyer, Francesco Maresca....I addressed my letter to him, saying how sorry I was for everything that had happened and expressing a wish that the full truth would soon come out.

I was naive enough to believe that Maresca would be sympathetic. I would understand only much later that his professional interest in Amanda and me was the money he could sue our families for. Entertaining the notion that we were innocent did not figure in this mind-set. And so my letter went unanswered."


As Max noted, Sollecito blames everyone for his woes - Maresca, Mignini, Napoleoni, Italian police, forensic scientists, his own lawyers, tabloid press... Is there anyone out there that he doesn't blame? Oh yeah, Rudy Guede and Amanda Knox (but only up to a point).
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

It really is awful Guermantes isn't it, what he is up to, I mean it has only just dawned on me, how awful, what with his trying to make out that he is some fantastic person, this idea of honour, when in fact they robbed Meredith of her honour, her dignity and her life.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 3:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I know one thing for certain. If I were truly innocent, and I decided to write the book, it would be a book of self-love.
I would be the one to write it, amateurish as it might be. They would be MY words, MY truth, and I really would not concern myself at all whether or not it would sell more than one copy.
I cannot imagine giving the control of telling my story to someone else, to have it fluffed up and written in what could loosely be considered my second language.
He complains bitterly about the treatment of the media. Is he any happier now with his portrayal as 'adorable', a word normally used in connection with babies and puppies?
He is not about the truth, he is about the 'sell'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ava


Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:08 pm

Posts: 943

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele interviewed by Peter van Sant.

Interview with Amanda Knox's ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito
11:01 a.m. EDT, September 24, 2012
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/osvideo- ... .htmlstory

Raffie assures us that he's humble and gentle, PvS explains the 'honor'-part of the book title (Simon & Schuster is owned by CBS).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

People lke this do not hammer at the things that are, in a word used by Sollecito himself, inconsistent, he does not explain the inconsistencies, he cannot explain why the things he said, did not fit with the known facts.

If people with this intellectual lack of calibre (van Sant & Co), are going to interview him, then he can say whatever he likes, it is preposterous, and again, preposterous that nobody hardtalks him on the things that need explaining, he needs to explain not by saying I don't remember.

I look at his face, the coordination with and between his glances, facial expressions, movement of his mouth and behaviour of his eyes, and all as I can see is a liar.

He knows he isn't going to be hardtalked too, because in no way is he ready to counter anything impacting and insightful and truly questioning that someone in a REAL interview would ask and would be compelled to ask, as a duty. So he knows he is not going to undergo true confrontation and all of the questions have already been run through a practiced with the how makers, therefore he can be entirely relaxed jusy the way that they have conspired to present him, yes, would like to see an independent, live interview, with persons that in no way could be in on any kind of planning/rehearsals.

Let's see how he squares up in a non-rehaearsed show.

I am certain he could never get through iit.

If you get a Barbie Nadeau to question him, or someone who knows the facts, someone who is aware of all of the things that do not fit as things stand and confront him, he'd be in a mess.

He now sit there as though he is so relaxed, truth is; he is a fake and so are these types of interviews, they are entirely meaningless, they have no value.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
I know one thing for certain. If I were truly innocent, and I decided to write the book, it would be a book of self-love.
I would be the one to write it, amateurish as it might be. They would be MY words, MY truth, and I really would not concern myself at all whether or not it would sell more than one copy.
I cannot imagine giving the control of telling my story to someone else, to have it fluffed up and written in what could loosely be considered my second language.
He complains bitterly about the treatment of the media. Is he any happier now with his portrayal as 'adorable', a word normally used in connection with babies and puppies?
He is not about the truth, he is about the 'sell'.



Me too , and had I nothing to hide, I would then be ready to answer ANYONE's questions.
All of these interviews have been rehearsed, like so many shows are, for hours.

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:24 pm   Post subject: SEMEN STAIN   

Knife Boy truly is unintelligent, and his writer Andrew Gumbel, equally so. What were they thinking?
From Honor Bound, the question of why the defense didn't insist on testing for the 'semen stain'. Source: Injustice In Perugia.

I WONDER WHY THE COPS MIGHT 'CONSTRUE' IT AS HIS?

Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I say, so many shows but I actually mean

ALL shows

Don't worry, they said, as they got someone to go and get him more cupcakes and coffee, anything else you would like sir?

Well, I do like Russian salad, do you know it? Yes, that with roast pork!

Your wish is our command Honourable Sire

Sollecito: Thank you, you lowly peasants

Show guy: Sheila, run out and get some Russian salad and pork for our porkie pie teller will you dear.

Sollecito: You are so kind, do you have any jobs? I'm good in the computers.

Sheila: (arrives puffed out) Here ya are, they didn't have no pork!!!

Sollecito: No pork, dammit, I want my pork or I do not do the interview

Show boss: Come on sheila, what were you thinking, chop chop, you get his pork, the porkie pie teller cannot tell porkers without his pork

Sheila sighs and as she leaves down the hall it's like she was muttering, can't tell porkers without his pork, humpfff, sounded like he was doing a pretty good job to me the dammed women killing creep!

Sollecito: What it is she says? (looking suspicious from the bad vibes trailing off Sheila's exit)

Shows Boss: Nothing, nothing, she loves you, we all love you, soon you will have lots of pork, so you like pork then eh!!!

Sheila returns

Sollecito chomps on his pork and salad


Okay, take 35.

Sollecito, so, then you ask me what the kiss was and I will say: the kiss, it was COMFORT.


(Sollecito says this, sat there in a highly groomed fashion, a fashion that at NO time in his recent past in Italy, did he ever have. So, the stage is set so far, the lights are adjusted, take 36

Show interviewer: So Raffaele, it was said the kissing you and Amanda Knox did just after Meredith had been discovered dead, looked out of place, what do you say, what was going on?

Sollecito: The kiss, it is normal in Italy, we all do, it was comfort, she was upset.

Interviewer: But you looked like you'd slept in the park and it didn't LOOK like a comfort kiss

Sollecito: Yes, but I am Italian, she was nervous

Interviewer: What about?

Sollecito: She said, will I have to move house now

Interviewer: Ah, she was concerned now about herself and where she would live?

Sollecito: Yes, it was a great shame for that girl dead but very inconvenient

Interviewer: But didn't you say she stayed with you most of the time


Sollecito: Yes I say, but this night, I do not know, maybe she met one strange guy from the Ivory Coast

Cut

Show censor: What, what are you saying?

Sollecito: Sorry I forgot

Take 37


Remember our lines or we'll be here all night

Action


Sollecito: Hello, I don't know nothing, she sleep my place, she don't sleep my place, she go with all kinds of guys out, I don't like to go

Cut cut

Show censor: What the hell do you want?

Sollecito: Sorry, it not easy to tell these lies in English

Director: Get it right now, you don't see nothing, you don't hear nothing, you don't do nothing, she was upset, you are a good boy, you are kind, you are sensible, look at your nice new clothes we got you. Say they treated you like a dog.


Take 38

I don't to know nuffingk

Action

Sollecito: Hello, I not do this, I good boy, look at how well-dressed I am. but, why not hold the photos up and show the way I used to look, like a vagrant, like someone using hard drugs

Cut cut cut, goddammit Sollecito, time out

Sollecito's mother's little helper from the book: Stop bullying the poor boy, he's been through a lot, he must have had a spliff in the WC, he can't help it forgetting everything.

Take 39

I don't to do nuffink

Action

Sollecito: Yes we went to the cottage, we drank, we smoked we had a few lines of coke, Guede came, Meredith went to bed. Anyway, to cut a long story short, we murdered Meredith, then cleaned the place up.

Okay I won't say any of this

Action

Sollecito: Hello, I'm good boy, boy yes, 28 years of age, I don't do nothing, I wake up, then this all happen, they are all bad and they are all liar, we kiss, it's normal, then I go to the jail, and they bash me up, put me with the rapist, the killer. Boo hoo boo hoo. I suffered so much, but I am hero.

Director: That's a wrap

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:55 pm   Post subject: TRULY HURL WORTHY PIC OF KNIFE BOY   

Turns out that one of the truly despicable people behind the "Free Meredith Kercher" Facebook page is uber-groupie Karen For Hair Pruett. She posted this picture of Raffaele Sollecito in Washington sitting beside a faux memorial for Meredith. In true narcissistic fashion, he's reading his book "If I Did It".

The anonymous people behind this FB page not only lifted copyrighted pictures of Meredith from John Kercher's book then plotted to post negative reviews on Amazon. They also post numerous passive aggressive messages to the Kerchers, wondering when they'll see the light of psycho-narcissist Saint Amandy's innocence in all this.

Raff in Seattle
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... =3&theater
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:15 pm   Post subject: Re: SEMEN STAIN   

Ergon wrote:
Knife Boy truly is unintelligent, and his writer Andrew Gumbel, equally so. What were they thinking.



Hi Ergon, your image has widened the page, did you notice? Having to scroll left to right at present.

_________________
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: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 8:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hi Zorba,

I've resized the image using [rimg] tags to fit the page and posted it up again; should be okay now. I PM'd Ergon 2 min ago.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
Hi Zorba,

I've resized the image using [rimg] tags to fit the page and posted it up again; should be okay now. I PM'd Ergon 2 min ago.



Ah that's better, thanks Guermantes.

I'm wonky eyed enough must get it seen too soon,

my right eye is far weaker than the left
and
if I'm sat at the computer for a long time and tired or working for a long time, I end up just looking through the lift eye,

which in itself is really tiring,

I hadn't realised why I kept doing that,

until I started trying each eye out,

but come to think of it,

I always did have a lazy right eye.

So I'd better get off to see the optician soon.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:10 pm   Post subject: Re: TRULY HURL WORTHY PIC OF KNIFE BOY   

Ergon wrote:
Turns out that one of the truly despicable people behind the "Free Meredith Kercher" Facebook page is uber-groupie Karen For Hair Pruett. She posted this picture of Raffaele Sollecito in Washington sitting beside a faux memorial for Meredith. In true narcissistic fashion, he's reading his book "If I Did It".

The anonymous people behind this FB page not only lifted copyrighted pictures of Meredith from John Kercher's book then plotted to post negative reviews on Amazon. They also post numerous passive aggressive messages to the Kerchers, wondering when they'll see the light of psycho-narcissist Saint Amandy's innocence in all this.

Raff in Seattle
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... =3&theater


That is just so awful, and then the sideways digs at the family, saying; hope you are gradually having the light of truth shine on you.

These people ought to be taken out and shot; the levels of depravity they go to are beyond belief.

_________________
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: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: TRULY HURL WORTHY PIC OF KNIFE BOY   

Ergon wrote:
Turns out that one of the truly despicable people behind the "Free Meredith Kercher" Facebook page is uber-groupie Karen For Hair Pruett. She posted this picture of Raffaele Sollecito in Washington sitting beside a faux memorial for Meredith. In true narcissistic fashion, he's reading his book "If I Did It".

The anonymous people behind this FB page not only lifted copyrighted pictures of Meredith from John Kercher's book then plotted to post negative reviews on Amazon. They also post numerous passive aggressive messages to the Kerchers, wondering when they'll see the light of psycho-narcissist Saint Amandy's innocence in all this.

Raff in Seattle
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= ... =3&theater


Ergon, as I told you in my PM, I share your indignation about the misuse of Meredith's picture.

I'm sure it was Karen Pruett's idea to pay tribute to Meredith in this distasteful fashion. These FOA fanatics are hypocrites of the highest order, and their consciences are dead. They preach one thing and do another! They say they honor Meredith's memory, and then turn around and do the very things that hurt Meredith's family and have the nerve to lecture the Kerchers on how they should behave and what they should or shouldn't believe. Those FOAs are 'toxic friends'. You can say they are naive and well-meaning but in fact they are insensitive and ignorant douchebags, to borrow Jackie's expression. I don't expect that will ever change, sadly.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

That reminds me... there are also some comic moments in this bizarrely obsessive campaign in support of Knox and Sollecito.

Once I had a good laugh over this sentence from an old piece by Karen Pruett posted on Gather:

Karen Pruett wrote:
Hairs, fluids and alleles all point to Guede and no one else.


Yes, in that order: hairs, fluids and alleles. Sparks of pure genius no-one forgets. :)

Then there was this pearl of new insight into Mignini's actions at the start of the crime scene investigation:

Karen Pruett wrote:
Why did Mignini, or Stefanoni for that matter, stop Lalli from taking the measurement [liver temperature]? Did someone, not saying whom, begin manipulating the evidence as soon as they became aware that there was an American at the scene?
...
Heck, Mignini may have also used Amanda and Raffaele as Cash Cows to pad the vaults of Perugia for all we know.


And they call us "conspiracy theorists" at IIP ??? You couldn't make this up.

What I find especially appalling is that Karen Pruett puts the victim on the same level as the two acquitted murderers:

Quote:
The only trouble was that the three university students, Meredith, Amanda and Raffaele, had never shown any inkling of a violent side; all three were known to be kind and gentle.


She also mentions Meredith's family and Knox's and Sollecito's families in the same breath:

Quote:
Three innocent families were harmed by their malicious lies and obsession with Amanda Knox.


I know that hairdresser's ramblings are unimportant in the big scheme of things but still find it slightly irritating that she continues to spread her drivel around the net.

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981354165
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:55 pm   Post subject: DISCUSSION TO MANIPULATE AMAZON REVIEWS   

It started when I noticed a section on Injustice In Perugia dedicated to discussing John Kercher's book Meredith They egged each other on there, then headed out to spam comments and reviews on Amazon. There literally are hundreds of comments, but here's a sampling. Their contempt for John Kercher is so obvious, and so contemptible.

Sarah Post subject: Re: John Kercher's book - Meredith Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 9:46 pm
Site Admin
Quote:
TomG wrote:
Gulp!! I am that man!! I wrote the “Real Colpovolisti “ comment on Amazon.co.uk. posted by Murdoch. I’m sorry if it went a bit far and embarrassed people on the forum. However I gave John Follains book “Death in Perugia” a complete and utter hammering as well on the same site. Murdoch doesn’t say why he pasted it onto the forum. I am going to review “Meredith” by John Kercher as well but let me know if there is a problem with this. It’s been a while since I posted on this site.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-rev ... centReview


Quote:
This must be your review. Very well written TomG.


Then Thomas Graham wrote:

Quote:
A DARKER KIND OF JUSTICE?, 6 Jun 2012

This review is from: Meredith: Our Daughter's Murder and the Heartbreaking Quest for the Truth (Hardcover)
MEREDITH
The testimony to Meredith is wonderful. She is no doubt a woman who illuminated the lives of others with her character. The first 80 pages of the book describe vividly just what an accomplished woman she was. The chapter titled "The Funeral" was particularly beautiful and it was difficult not to get emotional while reading it. Hopefully it's writing would have crystallized the memory of Meredith and been cathartic enough to bring some sort of emotional healing for the author. No individual can come close understanding his level of grief considering the circumstances of his loss. However, the author forfeits any moral high ground and dignity that would have been preserved if he had devoted the book strictly to Meredith's memory. Instead, the memory of Meredith is dragged into a quagmire of misunderstanding, misinformation, and bitterness that the author seems unable to extricate himself from. The author subsequently launches an onslaught of questionable and discredited evidence along with considerable emotional leverage in an effort to keep the more uninformed reader gullible and yielding.


Quote:
B_Real Post subject: Re: Italy owes the Kerchers an explanation Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:30 pm
It would take a big hearted person to forgive John Kercher for publishing his book 'Meredith', months after the acquittals, in which he hid behind his dead daughter to vilify innocent people with hateful lies. I'm sure Amanda and her family have such big hearts however, from everything I've seen of them.

I hope we've seen the last of the Kerchers' media campaign against Amanda, but somehow I doubt it.

I don't think the Kerchers have been searching for the truth or care about the truth. Their actions have for five years consistently shown no such interest. They have opposed the appeals themselves, independent examination of the evidence and even the questioning of Rudy Guede about the murder.


Quote:
TomG Post subject: Re: Italy owes the Kerchers an explanation Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:11 pm
Location: Scotland
This is probably the most frustrating part of the whole case. Having read and reviewed John Kerchers book ‘Meredith’ on Amazon, I can only conclude that he simply doesn’t require an explanation. His appalling book gives a fair indication that he thinks Amanda and Raffaele are guilty so he’s not going swayed easily.


Quote:
B_Real:Post subject: Re: Raffaele book and interview thread Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2012
Is it OK to organise some affirmative action on this thread? Could everybody please click 'no' on the 'was this review helpful or not?' on the one star review by 'true justice', here:http://www.amazon.com/Honor-Bound and also please flag it as inappropriate since the numbskull is trying to put links in his review which arent allowed at Amazon, as he would realise if he had ever shopped there in his life.Thanks guys.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Tara


User avatar


Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:44 pm

Posts: 1010

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:08 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7422894n

Has anybody seen this interview with Sollecito and Peter van Sant? Any reviews? I'm unable to watch at the moment...

_________________
“If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything” ~Mark Twain~
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:10 am   Post subject: Re: SEMEN STAIN   

zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Knife Boy truly is unintelligent, and his writer Andrew Gumbel, equally so. What were they thinking.



Hi Ergon, your image has widened the page, did you notice? Having to scroll left to right at present.


Hi, I was unable to resize it myself, so thanks, guermantes, for your help. But it was very important to highlight the Freudian poster boy's slip about how the 'semen stain' might have turned out to be his.

Yes, it should have been tested. Another opportunity missed, but it's interesting to see how his revelations will play out in Italy.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 1:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Tara wrote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7422894n

Has anybody seen this interview with Sollecito and Peter van Sant? Any reviews? I'm unable to watch at the moment...


Just saw it, Tara. The first 3 minutes are a carbon copy of the AC show, and the replies the same, but at 4:00 Peter Van Sant talks to the anchors in the studio and

"Do the Knox Family think he is a hero?" "Absolutely, he could have betrayed her".

"Knew each other 8 days".

"People in Italy were appalled by the kiss".

"He (Raffaele) says they were in shock" but "I thought that was odd".

"R still has some feelings for Amanda"

"Looking for a job in Seattle in computer gaming".

"Was in isolation most of the time" "Some abuse in prison, like with Amanda". "Shocking story".

"Seems very normal and intelligent".

"The judge says there is no evidence he was ever there in the murder house or committed the crime". "As was always said".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Tell me something, Ergon. What kind of human being writes something like this?

B_Real Post subject: Re: Italy owes the Kerchers an explanation Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:30 pm
It would take a big hearted person to forgive John Kercher for publishing his book 'Meredith', months after the acquittals, in which he hid behind his dead daughter to vilify innocent people with hateful lies. I'm sure Amanda and her family have such big hearts however, from everything I've seen of them.

I hope we've seen the last of the Kerchers' media campaign against Amanda, but somehow I doubt it.

I don't think the Kerchers have been searching for the truth or care about the truth. Their actions have for five years consistently shown no such interest. They have opposed the appeals themselves, independent examination of the evidence and even the questioning of Rudy Guede about the murder
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:14 am   Post subject: Re: THE GHIRGA-VEDOVA RECOURSE   

Yummi at .ORG has posted the following response http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewto ... 44#p121244 to the Knox Appeal I posted here.

Re: Anxieties about AK: Foot in Mouth on the Stand
by Yummi » 23 Sep 2012, 22:26

Quote:
brmull wrote:
"Yummi,

Ergon at .NET posted the Ghirga-Vedova appeal of Knox's calunnia conviction. It's fairly short and I didn't see anything remotely interesting, but I'd appreciate your thoughts".


Yummi:
Quote:
*"Pages 3-11: the first argument, is about the non usability of the evidence for the crime of calunnia. This first argument is basically the re-proposal of the same argument that had been already dismissed by the Supreme Court in 2008, and subsequently by Massei-Cristiani in 2009 and also by Hellmann-Zanetti. Therefore it is an especially weak argument. Ghirga-Dalla Vedova attempt to use it again at the SC, because it is what they have. Just like Giulia Bongiorno attempted to use the request of nullification of Stefanoni’s testimony on procedure grounds, but the request was rejected by Hellmann-Zanetti.

*Pages 11-14 completes the first argument, for the further requirements of the crime of calunnia. Basically these claim the false accusation was not voluntary or not malicious. The only usable point – in my opinion – in this reasoning consists in one line, where it recalls that Hellmann-Zanetti did not acknowledge the aggravation of continuance for the crime of Calunnia. But this point has no consequence. The other claims are basically useless, because not knowing that someone is factually innocent obviously cannot be extended to an absolute meaning; the argument has no backing in trial papers, so I doubt there is anything effective here.

*Pages 14-18: speaks about the extreme exhaustion of Knox to exculpate her of her confusion and falsehood. This argument tends to be a stronger attempt to use some of the contradiction in Hellmann-Zanetti, because H-Z in fact stated that Knox was allegedly under excessive pressure, but convicted her for calunnia nonetheless.

I think this argument won’t go too far, for two reasons: first, because it’s basically in the merits, it quotes the whole writing of Knox and requests the SC to directly re-assess the sincerity of her words, something which the SC are unlikely to do. Second, because while there is a contradiction in H-Z when they accuse her of calunnia on one side but do not use her writings as an evidence of lying on the other crime, and they reject the continuance despite the obvious link between the calunnia and the murder, the contradiction addressed by Ghirga is weaker.

In fact, under jurisprudence, pressure and psychological alteration is not enough to cause a person to lose their faculties to understand and will. Basically most crimes are committed in a state of psychological stress or alteration, but people are responsible of them, because the faculty to understand and will is not a psychological condition. It is something that affects the cognitive and decisional functioning of the brain on more basic functions, and requires a medical assessment. So there is no way the argument of Ghirga-Dalla Vedova can overturn a conviction for calunnia based on an argument of psychological conditions.

*Pages 19-20 is a very short argument about two articles of the codes athat Ghirga puts in in relation to a case of defensive rights, this is an argument I am unable to assess clearly. This point basically claims Knox is someway protected by the law because of an extension of her rights of defence. I have the feeling this point is wrong, because the boundaries of the right to defend oneself are already fixed and limited by a SC ruling of 2008, and because art. 51 only applies to what she declared as a defendant, but not to what she declared as a witness.

*Pages 20-22 is only about the sentencing and not about innocence; it claims that, anyway, even if Amanda is guilty of calunnia, the punishment was too stiff and this severity was not logically motivated by Hellmann. This point is the only that could stand, in my opinion."

--

*Based on the content summarized above, I think this recourse is likely to be rejected."


Yummi's points are well taken, and he is after all a specialist in Italian law. My doubts arise from the following, which are my own, uninformed, views:

* Pages 3-11: I agree that this is a weak argument. That the SC allowed the charges to stand does not however indicate how it might rule.

* Pages 11-14: This is where the problem lies. That Hellmann-Zanetti did not consider whether it was involuntary is the recourse's strong point, imo. This is where they have been hammering the lack of a recording of the interrogation and alleging coercion. These points were raised in court and therefore the SC can rule whether the law was applied correctly or not.

* Pages 14-18: Yes, there is a contradiction in Hellmann-Zanetti which acknowledged extreme pressure but convicted nevertheless. This is the sort of contradiction the SC will have to address. I also believe that while the state of psychological stress might not hold much sway under the old inquisitorial system in Italy, the new hybrid inquisitorial-adversarial Supreme Court might well consider this argument.

This is why, when I posted Bruce Fischer saying that Professor Saul Kassin had written a brief arguing "false confession" for the Hellmann court, I knew that these very same arguments would then make its way to the SC.

* pages 19-20: I am not sure I got this right, but surely SC rulings in another case are only accepted as precedent by lower courts, but not binding on this case at the SC level? Also, the statement made as a witness were disallowed but the written statement made as a defendant are applicable? Again, this is where the argument of coercion and psychological 'stress' might hold sway. Still, the fact the written letter was made voluntarily should end up being unfavourable for Amanda.

* Pages 20-22: This depends on whether the SC will send them for retrial, or, disallow the Galati Appeal, in which case the callunnia charges will be withdrawn. IMO.

* It all depends on who hears the case then.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Tell me something, Ergon. What kind of human being writes something like this?

B_Real Post subject: Re: Italy owes the Kerchers an explanation Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:30 pm
It would take a big hearted person to forgive John Kercher for publishing his book 'Meredith', months after the acquittals, in which he hid behind his dead daughter to vilify innocent people with hateful lies. I'm sure Amanda and her family have such big hearts however, from everything I've seen of them.

I hope we've seen the last of the Kerchers' media campaign against Amanda, but somehow I doubt it.

I don't think the Kerchers have been searching for the truth or care about the truth. Their actions have for five years consistently shown no such interest. They have opposed the appeals themselves, independent examination of the evidence and even the questioning of Rudy Guede about the murder


The type of person collected around him by one Bruce Fischer, Esq. I guess. At least he's honest in his bile, unlike the Facebook 'Free Meredith Kercher' biddies who are truly awful beings.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Another interview with Sollecito on KOMO News tonight:

Amanda Knox's ex boyfriend brings new book to Seattle
By Molly Shen

"Sollecito and Knox still talk and he said he had dinner with her family last weekend. He said he's even considering a move to Seattle.
...
Sollecito is speaking at Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus Tuesday at 7 p.m. He said Knox will not be there, but she has read the book and was impressed."

KOMO NEWS

His crooked smile or ugly smirk is becoming more pronounced. I can hardly stand to look at him anymore. He hit the TV circuit on the 18th; it's been going on for about a week now, with seemingly no end in sight. It's just too much in a short period of time.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

He says Amanda won't be in the audience, but he had dinner with her and her family on the weekend. No mention of his parents or sister, who are supposed to be there as well.

Would be interesting to see who does show of course.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
He says Amanda won't be in the audience, but he had dinner with her and her family on the weekend. No mention of his parents or sister, who are supposed to be there as well.

Would be interesting to see who does show of course.

The article says Raf had dinner with her family, so not with Amanda herself. She must be so busy writing her book 'I don't remember either'.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

What I've noticed is copying by Knox's supporters. What I mean is, they monitor channels that are likely to have an effect n public opinion, which means this site and the others like it, and if certain strong and real points are being laid out and expressed, they will rework those points by mentioning them but only after having switched them around to reverse the meaning, so that Knox becomes perceived as the victim.

So the character assassination that was something I used a lot in my writing, not long after Meredith had been murdered, to me, seemed as though they'd picked up on it, Mr Knox in fact using it, to make out it was Knox who was having her character destroyed, so, because the term character assassination is a potent one, they sort of stole it and started accusing everyone else of it, but let's examine where the true assassination lies.

Knox and Sollecito jointly accused;

Patrick Lumumba (of murder and rape)

Different prosecutors (of hitting her, of not feeding them, of generally torturing them)

Police (of being out to get them, of taking part in mistreating them, in ways that the same police mistreated nobody else = housemates and Meredith's friends, Meredith's actual friends all treated humanely.

Scientific police (of carrying out bad work or even falsifying the evidence in collaboration with the police and prosecutors)

Witness (such as shopkeeper next to Sollecito's home)

Witness (in Bubbles the lingerie store)

All of these people and more too, had their words assassinated, their positions reduced to zero by the way Knox's team accused them of everything bad under the sun.

And then Knox and Sollecito - did they not self-assassinate, they destroyed their own credibility by telling lies, by saying one thing that proved to be another.

Therefore nobody was out to character destroy them, they did a good job of that themselves, without any help, Knox, her walking into court, in an ugly over-sized T-shirt with the words 'All you need is love', is hardly appropriate when that very choice of words seemed to mock Meredith's death, for Meredith certainly needed love and obviously, it was the very last thing she was getting, at the moment she was murdered, therefore, to choose that T-shirt, as one to sway into court in, is a most awful act of her contempt for the severity and seriousness of the proceedings and the horrific reality of Meredith's murder.

If that is not auto-character-assassination, I do not know what is.

Another very strong act, that helped to chisel the impression of sheer contempt and a brazen uncontrolled behavioural pattern, in both Sollecito and Knox, was them standing outside the murder scene, looking very unkempt, poorly dressed and basically unwashed, with strained looks upon their faces, sinking away into what can only be described as erotic-like kissing, not comfort kissing.

If comfort kissing it tends to be on a cheek, on a forehead, with an arm or arms in coordination simultaneously expressing the acts of comforting, by holding someone momentarily, or even for a longer moment, but then there are TEARS, etc, and that is why you comfort someone, because they are UPSET<

but this was full-on lip kissing and prolonged; would you comfort your grandmother that way when her husband die? would you comfort any friend that way? and, would you even comfort a lover that way if they are genuinely upset and in need of comforting, to kiss them in a sexual way would create bad tension, as that would be so wrong, you do not mix comfort giving with sex taking = enjoying.
Neither was giving they were both participating and if he wa giving her anything, he was giving the same back, any arm stroking, was only comforting insofar as (don't worry Amanda, they are not going to find out what we did = unspoken obviously as they both were FULLY aware of what they'd done and that was their cause for concern, not that Meredith was dead on the floor).

There's no way they can convince anyone with a mind of their own that in those images outside the cottage right after the murder discovery, they were comforting one another.
To day that is an insult to peoples' intelligence, if it had been comforting like we all see so often on TV, when people genuinely are upset and ARE comforting one another then nobody would have said a word about those images being so disturbingly out of place.

If you want to comfort someone you do not mix up the act of comforting with sensualised, sex-potent kissing on the fullness of lips and hang in there too with eyes closed.

Are these people such fools that they really think they will be able to convince thinkers that what they are saying is true?

So what happens now is that Knox's team and Sollecito's by now as well, check things out being said, they see us all talking about the kiss so they jot that down on the list of to do elements, and work out different responses to any questions surrounding it.

I tell you what, I see these people on these daytime TV shows and none of them quite strike me as being particularly intelligent, Van Sant, what questions did he have lined up from the real facts of the matter, and that have never been answered, which of those questions did he ask Sollecito?

None that's how many, all that he did was accommodate Sollecito and his lies by providing another soft-shouldered platform where there would and could be absolutely no danger of him falling off, like being asked relevant and real questions.

Therefore I feel the TV folk are all more concerned with keeping in step and not losing their nicely paid little jobs, are they then going to go out on a limb by doing anything that has not been dictated to them? No.

Doubt it very much, even those with big shows and huge viewing ratings like Letterman, etc, do not have real freedom, they cannot do whatever they like and everything they are going to say is double-checked and approved of, or it gets deleted or doesn't get to go in.

TV shows appear to be spontaneous but in truth 3 quarters of product content is sliced out; the actual shows are pre-recorded and rehearsed many times beforehand with constant make-up adjustments. They present people not as they are but as they wish their show to come across as. They have their concepts worked out and everything must fit in with that.

Therefore, all of these recent TV spots with Chunkhead Sollecito on them, are nothing more than auntie and uncle sit-you-downs, hello auntie, nice to see you, wanna cookie?
How are you?
Well, thank you.

This murder? Oh, yes, I almost forgot, no. I did not do it, I'm a good boy

Yes we agree, in fact, when I met you in the lift I thought, my what a lovely young man

Yes, I am fantastic, hero (turns curled back of fist to breath out onto like someone cleaning a pair of spectacles).
No, please see me not as the killer but as some noble, high-seated hero guy, and let's all smile.

>>>> I would say several species from pre-historic times had IQs that were way about those of these telly folk.

So here we have it, Sollecito looking for a job in Seattle.

Seattle isn't that small and if he is going to try to avoid spending 25 years in prison when or if things do not go well for him in Italy (do not go well in his absence for he may not even return there) then it's handiest for him if he is close to his helpers there in Seattle.

If Sollecito remains in America or outside Italy, Italy will have to set about extraditing him, but if they are going to refuse to extradite Knox on the grounds of all of their claims against Italy, then Sollecito will have the chance/the possibility, that he will be provided with some kind of weird awkward refugee status in America, though this isn't certain.

However, what Sollecito's people think and he too, is that the more he manages to integrate into American culture and life, the more chance he will have of avoiding being forced back to Italy.

So having his main helpers close at hand, in Seattle, would be the reason he'd pick that cold northern state instead of some sun-bitten southern location.

I expect right now he is not even considering returning to Italy, though he can forget trying to visit Canada as a way of re-entering the states as I hardly think Canada is going to be welcoming him, just as they refused entry to Sausage Seller Sfarzo.

Yes, Sollecito with all of the praise heaped upon him, how is that for the ego of a killer?

He is being elevated into something he never was and never will be and he is only too pleased and willing to believe it himself, I expect.

There he sits, in movie star garments, specially selected FOR HIM, as of now, whereas before, though from the rich family, he appeared not to have a pot to piss in.

So mark my words, he is not going to return to Italy, and this being in America definitely will have made him certain of that, he in no way wishes to run the risk of having to go to court or be in Italy and be hauled in, with no way out.

If he does return to Italy, the danger that he will flee will be greater than ever, even though it might not seem that way based on his havin'g returned, but at any moment things turn bad, like the court goes against him and Knox, I reckon he'd take to his pre-planned escape route withiin the hour.
In this manner, in order to save himself a lot of trouble, he has decided, he is staying wherever it is that will mean he cannot be extradited, he will have checked out countries that have no extradition regulations with Italy.

I'm certain he is not going to be willing to do his time, if he gets convicted good and proper. And will his lawyers be willing to work for him again, after what he has been out saying about them? If they are going to be willing they must be insane.
He paid nothing, and they did it willingly, but "you get what you paid for," said Mr Clean, which means, Sollecito was saying, he got nothing, as nothing was paid. Very complimentary then; how proud they will be to be criticised by him that way.

If he were to attend SC, hear then that the appeal is being thrown out and that it will now mean he must remain in Italy, he would try to run; so rather than make this all so difficult, he is not going to be returning to start with.

Conveniently busy with job applications, etc, in America, however, a normal visa is but for 3 months, so how he will get that extended, I do not know, especially if they are aware, when deciding, that he is obliged to be in Italy for the appeal in relation to a murder.

Or maybe I'm wrong, maybe he is not under obligation to attend.

So then he could extend his delightful little trip by going to somewhere like Brazil, only to return anew, to America, and have a nice new visa. And time in which to manoeuvre

All of the aforementioned notwithstanding; just how far are the tentacles of the Marriot machinery likely to be able to reach into the dealings of governmental America, can they procure something like a year-long permit/visa? I don't know about that, up until now, what appears to be full compliance, is not really that, it is orchestrated by carefully contacting only the channels that are Knox-friendly, and thus in turn, because it has to be like that, Sollecito-friendly too.
Nonetheless, though she was all in the limelight, he is making his stage debut now, in his own right, and as things appear, seems like he has a bunch of washed-out cougars just ready & willing to take him in.

Shirley Template: I'm pleased you like our country, I'm glad you like my home and you can stay just as long as you like, with me.

Sollecito: Yes, yes, I do, thank you mother, er, I mean Shirley, and you are so good looking

TV cougar gal: Oh so are you, you are a lovely young man, how could they say these things against you, I read your book, this is all the evidence anyone needs,

Sollecito: I agree, three cheers for me, honour guy.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:49 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

TV-ville in no-man's land

Crew: We're ready

Director O.J. Simpson
Camera 1, Ted Bundy
Camera 2, Charles Manson
Producer, Karla Homolka

None of the above or below-named characters are real and any resemblance to people, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Sollecito: I got my script, I know it off by heart now though

Simpson: That's great you're a great guy and a truth teller just like I am

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yeah, so as I was saying, they see us talking about how the family are bound to be having lots of arguments and how there will be a lot of friction and that Knox will not be getting invited over all the time and what do we see now: They put it in these interviews that Sollecito has been over at Knox's domain, eating it up with dad and the family.

I would say they arranged a meeting in one of the cranky's back yards and ordered a pizza, maybe at the fine judge's home, the one that even his daughter distanced herself from on account of his indulgences in this case.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 1:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Zorba, your list of character assassinations is chilling, when read as a whole. Seeing them all, together, makes one understand just how destructive they wanted to be, not to the evidence, as much as the person.
I would add to your list, the friends of Meredith and the flatmates. The flatmates were called scumbags for not advising Amanda to get a lawyer.

And, IMHO,the absolute worst, and the most unbelievable, in terms of simple human decency, are the attacks on the Kerchers, and, poor Meredith herself.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 1:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele Sollecito shares his story with KING 5's Dennis Bounds (video)

Sollecito shares his story with KING 5's Dennis Bounds and his belief that Italian authorities took advantage of him and Amanda.

KING5 NEWS
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

The Insider with Raffaele Sollecito and Brooke Anderson



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO3wN_Gyawk
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

max wrote:
Ergon wrote:
He says Amanda won't be in the audience, but he had dinner with her and her family on the weekend. No mention of his parents or sister, who are supposed to be there as well.

Would be interesting to see who does show of course.

The article says Raf had dinner with her family, so not with Amanda herself. She must be so busy writing her book 'I don't remember either'.


The first video here in the newsreport http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Raff ... =video&c=y has this at 1:40 minutes: "they keep in touch with email and skype and he told me he had dinner with her and her family on the weekend. He interviewed with a video game maker here in Seattle but is not looking for a job till he gets a masters degree in a years time."

Raffaele also says "Amanda will not be at the book signing tomorrow. It is not time to in public together yet, but it will, one day"

Tickets for the event are $5 at the door or free if you buy the book.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Please excuse me, but I must inject a lighter note, just for a moment.
I would like the 411 to know that I have the ability to read her mind. Seriously.
I have been reading on .org, and have discovered a conversation revolving around the purchase of a 'cow thong'
in the lingerie shop.

Gotcha, 411. I can see you formulating your post about 'udderpants' already!!

Back to regular programming.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, your list of character assassinations is chilling, when read as a whole. Seeing them all, together, makes one understand just how destructive they wanted to be, not to the evidence, as much as the person.
I would add to your list, the friends of Meredith and the flatmates. The flatmates were called scumbags for not advising Amanda to get a lawyer.

And, IMHO,the absolute worst, and the most unbelievable, in terms of simple human decency, are the attacks on the Kerchers, and, poor Meredith herself.



Hi Napia,
you are correct, here's a rework.


So the character assassination that was something I used a lot in my writing, not long after Meredith had been murdered, to me, seemed as though they'd picked up on it, Mr Knox in fact using it, to make out it was Knox who was having her character destroyed, so, because the term character assassination is a potent one, they sort of stole it and started accusing everyone else of it.

Let's examine and list where the true assassination lies.
Knox and Sollecito jointly accused;


1) Patrick Lumumba (of murder and rape)

2) Different prosecutors (of hitting her, of not feeding them, of generally torturing them)

3) Police (of being out to get them, of taking part in mistreating them, in ways that the same police mistreated nobody else = housemates and Meredith's friends, Meredith's actual friends all treated humanely.

4) Scientific police (of carrying out bad work or even falsifying the evidence in collaboration with the police and prosecutors)

5) Witness (such as shopkeeper next to Sollecito's home)

6) Witness (in Bubbles the lingerie store)

7) Meredith's own housemates

8) Meredith's own friends

9) The Media, even though they themselves set about purchasing media coverage and still are engaged in that, using it to suit them.

10) Meredith (Knox trying to lower Meredith, like pointing to the blood and saying she thought it might have been Meredith's menstrual blood, when it was Knox who was the unhygienic housemate, and Meredith has a problem with that about Knox

11) Meredith's family, as according to Knox's family they do not know what they are doing and have no right to think that Knox was the murderer and unless they see that differently, then they are misguided and do not care about the truth.

12) Meredith's family's lawyer

13) All and any judges that did not see Knox as an innocent

14) The lay judges because they found Knox guilty

15) All of those not agreeing with the Knox family view/indoctrination and brainwashing


16) Sollecito's defence team, according to Sollecito, they worked for free, and Sollecito believes that you get what you py for, o as they paid nothing they got nothing and thus, what Sollecito means is, his lawyers were not good enough or else he should never have spent any time in jail at all

17) Not to forget, Sollecito's own tale originally, said it was all Knox's fault, his dad agreed and that he had lied for her.

18)

55)

etc

I'm sure there are more, cannot think of them all right now, please add to the list


______________________________________________________________________



All of these people and more too, had their words assassinated, their positions reduced to zero by the way Knox's team accused them of everything bad under the sun.

And then Knox and Sollecito - did they not self-assassinate, they destroyed their own credibility by telling lies, by saying one thing that proved to be another.

Therefore nobody was out to character destroy them, they did a good job of that themselves, without any help, Knox, her walking into court, in an ugly over-sized T-shirt with the words 'All you need is love', is hardly appropriate when that very choice of words seemed to mock Meredith's death, for Meredith certainly needed love and obviously, it was the very last thing she was getting, at the moment she was murdered, therefore, to choose that T-shirt, as one to sway into court in, is a most awful act of her contempt for the severity and seriousness of the proceedings and the horrific reality of Meredith's murder.

If that is not auto-character-assassination, I do not know what is.


That is character assassination.
What the case againt Knox and Sollecito is, has nought to do with character assassination, it has everything to do with the belief in their guilt.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Zorba, you can add Sollecito's own 'pro bono defense team.' They were paid nothing, and "You get what you pay for."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, you can add Sollecito's own 'pro bono defense team.' They were paid nothing, and "You get what you pay for."



Added them and another

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

And,Zorba, I believe there was an accusation against someone at the prison for making advances toward Knox.
I personally did not follow that portion of the story, so I think the source needs to be verified.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Sollecito, as soon as he realised his story wasn't working, and he was going to ensnare himself - this is in the beginning, right after the murder - he immediately pulled up his anchor, and abandoned his ship of fools sailing there with Jolly Roger the Pirate Knox, he left her in her dingy, and tried to float off, however, with no wind of truth behind anything, he could not get far, so after saying one thing then changing it and casting her out to the open sea, he yet again goes back on his word, without ever explaining why he said that in the first place or why he changed stuff, but he did blamed her, and said negative things about her, such as her being irresponsible for living only for pleasure.
So where is this story in his book?

He blamed her for many reasons,

that we are all well-aware of,

Sollecito shifted that story, conveniently,

as though it had never been said,

and this having said that but then acting as if it had never been said would have been a sore point to have him answer for in court,

sadly, he failed to take the stand, where anything said is valid and of importance, instead he waits years to say anything, then accuses everyone of mistreating him, including his own family, who are only doing it to help him, he knows he says, but.... so now he's making up crap about dad encouraging him to do things, that dad never did, and now dad's thinking, hey now wait a minute, I never said that.

Still, however weird it seems, I cannot see dad as having believed his dear son's words. He just made himself act as though he did for the benefit of self-preservation.

Had any of his claims been true, and he had told his lawyers, they would have made formal complaints even before the court hearings were rounded off, as it is, they made no such claims, they didn't because there were none to be made, but now, egged on by his bookie team and Knox club, they're getting him to make a lot of accusations that he may well come to regret. As none of them are true.



Good golly, the hero, oh he's so fantastico, he a man of honour, staying in jail like that, because obviously, he imagined that dad meant he could cut loose, throw her in it.

Okay so what's the reasoning behind this? If it were ever true that his dad and others were encouraging him to blame it all on Knox, when he supposedly knew nothing of the crimes, how was he to do this then? And if he did know and did what dad supposedly was suggesting, then where would that have left him? It would have meant not only Knox got the bullet but him too because at that point Knox if she had to go down, and knew it, was going to tell everything about him too.

He could only say, she definitely was not with me, I lied or I forgot.

But that would never have meant any court was going to believe him, not with all of the circumstantial evidence and his forever shifting versions.

And, in spite of what he says, the truth is, he could never have thrown her in it, and if she had not been at home, surely, honour would mean telling the truth, so truth is; she was with him and he had no choice but to do what he did to protect himself, he calls it honour I call it full of shitness.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
And,Zorba, I believe there was an accusation against someone at the prison for making advances toward Knox.
I personally did not follow that portion of the story, so I think the source needs to be verified.


Darn you have a good memory, I must accuse you of having failed to smoke your maryjuana, you are right, I knew there were more, even the jail folk were against her, when in truth they apparently were really good to her.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I expect Knox's book might have some new made-up revelations

My time in jail and how the jailors raped me

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Knox & Sollecito & Company have blamed and character assassinated the following


1) Patrick Lumumba

2) Prosecutors

3) Police

4) Scientific police

5) Witness food store shopkeeper

6) Witness Bubbles

7) Meredith's housemates

8) Meredith's friends

9) The Media

10) Meredith

11) Meredith's family

12) Meredith's lawyer

13) Judges

14) The lay judges

15) Those not agreeing with the Knox family view

16) Sollecito's defence team

17) Sollecito did blame Knox

18) The prison staff

19) The interpreter

20) Italy

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

If you are reading this Mr R Sollecito, it's time to return to Italy, hand yourself in at Police Headquarters, upon doing so, you will finally be able to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
1) You was there
2) You know exactly what happened
3) You've never forgotten anything and never will be able to short of a brain hemorrhage or dementia, I suppose you may be hoping for an early dose of the latter, as relief.


You will be doing yourself a favour, you cannot keep this act up the worms will lick your bones.

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

No response yet from the Friends Of Amanda about knife boy's revelation about the semen stain. I think they must all be flying in to Seattle :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I see the campaign for every one to award 5 stars to Rafaelle's book on Amazon (and flag the 1 star reviews) is going well. Latest bleat from the groupies: please do the same at the Barnes and Noble website?

Seriously? 5 stars? He isn't Dostoevsky, though perhaps a character in his novels? Raskolnikov? Prince Myshkin? Though perhaps he sees himself as Count Vronsky, who's from Tolstoy, of course :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
No response yet from the Friends Of Amanda about knife boy's revelation about the semen stain. I think they must all be flying in to Seattle :)


Yes, think so, they've probably invited Obama.

Listen Mr President, he's our favourite murderer, er, excuse me, favourite accused of murder, he ain't, you're safe, you'll like him sir he's just a small boy, an infant

President: bla bla la ...

Chief Bruce: what you say sir, oh, his age, why, he's a small 28 sir, still wears short pants

President: bla bla bla ...

Chief Bruce: Oh no sir, he aint still in kindergarten or nuffin, no sir

President: Well why the f you keep calling him a boy, coupla more years he'll be old enough to be someone's grandad-day

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
I see the campaign for every one to award 5 stars to Rafaelle's book on Amazon (and flag the 1 star reviews) is going well. Latest bleat from the groupies: please do the same at the Barnes and Noble website?

Seriously? 5 stars? He isn't Dostoevsky, though perhaps a character in his novels? Raskolnikov? Prince Myshkin? Though perhaps he sees himself as Count Vronsky, who's from Tolstoy, of course :)



Reminds me of the online reviews on Trip Advisor where everyone is saying how filthy the joint was and the staff unfriendly, there was only one change of sheets all week, the food was awful. Never coming back.

Then you get others, that pop up (and must be the owners) who give a 10 to everything, saying how fantastic it was.

Only if you'd never ever been anywhere else could you go that far, even if the staff had been friendly, the lack of kitchen utensils, unavailability of clean linen, noise at night, it's just impossible to give a 10.

I went to Amazon, set about sending a review then I found out you have to have bought a book.
I want to, just so I can make comments, but I do not use credit cards.


Fantastic book, I couldn't put it down

ahahaha


and then pointing out how all the other books - like the most meaningful thereof, such as Follain's - are useless, all the other books have been very poor quality with the exception of Dempsey's and some other one (said they).

My god, sites with no way of controlling reviews are pretty redundant as to value.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Zorba, one neat thing about amazon is you can 'review the reviews of the reviewer.'
When you read a review, you are asked if you want to see all of the particular reviewers reviews.
If you check further, you can determine if this person has only reviewed books written by a certain author,
or, if they only review books presenting a certain point of view, or, even if this is a first-time reviewer.

It becomes pretty obvious who some of them are, and what they are doing.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, one neat thing about amazon is you can 'review the reviews of the reviewer.'
When you read a review, you are asked if you want to see all of the particular reviewers reviews.
If you check further, you can determine if this person has only reviewed books written by a certain author,
or, if they only review books presenting a certain point of view, or, even if this is a first-time reviewer.

It becomes pretty obvious who some of them are, and what they are doing.


that's good to know, I will have to see how I can become a proper member, somehow, so I can say a few things

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

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele Sollecito shares his story with KING 5's Dennis Bounds:

http://www.king5.com/video/featured-vid ... 83811.html

Is Dennis Bounds a groupie or just a general dufus?
All these interviews lack substance!

At least this has to be coming to an end soon, as his University courses begin in five days.

Speaking of endings, isn't Frank Sfoarzo approaching the 90 day limit for a tourist visa soon, or does he have a work visa? Has anyone else read that his sentencing date is scheduled for October 10, and that he could be sentenced for up to six years?
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Raffaele Sollecito shares his story with KING 5's Dennis Bounds:

http://www.king5.com/video/featured-vid ... 83811.html

Is Dennis Bounds a groupie or just a general dufus?
All these interviews lack substance!

At least this has to be coming to an end soon, as his University courses begin in five days.

Speaking of endings, isn't Frank Sfarzo approaching the 90 day limit for a tourist visa soon, or does he have a work visa? Has anyone else read that his sentencing date is scheduled for October 10, and that he could be sentenced for up to six years?



Six years for F. Sfarzo, halleluja, that would do him a world of good, he deserves it, he is yet another twisted brain that jumped on this bandwagon of greed and cruelty.

I do sincerely hope he succeeds in getting his much needed six year stretch. People like him really made things worse. He is a profitmonger.

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, one neat thing about amazon is you can 'review the reviews of the reviewer.'
When you read a review, you are asked if you want to see all of the particular reviewers reviews.
If you check further, you can determine if this person has only reviewed books written by a certain author,
or, if they only review books presenting a certain point of view, or, even if this is a first-time reviewer.

It becomes pretty obvious who some of them are, and what they are doing.


Yes I did exactly that too, with one, and would you believe it, it was someone that had not recently joined simply to support Knox & Sollecito, however, it was a brainless nitwit, who while saying it was the best book and all that, could not even spell the word 'writing', spelling it writting more than once, so that kind of reviewer, saying how fantastic a book is written, doesn't seem very convincing!

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

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, one neat thing about amazon is you can 'review the reviews of the reviewer.'
When you read a review, you are asked if you want to see all of the particular reviewers reviews.
If you check further, you can determine if this person has only reviewed books written by a certain author,
or, if they only review books presenting a certain point of view, or, even if this is a first-time reviewer.

It becomes pretty obvious who some of them are, and what they are doing.


There's a new incoming nutjob, Napia, a new Facebook friend of RS. He's like the Ron Burgundy of Amazon reviews, has done over 50 of them, they're so good they are guaranteed to boost sales! He has promised to write one of his coveted reviews for RS. He's also invited him to come stay with him, even posted his cell number.

All this attention the FOAKers put into the reviews, what is the point? Maybe it's just me but I can't think a normal person would even take the time to read 20+ book reviews before they buy this book. They're going to buy it because they think he's innocent or guilty already.


Last edited by louiehaha on Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
The Insider with Raffaele Sollecito and Brooke Anderson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO3wN_Gyawk


Now I see why this program airs at 1:30am and 4:00am here!
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   



The sound and the fury...
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Zorba, one neat thing about amazon is you can 'review the reviews of the reviewer.'
When you read a review, you are asked if you want to see all of the particular reviewers reviews.
If you check further, you can determine if this person has only reviewed books written by a certain author,
or, if they only review books presenting a certain point of view, or, even if this is a first-time reviewer.

It becomes pretty obvious who some of them are, and what they are doing.


There's a new incoming nutjob, Napia, a new Facebook friend of RS. He's like the Ron Burgundy of Amazon reviews, has done over 50 of them, they're so good they are guaranteed to boost sales! He has promised to write one of his coveted reviews for RS. He's also invited him to come stay with him, even posted his cell number.

All this attention the FOAKers put into the reviews, what is the point? Maybe it's just me but I can't think a normal person would even take the time to read 20+ book reviews before they buy this book. They're going to buy it because they think he's innocent or guilty already.


The point, louiehaha, is some form of sublte intimidation, I think.
I am a frequent Amazon shopper. Because of this, I have received offers from Amazon to join some kind of 'members club' to do reviews for items. I'm sorry to say that I didn't pay more attention to it at the time, but there is a forum of members who post to each other about their review scores. Some of them were complaining about receiving a large number of 'unhelpful'clicks, because this somehow affects their scores. I never read through the whole thing at the time, to determine exactly what benefits these members received, but I get the impression that these reviewers would shy away from any item that was receiving 'unhelpful' clicks. Seemed a bit seedy to me. I think I'll look into this a bit.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:25 pm   Post subject: SOLLECITO THANKS YOU   

Here's a list of people thanked by Sollecito in the acknowledgments of his book: "Along the way I acquired many supporters who, over time and many exchanges of letters, have become true friends themselves. Among them: Gilbert Baumgartner, Michael Krom, Maria Luigia Alessandrini, Joe Santore, Jessica Nichols, Chris and Edda Mellas, Madison Paxton, Cassandra Knox, Deanna Knox, Elisabeth Huff, Shirley Anne Mather, J. Tappan Menard, Martin Speer, Jason Leznek, Eric Volz, Steve and Michelle Moore, Leslie Calixto, Laura Buchanan Kane, Larry Kells, Jerry and Sue Alexander, Steven David Bloomberg, Eve Applebaum-Dominick, Francisco di Gennaro and Anna Rella, and Nigel Scott. Other supporters I’d like to acknowledge include Angela Benn, Karen Pruett, Judge Michael Heavey, Sunshine Tsalagi, Janet Burgess, Alexander Jackson, Maria Alamillo, Candace Dempsey, Paul Smyth, Patrick King, Joe Starr, Mario Spezi, Douglas Preston, Mark Waterbury, Bruce Fisher, David D. Kamanski, Jerry Morgan, Bruce Locke, Jodie Leah ...

Notable absence of Curt Knox, but Cassandra's there? And no Frank Sfarzo? And here's another one of those people who get charged in other countries but get freed by noisome Americans, Eric Volz. More on him here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSo3sb73CZY

They defend sleazebags, don't they?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:


The sound and the fury...


I don't get it..

Did someone 'adjust' the size of his head, like they did the dimensions of his bloodied foot on the bathmat? :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 12:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Thanks, Ergon, and louiehaha. The longer I look at it, the funnier it gets. :D
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 1:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yet another Sollecito interview, as if we didn't have enough already.
The talk show host is Margaret Larson of New Day NW (Northwest).
For anyone interested in hearing him prattling on for 20 minutes.... here is the link:

Parts 1 & 2:

http://www.king5.com/video?id=171171331&sec=619972

Sollecito needs to go; if possible, yesterday... :)
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I see the 411 over at .org has picked up on my need for a little levity. In keeping with the moo-d,
I'd like to share a bit of news.

You can all stop wondering about the attraction the Feeb has for his locoweed wife, it seems that he's

A calf man! sor-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:03 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

An Interview with Giuliano Mignini: "No Talks with Sollecito"
By Lorenzo Lamperti

An imperfect Google translation (Maybe an Italian speaker can help refine the English better than my efforts ... Or maybe someone else will want to wrestle with Google Translate ...)

Prosecutor Mignini, in recent days it has been written that you made a deal with Raffaele Sollecito, offering a more lenient penalty in exchange for testimony against Amanda Knox.

"I must say that at this point I am baffled by this distortion of facts. It was enough to read what Sollecito wrote in his book to realize that I had absolutely nothing to do with it. Among other things, the father of Raffaele denied the existence of a negotiation. But I still see the newspapers that publish these things. Forget the Americans, on which it is better to draw a veil, but I am surprised that here in Italy we are talking about events that never occurred. Sollecito's father denied on live television, and in any case there were not even the starting elements to support something like this. "

So there was a manipulation of the story by Sollecito?

"It seems obvious. Anyway, the story of the Kercher process is preceded by the Monster of Florence [November 22, the Supreme Court will decide, ed.] And from there that started it all. I never said anything, but now it can not be more. The story of Meredith there was too superficial. "

Raffaele Sollecito talks [in his book] about a lawyer who would deal with his family ...

"They are simple inferences - inferences. Anyway, I do not understand how it was possible to interpret Sollecito's story as related to me. A good look at things would suffice; I couldn't be offended by a swagger."

Are you considering legal action?

"I have ninety days, I will assess. Of course, I must take note of the denial of Dr. Sollecito. He writes that his son, at least what the newspapers reported, had no intention to smear me. The problem is that they have been applied. Enough to read properly to understand that we are talking about simple impressions, not facts. As a concrete reference is made only to certain people who are not me. "

Therefore the existence of a secret negotiation is excluded?

"Absolutely. Why would I want [to cut a deal with Sollecitos] after conviction [in first instance] and the request for a life sentence pending an appeal? But for what?"

So you never had any doubts about the guilt of Amanda?

"If I'd had any doubts I would have asked to absolve her. I've always believed that both were responsible.

The appeal to the Supreme Court is also based on the conviction of Amanda for slander.

"That is one of the fundamental aspects of the application, which is still divided into many reasons. An action done very well. We'll see what the Supreme Court decides on March 25."

The fact is that you have created a unique situation in which Rudy Guede was convicted of complicity in the murder, but according to justice competitors there are no Amanda and Raffaele ...

"Yes, yes, indeed. There is Rudy Guede sentenced for complicity [in the murder]; Sollecito and Knox acquitted. Rudy Guede, on the other hand, as we have seen, has not been sentenced for the simulation of theft ... These are problems that are created with the fast track trial when a part of the story is split from the other part, instead of it being a single story. "

There was a lot of pressure in the trial. Do you think that could in any way have affected the verdict?

"I do not know specifically if it has influenced the [trial] proceedings. I know that the Court had this idea, this belief, I do not agree. Certainly, there was tremendous pressure. Believe the trial process in court, not outside."

She spoke of a hot judgment "almost announced." [?]

"Those who follow the appeal process will make its assessments. According to us, the first-instance judgment was correct and complete. We'll see how the Supreme Court decides, but beyond the process, I can not accept certain insinuations. We have been made the subject of attacks exclusively. I remain puzzled, for example, when it is still referred to the phrases that I refuted years ago where I allegedly said that the murder of Meredith was a satanic ritual. Which I never said, but despite this it is still written [about me]. "

Are these just superficial errors or something more?

"It is no longer possible to speak of mistakes because they are years that deny these phrases. At this point I was curious."

Many people turn up their noses at the mention of Raffaele's and Amanda's books, which will be released shortly, and do not find it correct to cash in on a tragedy like the murder of Meredith. What do you think?

"These are choices that everyone makes and is responsible for. Suffice to say that the process is in progress and you have to wait for the decision of the Supreme Court.

LIBERO
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

:!: Breaking News :!:

Amanda Knox’s former boyfriend in Seattle: ‘I lost everything’

Pictures from today's event:

SEATTLE PI

Poorly attended reading ...
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Thanks for this, guermantes. Not only was it poorly attended, it was poorly covered, also.This article gives less information than any of the coverages so far. What's up with that?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
:!: Breaking News :!:

Amanda Knox’s former boyfriend in Seattle: ‘I lost everything’

Pictures from today's event:

SEATTLE PI

Poorly attended reading ...

Quote:
“After four years, I lost everything,” Sollecito told Bounds. “Now, I am building a new life. It’s like they killed me, and after four years, they raised me up.”

Killed him? I need to stop reading this crap :roll:
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

max wrote:
guermantes wrote:
:!: Breaking News :!:

Amanda Knox’s former boyfriend in Seattle: ‘I lost everything’

Pictures from today's event:

SEATTLE PI

Poorly attended reading ...

Quote:
“After four years, I lost everything,” Sollecito told Bounds. “Now, I am building a new life. It’s like they killed me, and after four years, they raised me up.”

Killed him? I need to stop reading this crap :roll:



This shows what an ugly-minded shameless individual he is.

_________________
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: Wed Sep 26, 2012 12:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
max wrote:
guermantes wrote:
:!: Breaking News :!:

Amanda Knox’s former boyfriend in Seattle: ‘I lost everything’

Pictures from today's event:

SEATTLE PI

Poorly attended reading ...

Quote:
“After four years, I lost everything,” Sollecito told Bounds. “Now, I am building a new life. It’s like they killed me, and after four years, they raised me up.”

Killed him? I need to stop reading this crap :roll:



This shows what an ugly-minded shameless individual he is.


Self-pity and arrogance, I guess that's what many murderers share.
Even Edda and Deanna look sceptical and bored.
Maybe it's really time go home, he's getting weirder each day: “We were just starting to know each other. But someone came and destroyed everything.”
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 12:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Poorly attended indeed. I see Frank Sfarzo (Sforza) but not Raffaelle's father or sister, so those reports about them being in Seattle were wrong.

If I were Amanda Knox's publisher I'd be worried.

Note to Sollecito: go home. Be a man.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 12:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Been catching up on the Sollecito book stuff and I'm so amused. First of all by the almost throwing Knox back to the wolves then stopping to say he was honour bound to her. FFS, she was in the flat or she wasn't, it isn't a trick question.

The UW event last night was a scream by the looks of things (not). Deanna and Edda look like people whose ability to pay their bills rests on a $4m deal with a publisher that might be about to go tits up. I said at the time that Knox's advance will be $150k tops and the rest will be based on book sales with the estimate or contract price coming from the amount they expect to sell. I suspect that the forecast has been adjusted somewhat in light of Sollecito sales figures. He was always going to sell less than Knox but he's going to be lucky to have shifted 100 books this week. Which is awesome news.

I'm pretty busy trying to manage an unmanageable contractor at work whilst completing a post grad at the moment hence my absence BUT two things that you guys might be interested in....1. Sollecito's book is on Pirate Bay for torrent should you wish to read but not line the pockets of knife boy. Whatever your feelings on internet piracy, I think we can all agree that this is that one time you can justify it to yourself as noone short of her parents should make money from Meredith's murder. 2. Sollecito's personal Facebook page is open and he's replying to private messages. At one point he posted a gmail address to send questions to but its disappeared now *not very surprised face* I wouldn't go in with "YOU KILLED MEREDITH YOU BASTARD!!!1111!!!" as an opening gambit but it seems he's willing to talk if you go in with the right approach. I'm very tempted by this idea.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 1:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hi, daisysteiner. it's a great idea to write to him. Question is whether it's him replying. I suspect most of his FB is also, ghost-written :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

A view from "the other side" (with some quotes from RS's book).

Raffaele Sollecito Authors a Book about his Journey with Amanda Knox

By Joseph Bishop

GROUND REPORT

RS about his lawyer Maori:

“For my part, I wasn’t nearly as concerned about Maori, whom I’d long ago dismissed as a lightweight..."

RS on Massei Report:

“ I doubt an Italian court has ever published 427 pages quite this shameful, illogical, or flat-out ridiculous.”

"Why, if I was trying to further the idea that there had been a break-in, did I tell the carabinieri that nothing had been taken? Massei had to expend several paragraphs explaining this away. Because, he said, I wanted to establish some credibility with law enforcement and I knew, since I’d staged the break-in, that nothing had in fact been taken and I didn’t want to get caught in a lie. Huh? I had to read that one several times too. It was nonsense even on its own terms. Meredith’s money, credit cards, and cell phones were stolen, as the police later established. If I’d committed the murder, wouldn’t I know these were gone? Massei chose not to go anywhere near that subject."

A couple of pictures with his fans:

Attachment:
Sollecito and Joseph Bishop.jpg


Attachment:
Sollecito and a fan.jpg


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ava wrote:
zorba wrote:
max wrote:
guermantes wrote:
:!: Breaking News :!:

Amanda Knox’s former boyfriend in Seattle: ‘I lost everything’

Pictures from today's event:

SEATTLE PI

Poorly attended reading ...

Quote:
“After four years, I lost everything,” Sollecito told Bounds. “Now, I am building a new life. It’s like they killed me, and after four years, they raised me up.”

Killed him? I need to stop reading this crap :roll:


This shows what an ugly-minded shameless individual he is.


Self-pity and arrogance, I guess that's what many murderers share.
Even Edda and Deanna look sceptical and bored.
Maybe it's really time go home, he's getting weirder each day: “We were just starting to know each other. But someone came and destroyed everything.”


Yes right, I too felt the same seeing them. Mother looked rather ape-ishly confused, you know, no matter how far they went, in reality, as I've said a lit of times, these things re not easy to deal with, even if you've gone out of your way, knowing thing re not right, to help your family member, it's still too much to deal with in the aftermath, and also, what we've said about what is now going on in the family, like they protected but how are they coping truly, with themselves, after all, no matter how poor their behaviour has been, they murdered nobody, and with time, they find out they also cannot truly deal with the idea that in truth, their loved one did do it. They cannot avoid it

So I see mother hurt and I see sister hurt too, and the hurt is wound and bound up in the unbearable impression they can't escape that sis or daughter Knox is guilty after all.

After all, imagine the way Knox is now, how can she, if she did commit murder, keep up the act in simple everyday situations, you cannot because it can never leave you.

And that is the part that will be difficult for the family, seeing that Knox is not changed because of the prison experience but because of something else, and that can only ring a bell in them and greatly disturb them no matter how much they wish to ignore it, oppress it, not think it.
I see that look in her sister's eyes, you know, the idea of realising hey, my sister who I love, really (may have done it) did that.
Then they listen to Chump Sollecito with his disgusting exhibition of shamelessness, not crawling away happy to have escaped, he sees it fit to take it even further adding insults galore to fatal injury.

Let's face it, no matter how much mother may have misbehaved, she was and is in the process of a shattered awakening, that she has done everything to oppress, and refute, but she did not kill anyone, ever, and she was probably a decent person, a mother, but this sheer level of grossness, has had such an impact on her and the rest that it has pushed them in their wanting to protect, into areas they'd never have walked before in their entire lives.

Then Knox is away, they do not even get to see her much and notice her avoidance techniques since she returned and how she is a creature that metamorphosized into something different and now, slowly, they are losing love for her because the person they loved is dead/is no more, she isn't the persion they knew and that now is what disturbs them because if she were innocent she would still be herself, even if damaged by a bad experience.

This is the important difference; Knox will avoid rather than have to act, she does not need to act for the boyfriend as he does not know her the way the family do, and partners cannot always pick up on stuff that those in your family can.They are going to be upset that they are not getting to see her, she now always has excuses as to why he cannot come over. She's not feeling well, she has a toothache, she has a belly ache. They want to be quiet, etc.

It's more sister D is there at the book nonsense wanting it to be real but listening to him, cannot but help have wrong notes struck inside her head, they too (sis D and mother E) are having it dawn on them that he is an incredible bastard, one that sister D would never have ever have had anywhere near her, in her own life, her life in which she herself would have learned to be aware of who is okay and who is not.

Would she have had such a geeky creep around her?
His lack of honour only goes to show what a shameless wìmp he is, he even turned his dad into a liar by saying what he has, where's the honour then, and respect for dad?

I think he should have had his wishes come true and been placed on an ordinary wing in the prisons, sure man, he'd have been pushing up daisies too by now.

I think they ought to let Michelle S have her say at these books reviews, ahaha.

All as I am left with is an awful feeling I mean if it was'nt clear how bad Sollecito was, it is now, he is an out and out callous bastard. And that is putting it very lightly indeed.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:11 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: Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

This Joseph Bishop has a familiar face, wasn't he the man pictured in the factory with Free Knox items?

Anyhow, he does look like he might have a few corpses cemented under his patio.

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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
louiehaha wrote:


The sound and the fury...


I don't get it..

Did someone 'adjust' the size of his head, like they did the dimensions of his bloodied foot on the bathmat? :)



What is his height/weight anyway?

Dude looks kind a smallish... maybe he should only be in pics with the 'ThreeCrapateers'. band-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

dgfred wrote:
Ergon wrote:
louiehaha wrote:

The sound and the fury...


I don't get it..

Did someone 'adjust' the size of his head, like they did the dimensions of his bloodied foot on the bathmat? :)



What is his height/weight anyway?

Dude looks kind a smallish... maybe he should only be in pics with the 'ThreeCrapateers'. band-)



I think the photoshopping lot have been in, like the way they make someone like Lady Gaga balloon overnight, they copy pasted him, reduced size then re-entered him in between them, he looks like a boy midget and that is what they want people to think, he's just a little boy.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Theere aren't any more appearances scheduled on the Simon and Schuster website. At what point does a publisher realize that he/she is backing a financial dud? Time to head back to Italy and face the music, I think.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

From one of the fan sites on facebook:
Candace Dempsey
"Everybody, it really helps Raffaele if you "like" his book on Amazon. Just takes a second."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Sollecito Twists his Knife

to make sure his lies are fully embedded in his richly embroidered tapestry of deceit.

At the cottage his reassuring detective-like words were directly related to the situation in the room that appeared to be broken into, and not the rest of the house, so his latest bullshit is yet again so easily unraveled.

Poor Sollecito, thinking he can somehow undermine a judge!

This guy is really up the wall, trying to make Massei look like he doesn't know what he is talking about; Massei in no way avoided anything at all, but Sollecito made comments about the room with the broken window.
It's all well and good explaining shit away where it is entirely useless and of no value, yes to some stupid TV show, but in court where it did count and WAS valid, he said nothing at all.

What he said was in relationship to the state of the room where the burglary had been staged, It seems to me that he was responsible for that staging, and was keen to have the police simply accept his wonderful easy ideas and solutions.

How thick could anyone get.
For him to have imagined police would not pick up on such things is so dumb.

He just thought he would be able to fool them with this and it seem he was quite proud of his handiwork.

Now that it worked against him, he tries, outside of the law, to put it right, when we know the truth about this bit.

I am willing to be money on it that he is not going to return to Italy and if he does he is getting out again, just before the court case resumes next year.

In America he is like Knox was in Italy; living in a dream world. In America he feels free, he has a certain distance, imaginary, between everything that took place in italy, that is troubling him, of everything to do with the murder, not his life before that. Therefore, the distance placed, relieves him, through the diversionary nature of it, the attention heaped upon him by a bunch of nitwits there, yet, returning, is going to turn him grey and nauseous. There will be no joy brewing up inside him, stepping out of any jet from America.

Nope.

His favourite song will be

I'm leaving on a jet plane, I doubt that I will be back again

Sollecito the hero: Dad, I home!!!

Dad: Oh for f's sake, I thought you'd give us a rest and stay there, what the hell was you thinking making me out for a liar you retarded despicable waster

Sollecito: What's wrong pap, aren't you proud of me?

_________________
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: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
This Joseph Bishop has a familiar face, wasn't he the man pictured in the factory with Free Knox items?


Yes it's him. He is the one who wrote an open letter to the Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales: IIP

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Attachment:
Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB and RS.jpg


Bruce Fisher thanked him in Acknowledgements to his self-published book:

February 7, 2011 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...


Acknowledgements:

"There are many people to thank. The Injustice in Perugia website and this book are the result of the hard work of many people. I will do my best to include everyone and I apologize if I have left anyone out.
...
Joseph Bishop has been one of the most effective supporters of this cause. His comments on articles throughout the internet refute the guilter cut and paste nonsense in definitive fashion. Joseph brought the lack of transparency in the Italian justice system to my attention. I believe this is an extremely important topic. Joseph is a very charitable man. He is quick to offer airfare to members of our group, and he is present at many of the events to support Amanda’s defense fund. The world needs more people like Joseph Bishop."

http://www.perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?p=77678#p77678

Quote:
Anyhow, he does look like he might have a few corpses cemented under his patio.


:)


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
From one of the fan sites on facebook:
Candace Dempsey
"Everybody, it really helps Raffaele if you "like" his book on Amazon. Just takes a second."



If she puts her excess stock with his they can have a nice barbecue

Pathetic witch that is too.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
This Joseph Bishop has a familiar face, wasn't he the man pictured in the factory with Free Knox items?


Yes it's him. He is the one who wrote an open letter to the Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales: IIP

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Attachment:
Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB and RS.jpg


Bruce Fisher thanked him in Acknowledgements to his self-published book:

February 7, 2011 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...


Acknowledgements:

"There are many people to thank. The Injustice in Perugia website and this book are the result of the hard work of many people. I will do my best to include everyone and I apologize if I have left anyone out.
...
Joseph Bishop has been one of the most effective supporters of this cause. His comments on articles throughout the internet refute the guilter cut and paste nonsense in definitive fashion. Joseph brought the lack of transparency in the Italian justice system to my attention. I believe this is an extremely important topic. Joseph is a very charitable man. He is quick to offer airfare to members of our group, and he is present at many of the events to support Amanda’s defense fund. The world needs more people like Joseph Bishop."

http://www.perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic.php?p=77678#p77678

Quote:
Anyhow, he does look like he might have a few corpses cemented under his patio.


:)



Wow Germantes, tháts so good of you and very well do e to, to know where to find the plank.

I always thought he looked like someone out of a horror story, I mean what in hell could his interest be, I just always had the impression there must be something wrong with him, I mean which kind guy like that gets interested in something like this, and does what he did, with his Knox campaigning stuff?

He looks like some guy on a Frankenstein movie set adjusting Franky's bolt.


However, he was not the only disturbing looking person, male person of not so tender years.

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:06 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: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hey Guermantes,

who is he then in truth, what does he do, where does he live and how is it he stuck the boot in on this case?

Any idea?

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Maybe he is going to offer Sollecito a job on the cement mixer

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Or in it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Hey Guermantes,

who is he then in truth, what does he do, where does he live and how is it he stuck the boot in on this case?

Any idea?


I've no idea about his background or where he is from. I don't know anything about his true profession so I let it go. Jools might know more about him.
Maybe he works in a junk car yard? :mrgreen:

Attachment:
junk car.jpg

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Car repair shop I think is probably closer to truth.


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele Sollecito talks about the "dreamy romance" he had with Amanda Knox
By Doug Longhini

Given it all happened in an ancient Italian hill town, it is as though Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet were jailed one week after meeting each other. The inevitable question would be: what happened to the relationship?.

In an interview with 48 Hours correspondent Peter Van Sant, Raffaele Sollecito answers that question.


CBS NEWS CRIMESIDER
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
Hey Guermantes,

who is he then in truth, what does he do, where does he live and how is it he stuck the boot in on this case?

Any idea?


I've no idea about his background and where he is from. I don't know anything about his true profession so I let it go. Jools might know more about him.
Maybe he works in a junk car yard? ;)

Attachment:
junk car.jpg

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Car repair shop I think is probably closer to truth.



Very odd, he is an electrical engineer from Connecticut.


http://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-bishop/9/329/34


He works here: http://www.pepco-ft4.com/



Can't figure him out, he must be some kind of good ol' patriot, another one who doesn't then care about the facts, he was in Iraq, he probably thinks foreign countries are all like Iraq, so she's one of ours, so really, someone like that does think he's doing his bit for the country.

There must be an angle to him, as to why he has done what he did, by supporting Knox, the only one I can imagine is this pseudo and misplaced sense of patriotism.

When they sent him off to Irak he thought they'd said go fix a rack.

Maybe he is suffering from shock.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
Hey Guermantes,

who is he then in truth, what does he do, where does he live and how is it he stuck the boot in on this case?

Any idea?


I've no idea about his background and where he is from. I don't know anything about his true profession so I let it go. Jools might know more about him.
Maybe he works in a junk car yard? ;)

Attachment:
junk car.jpg

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Car repair shop I think is probably closer to truth.



Very odd, he is an electrical engineer from Connecticut.


http://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-bishop/9/329/34


He works here: http://www.pepco-ft4.com/



Can't figure him out, he must be some kind of good ol' patriot, another one who doesn't then care about the facts, he was in Iraq, he probably thinks foreign countries are all like Iraq, so she's one of ours, so really, someone like that does think he's doing his bit for the country.

There must be an angle to him, as to why he has done what he did, by supporting Knox, the only one I can imagine is this pseudo and misplaced sense of patriotism.

When they sent him off to Irak he thought they'd said go fix a rack.

Maybe he is suffering from shock.


Well,Zorba,if he isn't suffering from shock NOW, he will be, come March.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Very odd, he is an electrical engineer from Connecticut.


So I was wrong about the car repair shop. Maybe in that photo he is standing in front of a damaged car after an attack by the "coalition of the willing" on a convoy in Iraq, or something like it .... Must have been very traumatic.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 7:27 pm   Post subject: SHARLENE LEVIN MARTIN   

Sharlene Levin Martin is not the point of this post, although she is the literary agent who brokered Raffaele Sollecito's book deal with Simon and Schuster. Her attaboy comments for her client on his support websites show she is a little bit of a groupie herself, just saying, though she did manage to add after the Dempsey comment above "and please buy a book as well, since it makes your review more credible".

It is not widely known that Sharlene Martin was also the literary agent for the Goldman family that seized and published OJ Simpson's "If I Did It" manuscript, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_I_Did_It over the objections of Nicole Brown's family, who unsuccessfully tried to block the sale http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... ut/_2.html .

What interests me, having followed the OJ Simpson case a while back, were the measures he took to avoid paying the civil judgement against him, and here's the money trail showing more than $800,000 paid by Harper Collins to him http://confessionsofakiller.files.wordp ... -trail.pdf

Haven't Rupert Murdoch's Harper Collins learned anything? Just six years after trying to publish OJ Simpson's book, they try once again, to publish the memoirs of another killer, also acquitted? Last time it was met with howls of outrage. This time, it looks like it will be met with indifference, no matter how many times the media try to polish this pig's turd of a book. As we can see from Sollecito's book sale numbers.

But the real point is Frank Sfarzo's article in Oggi magazine that Amanda Knox set to make herself judgment proof, in case there's a civil suit filed against her. So interesting to see the parallels between this and the OJ Simpson case.

And interesting to see how Nicole Brown and Meredith Kercher's family both asked that no one be allowed to profit from their daughter's death, but the bottom feeders like Sharlene Martin, Bruce Fischer, Frank Sfarzo, thought by latching on to two murderers, they might further their own careers? Karma happens.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 7:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yes, Ergon, you are right. Karma happens. And we are watching it unfold. Keeping Knox tightly under wraps for this long is not going to work to their advantage. Not financially. Although I have always felt that Sollecito's book was the opening act for the star of the show, and his book will attract comments and questions that will allow them to fine-tune hers, it's still looking as if the public interest is no longer there. But, it's obvious that the Italian interest is still running strong.

Sollecito has burned more than one bridge, IMO, and, while I believe it was done with the blessing of his Papa,
those bridges were closely being monitored in his home country. He hasn't done himself any favors with this book, and it is my firm belief that Knox won't either. They should have learned the OJ lesson.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
Hey Guermantes,

who is he then in truth, what does he do, where does he live and how is it he stuck the boot in on this case?

Any idea?


I've no idea about his background and where he is from. I don't know anything about his true profession so I let it go. Jools might know more about him.
Maybe he works in a junk car yard? ;)

Attachment:
junk car.jpg

Attachment:
FOA Joseph Bishop aka PhanuelB.jpg


Car repair shop I think is probably closer to truth.



Very odd, he is an electrical engineer from Connecticut.


http://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-bishop/9/329/34


He works here: http://www.pepco-ft4.com/



Can't figure him out, he must be some kind of good ol' patriot, another one who doesn't then care about the facts, he was in Iraq, he probably thinks foreign countries are all like Iraq, so she's one of ours, so really, someone like that does think he's doing his bit for the country.

There must be an angle to him, as to why he has done what he did, by supporting Knox, the only one I can imagine is this pseudo and misplaced sense of patriotism.

When they sent him off to Iraq he thought they'd said go fix a rack.

Maybe he is suffering from shock.


Well,Zorba,if he isn't suffering from shock NOW, he will be, come March.



Right.
Imagine you're a glorified electrician, and, you go to Iraq, all of that bloodshed, all of that death, all of that horror, I mean, men such as him have been targeted, of course, any American there was, and was highly sought, so they the fighters could blackmail others, or simply to kill those caught, so people like this man had to really watch out. Many were killed. Not only Americans, but they were a top prize.

So you see all of that, it is hardly like ordinary American everyday life.

If you see a lot of awful things, maybe something happens to you in your head. Many soldiers, enough of them, did atrocious things, I know they were under extreme pressure, but some of the things some of them did were truly macabre.

Okay back to Joe Ordinary, this guy, he goes in there, he is getting paid a packet to do that and that is why such men go too, I mean the money, but, they know the risks. They think they do, until they get there and then see things happening, and have to operate under incredibly hard circumstances and conditions.

Yeah so he returns home, and he cannot differentiate anymore, all as he knows is, that what is his, is his, and that what IS his, is all things American. He is thoroughly traumatised and is drawn towards extreme situations because back home with the firm, there is no extreme situation, yet the effects of the one in Iraq, has sent him apeshit, on the quiet, he's a closet lunatic that needs the excitement that he never got counselling for after Iraq. His counselling, is self-medication, by means of Knox's situation and him donating to it, thinking he's dog something big and meaningful.
I mean people like this must have a source of motivation somewhere, something that he actually believes is correct, only he cannot see straight or reason things out properly, because his involvement is still something that benefits him rather than Knox, no matter what he does.

He cannot stop to deliberate matters with himself, all as he knows is she (Knox) is not foreign.

Really I think the man is mentally disturbed.

And the reasons for it, have something to do with what I've outlined, he functions, yes, but he feels this great uniformity with anyone American, as all the rest to him seemed like an enemy, as he was under huge stress in Iran, probably in danger of losing his life every day, having to move about under protection, knowing more and more that each day could be his last, you know that on your way to work you might get blown to bits, but then... the money, mmm the money, mm, the sweet money, so people like him stick in there. And come away damaged/disturbed.

Only he is a functioning citizen who is in fact up the wall.
His outlet valve, is placing his negative disturbed energy into something he feels is part of him, and, the bottom line is, he does not care about what Knox did or did not do; she is American everyone else is an Arab or an Iraqi or a foreign enemy.
He likes his new chum Sollecito a he is part of his outlet valve material (resulting from his traumatic experiences in Iraq), the case of Madam Knox.

Living in Connecticut he didn't get a lot of sun and had probably never even vacationed in Mexico, upon arrival in Iraq he underwent a severe case of sunstroke to start off with, after that he set about restoring electricity, his hands a-trembling more and more each day worrying about if he was gonna get bumped off on the way back to the company accommodation, sound of machine guns and bombs ringing in his lugholes.

What I'm saying is, all of the above, in my scenarios, may be be incorrect but one thing is certain, there's something not quite right with that Mr Ordinary Guy.

Joe Ordinary Guy had been dropped in onboard a special military plane: Okay, nice to be here, seems like a long way ta work though... right, where's this rack you want fixed?

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


Last edited by zorba on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:26 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
zorba wrote:
Very odd, he is an electrical engineer from Connecticut.


So I was wrong about the car repair shop. Maybe in that photo he is standing in front of a damaged car after an attack by the "coalition of the willing" on a convoy in Iraq, or something like it .... Must have been very traumatic.



Right but me too, I thought he looked like a guy from some productuon line, and he may be an engineer but he still struck me as being weird, and still does.

See my possible scenarios for what it is with his mental make-up.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

By the way, it was and always is pleasantly refreshing to read anything the good gentleman Mignini says

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

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 904

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

dgfred wrote:
...
What is his height/weight anyway?

Dude looks kind a smallish... maybe he should only be in pics with the 'ThreeCrapateers'. band-)


He looks surprisingly short and small:



His decision to wear a knife as compensation 'ornamentation' makes more sense to me now.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 904

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
...
I agree it's wrong for them to profit from the murder of Meredith.
I'd like to append a question to this discussion regarding the Kercher's civil suit. If the Kercher's are successful with their suit, will it be enforceable in a US court? Does the answer hinge on the political decision of granting extradition? Also, is a criminal conviction necessary for the civil suit to succeed?...


I'm a huge fan of "TomM" on .ORG - he is a US lawyer with, IIRC, over 3 decades of experience as a litigator and fluency in Italian to boot. Accordingly, I was interested to know his take on these matters as he was translating Hellmann's judgment. Search .ORG using "TomM" as the author + "Alien Tort Claims" to have a peek at our little chat.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 12:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hi everybody,

found this link to Honor Bound on the Simon & Schuster website:

http://books.simonandschuster.com/Honor-Bound/Andrew-Gumbel/9781451695984

Click on "Browse Inside" to read Sollecito's book. I've reached p.40; there are probably more in that preview.

A 3 min 25 sec Gumbel interview (nothing new, though); the joker who created this audio file named it "Grumble" :)

Attachment:
GRUMBLE092112.mp3


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele Sollecito: I Spent That Night With Amanda Knox
By Candace Dempsey

An interview with Andrew Gumbel has just been published on the Seattle PI website:

Andrew, how’d you land the ghostwriting job with Raffaele?

After Amanda Knox and Raffaele were released last October, it dawned on me that it would an ideal job for me to be Amanda’s ghostwriter. I’m British and lived in Italy and have written extensively about criminal justice and now I’m in the U.S. on the West Coast. So I reached out to contacts. Nothing happened. Then Sharlene Martin, Raffaele’s agent, put a notice on a list serve for literary agents and a friend saw it. I got the job.


SEATTLE PI (BLOG)

Posted by candace_dempsey on September 26, 2012 at 7:32 pm

Candace has misspelled his name (Gumbell)! :shock:
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:50 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

If it has been posted before, I missed it. Does anyone know how ghostwriters are paid? Do the get a fee for their services, which is the same, regardless how the book fares?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

By the way, thanks for all of your great finds, guermantes. Saves me a boatload of googling.
I especially like the pictures. Never imagined that Sollecito was such a slight, little thing.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:

An interview with Andrew Gumbel has just been published on the Seattle PI website:

Andrew, how’d you land the ghostwriting job with Raffaele?

After Amanda Knox and Raffaele were released last October, it dawned on me that it would an ideal job for me to be Amanda’s ghostwriter. I’m British and lived in Italy and have written extensively about criminal justice and now I’m in the U.S. on the West Coast. So I reached out to contacts. Nothing happened. Then Sharlene Martin, Raffaele’s agent, put a notice on a list serve for literary agents and a friend saw it. I got the job.



He's kidding, extensive, yeah sure man, world famous, basically, he's in America trying to earn a crumb, work not easy to come by, that's why would sell his own granny for money.


========================== Only in it for the dough============================

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:41 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
If it has been posted before, I missed it. Does anyone know how ghostwriters are paid? Do the get a fee for their services, which is the same, regardless how the book fares?


If the amount of books sold is anything to go by then I imagine per 100 books sold 1 sandwich/bun

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

They selected a Brit on purpose, to make it seem like Brit have nothing against these people either, they didn't want it being penned by an American.


This is not too hard to see.

They should have had Barbie write it for them.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 1:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Greater minds than mine will have to unravel this confusion. The plugs just don't fit into the sockets. Sollecito is an honorable man because he refused to throw her under the bus to save himself? What's with this 'hearing Amanda screaming as she was being interviewed?' He was coerced and intimidated also, and we are just hearing about it now, 5 years after the fact? Where was his nobility when she was being accused of making this up? Wouldn't he have been a star witness for her defense at that time? Wouldn't this admission have added a spine to her story at the time? Certainly he was fully aware of the charges levied against her and her family. So, where's the honor?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 1:59 pm   Post subject: GHOST WRITING EXPLAINED   

Napia5 wrote:
If it has been posted before, I missed it. Does anyone know how ghostwriters are paid? Do the get a fee for their services, which is the same, regardless how the book fares?


Widely varies, Napia5. Depends on the qualifications of the writer and whether the book is written on spec (no publisher yet and the subject hires the writer) or, there already is a publisher and literary agent attached. Writers usually get paid a fixed fee, with an advance and balance on completion. There sometimes are bonuses based on copies sold. See here http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/11/29/ ... stwriting/

Raf's agent Sharlene Martin hired Gumbel. Both he and Martin are solid, established professionals in their field. See http://www.truthdig.com/andrew_gumbel for his background. Aside from 20 years as a journalist for the respected Guardian and Independent, he does have the European background necessary to write from Sollecito's perspective. And his published books Steal This Vote and Oklahoma City are not bad at all.

So, from what I know, I guess his advance was about $25,000 against a total of no more than $100,000. He'd also be reimbursed for research and other expenses. Simon and Schuster being a major publishing house and his name on the cover, I think this is a reasonable estimate. And Sollecito's contract would be $250,000 advanced against the royalties. No matter how many books sold, he would get at least that.

One thing about ghost writing though. They're always based on raw material, except Gumbel doesn't read Italian and Raffaele's English is rudimentary. On perusing the book I am struck by how much material came from Candace Dempsey and the apologia therein look like an amalgam of Bruce Fischer's website. The 'research fees' I guess :)

Regarding Amanda Knox. I don't see another name on the title. It will be published as "Amanda Knox's Diary" even though there will be a ghost writer to er, polish the prose, and an editor to polish it further. And the timing of the release will tell how they expect the Appeal to go.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Gumbel is nothing more than another shrewd businessman.

He did not write the book for money, he wrote it in order to get seen, whether that is in a bad or good light, no matter, the object of the exercise is to gain notoriety he is busy trying to get known as a writer, he has other ''equally crap'' books out.

If someone wants to stand out, it is not easy, as there are so many people writing books, you will just not get a look in unless you are called Rowling or really do have something exceptional, and even if you do it may be hard to get it seen, so what better way than to latch on to something that is in the news, regularly.


Therefore, about the ghostwriting, he agreed to a sum, but, unless the publishers are nuts it couldn't be that much as they know and knew it would be a gamble, they only had to look at other bookselling results, not many really have the stomach for it all, no matter who the books are by, it's just a depressing subject. Not only they but this writer also would have known that there wouldn't be much chance of getting a lot of commission, but it does get his name spoken in the media, whereas I'd never heard of him before, just like most others never have, because there are so many so-called journalists. Some call themselves that (a journalist) and have never written for a newspaper, like Madam the Face Ache Dempsey. She should not be writing for any mag or rag, (s)he should be a model warning others why not to get a face job done, why not to use botox, or use it at your peril and end up looking like Frankenstein's monster, as she does.

So he either got a sum or is doing it part lump sum, part commission basis, or all commission basis, his book offers absolutely no angles at all, and although it is supposed to be by Sollecito or about him too, this guy adds stuff that any fool knows Sollecito would never come out with.

All in all that makes for a very unconvincing read.

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


Last edited by zorba on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:33 pm   Post subject: ANDREW GUMBEL   

guermantes wrote:
Raffaele Sollecito: I Spent That Night With Amanda Knox
By Candace Dempsey

An interview with Andrew Gumbel has just been published on the Seattle PI website:

Andrew, how’d you land the ghostwriting job with Raffaele?

After Amanda Knox and Raffaele were released last October, it dawned on me that it would an ideal job for me to be Amanda’s ghostwriter. I’m British and lived in Italy and have written extensively about criminal justice and now I’m in the U.S. on the West Coast. So I reached out to contacts. Nothing happened. Then Sharlene Martin, Raffaele’s agent, put a notice on a list serve for literary agents and a friend saw it. I got the job.


SEATTLE PI (BLOG)

Posted by candace_dempsey on September 26, 2012 at 7:32 pm

Candace has misspelled his name (Gumbell)! :shock:


Thanks for the link, guermantes. I see she's corrected that misspelling now :)

The interview confirms, to me, just how little time Gumbel actually spent writing the book. He makes the same assertion Steve Moore did about 'looking at the case files', yet has not said one original thing at all, just rehashed the FOA talking points. His last book, Oklahoma City was published April 16, 2012. Looks like he worked with Raffaele some time over the spring and from what he describes, I'd say no more than two weeks together, tops. (Considering the lead time for proofreading, further editing at S&S, and preparing the print run, yep)

Journalists like Gumbel can churn these books out like sausages, and living in Los Angeles is very expensive, I know :) So he'll promote the book a little, make the appropriate noises (what's he supposed to say, Raffaele is a fruit loop and probably guilty?) and move on. The word mercenary comes to mind. I don't appreciate how he belittles the Kerchers, but then, that's all part of the pre packaged narrative fed to him by Dempsey and Bruce Fischer, Amanda Knox's surrogates.

But you can bet he got paid well for the limited time spent on the book.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
If it has been posted before, I missed it. Does anyone know how ghostwriters are paid? Do the get a fee for their services, which is the same, regardless how the book fares?


Widely varies, Napia5. Depends on the qualifications of the writer and whether the book is written on spec (no publisher yet and the subject hires the writer) or, there already is a publisher and literary agent attached. Writers usually get paid a fixed fee, with an advance and balance on completion. There sometimes are bonuses based on copies sold. See here http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/11/29/ ... stwriting/

Raf's agent Sharlene Martin hired Gumbel. Both he and Martin are solid, established professionals in their field. See http://www.truthdig.com/andrew_gumbel for his background. Aside from 20 years as a journalist for the respected Guardian and Independent, he does have the European background necessary to write from Sollecito's perspective. And his published books Steal This Vote and Oklahoma City are not bad at all.

So, from what I know, I guess his advance was about $25,000 against a total of no more than $100,000. He'd also be reimbursed for research and other expenses. Simon and Schuster being a major publishing house and his name on the cover, I think this is a reasonable estimate. And Sollecito's contract would be $250,000 advanced against the royalties. No matter how many books sold, he would get at least that.

One thing about ghost writing though. They're always based on raw material, except Gumbel doesn't read Italian and Raffaele's English is rudimentary. On perusing the book I am struck by how much material came from Candace Dempsey and the apologia therein look like an amalgam of Bruce Fischer's website. The 'research fees' I guess :)

Regarding Amanda Knox. I don't see another name on the title. It will be published as "Amanda Knox's Diary" even though there will be a ghost writer to er, polish the prose, and an editor to polish it further. And the timing of the release will tell how they expect the Appeal to go.


Thanks, Ergon. I found the truthdig article particularly interesting. Gumbel's article on the Oklahoma City bombing, involving the accusation of FBI coverup must have had Steve the Feeb sputtering in his coffee. Wonder how Steve liked Gumbel as a pick"? Wonder if he is even familiar with Gumbel's work?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.

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


Last edited by zorba on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:30 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: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

and mercenary

exactly Ergon

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Gumbel is nothing more than another shrewd businessman.

He did not write the book for money, he wrote it in order to get seen, whether that is in a bad or good light, no matter, the object of the exercise is to gain notoriety he is busy trying to get known as a writer, he has other ''equally crap'' books out.

If someone wants to stand out, it is not easy, as there are so many people writing books, you jut will not get a look in unless you are called Rowling or really do have something exceptional, and even if you do it may be hard to get it seen, so what better way than to latch on to something that is in the news, regularly.


Therefore, about the ghostwriting, either he agreed to a sum, but, unless the publishers are nuts it couldn't be that much as they know and knew it would be a gamble, they only had to look at other bookselling results, not many really have the stomach for it all, no matter who the books are by, it's just a depressing subject. Not only they but this writer also would have known that there wouldn't be much chance of getting a lot of commission, but it does get his name spoken in the media, whereas I'd never heard of him before, just like most others never have, because there are so many so-called journalists. Some call themselves that and have never written for a newspaper, like Madam the Face ache Dempsey. She should not be writing for any mag or rag, he should be a model warning others why not to get a face job done, why not to use botox, or use it at your peril and end up looking like Frankenstein's monster, as she does.

So he either got a sum or is doing it part lump sum part commission basis or all commission basis, his book offers absolutely no angles at all, and although it is supposed to be by Sollecito or about him too, this guy adds stuff that any fool knows Sollecito would never come out with.

All in all that makes for a very unconvincing read.


Sometimes, Zorba, all of this is just too much. Depressing, sad, and more than just a little bit frightening. At least, to me.
We have many very knowledgable posters here. I'm including you in this group. When one of you post an article, with links and proof of your point, I see the leading, and mis-leading and outright lies and money-grubbing that goes on behind the scenes. Some of you post these articles with very seasoned opinions, which shows knowledge of just how pervasive some of these things are.

I was one of those people who thought, "It must be true, I heard it on the news or I read it in the paper." And sometimes, I walk a very fine line between wanting to know the full truth of all of this, and wanting to go back to Hicksville and bury my head under the covers and let the rest of the world sort it out.

We 'guilters' are often presented as rabid haters who enjoy 'vilifying'. Can anyone out there with half a brain think that there is pleasure in this? Does anyone think that we read an attack on the Kerchers and find our hearts racing with joy because we have found another poster to attack? Some of the comments made by Groupies against the Kerchers are just plain disgusting and sick. And all of the hangers-on, wanting to make money or a name from this tragedy are just plain sick, too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:31 pm   Post subject: THE REALITIES OF BOOK SELLING   

I'd also like to remind people that we do not know the exact figures for the book sales. When the page rank calculations came out I pointed out it was a computer algorithm based program. Therefore it's an estimate which no one can verify (Amazon and the publishing houses closely guard their sales figures) From what I can figure having looked more closely at Novel Rank, it's only good to tell whether a book is a best seller or not, and the answer is obviously, no. Not even respectable figures, so it looks like it'll be a flop. But we knew that already, except for the emotionally invested who thought a book contract and media coverage automatically translates into some sort of event.

You also need to know how books are sold. The publisher estimates sales and publishes a limited number of hardcovers. Due to the necessities of a print run, industry insiders say 10,000 hardcovers is the minimum. In Sollecito's case I'd therefore say 10,000. Any more than that and they didn't do their homework, and I'm also looking at the almost complete lack of advance publicity.

The sellers package the deal and offer them to libraries and chain bookstores, then other bookstores. Amazon and the chains estimate demand (they don't want to have books lying around on shelves and warehouses) but you can get a pretty good estimate of advance sales by the following methods.

Just look around your local bookstore. See any massive stacks of his book? Nope. So, it'll be ONE book in SOME bookstores, maybe a few in the larger ones. How many books are there in your city's public library system? I checked. In Toronto, pop. 2 million, it's 14 books, http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/deta ... &R=2889111 Los Angeles, pop. 3.7 million http://catalog.lapl.org/carlweb/jsp/Ful ... er=5081056 it's 11, and NYC, pop. 8.3 million, a grand total of 46 books http://nypl.bibliocommons.com/search?t= ... =catalogue These are the verified figures, and indicative of how much will eventually be sold.

So, a print run of 10,000 books, shipped out in September, and the only question is, how many will be returned :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:24 pm   Post subject: A PLUG FOR THE PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM   

Mustn't forget Seattle, which is Knox Central, of course. The Seattle Public Library System, with 26 branches serving 608,000 residents, has a grand total of 16 copies (with 41 holds) http://seattle.bibliocommons.com/item/s ... onor_bound

One of the necessities of civilization is a good library system. Poor people who can't buy books benefit of course; I see millions of kids goofing off on the public internet computers but many more quietly doing their homework here, and there are all sorts using what is an essential resource of society. Its place in the fabric of our culture can't be underestimated.

We here in Toronto are justified in our pride in our world class library system www.torontopubliclibrary.ca and if we just elected a penny pinching mayor that threatened our libraries, we'll get rid of the bastard next election.

But a place without libraries is a place fit only for barbarians. Support your public library!

And I, not willing to give a cent to rat boy, but needing to review the book, just placed a hold at the library :) In a city of two million, only 6 people are waiting to read it. I guess that's one indice of our civilization, yay hooray.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon, you've done it again. I had no clue that my local library had such a wonderful website. You CAN teach an old dog new tricks. The section for children is just brilliant. I just checked to see if there was a listing for the book, and, another door has opened for me and my grandchildren!

Anyway, our library services a population of 22,000. They do not carry the book, but have a service whereby I could check the library system as a whole in my area. In the 7 additional libraries, there are a total of 8 copies, and all are available.

I expected to see much more interest, considering all of the televised interviews. My guess is that the publishers expected the same. What a shame. Not.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
zorba wrote:
Gumbel is nothing more than another shrewd businessman.

He did not write the book for money, he wrote it in order to get seen, whether that is in a bad or good light, no matter, the object of the exercise is to gain notoriety he is busy trying to get known as a writer, he has other ''equally crap'' books out.

If someone wants to stand out, it is not easy, as there are so many people writing books, you jut will not get a look in unless you are called Rowling or really do have something exceptional, and even if you do it may be hard to get it seen, so what better way than to latch on to something that is in the news, regularly.


Therefore, about the ghostwriting, either he agreed to a sum, but, unless the publishers are nuts it couldn't be that much as they know and knew it would be a gamble, they only had to look at other bookselling results, not many really have the stomach for it all, no matter who the books are by, it's just a depressing subject. Not only they but this writer also would have known that there wouldn't be much chance of getting a lot of commission, but it does get his name spoken in the media, whereas I'd never heard of him before, just like most others never have, because there are so many so-called journalists. Some call themselves that and have never written for a newspaper, like Madam the Face ache Dempsey. She should not be writing for any mag or rag, he should be a model warning others why not to get a face job done, why not to use botox, or use it at your peril and end up looking like Frankenstein's monster, as she does.

So he either got a sum or is doing it part lump sum part commission basis or all commission basis, his book offers absolutely no angles at all, and although it is supposed to be by Sollecito or about him too, this guy adds stuff that any fool knows Sollecito would never come out with.

All in all that makes for a very unconvincing read.


Sometimes, Zorba, all of this is just too much. Depressing, sad, and more than just a little bit frightening. At least, to me.
We have many very knowledgeable posters here. I'm including you in this group. When one of you post an article, with links and proof of your point, I see the leading, and misleading and outright lies and money-grubbing that goes on behind the scenes. Some of you post these articles with very seasoned opinions, which shows knowledge of just how pervasive some of these things are.

I was one of those people who thought, "It must be true, I heard it on the news or I read it in the paper." And sometimes, I walk a very fine line between wanting to know the full truth of all of this, and wanting to go back to Hicksville and bury my head under the covers and let the rest of the world sort it out.

We 'guilters' are often presented as rabid haters who enjoy 'vilifying'. Can anyone out there with half a brain think that there is pleasure in this? Does anyone think that we read an attack on the Kerchers and find our hearts racing with joy because we have found another poster to attack? Some of the comments made by Groupies against the Kerchers are just plain disgusting and sick. And all of the hangers-on, wanting to make money or a name from this tragedy are just plain sick, too.



Thank you Napia,

It exhausts me even reading ABOUT these people, let alone actually reading anything from their hands, which I mostly avoid, I get in a state, knowing what they are doing, supposedly educated and what not, people acting like nincompoops, it's reading those things about these opeople that gets my blood cooking, I had to close off, and do sometimes, because taking in what they are up to makes me feel sick, and so there's no use in letting that happen.

I don't think I've actually listened to 3 words Sollecito said, why should I, he is an outright wicked liar.

Anyway, all in all they can only fall wth a crashing and meaningless blow

all except inside the gates of Eden.

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


Last edited by zorba on Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Has anyone, anywhere, read or heard of a reason given for Knox's obvious failure to attend the book signing?
Anyone following this in any casual way has got to be totally baffled at her non-appearance in her own hometown.
Why do people think that he showed up there? People have got to be asking this question of themselves.
I mean, seriously, this guy writes a book about his ulitmate sacrifice for her, four long years in jail for his silence, and then he travels half-way round the world and shows up on her doorstep, and she's a no-show?
Does she feel threatened in some way? Guilters? Honest questions? Has this been dealt with at all by any of them?
Is she sick? Shy? Fearful of stealing his limelight? Wouldn't she want his book to have a proper send-off?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:48 pm   Post subject: Re: THE REALITIES OF BOOK SELLING   

Ergon wrote:
I'd also like to remind people that we do not know the exact figures for the book sales. When the page rank calculations came out I pointed out it was a computer algorithm based program. Therefore it's an estimate which no one can verify (Amazon and the publishing houses closely guard their sales figures) From what I can figure having looked more closely at Novel Rank, it's only good to tell whether a book is a best seller or not, and the answer is obviously, no. Not even respectable figures, so it looks like it'll be a flop. But we knew that already, except for the emotionally invested who thought a book contract and media coverage automatically translates into some sort of event.

You also need to know how books are sold. The publisher estimates sales and publishes a limited number of hardcovers. Due to the necessities of a print run, industry insiders say 10,000 hardcovers is the minimum. In Sollecito's case I'd therefore say 10,000. Any more than that and they didn't do their homework, and I'm also looking at the almost complete lack of advance publicity.

The sellers package the deal and offer them to libraries and chain bookstores, then other bookstores. Amazon and the chains estimate demand (they don't want to have books lying around on shelves and warehouses) but you can get a pretty good estimate of advance sales by the following methods.

Just look around your local bookstore. See any massive stacks of his book? Nope. So, it'll be ONE book in SOME bookstores, maybe a few in the larger ones. How many books are there in your city's public library system? I checked. In Toronto, pop. 2 million, it's 14 books, http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/deta ... &R=2889111 Los Angeles, pop. 3.7 million http://catalog.lapl.org/carlweb/jsp/Ful ... er=5081056 it's 11, and NYC, pop. 8.3 million, a grand total of 46 books http://nypl.bibliocommons.com/search?t= ... =catalogue These are the verified figures, and indicative of how much will eventually be sold.

So, a print run of 10,000 books, shipped out in September, and the only question is, how many will be returned :)


Very informative post, Ergon.

I bet not even the groupies are eager to read Sollecito's book, they only buy it to show their support. Predictable and laughable.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:

Thanks for the link. Brave of her to start with this gem:
Quote:
“She didn’t have her own key, so if she’d gone out alone, she would have had to ring the doorbell and ask me to buzz her back in. Even if I’d been stoned or asleep when she rang, I would have remembered that. And it didn’t happen.”

Doorbells will always be remembered, but being asleep or stoned or together with your gf is different. I wonder how AK will explain her making out with Raf, showering together and whatever she made up about what they did that night. She probably doesn't remember.

Is the promo tour over now? I hope so. I don't think publishers are really that stupid that they didn't realize this book wouldn't make them any money. I wonder if the publication was sponsored. Hopefully AK's book gets cancelled when the SC throws the case back to the appeal level, and Rudy's book never sees the light of day. Of course, we would like to see Rudy talk about how he met up with AK and RS etc. but there is no need to profit from that and he can just send another letter. A book describing his 'date' with Meredith and encounter with an unknown Italian would be even more disgusting then the drivel we read from Raf IMO.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:30 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Has anyone, anywhere, read or heard of a reason given for Knox's obvious failure to attend the book signing?
Anyone following this in any casual way has got to be totally baffled at her non-appearance in her own hometown.
Why do people think that he showed up there? People have got to be asking this question of themselves.
I mean, seriously, this guy writes a book about his ulitmate sacrifice for her, four long years in jail for his silence, and then he travels half-way round the world and shows up on her doorstep, and she's a no-show?
Does she feel threatened in some way? Guilters? Honest questions? Has this been dealt with at all by any of them?
Is she sick? Shy? Fearful of stealing his limelight? Wouldn't she want his book to have a proper send-off?


The official story I reported earlier was the two deciding they shouldn't be seen together before the Appeal. But then there's a photo in the book of the two of them at the Mellas home on March 26, 2012 (his birthday)

I perused it at a book store today (more on that later) but here's the story about his stay there. Gumbel said on Dempsey's blog he went up there for the weekend and Raffaele, continuing in the book, says the person he was supposed to stay with freaked out when it seemed the paparazzi would show up, so he stayed with Chris and Edda for the weekend. Then on the Monday, Amanda showed up for his birthday with James Terrano, who left them alone to catch up.

You can tell he still has feelings, but also, that she was in the limelight, but he never 'got to tell his story'. A plaint he makes often, and the reason, I believe why she wasn't at his book signing at UW. He'd have been totally overshadowed then :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:38 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

max wrote:
guermantes wrote:

Thanks for the link. Brave of her to start with this gem:
Quote:
“She didn’t have her own key, so if she’d gone out alone, she would have had to ring the doorbell and ask me to buzz her back in. Even if I’d been stoned or asleep when she rang, I would have remembered that. And it didn’t happen.”


--- snip ---
Doorbells will always be remembered, but being asleep or stoned or together with your gf is different. I wonder how AK will explain her making out with Raf, showering together and whatever she made up about what they did that night. She probably doesn't remember.
--- snap ---


I agree. It's a bit rich coming from a guy who said he couldn't remember if he had sex or not with Amanda Knox, but then claims he would have remembered if she would have rang his doorbell. It's comical.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
Has anyone, anywhere, read or heard of a reason given for Knox's obvious failure to attend the book signing?
Anyone following this in any casual way has got to be totally baffled at her non-appearance in her own hometown.
Why do people think that he showed up there? People have got to be asking this question of themselves.
I mean, seriously, this guy writes a book about his ulitmate sacrifice for her, four long years in jail for his silence, and then he travels half-way round the world and shows up on her doorstep, and she's a no-show?
Does she feel threatened in some way? Guilters? Honest questions? Has this been dealt with at all by any of them?
Is she sick? Shy? Fearful of stealing his limelight? Wouldn't she want his book to have a proper send-off?


The official story I reported earlier was the two deciding they shouldn't be seen together before the Appeal. But then there's a photo in the book of the two of them at the Mellas home on March 26, 2012 (his birthday)

I perused it at a book store today (more on that later) but here's the story about his stay there. Gumbel said on Dempsey's blog he went up there for the weekend and Raffaele, continuing in the book, says the person he was supposed to stay with freaked out when it seemed the paparazzi would show up, so he stayed with Chris and Edda for the weekend. Then on the Monday, Amanda showed up for his birthday with James Terrano, who left them alone to catch up.

You can tell he still has feelings, but also, that she was in the limelight, but he never 'got to tell his story'. A plaint he makes often, and the reason, I believe why she wasn't at his book signing at UW. He'd have been totally overshadowed then :)


Forgive me, Ergon. You know me, sometimes I'm a little slow on the uptake. I like things simple. Things that follow some sort of logical progression.

Let me see if I get this now. He's whining and complaining about how it was all about Knox, and he felt like a nobody, like he was forgotten. Then he writes a book in Her language, comes to Her country, presents their story in HER town, and nobody shows up, and there is next to no interest in his book, thus validating what he's been whining and complaining about all along: nobody is interested in his story. Sheesh, Einstein, he ain't.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:45 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

It really is shocking to see Sharlene Martin on those hardcore Facebook sites that exist to cyber-bully the Kerchers. I thought they had been reported and taken down. In reality, they’ve multiplied!

If Raffaele was serious about wanting to distance himself from the a-hole behavior of Knox’s supporters he lamented about in his book, why doesn't he demand his literary agent move off the epicenter of it. What’s next, new fringe theories on Ground Report like Anglo-Lawyer’s failed lamp paper?

Anyway, here is an announcement she made today on Facebook:

Quote:
7 hours ago
Congrats to Raffaele Sollecito whose book, HONOR BOUND, made the at #25 for the week of Oct. 7th forthcoming!


What?
Maybe the #25 slot works like the US Investor Visa Program? This week's #25 spot is ranked 5459 on Amazon.


Ergon pointed out the figures on Novelrank are estimates, which is true, but with respect to e-sales:

• Amazon.com has 70-90% of the e-book market. Barnes & Noble and iBook also carry the title, but Amazon is market dominant.
• There are no third party resellers or brick and mortar stores to obfuscate what constitutes a sale in the case of e-books. You cannot even purchase an e-book directly from Simon & Schuster!
• Simon & Schuster does not sell e-books to libraries. (Harper Collins does but has infuriated librarians with a 26 checkout limit per e-book.)
• Publishers recently won the right to set the price of e-books to $12.99 - $14.99 on many new titles, which was fought by Amazon (who understands the market better) who argued the price point was too high, and wanted the right to set it by title. This is a significant increase over the old $9.99 norm. Sales in general are depressed, which may be inflating this book’s relative sales rank.

I think the e-book sales we're seeing on Novelrank are probably not that far off. Best Seller? Novelrank is reporting 2 kindles sales today. LoL.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:

I think they made a spelling mistake, his book was supposed to be called Boner Hound.



posting.php?mode=quote&f=1&t=387&p=99744#

*throws a smiley down*
(wish I could get them to work)
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

This quote from p 9 stood out:

"If Meredith had stayed (at the concert), chances are we’d have never started talking and things would have worked out much differently."

Well done, Raffaele, blame Meredith.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Jackie wrote:
louiehaha wrote:
...
I agree it's wrong for them to profit from the murder of Meredith.
I'd like to append a question to this discussion regarding the Kercher's civil suit. If the Kercher's are successful with their suit, will it be enforceable in a US court? Does the answer hinge on the political decision of granting extradition? Also, is a criminal conviction necessary for the civil suit to succeed?...


I'm a huge fan of "TomM" on .ORG - he is a US lawyer with, IIRC, over 3 decades of experience as a litigator and fluency in Italian to boot. Accordingly, I was interested to know his take on these matters as he was translating Hellmann's judgment. Search .ORG using "TomM" as the author + "Alien Tort Claims" to have a peek at our little chat.


Thanks Jackie!
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
RS about his lawyer Maori:

“For my part, I wasn’t nearly as concerned about Maori, whom I’d long ago dismissed as a lightweight..."


Then he thanks him anyway at the end of the book.


Quote:
A (picture) with his fan(s):

Attachment:
Sollecito and a fan.jpg


The fan would like you to know he's Bill Williams, of Canada. Not outing him in any way; he wanted to update the picture you posted.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:58 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

It's a hard slog going through the closed "Today Over At PMF" thread they have going there, as Hans of Germany dutifully brings over snippets every day of what we post here. Out of several thousand posts they put up, very few are actually worth even mentioning, since there's no substance, only lots of backslapping about how they're intelligent, and we are not. The personal stuff, I ignore completely.

But there is one thing I will respond to, which they wrote in response to my "the bottom feeders" post about how they didn't respect the Kerchers wish not to profit from the death of their daughter Meredith. The 'groupies' point out I never complained about Barbie Nadeau, Follain or John Kercher. Well, John is not profiting from his daughter's death, as all funds from the sale of his book go to a memorial fund, and Nadeau and Follain are journalists doing their job, which is to report. Whether they benefit by way of a salary or a book sale does not concern the Kerchers.

But simple decency would hopefully apply to those accused of the murder, and their supporters, to not do this until Knox and Sollecito are finally acquitted, No one can force you to comply, of course, just as we are free to criticise you. Sharlene Martin is quite free to make a buck as that's her job as a literary agent. One suspects she'd sell the story of her (hypothetically speaking) mother's murderer if she could make a buck, but that's just her job. My comment was merely to point out the coincidence of her publishing the OJ Simpson book over the objections of Nicole Brown's family, and she's doing a similar thing again. As I said, that's her job.

The hypocrisy I point out is that of Frank Sfarzo, Bruce Fisher, and Doug Preston, who act only out of mercenary motives, who attack journalists for doing their job, but complain that PM Mignini is harassing a 'journalist', Frank Sfarzo. Meh.

Funny how, in trying to make a buck, they er, didn't? :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 904

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
...here is an announcement she made today on Facebook:

Quote:
7 hours ago
Congrats to Raffaele Sollecito whose book, HONOR BOUND, made the at #25 for the week of Oct. 7th forthcoming!


What?
Maybe the #25 slot works like the US Investor Visa Program? This week's #25 spot is ranked 5459 on Amazon.
...


Looks like you could buy your way onto the ebook list for as little as $2K to $7K!

Here are the Amazon numbers (~ 1/3 share of the total market):

http://www.novelrank.com/asin/1451695985

Image

$16.25 a pop for 151 hardcover books is $2,453.75 for Amazon, times 3 to approximate the total market, so just over $7K

THe ebook numbers are similar and more or less double the grand total to about $14K:

http://www.novelrank.com/asin/B007MB5UYQ
Image

14 grand ... barely enough to cover the cost of a used Audi A3 ;-)

Paltry sums of this kind could never justify the legal risks inherent in this exercise.

Sollectio's numbers are so bad you have to believe that Knox's publisher is reaching for the xanax right about now.



P.S. At least Sollectio did better than the furrier - here's his Amazon total for the year: 3 books.

http://www.novelrank.com/asin/1466421282

Image

I guess when he invited Harry to lunch, he figured Harry would be picking up the tab 8-)
Top Profile 

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:23 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


'one of the admins' - Are there others?
'who are we bullying' - Seriously? What a horrible and completely atrocious name to give your site. You should (but doubt you are) be ashamed of yourself and your group. The Kerchers need ABSOLUTELY NOTHING from or by you or your site. Go back under your bridge you bunch of worthless trolls.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:33 pm   Post subject: REPLY TO THE FREE MEREDITH KERCHER FACEBOOK SITE   

LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


Hello, Lyn Duncan, and thank you for replying. I was expecting someone to do so. I, too, am "one of the admins" of Perugia Murder Files, but I did not set it up, nor am I the owner of this site. So if you can confirm that you set up the page and not Karen Pruett or Shirley Anne Mathers, I withdraw their names, but retain the right to speculate on who the other 'admins' are. Elisabeth Huff? Did Chris Mellas set up the site ? Or Bruce Fischer? I have no intention of harassing them, or encouraging any one to do so.

Now that I have your attention, you are cyber harassing and taunting the family of Meredith Kercher. Inter spaced with all your New Age exhortations of 'love', you post numerous accounts of how the Kerchers are deluded, mistaken, led astray by their lawyer Francesco Maresca. Your site is the one that lifted copyrighted pictures of the young Meredith from John Kercher's book without permission and used it to promote a site dedicated, not to Meredith Kercher, but promoting the innocence of the two accused the family still believes responsible for their daughter and sister's murder. You post a picture of Raffaele Sollecito on his book tour posing beside a picture of Meredith, and don't appreciate how wrong that is, on so many levels? All the fake shrines and hallmark sentiments you post alongside do not disguise your true intent. The Kerchers are unable to defend themselves against such attacks. I am glad I had the opportunity to speak up in their defense.

Any further response from you will have to be on Tuesdays, thanks.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

dgfred wrote:
LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


'one of the admins' - Are there others?
'who are we bullying' - Seriously? What a horrible and completely atrocious name to give your site. You should (but doubt you are) be ashamed of yourself and your group. The Kerchers need ABSOLUTELY NOTHING from or by you or your site. Go back under your bridge you bunch of worthless trolls.


She was referring to my calling them cyberbullies, dgfred. But you're right, the title of their page "Free Meredith Kercher" is the most offensive thing they could have done. That they pretend not to know it is a horrible thing to say shows how morally depraved they are. I'm glad that we had the opportunity to tell them that here, since I have no intention of posting there. And she posts as Lyn Duncan, but the person behind the site signs in as "Free Meredith Kercher" and posts links to IIP all the time. Probably Bruce Fischer, fits his obnoxious passive-aggressive style to a T.

Edit: I just realize you were asking a rhetorical question of Lyn, dgfred. Apologies. They are indeed, in all their manifestations and all their cloned sites, cyberbullies, as I make clear in my response to her.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Sparkles


Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:54 pm

Posts: 28

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

There is also the Meredith Kercher Book page - which is worse IMO. She's probably admin there also.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

daisysteiner wrote:
zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.


Not saying whoa to either of you :) and you can speak for yourselves. But zorba was responding to my stating the Guardian and Independent were respected papers, which I think they are, among a wide swath of liberal and independent readers. The Right will call them communists, and the Marxist Left will say they're not communist enough. The Board of British Jews will call the Guardian anti-semitic for criticising Israel and many Palestinians criticise them for using neutral language when describing Israel, and not any other such state, but I think all that criticism cancels each other out. My own personal beef with the Guardian is that it affords a regular column to the 'scientifically oriented' and allow a wide range of attacks on holistic medicine and anti-vaccination researchers but does not provide the same resources to the opposing side, just an occasional 'Comment is free' column. Fair enough, the Guardian has its own biases, like any other paper. And yes, the Guardian supported Julian Assange until it turned upon him and caused a security breach by releasing a non-redacted version of the Wikileaks Files, so it seems that the reporter involved (and the paper) has it in for Julain Assange. But yes, it was against the Iraq and Afghan wars, and who can forget the thrill of that huge march in London?

For the purposes of this site, it seems to me that the Guardian bought into the Nina Burleigh myth about Amanda Knox, that it was a patriarchal burning at the stake of the eternal feminine, and some of its reporting hewed to that line. So we can disagree with some reporters on the Independent or the Guardian, some of us might or might not respect these papers, but the fact still remains that they are, 'widely respected'. Otherwise, we'll be the same as the FOA who say the Times of London is a 'tabloid' because they disagree with John Follain.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:07 pm   Post subject: Re: REPLY TO THE FREE MEREDITH KERCHER FACEBOOK SITE   

Ergon wrote:
LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


Hello, Lyn Duncan, and thank you for replying. I was expecting someone to do so. I, too, am "one of the admins" of Perugia Murder Files, but I did not set it up, nor am I the owner of this site. So if you can confirm that you set up the page and not Karen Pruett or Shirley Anne Mathers, I withdraw their names, but retain the right to speculate on who the other 'admins' are. Elisabeth Huff? Did Chris Mellas set up the site ? Or Bruce Fischer? I have no intention of harassing them, or encouraging any one to do so.

Now that I have your attention, you are cyber harassing and taunting the family of Meredith Kercher. Inter spaced with all your New Age exhortations of 'love', you post numerous accounts of how the Kerchers are deluded, mistaken, led astray by their lawyer Francesco Maresca. Your site is the one that lifted copyrighted pictures of the young Meredith from John Kercher's book without permission and used it to promote a site dedicated, not to Meredith Kercher, but promoting the innocence of the two accused the family still believes responsible for their daughter and sister's murder. You post a picture of Raffaele Sollecito on his book tour posing beside a picture of Meredith, and don't appreciate how wrong that is, on so many levels? All the fake shrines and hallmark sentiments you post alongside do not disguise your true intent. The Kerchers are unable to defend themselves against such attacks. I am glad I had the opportunity to speak up in their defense.

Any further response from you will have to be on Tuesdays, thanks.

Thank you Ergon for speaking the truth. The site is an abomination that holds the Kerchers hostage by using treasures photos of Meredith. In the comment section 'Amanda Raffaele Ordinary People. Karen Pruett posts at length about the H.O.T video. She not only thinks its great she provides a link. This is the worst hate site out there.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Sparkles wrote:
There is also the Meredith Kercher Book page - which is worse IMO. She's probably admin there also.


She certainly has a presence on all the other sites, Sparkles. I even remember a 'Lyn Duncan' on Huffington Post's Amanda Knox pages.

My point is that it's a small group of individuals, most of them with aliases, who create a number of sites and post on them to give the false impression of wide spread support. I check them out, not to out them, but to prove their agenda.

They're still the same group of people who accused the Kerchers of 'being in this for the money'.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

UPDATE on NY Times list:
The sales period for the NY Times list Sollecito made #25 was the week ending September 22, at which time Sollecito’s book had a sales ranking of 371. It's 1567 at the present. I don't think we're far off in our understanding of the true sales picture for this book.


funny post on Wendy Murphy's Facebook page (see if you can guess by whom before you click the link):
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:38 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

daisysteiner wrote:
Whatever your feelings on internet piracy


I have been meaning to ask, did Sollecito P2P download the movie Amelie? I wonder if his views on IP have changed at all over the past five years?
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
UPDATE on NY Times list:
The sales period for the NY Times list Sollecito made #25 was the week ending September 22, at which time Sollecito’s book had a sales ranking of 371. It's 1567 at the present. I don't think we're far off in our understanding of the true sales picture for this book.


funny post on Wendy Murphy's Facebook page (see if you can guess by whom before you click the link):


I don't have a facebook account, louiehaha, but, I bet I can Name that Tune in 2 notes......MM.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

daisysteiner wrote:
zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.




Hello Daisy,

The Daily Mail, the worst rag in the world, has the most sales, the most online activity, but, does that mean it is good?

I know about the things you mentioned but do they weigh up against the bad things it has stood for? Like being pro let's go into Iraq, and I wonder myself, whether people who write really do have the right to be influencing people, like in that situation of going into Iraq, to go in and use military might.
Afterwards, they apologised, an admitted they had been wrong.

I'm not the best person to talk to about these things as I have always been extremely critical of the UK media, and I really do not like the way the power of newspapers works there, I know other countries and it opened my eyes, experiencing different ways and attitudes, in other countries, to the things that are bad in my own country.

As an example, many may say the BBC is great, but me, I do not agree with the way it is set up, it does have quality but it also has a lot of old tripe too and also helps some of the bad streams within society, such as bullying, and it is hardly independent and free when citizens are FORCED to pay for it through their annual TV licences even if they do not wish to watch BBC, that is a kind of dictatorship in itself.


I mean that TV programme for instance, that goes along to people who are, indeed, ripping people off, ripping people off from all walks of life, so TV programme presenters/makers really get in the faces of these people, show them on TV, and nothing stands in their way, because they assume that they have the right to do things that way (even though they are right about how bad it is the overall feeling created is a lot of aggression and I do not and cannot agreewith that), so in the pandemonium that ensues, people could get hurt, run over by a car, as what they do is very dangerous because the people they are approaching, again indeed, are often, more often than not, very hard and aggressive types who after exposure, if they don't get jailed, simply do carry on.
One presenter of that programme, who used to accompany the guy who is still presenting it (it was and is popular) was found to have been guilty of fraud himself, while presenting the programme, had been earning from the BBC while claiming all kinds of benefits, so he got fired, the programme carries on. What I mean is, what gives a body like that the right over others to be almost as aggressive as those they pursue?

Do two wrongs make a right?
And this is the fantastic BBC.

As for the rest, I have always hated all of the British newspapers because I find Britain a backward country in its unfairness, its greatly unbalanced society (heavy duty - divided - class society; the divide between the 'haves and the have nots' and its trending, which culturally is infectious, is definitely not all okay, as Britain like no other place except America is a country living with huge problems, where violence is the main ingredient. This aggression runs through British society, in combination with fear of authority, fear of authority because society there Is authoritarian,one that babies people and treats them as though they cannot think for themselves, and because this mentality is institutionalised people do not and cannot really think for themselves, it mean you get a Thatcherite system, one characterised by those in the boat just pleased they are onboard, willing to ignore and abandon those who have fallen out. This doesn't mean there are not forces for good, but the defining line is the over-presence of inequality - which causes all of the problems suffered there.

People keep one another in place, through fear, and the media help keep up the illusions wherein people do not actually have a real voice.

This is why unlike every other country, this thought police business always has kept people down, in Britain, through fear, and that's why there was no need for armed police, unlike everywhere else, this might seem like a positive note but it isn't it's just that people have always been kept in their places in Britain. I guess originally America was precisely founded with these ideals in mind; to get away from the lack of opportunity caused by the abundance of power the ruling class had, and sadly, in Britain's case, still has.

Why has a newspaper the right to be 'oh we are so knowledgeable/good, but hey, it is right to go to war so come on boys, come on our lads, support the troops!!!
I hate all of it.

And this is what they have been into.

They did, the Guardian then, start an American branch but it closed down.
just because many people do a thing doesn't make it right, i see the masses most often as a brainwashed conglomerate of disillusioned fools, that walk this way, just because to them if they are able to stay in the boat, find it easier to conform. Look at this case for instance, where in America, a media firm, a money-spinning endeavour, as is Marriot's firm, allowed to get way with what they have in fact been doing, which is in my opinion to warp, confuse and pervert the course of justice through the manipulation of media.

No amount of these are good guys is about to convince me that the Guardian is a force for good when they allow idiots like the Sollecito's ghostwriter to be working for them when it is plain as day he never did any research on Meredith murder and he is now profiting, like so many others, from that murder.

It is self-comforting to think of yourself as a liberal-minded individual or group (trendy perhaps?) while not exactly advocating diplomacy when backing aggression/war which to me means little kiddies/babies getting their arms and legs blown off which are then after an attack found in branches of trees.
Who can say it is right to expel one dictator while ignoring the rest and continuing to do business with them, who can say it is right to expel a dictator whilst the Western countries still make a fortune through dealing in weapons, and double dealing, which has always been a mainstay of Western (Canada, America, Europe, Australian) policies. - the profiting off the weakness of countries.
It's not for nothing that just as little kids in kindergarten, big business has had to be taught what CSR means and why it is important to abide by it. It's because the people with the real power, a huge minority, have always pillaged the planet and taken everything they could get without giving anything back, and it is still going on to this very day. I'm going to need a lot more convincing before I start respecting any newspaper, because I think they do more harm than good.

I find it unforgivable, the fact that others are even worse in my view doesn't mean that these then are per ratio good or better.
You cannot be less bad; you need to be good to make a difference in this world.

Anyhow, I'm just very angry at what this man from the Guardian has done.

The Independent too, so how do they scrutinize their writers, if they too have people just like the ghostwriter, Mr Popham... also simply causing harm because he has the power through readership to write off the cuff, uninformed pieces, combined with the audaciously simplistic air of smugness that could down an African buffalo from a mile away?

It's just a breed of creature I cannot stand.
I will cite and appreciate any who actually do demonstrate an own mind and will to be thorough and true but none of these that I have observed since Meredith died have shown anything of the sort, to me, most of them are just playing a part, going through the motions, and that makes me suspect that the main thing for them is the maintaining of their own pleasant lifestyle = accumulation of monies.

1) Guardian opposed the creation of the National Health Service (no employed journalist needed it; lucky for some)

2) 1956 Suez Crisis: "The government is right to be prepared for military action at Suez", because Egyptian control of the canal would be "commercially damaging for the West, and perhaps part of a plan for creating a new Arab Empire based on the Nile (Kent and Buckinghamshire, etc, fear of A-rabs or what? = and an English Count-ry garden )

3) When 13 civil rights demonstrators were killed on 30 January 1972, known as Bloody Sunday, by British soldiers in Northern Ireland, The Guardian blamed the protesters

4) Supported internment without trial in Northern Ireland: "Internment without trial is hateful, repressive and undemocratic. In the existing Irish situation, most regrettably, it is also inevitable. ... .To remove the ringleaders, in the hope that the atmosphere might calm down, is a step to which there is no obvious alternative.

The Guardian had called for British troops to be sent to the region: British soldiers could "present a more disinterested face of law and order",[28] but only on condition that "Britain takes charge

5) On the eve of the war, the paper rallied to the war cause: "The simple cause, at the end, is just. An evil regime in Iraq instituted an evil and brutal invasion. Our soldiers and airmen are there, at UN behest, to set that evil to rights. Their duties are clear. ... Let the momentum, and the resolution, be swift."[35] After the event, journalist Maggie O'Kane conceded that she and her colleagues had been a mouthpiece for war propaganda

6) Supported NATO's military intervention in the Kosovo War in 1999. Though the United Nations Security Council did not support the action, The Guardian stated that "the only honourable course for Europe and America is to use military force.

7) During the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, The Guardian attracted a proportion of anti-war readers as one of the mass-media outlets most critical of UK and USA military initiatives.[citation needed] The paper did, however, endorse the argument that Iraq had to be disarmed of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. (hypocritical or what?)

8) Despite its early support for the Zionist movement, in recent decades The Guardian has been accused of biased criticism of Israeli government policy.[56] In December 2003 columnist Julie Burchill cited "striking bias against the state of Israel" as one of the reasons she left the paper for The Times. A leaked report from the European Monitoring Centre on Racism cited The Economist's claim that for "many British Jews," the British media's reporting on Israel "is spiced with a tone of animosity, 'as to smell of anti-Semitism'... This is above all the case with the Guardian and The Independent".The EU said the report, dated February 2003 was not published because it was insubstantial in its current state and lacking sufficient evidence.[58][59] Greville Janner, former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, has accused The Guardian of being "viciously and notoriously anti-Israel".

9) The Guardian's style guide section referred to Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel in 2012 (stirring the pot, arrogance or what, meddling or what?)

10) In August 2004, for the US presidential election, the daily G2 supplement launched an experimental letter-writing campaign in Clark County, Ohio, an average-sized county in a swing state. G2 editor Ian Katz bought a voter list from the county for $25 and asked readers to write to people listed as undecided in the election, giving them an impression of the international view and the importance of voting against US President George W. Bush. The paper scrapped "Operation Clark County" on 21 October 2004 after first publishing a column of complaints from Bush supporters about the campaign under the headline "Dear Limey assholes". The public backlash against the campaign likely contributed to Bush's victory in Clark County.

(Arrogance again in its idea that it somehow has the right to meddle? Journalists somehow think that they are a supreme breed?)

11) In 2007, the paper launched a website Guardian America, an attempt to capitalise on its large online readership in the United States, which at the time stood at more than 5.9m.

In October 2009, the company abandoned the Guardian America homepage, instead directing users to a US news index page on the main website.[69] The next month, the company laid off six American employees, including a reporter, a multimedia producer and four web editors. The move came as Guardian News and Media opted to reconsider its US strategy amid a massive effort to cut costs across the company.[70] In subsequent years however, the Guardian has hired various commentators on US affairs including Ana Marie Cox, Michael Wolff, Naomi Wolf, Glenn Greenwald and former George W. Bush speechwriter Josh Treviño. (Liberal? Bush?)

12) Founded by textile traders and merchants, The Guardian had a reputation as "an organ of the middle class", or in the words of C.P. Scott's son Ted "a paper that will remain bourgeois to the last".[90] "I write for the Guardian," said Sir Max Hastings in 2005, "because it is read by the new establishment", reflecting the paper's then growing influence.



Not hard to find this stuff.

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


Last edited by zorba on Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
daisysteiner wrote:
zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.


Not saying whoa to either of you :) and you can speak for yourselves. But zorba was responding to my stating the Guardian and Independent were respected papers, which I think they are, among a wide swath of liberal and independent readers. The Right will call them communists, and the Marxist Left will say they're not communist enough. The Board of British Jews will call the Guardian anti-semitic for criticising Israel and many Palestinians criticise them for using neutral language when describing Israel, and not any other such state, but I think all that criticism cancels each other out. My own personal beef with the Guardian is that it affords a regular column to the 'scientifically oriented' and allow a wide range of attacks on holistic medicine and anti-vaccination researchers but does not provide the same resources to the opposing side, just an occasional 'Comment is free' column. Fair enough, the Guardian has its own biases, like any other paper. And yes, the Guardian supported Julian Assange until it turned upon him and caused a security breach by releasing a non-redacted version of the Wikileaks Files, so it seems that the reporter involved (and the paper) has it in for Julain Assange. But yes, it was against the Iraq and Afghan wars, and who can forget the thrill of that huge march in London?

For the purposes of this site, it seems to me that the Guardian bought into the Nina Burleigh myth about Amanda Knox, that it was a patriarchal burning at the stake of the eternal feminine, and some of its reporting hewed to that line. So we can disagree with some reporters on the Independent or the Guardian, some of us might or might not respect these papers, but the fact still remains that they are, 'widely respected'. Otherwise, we'll be the same as the FOA who say the Times of London is a 'tabloid' because they disagree with John Follain.



I still disagree with your reasoning and idea; respect is relative.

It's a word too, and misused, Knox is respected but is that respect? And what value does it have when you see by whom?

Equal to your take 'widely respected', it is also 'widely frowned upon' Ergon, as ít caters to those who like to see themselves as better, and that take/idea self-view, is not as hip as the self-assured like to think it is, of themselves.

That is what I took a disliking to, with them.


However, much more important to me, is that somehow these papers have people like Popham, Kington, this latest one, Gumbel, writing and having none of what they say checked, so to me it's like well what do you really stand for.

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

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

That, in a nutshell, Zorba, pretty much explains the importance of the PMFs and TJMK.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
daisysteiner wrote:
zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.


Not saying whoa to either of you :) and you can speak for yourselves. But zorba was responding to my stating the Guardian and Independent were respected papers, which I think they are, among a wide swath of liberal and independent readers. The Right will call them communists, and the Marxist Left will say they're not communist enough. The Board of British Jews will call the Guardian anti-semitic for criticising Israel and many Palestinians criticise them for using neutral language when describing Israel, and not any other such state, but I think all that criticism cancels each other out. My own personal beef with the Guardian is that it affords a regular column to the 'scientifically oriented' and allow a wide range of attacks on holistic medicine and anti-vaccination researchers but does not provide the same resources to the opposing side, just an occasional 'Comment is free' column. Fair enough, the Guardian has its own biases, like any other paper. And yes, the Guardian supported Julian Assange until it turned upon him and caused a security breach by releasing a non-redacted version of the Wikileaks Files, so it seems that the reporter involved (and the paper) has it in for Julain Assange. But yes, it was against the Iraq and Afghan wars, and who can forget the thrill of that huge march in London?

For the purposes of this site, it seems to me that the Guardian bought into the Nina Burleigh myth about Amanda Knox, that it was a patriarchal burning at the stake of the eternal feminine, and some of its reporting hewed to that line. So we can disagree with some reporters on the Independent or the Guardian, some of us might or might not respect these papers, but the fact still remains that they are, 'widely respected'. Otherwise, we'll be the same as the FOA who say the Times of London is a 'tabloid' because they disagree with John Follain.



I still disagree with your reasoning and idea; respect is relative.

It's a word too, and misused, Knox is respected but is that respect? And what value does it have when you see by whom?

Equal to your take 'widely respected', it is also 'widely frowned upon' Ergon, as ít caters to those who like to see themselves as better, and that take/idea self-view, is not as hip as the self-assured like to think it is, of themselves.

That is what I took a disliking to, with them.


However, much more important to me, is that somehow these papers have people like Popham, Kington, this latest one, Gumbel, writing and having none of what they say checked, so to me it's like well what do you really stand for.


Well, if it helps, zorba, it is NOT respected by me personally, and for much the same reasons you gave in your illuminating list of what it has done over the years. The only error I can think of on my part was to think it was always against the war in Iraq. Since I was no longer residing in the UK I just got the later impression of it being against. To me, anyone in the media that ever supported that obscene war is anathema to me, and I would need no other reason. Whether they are bourgeois liberals that would support the bombing of women to 'save' them or the bombing of Iraq because they were held captive by Tony Blair, I don't care. As someone whose politics run along the line between Ron Paul and Ralph Nader, and agrees more often with Marxists than the mushy middle, I don't trust regular media at all. But even if I dislike the Guardian, and I'm sure many others feel the same way, it still respected, by others. That isn't a comment on how good they are. IMO they distract from the real powers that be, and give people the illusion of change espoused by 'liberals'. Me, I'm peace loving, but I'm a radical.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
It's a hard slog going through the closed "Today Over At PMF" thread they have going there, as Hans of Germany dutifully brings over snippets every day of what we post here. Out of several thousand posts they put up, very few are actually worth even mentioning, since there's no substance, only lots of backslapping about how they're intelligent, and we are not. The personal stuff, I ignore completely.

But there is one thing I will respond to, which they wrote in response to my "the bottom feeders" post about how they didn't respect the Kerchers wish not to profit from the death of their daughter Meredith. The 'groupies' point out I never complained about Barbie Nadeau, Follain or John Kercher. Well, John is not profiting from his daughter's death, as all funds from the sale of his book go to a memorial fund, and Nadeau and Follain are journalists doing their job, which is to report. Whether they benefit by way of a salary or a book sale does not concern the Kerchers.

But simple decency would hopefully apply to those accused of the murder, and their supporters, to not do this until Knox and Sollecito are finally acquitted, No one can force you to comply, of course, just as we are free to criticise you. Sharlene Martin is quite free to make a buck as that's her job as a literary agent. One suspects she'd sell the story of her (hypothetically speaking) mother's murderer if she could make a buck, but that's just her job. My comment was merely to point out the coincidence of her publishing the OJ Simpson book over the objections of Nicole Brown's family, and she's doing a similar thing again. As I said, that's her job.

The hypocrisy I point out is that of Frank Sfarzo, Bruce Fisher, and Doug Preston, who act only out of mercenary motives, who attack journalists for doing their job, but complain that PM Mignini is harassing a 'journalist', Frank Sfarzo. Meh.

Funny how, in trying to make a buck, they er, didn't? :)


I applaud your patience in ploughing through their private posts. If the private ones are as full of pompous puffery as their public ones, I have the perfect place for them:

The fc-)) potty.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

A Lot More Poop in the Private Posts, Napia5. And whenever I think, enough, already, of my life being wasted there, up floats another nugget :)

For example: The video of someone heckling Oedipal boy and the posters ready to give him the Victoria Cross and Congressional Medal of Honor for his 'bravery'. Even though he was surrounded by enough security to give even Al-Qaeda pause.

And: I ban people here because of "defamation". Nope, because of their abuse of the rules of this forum. If they don't like it, leave. Which they do, once they realize their silly debating tricks don't work here.

And: "Once the SC court rules in their favour there will have to be a security detail around Amanda Knox to protect her from threats to her safety" and a hundred white knights jumped up to er, salute ;)

Now THAT, I wish I'd saved, and I can't find it again. They've got several sub forums, amounting to about twenty thousand posts or so, and their first obsession is a) Amanda Knox b) us :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:41 pm   Post subject: MORE FROM THE 'WE DON'T TAUNT THE KERCHERS' BRIGADE   

From Wendy Murphy's FB page, https://www.facebook.com/wendymurphylaw there's a post from Sharlene Martin about John Kercher's book, with chiming in from Jodie Leah.

"Jodie Leah: JK is NOT the best one to take your view from. especially after the evening hour.. things get a bit tipsy from that point..... trust me I have seen it : )
Wednesday at 5:09pm ·

Jodie Leah: His OWN guilt of his doings is what's harboring his view.
Wednesday at 5:09pm

Quite charming, to see the victim's father still being attacked, 5 years after his daughter's death.

Jodie Leah is thanked fulsomely by Raffaele Sollecito in his acknowledgments. I guess he supports the comments from the self-described "friend of Raffaele and his family" and his 'reaching out to the Kerchers', this is what he means?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

She and he have both been released at this point. Is there a security detail around them now? Did Sollecito have one at the 'Burning Man'? Does she have one at the dance studio? Did she when she went to school?
Have the Groupies been in constant contact with the police with their concerns?
We live in a very unsafe world these days, of that there is no doubt. If anyone believes their safety and well-being to be in jeopardy, the intelligent thing to do would be to contact the police. I would suggest that to anyone, including Knox and Sollecito.
But I don't see where the Groupies should be overly concerned. Seems almost a sub-set of the excitement to some of them. I guess it goes with the fantasy. Ho Hum.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

No one's said boo to Sollecito or Knox so far. Yeah, that's how they get their thrills, Napia5. I mention it because they've used that line so many times.
Secret meetings for when RS or Frank Sfarzo come to town? It's for their safety.
Let's not publicise his media appearances and change the times and check in points? 'Credible threats' reported by the groupies who troll our websites for anything that looks like a threat.
Amanda Knox not appearing in public (except when she calls the paparazzi and sets up a photo shoot)? She's scared of threats.
They actually speculated about someone (not from .NET) as having access to a gun! Wow.
They had Seattle police hanging around UW, and NYPD was told to watch out for us. Seriously, what a waste of resources. And brain cells :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I can see why you mentioned it. That a threat would come from one of our sites is what makes it so funny.
Loony is a better word for it. For whatever reason, they need to believe we are a group of 'haters', capable of anything.
I think escalating our desire for justice to violent levels in their minds somehow satisfies a need in them to 'save' her.
The bigger the boogey-man, the more necessary THEY are. How is it said? Meh? Is that a polite way of saying BS?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Meh! is what bugs bunny would say :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
Meh! is what bugs bunny would say :)


I just googled "Meh". What an adorable little word! Wish it had been around when I had a mother-in-law! hbc)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Sollecito's back in Italy, as reported on . ORG. I guess the book tour's over, and now it's up to the publisher to move copies. I saw a link to a formula for Barnes and Noble rankings; will post later. It looks like he sold less than 200 a week there. Not bad, not impressed. I am told that copies for sale are appearing on E Bay: "once read, like new" :-)
Now we've learned from this experience, maybe we can think about the Amanda Knox book?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Note: it never was about how many books he would sell. It was to let people know that there still is evidence against him, and to make sure Meredith was not forgotten. I am glad I was able to get through to Katie Couric's producer, and hope that others who interview Knox in the future also go beyond the script.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
Note: it never was about how many books he would sell. It was to let people know that there still is evidence against him, and to make sure Meredith was not forgotten. I am glad I was able to get through to Katie Couric's producer, and hope that others who interview Knox in the future also go beyond the script.


Let's not forget, either, that 200 books are in the hands of people who may not have bought the book believing that he is innocent. New eyes on this story will see all sorts of things.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Ergon wrote:
zorba wrote:
Ergon wrote:
daisysteiner wrote:
zorba wrote:
By the way, The Guardian is not a respected newspaper, on that basis anyone or anything is respected, the Guardian was a pro-war newspaper, has been accused of anti-semitism, and more, so, it's all very relative, the Independent started out as something hopeful, look at Popham to get a picture of what screening they have in place to check who they allow to write for it.

There's a whole lot of Brit journos living nicely abroad in the jolly old sun what what, I say, and they seem to be willing to say any old crap, they will do anything to maintain their pleasant little away from it all lifestyles, look at Popham and others just like him (Brits) slagging Italy off whilst living there enjoying all of its niceties, fantastic things, humping a beautiful Italian wife each day and leaving a trail of kids yet doing that 'to Italy', and Meredith and her family, I have no words harsh enough to express the depth and levels of animosity I feel for those individual fuck-wits, they are Brits, so good god, who is going to stand up for Meredith then? But then one should not automatically assume Britain is so fantastic, there are dogs galore running round there/and elsewhere, mongrel dog bloodsucking, worm kissing little horrors with no dignity and no worries except those concerning their own bank accounts.


Whoa there Zorba, I have to hugely disagree with this. Of all the newspapers in Britain, The Guardian is one of the fairest and most respected news outlets in the world. I believe it is the four or fifth most read newspaper in the USA too, so much so they opened a US edition. It has a strong left lean granted but it's the only UK paper (along with the Indy) that actually does something for social justice and was very vocally anti war as they were instrumental in organising the Million person march on parliament in 2003 - I should know, I was there. They also were one of the organsations who published the Wikileaks documents - chosen by Assange for their fairness in dealing with the material. Google Alan Rusbringer for more info. They have a section called Comment Is Free where deliberately provocative articles are placed in order to stoke discussion (The section is named from an ex-editor's quote which said "Comment is free but facts are sacred" and he used this as his editorial mantra - google C P Scott). This section is a bit like Gather where they allow pretty much anyone to post. Most of the Knox articles which were open to comments were placed here, the proper articles reporting news and not opinion did not have open comments. I should declare a vested interest as I have worked with the Guardian in the past. They aren't perfect by any stretch but I'm really not having Zorba's comment pass unchallenged as they are blatantly untrue and very unfair - Italians slag off Italy, not just British and Americans. The difference between the Italians/Brits and the Americans is the US journalists (with some notable exceptions) slag off Italy with a sense of superiority/entitlement that hasn't been seen in print since the heady days of the Empire ffs. The British should know about that shitty attitude as we invented it and exported it everywhere.


Not saying whoa to either of you :) and you can speak for yourselves. But zorba was responding to my stating the Guardian and Independent were respected papers, which I think they are, among a wide swath of liberal and independent readers. The Right will call them communists, and the Marxist Left will say they're not communist enough. The Board of British Jews will call the Guardian anti-semitic for criticising Israel and many Palestinians criticise them for using neutral language when describing Israel, and not any other such state, but I think all that criticism cancels each other out. My own personal beef with the Guardian is that it affords a regular column to the 'scientifically oriented' and allow a wide range of attacks on holistic medicine and anti-vaccination researchers but does not provide the same resources to the opposing side, just an occasional 'Comment is free' column. Fair enough, the Guardian has its own biases, like any other paper. And yes, the Guardian supported Julian Assange until it turned upon him and caused a security breach by releasing a non-redacted version of the Wikileaks Files, so it seems that the reporter involved (and the paper) has it in for Julain Assange. But yes, it was against the Iraq and Afghan wars, and who can forget the thrill of that huge march in London?

For the purposes of this site, it seems to me that the Guardian bought into the Nina Burleigh myth about Amanda Knox, that it was a patriarchal burning at the stake of the eternal feminine, and some of its reporting hewed to that line. So we can disagree with some reporters on the Independent or the Guardian, some of us might or might not respect these papers, but the fact still remains that they are, 'widely respected'. Otherwise, we'll be the same as the FOA who say the Times of London is a 'tabloid' because they disagree with John Follain.



I still disagree with your reasoning and idea; respect is relative.

It's a word too, and misused, Knox is respected but is that respect? And what value does it have when you see by whom?

Equal to your take 'widely respected', it is also 'widely frowned upon' Ergon, as ít caters to those who like to see themselves as better, and that take/idea self-view, is not as hip as the self-assured like to think it is, of themselves.

That is what I took a disliking to, with them.


However, much more important to me, is that somehow these papers have people like Popham, Kington, this latest one, Gumbel, writing and having none of what they say checked, so to me it's like well what do you really stand for.


Well, if it helps, zorba, it is NOT respected by me personally, and for much the same reasons you gave in your illuminating list of what it has done over the years. The only error I can think of on my part was to think it was always against the war in Iraq. Since I was no longer residing in the UK I just got the later impression of it being against. To me, anyone in the media that ever supported that obscene war is anathema to me, and I would need no other reason. Whether they are bourgeois liberals that would support the bombing of women to 'save' them or the bombing of Iraq because they were held captive by Tony Blair, I don't care. As someone whose politics run along the line between Ron Paul and Ralph Nader, and agrees more often with Marxists than the mushy middle, I don't trust regular media at all. But even if I dislike the Guardian, and I'm sure many others feel the same way, it still respected, by others. That isn't a comment on how good they are. IMO they distract from the real powers that be, and give people the illusion of change espoused by 'liberals'. Me, I'm peace loving, but I'm a radical.



Right Ergon,

I too, I'm open to what people have to say, but, well, have such a bad taste in my mouth of everything to do with the British media, mostly, good news, as in non-biased, left or right, is very hard to come by.

Being brought up by a politician, on the very left of politics, and reading his works, online, as an adult now, and finding my father, as a quite young man, was enlightening, to see he really did know what he was saying, and he really was a good man with high ideals, but the constant battle of you must be like us, to me is like religion, he ruined the one article of his, I read, by saying, near the end, in what was a really nice illuminating piece, yes and the answer can only come from the left.
So there he was pushing his way. All of this notwithstanding, I cannot help being pushed to try to understand things as they really are, no matter who it involves, so I experience my dad, and go through so many things, only eventually to find who he was, and understand him, and why he was who he was and what he thought, he was who he was, through his environment, being a child during the Second World War, and as a matter of chance and a light influence from his father, he thought the answer to the extreme of right, Hitler, could be counteracted by the extreme of the left, communism.

I don't think either are the answer, as it is like a weird religion, after all, religion often/always indoctrinates people too, makes them think this is the answer, and I must take onboard what this doctrine is saying, but I think, the highest intelligence is reflected by the individual that can think for him/herself.

And, Amen to that

I'm also an atheist, and thank god for that (just kidding = about what I'm kidding that's for anyone to work out).

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


Last edited by zorba on Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:46 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: Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Note: it never was about how many books he would sell. It was to let people know that there still is evidence against him, and to make sure Meredith was not forgotten. I am glad I was able to get through to Katie Couric's producer, and hope that others who interview Knox in the future also go beyond the script.


Let's not forget, either, that 200 books are in the hands of people who may not have bought the book believing that he is innocent. New eyes on this story will see all sorts of things.



I expect that well-off engineering traumatised Iraq working guy, may have bought a couple of thousand just because.

Funny how that nutter Bruce said yeah great guy never shy of handing out plane tickets

ahaha

for Christ's sake, and the Knoxes yeah we spent billions, million, trillions, thousand, hundreds, lots ya know folks

Yes, I think father Knox is now stuck down mine all days of the week and only has Christmas day off for 2 hours before he has to get back ''downt mine' - downt is Yorkshirey lingo in order to create more effect - Yes, Knox senior, downt mine aye, they only gave him cup-a-tea once every 3 hours, the poor lad.

All this 'spent millions' my royally upholstered backsidery, come on, get real, bomb traumatised border-liners like Joe B donate their bits of extra cash, and poor old Sollecito, he had a look on his face when in the company of Hey Joey, as if to say, Sir, very kind you are supporting my murder, but, I pass on bending over to pick up the hundred dollar bills you keep throwing at my feet, poor old Sollecito no idea who anyone really is...

Joey B: Hello Son I luvs ya, you're great !
Sollecito: Yes, you are correcto

I betcha old Joe said he could fix a job for Sollecito doing da com-pu-terrrrrrrrrrrrrrs

Joe Garage: Ya will have ta learn a bit of English though, think ya can manage that?

Sollecito: Sure dude-o

Anyway lovely people I've never been able to believe this stuff about spending so much.

For one thing, lawyers and translators are very poorly paid in Italy and for instance, it is only recently, in relative terms, that court translators/court interpreters have been upgraded.

It was never a case like the family had to book a flight overnight, nope they knew ages in advance, so man, I looked already 4 years ago at all of this and you can get a flight from Seattle to Italy for PEANUTS.

I mean if they opted for 5-star hotels that's their look out but I cannot see any evidence of that.

And even the media I mean instead of paying for it, they let it pay for itself by signing up to deals that gave certain outlets access to them, in the first degree
I bet they owe Sweet F all.

Nope these people got rich off this not poor

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:36 pm   Post subject: THE PURPOSE OF THIS SITE   

zorba wrote:
Right Ergon,

I too, I'm open to what people have to say, but, well, have such a bad taste in my mouth of everything to do with the British media, mostly, good news, as in non-biased, left or right, is very hard to come by.

Being brought up by a politician, on the very left of politic, and reading his works, online, as an adult now, and finding my father, as a quite young man, was enlightening, to see he really did know what he was saying, and he really was a good man with high ideals, but the constant battle of you must be like us, to me is lke religion, he ruined the one article of his, I read, by saying, near the end, if what was a really nice illuminating piece, yes an the answer can only come fro m the left.
So there he was pushing his way. All of this notwithstanding, id that I cannot help being pushed to try to understand things as they really are, no matter who it involves, so I experience my dad, and go through so many things, only eventually to find who he was, and understand him, and why he was who he was and what he thought, he was who he was, through his environment, being a child during the Second World War, and as a matter of chance and a light influence from his father, he thought the answer to the extreme of right, Hitler, could be counteracted by the extreme of the left, communism.

I don't think either are the answer, as it is like a weir religion, after all, religion often indoctrinates people too, makes them think this is the answer, and I must take onboard what this doctrine is saying, but I think, the highest intelligence is reflected by the individual that can think for him/herself.

And, Amen to that

I'm also an atheist, and thank god for that (just kidding = about what I'm kidding that's for anyone to work out).


Right on, zorba. For me, this is the reason I don't respect the Guardian http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article22212 in the way it downplays the effects of the Iraq war. Just as you saw with your father, the pressure to compromise and remove independent thought exists amongst religionists, scientific rationalists and those that define themselves by their political philosophy. You cannot force anyone to your way of thinking, just present your argument and try to convince people.

What is the purpose of this site? One thing it is NOT is a debating club where the Amandii and the Sollecitu can come and disrupt the forum. They made it clear by their actions so far they cannot engage in respectful dialogue, and their only purpose is to influence public opinion by whatever means, and not, actually prove their case.

The Italian Court of Cassazione will decide the case, and not, us. The purpose of this site is to provide the translations of the original Italian documents, to present the case to the general public, and, to defend the Kercher family and the memory of Meredith Kercher.

We believe the decisions of Judge Micheli and Massei are a fairly accurate reflection of what happened on the night of the murder, and the trial sentences were fair and just. We also consider the subsequent Hellmann court decision that exonerated Knox and Sollecito to be patently false.

We here on http://www.perugiamurderfile.net present all our information to the public, and not, hidden away in private sub forums where the Amanda Knox partisans search out identities and personal information of those individuals that oppose them and then publish that information to embarrass them. Every action we have taken here, and they have been relatively mild in comparison, were in response to specific outrages, and done openly, so people could see and judge for themselves. But we will actively defend ourselves against those that call us hate sites, and expose actions that are so egregious one can only wonder why they don't realize it hurts their own cause?

I recently posted details of the "Free Meredith Kercher" Facebook page. This site, set up by Amanda Knox groupies, appropriated copyrighted pictures from John Kercher's book (which they say was in the public domain, not true) to peddle their cause, then posed the person accused of her murder beside a mawkish shrine they call a way of honoring her.

When brmull, a physician member of .ORG wrote a letter to the American Psychiatric Association criticizing Dr. Saul Kassin's article on false confessions, the groupies responded by looking up a disciplinary action taken against him many years ago when he had a breakdown, and, they still snipe at him and threaten to report him to his disciplinary hearing. For what? Writing letters criticising bad research? Recently, another member of .ORG, Fly By Night's c.v. was published on their site with threats to write to his college. It is one thing to criticise the research of a professional witness for Amanda Knox, and another to write about someone's personal life or views. I object on their behalf.

Disclosure: their poster B_Real published an old picture of me once again, which makes it four or five times, no big deal, but he also found a friend's website, and not even realizing it didn't belong to me, published her details too, not even looking to see the person listed is not me and has nothing to do with the case. Bruce Fischer ought to be ashamed for allowing that to be put up, and if my friend is harassed in any way, I will hold him personally responsible, since it is his site.

For the reason that so many cases of harassment have originated from his website and group of friends, I find his protestations about not having anything to do with the Free Meredith Kercher page, also, not believable. His representative is welcome to reply to that here.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:08 pm   Post subject: Re: THE PURPOSE OF THIS SITE   

Ergon wrote:
zorba wrote:
Right Ergon,

I too, I'm open to what people have to say, but, well, have such a bad taste in my mouth of everything to do with the British media, mostly, good news, as in non-biased, left or right, is very hard to come by.

Being brought up by a politician, on the very left of politics, and reading his works, online, as an adult now, and finding my father, as a quite young man, was enlightening, to see he really did know what he was saying, and he really was a good man with high ideals, but the constant battle of 'you must be like us', to me is lke religion, he ruined the one article of his I read, by saying, near the end, in what was a really nice, illuminating piece, yes and the answer can only come from the left.
So there he was pushing his way.
All of this notwithstanding, I cannot help being pushed to try to understand things as they really are, no matter who it involves, so I experience my dad, and go through so many things, only eventually to find who he was, and understand him, and why he was who he was and what he thought, he was who he was, through his environment, being a child during the Second World War, and as a matter of chance and a light influence from his father, he thought the answer to the extreme of right, Hitler, could be counteracted by the extreme of the left, communism.

I don't think either are the answer, as it is like a weir religion, after all, religion often indoctrinates people too, makes them think this is the answer, and I must take onboard what this doctrine is saying, but I think, the highest intelligence is reflected by the individual that can think for him/herself.

And, Amen to that

I'm also an atheist, and thank god for that (just kidding = about what I'm kidding that's for anyone to work out).


Right on, zorba. For me, this is the reason I don't respect the Guardian http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article22212 in the way it downplays the effects of the Iraq war. Just as you saw with your father, the pressure to compromise and remove independent thought exists amongst religionists, scientific rationalists and those that define themselves by their political philosophy. You cannot force anyone to your way of thinking, just present your argument and try to convince people.

What is the purpose of this site? One thing it is NOT is a debating club where the Amandii and the Sollecitu can come and disrupt the forum. They made it clear by their actions so far they cannot engage in respectful dialogue, and their only purpose is to influence public opinion by whatever means, and not, actually prove their case.

The Italian Court of Cassazione will decide the case, and not, us. The purpose of this site is to provide the translations of the original Italian documents, to present the case to the general public, and, to defend the Kercher family and the memory of Meredith Kercher.

We believe the decisions of Judge Micheli and Massei are a fairly accurate reflection of what happened on the night of the murder, and the trial sentences were fair and just. We also consider the subsequent Hellmann court decision that exonerated Knox and Sollecito to be patently false.

We here on http://www.perugiamurderfile.net present all our information to the public, and not, hidden away in private sub forums where the Amanda Knox partisans search out identities and personal information of those individuals that oppose them and then publish that information to embarrass them. Every action we have taken here, and they have been relatively mild in comparison, were in response to specific outrages, and done openly, so people could see and judge for themselves. But we will actively defend ourselves against those that call us hate sites, and expose actions that are so egregious one can only wonder why they don't realize it hurts their own cause?

I recently posted details of the "Free Meredith Kercher" Facebook page. This site, set up by Amanda Knox groupies, appropriated copyrighted pictures from John Kercher's book (which they say was in the public domain, not true) to peddle their cause, then posed the person accused of her murder beside a mawkish shrine they call a way of honoring her.

When brmull, a physician member of .ORG wrote a letter to the American Psychiatric Association criticizing Dr. Saul Kassin's article on false confessions, the groupies responded by looking up a disciplinary action taken against him many years ago when he had a breakdown, and, they still snipe at him and threaten to report him to his disciplinary hearing. For what? Writing letters criticising bad research? Recently, another member of .ORG, Fly By Night's c.v. was published on their site with threats to write to his college. It is one thing to criticise the research of a professional witness for Amanda Knox, and another to write about someone's personal life or views. I object on their behalf.

Disclosure: their poster B_Real published an old picture of me once again, which makes it four or five times, no big deal, but he also found a friend's website, and not even realizing it didn't belong to me, published her details too, not even looking to see the person listed is not me and has nothing to do with the case. Bruce Fischer ought to be ashamed for allowing that to be put up, and if my friend is harassed in any way, I will hold him personally responsible, since it is his site.

For the reason that so many cases of harassment have originated from his website and group of friends, I find his protestations about not having anything to do with the Free Meredith Kercher page, also, not believable. His representative is welcome to reply to that here.



Hey Ergon, that's awful, this harassment.

In more or less terms, one could conclude that Meredith's murder, formed a source of inspiration, to minds similar to those of the killers!
They are drawn to the ill-mindedness of it all.
As if the murder wasn't bad enough itself, they seem to be incapable of understanding that their bullying tactics mirror exactly the bullying behaviour that ended Meredith's life.
Seeing as how they are of like minds, the killers and their supporters, the supporters cannot even see what their behaviour reflects and what it signifies.

Not one of those supporters seems to be down to earth and or normal, and I mean normal as in people with a true sense of decency, each one I've seem appears to be using the murder case for one thing or another, money or a leg up one way or another.

I think they need a Cesar Milan sent in to teach them about behaviour, he's an expert with dogs.

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


Last edited by zorba on Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I've looked at these sites from time to time, Ergon. They are certainly puffed up on their pride in their intelligence, aren't they? However, IMO, they fall far short in the area of human decency. Some of the attacks on the Kerchers are, in a word, sick. John Kercher wrote a book about his experiences with his beloved daughter. The fact that the book ends with her murder, and, by association, the trial, is important, because it is HIS story to tell. He is not 'hiding behind his dead daughter' to vilify anybody, as one of the sick bastards wrote. Don't they get it? It is John Kercher's story to tell.
He told it beautifully, sadly, truthfully as it unfolded to his family, and I believe he told it in his native tongue, without the help of a ghost-writer and proof-readers who apparently aren't at the top of their trade.
If they dispute some of the evidence, or, believe he has a fact wrong, I get that. But,to personally attack the man, and, to believe that the Kerchers 'don't care about the truth' of what happened to their dear Meredith, is, as I said, and will continue to say, sick. disgusting. And, beyond belief.
I wonder, if Meredith were still alive, and capable of reading the site, "Free Meredith Kercher", and could see all of the powder-puffed, candle-lit pot-shots taken at her father, would she be at peace? Would she applaud your efforts, or, would she see them as the thinly-veiled, phony bull-shit that they are?
The picture of Meredith, the 'shrine' posed with the man still accused of her murder is, to me, as tasteless, and unbelievable as anything I have seen so far, and I have seen much.
People say that these sites are like putting lipstick on a pig. Frankly, I think this comment is an insult to pigs everywhere. Pigs are intelligent creatures.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

One more thing, while I'm on the subject of John Kercher, and, the rest of his family.
Does anyone think that John Kercher didn't spend some time considering the evidence, the facts, and try to look at the picture from the defense side of things? Wouldn't you think that he HAD viewed the evidence and the facts, looking for the possibility of corruption, of mistakes and mis-information? Wouldn't anyone, faced with information concerning the murder of their child, their sister, weigh ALL the information, follow ALL threads, before forming an opinion?
Does anyone believe that the family simply followed along blindly, with no opinion, no discussion at all of the possibility that the prosecution was mistaken? The kindest of the Groupiess believe the Kerchers were duped.
Don't you think that John Kercher has already considered and discarded that possibility?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Dad: Son, your mother has been murdered while preparing your spaghetti dinner, you can't go in there

Son: Damn, does this mean I'll have to move?

_________________
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 Sep 30, 2012 9:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Have to admit, tried to scrutinize what it is about Sollecito's face that sickens me, I've been trying to place my finger on what the look of him is telling me, however, ca'nt get much expect that he is a smug bastard, and a smart arse, however, for anyone that doesn't know, a smart arse in no way means that a person is indeed smart, in fact it means everything but that, and, it means the opposite.

Was scrying his moving face having taken care to make sure that the volume was already turned off.
Could only take a minute, his face shows he is totally faking it all, it's not real or sincere.

You could hardly expect anyone guilty of murder to come away unscathed.
I mean the guy is now ill in the head and just does not know what he is doing.
He thinks he does know.

Yes, there he is putting his dad -who had been so relieved his son escaped punishment (for now) -in a more than tight squeeze; what a fool his father looked, after defending his son's lies and creating enough of his own, to have his son make everything very clear: those who had not been completely clear about what had gone down in this case, now when watching in Italy, watching dad have to deny it, must have then had a moment of realisation like, jee, so this guy really must have been lying all along if he comes out with things like this that put his own dad in shitstreet. as the accusations are entirely uncreditworthy. His dad must have instantly realised, crikey, am I to say yes he is correct and hey yes let's do have another court case.


I'm sure if any of what Sollecito is now trying to use - to blacken the reputation of others - had even an inkling of truth to it, then they'd have made some accusations when it would have been relevant; doing things like this, this way, just goes to show what a lying individual Sollecito is.

_________________
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 Sep 30, 2012 11:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
One more thing, while I'm on the subject of John Kercher, and, the rest of his family.
Does anyone think that John Kercher didn't spend some time considering the evidence, the facts, and try to look at the picture from the defense side of things? Wouldn't you think that he HAD viewed the evidence and the facts, looking for the possibility of corruption, of mistakes and mis-information? Wouldn't anyone, faced with information concerning the murder of their child, their sister, weigh ALL the information, follow ALL threads, before forming an opinion?
Does anyone believe that the family simply followed along blindly, with no opinion, no discussion at all of the possibility that the prosecution was mistaken? The kindest of the Groupies believe the Kerchers were duped.
Don't you think that John Kercher has already considered and discarded that possibility?



They are fully aware of those things Nap, but their central focus is to discredit anyone that opposes the stance, they do not care about what happened to Meredith, their central theme is aggression and violence, whether physical, mental or spiritual nothing is too much for them; this is why they ignore the violence carried out on Meredith and so not recognise their own violence when they abuse people at the mind level, where they're out doing all they do, putting energy into opposing everyone that doesn't agree with them. To go out of your way to twist facts, is an act of violence/aggression. To play games like this with Sollecito sat next to some pseudo shrine, using dead Meredith to do this, is so sick it's almost indescribable, this is aggression at the spiritual level, trying to trick people into thinking anyone there gives a hoot, and I bet Sollecito made sure he did not have to sit facing photographs of Meredith.
Sollecito says he was left out, who is he trying to kid, he was relieved people seemed to think Knox was more to blame.

First of all he said one thing then changed that, on several occasions, this is all documented and filed, but now, he continues, by trying to sound convincing when he now states she definitely was with Knox, and that though he had said she was to blame, said she was to blame if he was there (in trouble) it was her fault, as she lived for pleasured, and was not in contact with reality, now he is trying to have us believe him when he says, no, no, Knox was not to blame. A small child could do a better job of telling lies than he does.

They do not care that they walk over people in relation to Meredith's murder, don't care who they hurt, so this includes John because they, in the first place, do not give a shit about that happened to Meredith, so considering the aggression attached to being like that within the context of how terribly awful and unkind that is, to be like that, then it figures that they don't care about trying to blacken others, and then why should they care about her dad's feelings, this is how they are. All I know is, I've seen some of the most creepy types getting involved with their support Knox thing.

The bad of the case has appealed to those who are like-minded or else to simple-minded to actually understand the real case.

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


Last edited by zorba on Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 4:33 am   Post subject: Re: REPLY TO THE FREE MEREDITH KERCHER FACEBOOK SITE   

Ergon wrote:
Hello, Lyn Duncan, and thank you for replying. [...]
Now that I have your attention, you are cyber harassing and taunting the family of Meredith Kercher. Inter spaced with all your New Age exhortations of 'love', you post numerous accounts of how the Kerchers are deluded, mistaken, led astray by their lawyer Francesco Maresca. [...]
All the fake shrines and hallmark sentiments you post alongside do not disguise your true intent.


Well said, Ergon. "Fake shrine(s)" is the right expression. I can almost smell an acrid odor of incense and hear the hollow, monotonous incantations and the chanting of "innocent, innocent, innocent..."

http://www.facebook.com/FreeMeredithKercher

Here is a sampling of some of LynDuncan's comments, one in reply to yours, on the Anderson Live website:

LynDuncan wrote:
Naseer Ahmad aka Ergon, you really need to read Raffaele's book! And Hellmann/Zanetti. ;) If you have done so already, you know very well why ' their alibi's didn't match'. They had been interrogated by many many people, physically harmed and were exhausted. Truly, I would love to see you survive as long as they did before giving over some nonsense and in Amanda's case, agreeing with a suggestion made to her by her interrogators.
Thank you Anderson for your choosing to support the truth, it always wins. And both you and Raffaele won.
9 days ago


LynDuncan wrote:
If you are so curious, I advise you to read the Hellmann/Zanetti Motivation Report. It has all the reasons why Amanda and Raffaele were found to be TOTALLY innocent of any involvement in Merediths dreadful murder. Hellmann threw Judge Massei's reasonings out rather forcefully, and dont forget Hellmann presided over a Higher Court. For a 'business Judge' he sure saw things sans blinkers. ;)
9 days ago


LynDuncan wrote:
Sorry, I should have added that you must read Raffaeles book, it will answer all of your questions. :)
9 days ago


http://www.andersoncooper.com/2012/09/20/amanda-knoxs-former-boyfriend-raffaele-sollecito-on-todays-show/

Why wouldn't she recommend reading the Galati-Costagliola Appeal document, I wonder?
Top Profile 

Offline daisysteiner


Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 2:59 pm

Posts: 490

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hey all , Zorba - I really want to reply to your post but for now we'll have to agree to differ :)

LynDuncan - Question for you - if the Kercher family asked you to remove your "tribute page to Meredith", would you?
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

daisysteiner wrote:
Hey all , Zorba - I really want to reply to your post but for now we'll have to agree to differ :)

LynDuncan - Question for you - if the Kercher family asked you to remove your "tribute page to Meredith", would you?


Hi Daisy,

Exactly the same words that came to (my) mind when thinking about trying to argue opinions on this with you.
Mister whatever his name was, writing for them and for Sollecito, didn't leave me in the most objective frame of mind, apart from that, basicaly I can't say there is a single newspaper in the world I can fully stand behind except for the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers & Fat Freddy's Cat.

_________________
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: 4882

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

New blog post by Candace Dempsey over at the Seattle PI:

Amanda Knox’s prison guard investigated for rape

Amanda Knox, in a leaked prison diary, described a prison official who was fixated on sex, a man who summoned her to a late night-session and questioned her about lovers. Amanda was acquitted nearly a year ago, but another prisoner says that the American’s words encouraged her to speak out about sexual abuse at the hands of Raffaele Argirò, apparently the guard who escorted Knox in and out of court even on the long night of her acquittal.


She cites a translated report from La Nazione.

Seattle PI (Blog)

Bruce Fischer's "review" of Raf's book at GroundReport isn't even worth reading. Same old same old from an over-zealous groupie:

Yellow journalists like Barbie Nadeau, Nick Piza, and Andrea Vogt, had no use for Raffaele when creating salacious headlines about a young attractive lady killer. These Architects of the Foxy Knoxy myth had the same disregard for the truth, often ignoring it completely. Now it is time for these journalists to shut up and listen as two innocent people (they chose to victimize in their repulsive articles) tell their side of the story. Nadeau, Piza, and Vogt, would be ashamed of themselves if they ever took the time to get to know the real Raffaele Sollecito.


Ground Report

By the way, Bruce, Nick Pisa's last name is spelled "P-i-s-a".
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 6:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Thanks for the link to Ground Report, Guermantes.
I have not read the book, but I continually read variations of this statement, as appears in Bruce's article:

Quote:
Raffaele's true character is revealed when he discusses the intense pressure he was under from his family and lawyers to separate himself from Amanda Knox. He could have easily taken the advice of his loved ones and legal counsel in order to save himself but he refused to do so. Raffaele stood strong because he would not lie, no matter what the consequences would bring. Raffaele discusses the horrific experience of being locked away in solitary confinement giving him 6 long months to think about his future. Even in his most desperate moments, Raffaele resisted the temptation to turn on Amanda in order to save himself from the painful silence of being alone.


Does Sollecito explain exactly WHAT lie he was being pressured to tell? What story could help him? I think this paragrah is very telling in that the defense must have felt that the prosecution's case was extremely strong, or, why would there be a need to lie?

The Groupies are fond of their theory of 'corruption'. What do they call it when a defense attorney pressures the client to lie?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:07 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Jackie wrote:

Looks like you could buy your way onto the ebook list for as little as $2K to $7K!


EVERYONE GETS A TROPHY has creeped its way into the NY Times list! Maybe it only takes around $1,500, if you're willing to shell out for last place on the e-books non-fiction specialty list. If there really is a reason for this list to exist, which I question, it should cut off at #15 like the original list does. But then, not everyone would get a trophy, and the publishers love to brag about their books being on the NY Times list.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
New blog post by Candace Dempsey over at the Seattle PI:

Amanda Knox’s prison guard investigated for rape

Amanda Knox, in a leaked prison diary, described a prison official who was fixated on sex, a man who summoned her to a late night-session and questioned her about lovers. Amanda was acquitted nearly a year ago, but another prisoner says that the American’s words encouraged her to speak out about sexual abuse at the hands of Raffaele Argirò, apparently the guard who escorted Knox in and out of court even on the long night of her acquittal.


She cites a translated report from La Nazione.

Seattle PI (Blog)



I'm trying to anticipate how the groupies will respond to this. After all they claim to be interested in justice and would be the first to insist that the presumption of innocence should be maintained...RIGHT? No DNA I take it, no sperm, just an accusation of rape six years ago, prompted by an accusation of sexual harassment (in the media, not in the courts) - by one Amanda Knox, convicted of calunnia for having made a false rape and murder accusation already and rewarded with a $4million book deal.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Here, Sollecito explains why they staged the break-in in Filomena's room:

In the upstairs apartment, Filomena took responsibility for gathering everyone’s cash and handing it over to the landlady. And it was Filomena’s bedroom window that would soon be smashed with a large rock—

Guede would know this? No. But he and Knox would.

If someone could explain to me, why a burglar would believe there to be CASH lying around because it was the first of the month and rent was due, I'd appreciate it. If rent were due on the first, the expectation would be that rent had already been paid. I think I read that their rent was due on the fifth, and that doesn't explain why a burglar would break in on the first for the rent money either. thanks.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Here, Sollecito explains why they staged the break-in in Filomena's room:

In the upstairs apartment, Filomena took responsibility for gathering everyone’s cash and handing it over to the landlady. And it was Filomena’s bedroom window that would soon be smashed with a large rock—

Guede would know this? No. But he and Knox would.

If someone could explain to me, why a burglar would believe there to be CASH lying around because it was the first of the month and rent was due, I'd appreciate it. If rent were due on the first, the expectation would be that rent had already been paid. I think I read that their rent was due on the fifth, and that doesn't explain why a burglar would break in on the first for the rent money either. thanks.


What a boob he is! With this logic, the 'burglar' would have to know that Filomena was in charge of the money, hadn't paid the rent yet, AND which window belonged to Filomena.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Another thing: Knox's period. I know this is an impolite topic but that doesn't stop Edda, Knox, and Sollecito from speaking about it. It's so impolite I think it might be used as a diversionary tactic by them. Anyway, we know Knox's period has been used to explain why she was bleeding in the cottage on November 1st and it was used to explain why suddenly two days after the murder on November 3, Knox had an urgent need to purchase a $100 g-string and camisole set at the precise moment students were gathering to mourn Meredith's murder.

FORGET ALL THAT!

Sollecito claims in his book that Knox started getting her period on November 4, that she sent him out to fetch tampons and a slice of pizza for her, and that she was moody!

"As the days went by— it was now Sunday, November 4…….Amanda was getting her period, one more reason for her to feel uncomfortable and moody, and she sent me out to buy tampons and a slice of pizza."

He sounds more like a personal attendant than a boyfriend! Buying her tampons after only 8 days? I hope she tipped him well.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Sollecito actually manages to slip in "Amanda, being Amanda" (FOA favorite saying) and and adaptation of Judge Hellman's flawed logic "two young people, open and friendly to others" in a single sentence explaining why she was turning cartwheels at the Questuera in the course of a murder investigation of her dear friend Meredith!

"Ivan Raffo, a young policeman who had come up from Rome, remarked how flexible she was. And Amanda, allowing herself to be charmed in the worst of all circumstances, decided to show him what she could do. It was a disastrous idea. When I first heard about what happened next, I understood that Amanda, being Amanda, was mostly interested in being open and friendly to the officer.

Way to keep it fresh!
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Reading these things about Sollecito and all the rest of them, makes me want to stick red hot pokers in my eye sockets and then fill them with molten lead, smash my knee with a 20 pound mallet, pull my toenails out with a blacksmith's tongs, shit on a brace of geese, cut the legs off a rare breed of Shetland ponies by the herd, cement a string of springbok to a pool filled with crocs, send elderly people love letters from their long dead first loves, all in all, the extremes to which their input inspires one, knows no bounds.

Other than this, I cannot at all fathom what in the world any of what they say means, can mean, will mean, in fact, all of it is meaningless and has absolutely no value whatsoever, they can say whatever they like, doesn't change the fact Knox and Sollecito are a pair of shameless liars who are concerned only with themselves, Sollecito showing us now, that means even to the destruction of his own disillusioned, ill-guided dad, dad was these things already once he started being deceitful too in order to try to save his son, by handing over that video, colluding with others to try to bend the law in Italy, but now he gets an extra helping of ice, you thought I was going to say cream eh? But no, just ice. What I'm saying is dad knew he shouldn't do what he did but he did it just the same, so that is his responsibility, however, if it had not been for this situation, the lies from his son, he'd never ever have done these things, it just shows a typically weak human being, human ways are like this so often, one can easily love family, any fool can, but to show greater love, the true mark of those who have mastered love, is something such a man cannot do, because he like so many others are incapable of the higher love we were all born to get to. It is no surprise, so many human beings act like he has, when it concerns family, because people identify with family, it is their all important thing, but they have not learned that greater love involves being able to love all people, in a universal, spiritual and enlightened way. It does not mean you simply turn a blind eye to their bad ways, it means that you make them face the music; love towards Knox would have meant making her face the music, did her family love her?

Answer; No, they were incapable of real love, they failed; themselves, her, society & if God exists, they failed its tests.

Allow me to take a dump on your old head dad, have I not caused you enough trouble?
No son, go ahead, be my guest much obliged n all, thank you even, for bending my old almost retired brain into taking on the ways of a lousy criminal, me a doctor, imagine that, yep, but because you are my son, you have been able to get me into these things, I should have known better, but as a human being with all of the human weaknesses, the one thing that I could not avoid... was family, nothing else would have swayed me from my path, yet family, the human weakness, has had me doing things I know I should never have done.

Yeah right sad, what did ya think of my performances in the Americas?

Son, if I ever could really tell a soul I'd say I am in fact ashamed but what can I do, you are in fact blackmailing me emotionally, but just how far will I go, when you have already made me look like the biggest village idiot, what with your wild accusations, your lies and your mental disturbances.

Do ya need any money son, any more?

Well, not for now dad, I earned some, this murder has been profitable.

Dad: I see. Yes son, for you maybe.

Son: Why don't you write your own book dad?


Imagine Sollecito returning now, after America, wouldn't dad have slapped his mother/papa screwing face?

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


Last edited by zorba on Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:05 am   Post subject: Re: REPLY TO THE FREE MEREDITH KERCHER FACEBOOK SITE   

Ergon wrote:
LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


Hello, Lyn Duncan, and thank you for replying. I was expecting someone to do so. I, too, am "one of the admins" of Perugia Murder Files, but I did not set it up, nor am I the owner of this site. So if you can confirm that you set up the page and not Karen Pruett or Shirley Anne Mathers, I withdraw their names, but retain the right to speculate on who the other 'admins' are. Elisabeth Huff? Did Chris Mellas set up the site ? Or Bruce Fischer? I have no intention of harassing them, or encouraging any one to do so.

Now that I have your attention, you are cyber harassing and taunting the family of Meredith Kercher. Inter spaced with all your New Age exhortations of 'love', you post numerous accounts of how the Kerchers are deluded, mistaken, led astray by their lawyer Francesco Maresca. Your site is the one that lifted copyrighted pictures of the young Meredith from John Kercher's book without permission and used it to promote a site dedicated, not to Meredith Kercher, but promoting the innocence of the two accused the family still believes responsible for their daughter and sister's murder. You post a picture of Raffaele Sollecito on his book tour posing beside a picture of Meredith, and don't appreciate how wrong that is, on so many levels? All the fake shrines and hallmark sentiments you post alongside do not disguise your true intent. The Kerchers are unable to defend themselves against such attacks. I am glad I had the opportunity to speak up in their defense.

Any further response from you will have to be on Tuesdays, thanks.


Ergon, I am well aware you did not set this site up and that for the time being, you are 2nd in command. I did see the Commander here a couple of times yesterday but he made no posts. Hope his computer issues are coming along.

You are welcome to speculate all you like on who admins the FMK page, but I can tell you that none of those you have put forward have anything to do with it. In the slightest! Oh, I do admit we use pieces from IIP as we find it is the only site that can see the truth, clearly. I find it hysterical that you believe Bruce Fischer even needs to have a facebook page on this particular case these days. Seems the crew at injusticeanywhere have many other worthwhile cases to check out.....Amanda and Raff are free so its all over bar the final champagne popping to come in March next year.

Now to come to the subjects that upset you so. Firstly, there is no taunting or cyber harrassing happening! Whether you like it or not, John Kerchers book ' Meredith' promotes discredited evidence and is full of untruths. It is really that simple. We point those discrepancies out so that anybody who visits the Meredith Kercher Book page can see and understand the truth. These issues are not discussed at the page for Meredith.

I find it a little rich that you use the term ' New Age' in such a derogatory manner given your habit of star gazing and crystal ball reading may be considered to fall into the same category. And do you not promote ' love' elsewhere??
We care very much about what happened to Meredith and honor her memory with respect. We also care very much about what the Kercher family has been through during these past 4 years and sadly, most of that pain has been inflicted by the Perugian Police and other authorites involved in the case. It goes without saying that we also care very much about 2 innocent young people who have lost 4 years of their lives so as to save face for a certain few people.

Now to the issue of copyright and the photos we have posted. You may need to mosey over to .org and take a look around their gallery. Every single photo we have used is also there so maybe you'd best let Peg know she is breaking ' your rules'. Now, I dont imagine John Kercher gave permission to post the pics in that gallery. I mean to say.....he didn't even mention the PMF sites in his book at all! Most of the pics we use have been taken off newspaper sites, which are in the public domain.

Re the photo of Meredith beside Raffaele an event in Seattle.....there has always been a photo of Meredith at any gathering of the Seattle supporters. I have this on very good authority. She is never forgotten, ever. So her photo will continue to grace any event that the good Seattle people attend in support of Amanda or Raffaele. And that is just as it should be, showing respect and honoring the life of a beautiful young woman who has touched our lives. It is a pity there is so little of that shown here or at .org. Sad actually.

I am sure I have overstayed my welcome so I will ban myself. Still......one of those cute banners on the bottom of my posts would look cool. If you've a mind. :D

Note
You have been BANNED!!
Reason: Disregarded warning
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yeah do that Duncan, drop dead.

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

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:14 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Napia5 wrote:
One more thing, while I'm on the subject of John Kercher, and, the rest of his family.
Does anyone think that John Kercher didn't spend some time considering the evidence, the facts, and try to look at the picture from the defense side of things? Wouldn't you think that he HAD viewed the evidence and the facts, looking for the possibility of corruption, of mistakes and mis-information? Wouldn't anyone, faced with information concerning the murder of their child, their sister, weigh ALL the information, follow ALL threads, before forming an opinion?
Does anyone believe that the family simply followed along blindly, with no opinion, no discussion at all of the possibility that the prosecution was mistaken? The kindest of the Groupies believe the Kerchers were duped.
Don't you think that John Kercher has already considered and discarded that possibility?



They are fully aware of those things Nap, but their central focus is to discredit anyone that opposes the stance, they do not care about what happened to Meredith, their central theme is aggression and violence, whether physical, mental or spiritual nothing is too much for them; this is why they ignore the violence carried out on Meredith and so not recognise their own violence when they abuse people at the mind level, where they're out doing all they do, putting energy into opposing everyone that doesn't agree with them. To go out of your way to twist facts, is an act of violence/aggression. To play games like this with Sollecito sat next to some pseudo shrine, using dead Meredith to do this, is so sick it's almost indescribable, this is aggression at the spiritual level, trying to trick people into thinking anyone there gives a hoot, and I bet Sollecito made sure he did not have to sit facing photographs of Meredith.
Sollecito says he was left out, who is he trying to kid, he was relieved people seemed to think Knox was more to blame.

First of all he said one thing then changed that, on several occasions, this is all documented and filed, but now, he continues, by trying to sound convincing when he now states she definitely was with Knox, and that though he had said she was to blame, said she was to blame if he was there (in trouble) it was her fault, as she lived for pleasured, and was not in contact with reality, now he is trying to have us believe him when he says, no, no, Knox was not to blame. A small child could do a better job of telling lies than he does.

They do not care that they walk over people in relation to Meredith's murder, don't care who they hurt, so this includes John because they, in the first place, do not give a shit about that happened to Meredith, so considering the aggression attached to being like that within the context of how terribly awful and unkind that is, to be like that, then it figures that they don't care about trying to blacken others, and then why should they care about her dad's feelings, this is how they are. All I know is, I've seen some of the most creepy types getting involved with their support Knox thing.

The bad of the case has appealed to those who are like-minded or else to simple-minded to actually understand the real case.



Zorba, I have very great pleasure in telling you that you are seriously in need of help, and not out of bottle!! Well maybe a small bottle...... ;) You need to put the big bottle down, it shows.

I send people here who have had doubts about the case...I have posted your theory on what happened to Meredith in so many places. Oh, and Ergons theory also. I cant begin to tell you how many laughs they have evoked. And how sad it is that you do not see the truth, it is as plain as the nose on your face.
But please keep it up, I would hate my source of amusement to run dry. Well just yet. Come March you wont have anything to fantasise about anyways.
:lol:
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Yeah do that Duncan, drop dead.



Now that is not nice! I would never stoop so low as to tell someone to ' drop dead'. And you do this all for ...whom...???

Keep it up Zorba!!!! n-(( lolol
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:44 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Drop dead,

that is all you deserve, you are despicable

and if you say you are banning yourself why not keep your word?

Don't write anything more here please, murderers and supporters of murderers not welcome

_________________
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 Oct 02, 2012 1:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Duncan thinks anyone gives a shit about what she/he/it thinks!

God I have other things to think about.

Sounds like a sister of Michelle sings if you ask me.

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

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:01 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

zorba wrote:
Drop dead,

that is all you deserve, you are despicable

and if you say you are banning yourself why not keep your word?

Don't write anything more here please, murderers and supporters of murderers not welcome


Oh but therein lies the problem Zorba, I beg to differ. Amanda and Raffaele are no more murderers than I. One day it will all become clear to you, fog eventually lifts and truth always wins.
Always.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Hey our Duncan murderer supporter, says one thing then does another.

I wish he/she/it would keep to the things he/she /it said, like I will ban myself and not post.

I do hope that you too suffer the same as Meredith's parent have, dear Duncan, then perhaps you might understand how gross you and people like you are, you are entirely uncaring, insensitive and cruel, and not least of all plain dishonest, so please just keep your word, stop posting and f off. I have no idea who you are but you come across like a child in kindergarten.

_________________
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 Oct 02, 2012 2:15 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Lyn I wandered over to your unfortunate page a while back. You had no patience for poster who brought up the H.O.T video. Deviate from the script of your page and the horns come out. I notice you didn't chastise Karen who thought the video was great. No one is fooled, you have a very nasty approach when you use the Kercher's in your message. Stop using their photos when you know they would not agree, it is obvious you see them as the enemy.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:24 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Goodbye, LynDuncan. Light a couple more scented candles in your FB sanctuary and reunite with your FB pals. Nobody invited you here. If you don't like something, stay away. Or show evidence of Knox and Sollecito's innocence.
Top Profile 

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
Goodbye, LynDuncan. Lit a couple more scented candles at your FB page and reunite with your FB pals. Nobody invited you here. If you don't like something, stay away. Or show evidence of Knox and Sollecito's innocence.



Not true actually, Ergon invited me. As far as showing you evidence of innocence, it has been shown over and over and over. You just cant see it. And thats cool, not everyone is wired the same.

Note
You have been BANNED!!
Reason: I invited someone to come over and say who's responsible for the FB page. It appears, that a lot of you are, including Karen Pruett. I'll post on this tomorrow.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline LynDuncan

Banned


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:51 am

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:37 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

malvern wrote:
Lyn I wandered over to your unfortunate page a while back. You had no patience for poster who brought up the H.O.T video. Deviate from the script of your page and the horns come out. I notice you didn't chastise Karen who thought the video was great. No one is fooled, you have a very nasty approach when you use the Kercher's in your message. Stop using their photos when you know they would not agree, it is obvious you see them as the enemy.


Malvern, you are quite entitled to your opinion of the FB page.
Deviate from the script??? LMAO!!!!! Have you not noticed that anyone deviating from YOUR script here is swiftly dispatched?? Of course I will be banned, and probably for good reason but many others have given sensible calm debate only to be banished.
So please, dont tell me about deviating from a script.

ETA: Re the H.O.T video that Amanda never sanctioned.....as far as I recall the only people who may seen our ' horns' were those who insisted it was all Amandas doing. It was not. You really need to research better. Go to IIP. They have all the facts, the correct ones.

Note
You have been BANNED!!
Reason: 3rd Ban. Now YOU hold the record for the most bans :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:53 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Lyn Duncan has been banned for just cause. She didn't come to debate, just make a point, and leave. Pity, since I was hoping for a dialogue about her FB page, but I guess she isn't interested.

I go away for a little while, and there it is, the FOA equivalent of a drive-by shooting. I'll respond to her tomorrow, thanks.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I would never go to site that endorses your FB page. Voice your opinion about your belief in their innocence all you want, but the use of the Kercher's photos is unforgivable. The fact that you don't get that only undermines your credibility with this case and shows your determined nastiness towards the family.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Yes you do get some nutters hanging around

Me, I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire

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

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:01 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Lyn the LDS church has resumed baptizing dead Jews into the Mormon faith. What do you think about that? It reminds me of what you attempt to do with Meredith's memory.


Last edited by louiehaha on Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:08 am, edited 2 times in total.
Top Profile 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

It greatly does disturb me, people like this one, as I feel their aggression, feel it because they are like people selling a product, if I want to buy a second-hand car I will look in the ads sections of the papers I know but I don't need or want to buy ANYTHING, I wish they'd drop their purple oversized ties and shut up pushing crap like car sales people do.

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

LynDuncan wrote:
zorba wrote:
Yeah do that Duncan, drop dead.



Now that is not nice! I would never stoop so low as to tell someone to ' drop dead'. And you do this all for ...whom...???

Keep it up Zorba!!!! n-(( lolol


We think that what YOU do is worse, LynDuncan. I guess we're wired differently then?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

malvern wrote:
I would never go to site that endorses your FB page. Voice your opinion about your belief in their innocence all you want, but the use of the Kercher's photos is unforgivable. The fact that you don't get that only undermines your credibility with this case and shows your determined nastiness towards the family.



This is exactly what I think but I'm afraid I have absolutely no patience with such people or desire to try to talk sense with them, for one thing, doing such things as plodding Sollecito down next to that pseudo shrine using the images of Meredith is lower than low, it's unforgivable, even if these two were innocent, you don't do such a thing, it's purely insensitive and disrespectful and if you have a true case/point to make, you don't need to carry out such low actions.

If Sollecito had a case to make, he would never need to use such low tactics.

_________________
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 Oct 02, 2012 3:34 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Meredith, who cannot speak for herself. and has been reduced to dust,

we here, with hearts, love you, and we love all of your family and friends, god bless you all.

Imagine Meredith unable to speak, unable to say what happened to her but looking at us, never mind about haters such as this one just now, the truth will come out, personally I will pursue the truth in this matter up until the day I die, I owe it to Meredith because it could be me you or anyone and if she could speak she'd say please help me, please, I cannot help myself.

If I myself am defined as a hater in relation to this, then good, because what I hate is liars and murderers. Yes I hate them

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:37 am   Post subject: LOOKS KINDA LONESOME DOWN THERE   

So I went to the Indigo book store, the flagship at Yonge and Bloor, on Sept. 18. There's just one of these books on the shelf, down by the floor. The computer says there's 8 copies in the store. I go back again today, almost two weeks later, and there's still the one book, and still 8 copies in the whole store.

I guess we Canadians don't like murderers that write books, except for a few in B.C. across the border from Seattle I guess.


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:40 am   Post subject: Re: LOOKS KINDA LONESOME DOWN THERE   

Ergon wrote:
So I went to the Indigo book store, the flagship at Yonge and Bloor, on Sept. 18. There's just one of these books on the shelf, down by the floor. The computer says there's 8 copies in the store. I go back again today, almost two weeks later, and there's still the one book, and still 8 copies in the whole store.

I guess we Canadians don't like murderers that write books, except for a few in B.C. across the border from Seattle I guess.



Aha, that's rich, maybe someone needs to tell Sollecito that if he can write a Mein Kampf he may do better if he can, in some way, force everyone to read it!

_________________
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 Oct 02, 2012 3:42 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

I tell you what Ergon, I was really glad you showed up as such individuals love to run riot.

_________________
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: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Thanks Louie for the excerpts from Gumbel/Sollecito book; actually, it's more Gumbel than Sollecito. Also, there are whole passages that Gumbel has "borrowed" from Dempsey's Murder in Italy, i.e. her material (the results of her "research"), all rearranged into a new pattern, but the source of the content is still clearly recognizable. I don't understand why someone who uses material written by other writers can even go ahead and publish this patchwork of a book.

Compare these two passages from Gumbel and Dempsey's books; they are almost identical in structure, language, etc

Attachment:
Honor Bound p. 25.JPG


Attachment:
Honor Bound p. 26.JPG


Similar passage in Dempsey's Murder in Italy:

Murder in Italy


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Gumbel: Shortly after breakfast on November 2, Alessandro stepped outside to talk to his girlfriend on the phone and noticed a Motorola flip phone lying facedown on a lawn about sixty feet from the wall separating the property from the street.

Dempsey: He (Alessandro) strolled around the half-acre garden, enjoying the crisp morning air and talking on the phone. Around 9 A.M. an object caught his eye. He stopped to look. He saw a light-colored Motorola, flipped over, its keyboard resting on the ground. It was in the middle of the lawn, less than sixty feet from the wooded Via Andrea da Perugia, which wound uphill from the cottage.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:50 am   Post subject: Re: LOOKS KINDA LONESOME DOWN THERE   

Ergon wrote:
So I went to the Indigo book store, the flagship at Yonge and Bloor, on Sept. 18. There's just one of these books on the shelf, down by the floor. The computer says there's 8 copies in the store. I go back again today, almost two weeks later, and there's still the one book, and still 8 copies in the whole store.

I guess we Canadians don't like murderers that write books, except for a few in B.C. across the border from Seattle I guess.


I think I've solved the Canadian mystery, Ergon. It's not the dislike for murderers, it's elevators.
Yes, it's true. See the link.
http://www.neii.org/presskit/printmaste ... 0Facts.cfm

The NEII states that there are 900,000 elevators in the US and, only 100,000 in Canada.
This gives the average Canadian 9 times less opportunity than an American like Jane Velez Mitchell
to ride in an elevator with Sollecito, thus insuring instant belief in his adorable-ness, and a 30 second lesson in his complete honesty.

Sadly, Canadians are not smarter, they are simply elevator-deprived. tou-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4882

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Gumbel: A few minutes later, while Elisabetta was still out shopping, she received a call from her son announcing that a second phone had just been found in the garden. Elisabetta's daughter, Fiammetta, and the maid heard it ringing in the underbrush about twenty feet from the property line. By the time they retrieved it, the ringing had stopped.
It was a Sony Ericsson, Meredith's British phone. They brought it into the house, and a couple of minutes later, it rang again. Alessandro looked at the display, which flashed up the name Amanda.

Dempsey: Suddenly the two women heard a ringing noise, coming from somewhere off in the shrubbery. Fiametta followed the sound and started poking around in the bushes with a spade. Incredibly, she found another cell phone under dead leaves and brambles, less than twenty feet from Via Andrea da Perugia. Fiametta stared at the tiny phone, a gray and black Sony Ericsson, later determined to be British. By the time she reached it, it had stopped ringing. She brought it into the house and asked Alessandro to take a look.
It rang again. He checked the display.
"AMANDA", it said.

Etc.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 5:05 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
Gumbel: A few minutes later, while Elisabetta was still out shopping, she received a call from her son announcing that a second phone had just been found in the garden. Elisabetta's daughter, Fiammetta, and the maid heard it ringing in the underbrush about twenty feet from the property line. By the time they retrieved it, the ringing had stopped.
It was a Sony Ericsson, Meredith's British phone. They brought it into the house, and a couple of minutes later, it rang again. Alessandro looked at the display, which flashed up the name Amanda.

Dempsey: Suddenly the two women heard a ringing noise, coming from somewhere off in the shrubbery. Fiametta followed the sound and started poking around in the bushes with a spade. Incredibly, she found another cell phone under dead leaves and brambles, less than twenty feet from Via Andrea da Perugia. Fiametta stared at the tiny phone, a gray and black Sony Ericsson, later determined to be British. By the time she reached it, it had stopped ringing. She brought it into the house and asked Alessandro to take a look.
It rang again. He checked the display.
"AMANDA", it said.


This section is too close to be coincidence, IMO, Guermantes. Get the aspirin ready. Reading ONE of these books is enough to give you a headache, reading TWO of them in order to make comparisons is bound to produce a major pain somehere on your person.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Dempsey really tries to come across as some kind of great writer, with her details, but in doing so she shows only how dense she is, after all, just adding shit for the sake of it is in no way the mark of a good writer, the subject matter and how you get that across is the important thing, she hangs all of these silly little ornaments of irrelevant crap on stuff, like TINY LITTLE PHONE,

Mentions the colour of the phone like that has anything whatsoever in the world to do with anything at all, all as it means is she is trying out her creative writing exercises that she spent so many hours in evening classes trying to get good at, yet no matter what study or what extra classes she took, she never made it, anywhere, or else she'd have better things to do.

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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Here, Sollecito explains why they staged the break-in in Filomena's room:

In the upstairs apartment, Filomena took responsibility for gathering everyone’s cash and handing it over to the landlady. And it was Filomena’s bedroom window that would soon be smashed with a large rock—

Guede would know this? No. But he and Knox would.

If someone could explain to me, why a burglar would believe there to be CASH lying around because it was the first of the month and rent was due, I'd appreciate it. If rent were due on the first, the expectation would be that rent had already been paid. I think I read that their rent was due on the fifth, and that doesn't explain why a burglar would break in on the first for the rent money either. thanks.


There ya go. They both knew about the rent money collection (which AK hadn't put in her part yet) and they BOTH likely knew of RG's prior problems with the law. News like that spreads like wildfire around a group of students/people. The argument with groupies about a burglar knowing that the rent would have been laying around an empty cottage is hilarious... but they WILL try it on occasion. Interesting too is RG mentioning immediately a 'money' issue as the cause of a confrontation between AK and Meredith. His 'drugged up tart' comment certainly may be spot on too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Another thing: Knox's period. I know this is an impolite topic but that doesn't stop Edda, Knox, and Sollecito from speaking about it. It's so impolite I think it might be used as a diversionary tactic by them. Anyway, we know Knox's period has been used to explain why she was bleeding in the cottage on November 1st and it was used to explain why suddenly two days after the murder on November 3, Knox had an urgent need to purchase a $100 g-string and camisole set at the precise moment students were gathering to mourn Meredith's murder.

FORGET ALL THAT!

Sollecito claims in his book that Knox started getting her period on November 4, that she sent him out to fetch tampons and a slice of pizza for her, and that she was moody!

"As the days went by— it was now Sunday, November 4…….Amanda was getting her period, one more reason for her to feel uncomfortable and moody, and she sent me out to buy tampons and a slice of pizza."

He sounds more like a personal attendant than a boyfriend! Buying her tampons after only 8 days? I hope she tipped him well.


I thought the blood in the bathroom was speculated by AK to maybe be Meredith's period... not her own. She thought maybe it was from her own ear tho.
And regarding the bloomers... her reasoning was that she could not get back into the cottage for her own.

Yeah... she had him on a leash it seems. Most guys would have likely said 'go get your own' IMO. So she was going to stay at his apt while he went out for her tampons and pizza? What a honor bound lap dog. Wonder if he went to Q's shop???
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 6:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

dgfred wrote:
louiehaha wrote:
Another thing: Knox's period. I know this is an impolite topic but that doesn't stop Edda, Knox, and Sollecito from speaking about it. It's so impolite I think it might be used as a diversionary tactic by them. Anyway, we know Knox's period has been used to explain why she was bleeding in the cottage on November 1st and it was used to explain why suddenly two days after the murder on November 3, Knox had an urgent need to purchase a $100 g-string and camisole set at the precise moment students were gathering to mourn Meredith's murder.

FORGET ALL THAT!

Sollecito claims in his book that Knox started getting her period on November 4, that she sent him out to fetch tampons and a slice of pizza for her, and that she was moody!

"As the days went by— it was now Sunday, November 4…….Amanda was getting her period, one more reason for her to feel uncomfortable and moody, and she sent me out to buy tampons and a slice of pizza."

He sounds more like a personal attendant than a boyfriend! Buying her tampons after only 8 days? I hope she tipped him well.


I thought the blood in the bathroom was speculated by AK to maybe be Meredith's period... not her own. She thought maybe it was from her own ear tho.
And regarding the bloomers... her reasoning was that she could not get back into the cottage for her own.

Yeah... she had him on a leash it seems. Most guys would have likely said 'go get your own' IMO. So she was going to stay at his apt while he went out for her tampons and pizza? What a honor bound lap dog. Wonder if he went to Q's shop???



Nothing Sollecito says is true.

_________________
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 Oct 02, 2012 6:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Wouldn't it be great if Sollecito's dad shaped up, as a result of seeing what his son really is into, and cracks, wanting to put things right!

If Sollecito is going to place dad in really difficult situations that removed any shred of decency or the idea of it from dear old dad, then dear old dad may well get sick of it in the end, though I'm not being realistic to even imagine this, it is wishful thinking, but if dad did come clean, his reputation would be restored, in fact, the ony way to restore his name is to come clean. I do not think he has a good reputation in Italy anymore.

His son is a waster, does he not care for his daughter, that he has allowed her to allow herself to be pulled in, because I reckon her name isn't worth much in Italy at the moment either, and what did her little brother do, well he used her too to try and convince people with his book. If the book had any value and had any truth in it, then people would have seen that themselves without any help or goading, made up their own minds, all of these appearances for the book makes him look even worse than he already did.

Well, I pray that the appeal gets overturned and that the original sentence is confirmed, my how brave Sollecito will be then, how honourable he will be, towards Knox, if she is in the states and he is on his cell bunk with no way of getting out for the next 25 years, I reckon he'll start singing a different tune, and it won't be music to Knox's ears

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

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

dgfred wrote:
louiehaha wrote:
Another thing: Knox's period. I know this is an impolite topic but that doesn't stop Edda, Knox, and Sollecito from speaking about it. It's so impolite I think it might be used as a diversionary tactic by them. Anyway, we know Knox's period has been used to explain why she was bleeding in the cottage on November 1st and it was used to explain why suddenly two days after the murder on November 3, Knox had an urgent need to purchase a $100 g-string and camisole set at the precise moment students were gathering to mourn Meredith's murder.

FORGET ALL THAT!

Sollecito claims in his book that Knox started getting her period on November 4, that she sent him out to fetch tampons and a slice of pizza for her, and that she was moody!

"As the days went by— it was now Sunday, November 4…….Amanda was getting her period, one more reason for her to feel uncomfortable and moody, and she sent me out to buy tampons and a slice of pizza."

He sounds more like a personal attendant than a boyfriend! Buying her tampons after only 8 days? I hope she tipped him well.


I thought the blood in the bathroom was speculated by AK to maybe be Meredith's period... not her own. She thought maybe it was from her own ear tho.
And regarding the bloomers... her reasoning was that she could not get back into the cottage for her own.

Yeah... she had him on a leash it seems. Most guys would have likely said 'go get your own' IMO. So she was going to stay at his apt while he went out for her tampons and pizza? What a honor bound lap dog. Wonder if he went to Q's shop???


Additionally, Knox’s (fake) period made its way into both topics. Now we know the tale of her having her period on Nov 1 and Nov 3 to be false. It's clear there is nothing that can embarrass this clan; Edda herself took to television talking about her daughter's period and now we find out this was pure bs.

When the blood/DNA was identified as belonging to Knox, both her period and her Oct 2 cartilage peircings were offered as possible sources by her defense:

Quote:
The significance of the mixed DNA was not explained in court, but in past reports the prosecution has theorized that Knox used that bathroom to wash-up after the murder, and due to a nose-bleed or some other injury, her blood mixed with that of the victim.
Knox's defense, however, has mentioned the possibility that it could be menstrual blood or blood from Knox's ear, which she had recently pierced. Knox had taken a shower in that bathroom the morning after the murder, before Kercher's murder had been discovered.”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/sto ... Gsc5FHF085


Amanda’s period has been in the dialog about her “underwear” purchase as well as the cottage being designated a crime scene.

Quote:
WHEN THE POLICE SENT them home early Saturday evening, Amanda and Raffaele went shopping. Amanda needed some clean underwear. She had her period and was still wearing the clothes she’d put on the morning before Meredith’s body was found.

Burleigh, Nina (2011-08-02). The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox (p. 181). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

guermantes wrote:
Thanks Louie for the excerpts from Gumbel/Sollecito book; actually, it's more Gumbel than Sollecito. Also, there are whole passages that Gumbel has "borrowed" from Dempsey's Murder in Italy, i.e. her material (the results of her "research"), all rearranged into a new pattern, but the source of the content is still clearly recognizable. I don't understand why someone who uses material written by other writers can even go ahead and publish this patchwork of a book.


Well Mr. Gumbel didn't pay close attention to all of Dempsey's book. In promoting the "two lovebirds nesting" seems he overlooked this:

Later, Amanda explained in court that Juve came over to listen to her play guitar since the only instruments she had access to belonged to Laura and couldn’t be taken out of the house.

Dempsey, Candace (2010-04-27). Murder in Italy: The Shocking Slaying of a British Student, the Accused American Girl, and anInternational Scandal (p. 114). Penguin Group. Kindle Edition.

Knox did testify to this:
Then, once, there was Spiros, who
wanted to hear me play the guitar. I told him that I couldn't
take Laura's guitar out of the house
, so I invited him over. ~Massei
(Seems Candace got the fellows mixed up.)

But Gumbel & Sollecito say this anyway:
"Back in Perugia, we settled into long, carefree evenings watching movies and listening to music. Sometimes I’d work on my thesis, while Amanda strummed her guitar and sang Beatles songs or did her yoga stretches on the floor. We made elaborate dinners."

*****

I get the feeling he didn't know her at all and just grabbed this out of some FOA manifesto.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Here, he says he and Amanda both switched off their cell phones. His dad hired a consultant to try to convince the court he left his cell phone on all night IIRC.

"In the meantime, Jovana dropped by again and told Amanda that I didn’t need to drive her to the bus station after all. Now we didn’t have to leave the apartment. The evening was ours, and we couldn’t have been happier. We switched off our cell phones, finished watching Amélie, and discussed what to make for dinner"

Wonder if Papa has read this?
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Remember how Knox had NO MEMORY of texting a response to Patrick?

According to Sollecito, they PAUSED THEIR MOVIE so Amanda could reply to the text! Well I don't know anyone who would have to pause a movie to type a short text message, but if they had paused the movie for the purpose of replying to a text, how could Knox have forgotten she replied???

"When she left, Amanda and I sat down at the computer to watch a favorite movie, Amélie. We had to stop the film a few times as the evening wore on. First, Amanda got a text from Patrick telling her it was a slow night because of the holiday and he didn’t need her to come in after all. It was like getting an unexpected snow day— we were thrilled. Amanda texted back: Certo ci vediamo più tardi buona serata! Sure. See you later. Have a good evening."
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
dgfred wrote:
louiehaha wrote:
Another thing: Knox's period. I know this is an impolite topic but that doesn't stop Edda, Knox, and Sollecito from speaking about it. It's so impolite I think it might be used as a diversionary tactic by them. Anyway, we know Knox's period has been used to explain why she was bleeding in the cottage on November 1st and it was used to explain why suddenly two days after the murder on November 3, Knox had an urgent need to purchase a $100 g-string and camisole set at the precise moment students were gathering to mourn Meredith's murder.

FORGET ALL THAT!

Sollecito claims in his book that Knox started getting her period on November 4, that she sent him out to fetch tampons and a slice of pizza for her, and that she was moody!

"As the days went by— it was now Sunday, November 4…….Amanda was getting her period, one more reason for her to feel uncomfortable and moody, and she sent me out to buy tampons and a slice of pizza."

He sounds more like a personal attendant than a boyfriend! Buying her tampons after only 8 days? I hope she tipped him well.


I thought the blood in the bathroom was speculated by AK to maybe be Meredith's period... not her own. She thought maybe it was from her own ear tho.
And regarding the bloomers... her reasoning was that she could not get back into the cottage for her own.

Yeah... she had him on a leash it seems. Most guys would have likely said 'go get your own' IMO. So she was going to stay at his apt while he went out for her tampons and pizza? What a honor bound lap dog. Wonder if he went to Q's shop???


Additionally, Knox’s (fake) period made its way into both topics. Now we know the tale of her having her period on Nov 1 and Nov 3 to be false. It's clear there is nothing that can embarrass this clan; Edda herself took to television talking about her daughter's period and now we find out this was pure bs.

When the blood/DNA was identified as belonging to Knox, both her period and her Oct 2 cartilage peircings were offered as possible sources by her defense:

Quote:
The significance of the mixed DNA was not explained in court, but in past reports the prosecution has theorized that Knox used that bathroom to wash-up after the murder, and due to a nose-bleed or some other injury, her blood mixed with that of the victim.
Knox's defense, however, has mentioned the possibility that it could be menstrual blood or blood from Knox's ear, which she had recently pierced. Knox had taken a shower in that bathroom the morning after the murder, before Kercher's murder had been discovered.”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/sto ... Gsc5FHF085


Amanda’s period has been in the dialog about her “underwear” purchase as well as the cottage being designated a crime scene.

Quote:
WHEN THE POLICE SENT them home early Saturday evening, Amanda and Raffaele went shopping. Amanda needed some clean underwear. She had her period and was still wearing the clothes she’d put on the morning before Meredith’s body was found.

Burleigh, Nina (2011-08-02). The Fatal Gift of Beauty: The Trials of Amanda Knox (p. 181). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.



Hey louie.
I am not arguing with you but both those examples are someone else writing what they interpreted AK saying. I don't believe she ever said it could have been her menstrual blood.
If the defense said it... it was because they knew it was her blood dna mixed with Meredith's blood dna and not just by accident. Thanks for the quotes and information.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

This overjoyed, because Knox didn't need to go in to work for Patrick means the opposite, Knox was pissed off and interpreted it as Meredith muscling in on her job.

That's why Sollecito mentions it that way, I mean, how/why would you be overjoyed about such a thing, by all accounts all as she did was talk & flirt and not work.

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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7192

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:47 pm   Post subject: Re: REPLY TO THE FREE MEREDITH KERCHER FACEBOOK SITE   

LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
LynDuncan wrote:
Ergon wrote:
- Since E-Book sales are depressed anyways, you can be # 25 at the NY Times list and still sell only ten units. Big whoopie doo. My argument is with Bruce Fischer, who says the Novel Rank figures aren't correct. Here's a challenge, Bruce. Tell us your book sales (since you're the only one outside of your publisher that would know) and we'll match them against the Novel Rank figures. Till then, we'll say your book's a flop.
-Likewise, a challenge to Sharlene Martin. Do tell us how many actual books and e-books Raffaele Sollecito sold.
-Yes, Sharlene does post on those sites, louiehaha. The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.


Ergon, I am one of the admins at the Free Meredith Kercher facebook page and can categorically state that Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Parker Pruett are not. I will say though, their input is valued and respected. I am pretty sure that both Karen and Shirley have no intention of signing up here to come tell you their status at that page so you will need to take my word for it. :) BTW, the name I use here is...surprise surprise! My real name. I would appreciate you quantifying your statement re ' worst of the cyberbullying sites' if you are able. Just who are we bullying there please?
Thanks for your time and accepting an out of FOAKER Tuesday comment. Well...thats assuming you do. ;)


Hello, Lyn Duncan, and thank you for replying. I was expecting someone to do so. I, too, am "one of the admins" of Perugia Murder Files, but I did not set it up, nor am I the owner of this site. So if you can confirm that you set up the page and not Karen Pruett or Shirley Anne Mathers, I withdraw their names, but retain the right to speculate on who the other 'admins' are. Elisabeth Huff? Did Chris Mellas set up the site ? Or Bruce Fischer? I have no intention of harassing them, or encouraging any one to do so.

Now that I have your attention, you are cyber harassing and taunting the family of Meredith Kercher. Inter spaced with all your New Age exhortations of 'love', you post numerous accounts of how the Kerchers are deluded, mistaken, led astray by their lawyer Francesco Maresca. Your site is the one that lifted copyrighted pictures of the young Meredith from John Kercher's book without permission and used it to promote a site dedicated, not to Meredith Kercher, but promoting the innocence of the two accused the family still believes responsible for their daughter and sister's murder. You post a picture of Raffaele Sollecito on his book tour posing beside a picture of Meredith, and don't appreciate how wrong that is, on so many levels? All the fake shrines and hallmark sentiments you post alongside do not disguise your true intent. The Kerchers are unable to defend themselves against such attacks. I am glad I had the opportunity to speak up in their defense.

Any further response from you will have to be on Tuesdays, thanks.


Ergon, I am well aware you did not set this site up and that for the time being, you are 2nd in command. I did see the Commander here a couple of times yesterday but he made no posts. Hope his computer issues are coming along.

You are welcome to speculate all you like on who admins the FMK page, but I can tell you that none of those you have put forward have anything to do with it. In the slightest! Oh, I do admit we use pieces from IIP as we find it is the only site that can see the truth, clearly. I find it hysterical that you believe Bruce Fischer even needs to have a facebook page on this particular case these days. Seems the crew at injusticeanywhere have many other worthwhile cases to check out.....Amanda and Raff are free so its all over bar the final champagne popping to come in March next year.

Now to come to the subjects that upset you so. Firstly, there is no taunting or cyber harrassing happening! Whether you like it or not, John Kerchers book ' Meredith' promotes discredited evidence and is full of untruths. It is really that simple. We point those discrepancies out so that anybody who visits the Meredith Kercher Book page can see and understand the truth. These issues are not discussed at the page for Meredith.

I find it a little rich that you use the term ' New Age' in such a derogatory manner given your habit of star gazing and crystal ball reading may be considered to fall into the same category. And do you not promote ' love' elsewhere??
We care very much about what happened to Meredith and honor her memory with respect. We also care very much about what the Kercher family has been through during these past 4 years and sadly, most of that pain has been inflicted by the Perugian Police and other authorites involved in the case. It goes without saying that we also care very much about 2 innocent young people who have lost 4 years of their lives so as to save face for a certain few people.

Now to the issue of copyright and the photos we have posted. You may need to mosey over to .org and take a look around their gallery. Every single photo we have used is also there so maybe you'd best let Peg know she is breaking ' your rules'. Now, I dont imagine John Kercher gave permission to post the pics in that gallery. I mean to say.....he didn't even mention the PMF sites in his book at all! Most of the pics we use have been taken off newspaper sites, which are in the public domain.

Re the photo of Meredith beside Raffaele an event in Seattle.....there has always been a photo of Meredith at any gathering of the Seattle supporters. I have this on very good authority. She is never forgotten, ever. So her photo will continue to grace any event that the good Seattle people attend in support of Amanda or Raffaele. And that is just as it should be, showing respect and honoring the life of a beautiful young woman who has touched our lives. It is a pity there is so little of that shown here or at .org. Sad actually.

I am sure I have overstayed my welcome so I will ban myself. Still......one of those cute banners on the bottom of my posts would look cool. If you've a mind. :D

Note
You have been BANNED!!
Reason: Disregarded warning


This is a typical example of why I consider the FOA to be dishonest debaters. Lyn Duncan can't even answer specific questions or statements honestly.

As I pointed out, being admin of a site does not mean that I run or own it. Since the Bruces have been saying that of me ever since I became a moderator, based on my numerous contributions alone, then I think it's fair that I say that of Shirley Anne Mather or Karen Pruett. They're the primary contributors to that page, yes or no? Karen admits it, the person who posts anonymously as "Free Meredith Kercher" will unless they come forward, be one of the posters on IIP, too cowardly to sign their name to an offensive website. You and your friends have been hectoring the Kerchers before the 'High Court ruling' came out, and I am not referring to FMK, but the site you are all a part of, IIP. FMK is just your cut off for the truly awful site. I trust ordinary people, and not you, to see the parallels between you and OJ Simpson's "If I Did It" and would be offended and see how offensive it would be to the Brown and Goldman families if he had set up a "Free Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goodman" website. That YOU don't see that makes you morally, beyond the pale.

This is what I find offensive. You take a murder victim's name and picture, then offer to set her family 'right' on your interpretation of the case? Can you even look at yourself in the mirror and say that is right in any way? Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito truly attract like minded narcissists:

Quote:
KayPea Post subject: Re: Today over at PMF Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:12 pm

Location: Seattle WA
Quote:
Ergon:
The worst of the cyberbullying sites (I haven't seen her there) is Free Meredith Kercher, run by Shirley Anne Mather and Karen Pruett. If they want to deny that's their site, they can come here and say so.

OFFICIAL IIP MEMO

TO Ergon
FROM Karen
SUBJECT OH for heaven's sake!

Free Meredith Kercher is run by several friends. Lyn Duncan (hey Lyn! ) introduced herself to you and she is correct, I am not an admin at FMK. Miss Shirley is the admin of Free Raffaele Sollecito, I do not admin anything other than my own profile. Far too busy.

The point of all the "Free....." pages has become to Free Meredith from Haters and Free Amanda and Raffaele's Reputations. Each page is an avenue to pertinent information and a safe haven from hate for Defense Supporters. Certainly we all deserve that luxury.

I fully support what Free Meredith Kercher is doing and what they are all about and find it truly laughable that you, of all people, would call that page a "cyberbully," when it's clear that no bullying goes on at all.

EXCEPT for keeping the haters from taking over the page, of course.

The admins wisely decided early on that no known bullies would be allowed simply because they, and all of us, have already experienced your form of "debate." What was the point of starting another page and then allowing the same old crap??

I LOVED THE IDEA!!

I collaborated with them in the beginning as we all had the same vision: a page where all of the Defense Supporters could pay homage to Miss Meredith without fear of reprisal and the hate that is regularly focused on us. In fact, THAT is precisely how the name Free Meredith Kercher came about. We ALL wanted to free her from hate and that is why you are ALL banned. It's impossible for any of you to behave civilly.

I regularly contribute to FMK and have since it's inception, I literally emptied my files onto the page in the beginning, one of many who helped to give it life.

And Freeing Meredith from Hate is a paramount interest to me. Personally I am sick and tired of all the hating, the Kerchers certainly don't deserve it. And neither do my friends. Honestly, how could anyone deny a grieving family sympathy? Such cruel and selfish behavior is beyond me.

All you little bitches make me sick.

And your whole argument over Meredith's pictures being unauthorized on that page is such a joke. What about myself along with several members of IIP and the Knox and Sollecito families? We never gave you permission to post our pictures and personal information on your sites.

NEVER.

No, your whole argument of dogging my friends and I has been wrapped around 'freedom of the press,' so back at'cha. Those pix are all public and you know it, just more smoke and mirrors on your part. One more Myth for the list.

So take your petty little challenge and go back to the Brat Pack and bitch about me. I simply don't care. I'm not "coming over" because I don't like stepping in dog poo and I'm well aware that this an effective way to send messages back and forth.

And for those of you who have not yet visited Free Meredith Kercher or wonder what it's all about, please pay a visit.

https://www.facebook.com/FreeMeredithKercher

The idea evolved as a safe place for supporters to leave a message for Meredith and her family, since certain haters would dog us at the other Meredith Memorial pages. On FMK there is a link to a site to light candles and any case discussion needs to be Meredith-centric and not too gory. There are no autopsy photos allowed. All who contribute keep in mind that her family may one day read it, perhaps they already have, and we want them to find kindness and succinct information there. We want to help them find the truth.

FMK is also trying, valiantly, to foster a civil relationship with the guilters and so discussion is allowed, but once convos go off the cliff they are deleted and the bully is banned. This is actually what Ergon means by the admins being "cyberbullies." The admins are not bullies, they just don't put up with crap. Oh how I LOVE that!!

My hat is off to the FMK admins and they know full well that I love them. Keep up the good work peeps!


So there you have it. The same group that posts at Bruce Fischer's website runs, keeps running, and have contributed to "Free Meredith Kercher" wants to engage in sophistry about who is or is not an "admin". Thanks for confirming that Shirley Anne Mather is the admin for "Free Raffaele Sollecito" which we haven't even looked at or care about, unless it has appropriated Meredith Kercher's image in any way.

These are the people, who apparently, cannot see the difference between stealing a copyrighted image and using a photo pulled from a public site. They lovingly quote from a plagiarised book, and threaten to report us because someone joking talked about downloading a bittorrent movie which is what Raffaele did?

They also suggest we complain to .ORG because "they used the same images" and suggest that since John Kercher didn't thank us in his book, we do not have his permission either? Horsepoop. You already tell us that he and his family post here and all over the internet under assumed names but don't like it when we hold the Knox and Sollecito entourages culpable for the abuses and bullying of your many sock sites. Just don't presume to tell us what permissions we hold or do not hold.

Nor do we care to post on FMK, but if Karen For Hair has nothing to do with 'your' site, then who's she to tell us we're ALL banned?

Yes, I do talk of love, elsewhere. I also talk about karma and personal responsibility.

You state "We point those discrepancies out so that anybody who visits the Meredith Kercher Book page can see and understand the truth. These issues are not discussed at the page for Meredith." which is just one of many examples of your dishonesty.

For example, "Free Meredith Kercher" wrote:

"The 47 Stab Wounds Myth"
"One of the crueler fables centers on Meredith's autopsy in which there are over 40 abrasions and bruises in addition to the three knife wounds. Of the three only the stab wound on the left side of her neck was fatal,...See More
Injustice in Perugia: the Wrongful Conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito: AMANDA AND RAFFAE
injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com
A blog featuring independent articles on the case. For a comprehensive analysis of this case please visit http://www.injusticeinperugia.org"

And this:

Free Meredith Kercher shared a link.
July 10
"So, recapitulating, Meredith is killed at 23.35 and Knox and Sollecito have to leave the cottage at 23.55: they have twenty minutes to wash themselves, dress themselves, stage the burglary, go back to Meredith’s room, cover her with the...."

And this:

"Free Meredith Kercher shared a link:
June 18
"There's a great amount of DNA and it's all Rudy Guede's.....more than 100 samples of DNA...."

And above all this:

Free Meredith Kercher:
August 29
"For Arline, John Snr, Stephanie, John and Lyle. With the hope that the light of truth is beginning to shine on you.
Blessings to you all.
"

Truth? So not only are you lying about not discussing the case, you do so on a site that you say is only about honouring Meredith? Fundamentally dishonest. You're there as a public relations exercise, and continue to insult the Kerchers, so I'm glad to be able to call you out on it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Gumbel/Sollecito say:
“Only when we were close to finishing our cereal did she finally tell me what was on her mind. “I saw some strange things over at the house. Well, the front door was open when I arrived, but nobody seemed to be home. At first, I just assumed someone had taken out the garbage or gone to the corner store.”

The corner store wasn't mentioned by Knox in her email:

"i assumed someone in the house was doing
exactly what i just said, taking out the trash or talking really
uickley to the neighbors downstairs. so i closed the door behind me
but i didnt lock it, assuming that the person who left the door open
would like to come back in." ~Knox's email Nov 4, 2007

It made it to her testimony in 2009 though:

I thought
maybe someone had gone out very quickly, or just downstairs to
get something, or to take out the trash, or something. When I
went in, I called out "Is anybody there?" and no one answered, so
I closed the door, but I didn't lock it, because I thought maybe
someone would come, maybe they had just gone out to get
cigarettes
or whatever.

Doesn't the corner store theory suffer the same flaw as the taking out the trash theory, that is their paths would have crossed on her walk home.
Top Profile 

Offline louiehaha


Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:13 am

Posts: 348

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   


by Doug Longhini and Sara Ely Hulse

Quote:
Under cross-examination, one of the court-appointed forensic experts, Carla Vecchiotti, told the court that had she done the original DNA analysis, she would not have been able to match Sollecito to any of the DNA on the bra clasp.

In Vecchiotti's opinion, none of the DNA profiles on the bra clasp matched Sollecito's. Somehow, that part of Vecchiotti's testimony failed to make it into the media coverage of the trial.


Is there a translation of the C&V testimony? I thought Vecchiotti admitted Sollecito's DNA was on the clasp.
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Gumbel/Sollecito say:
“Only when we were close to finishing our cereal did she finally tell me what was on her mind. “I saw some strange things over at the house. Well, the front door was open when I arrived, but nobody seemed to be home. At first, I just assumed someone had taken out the garbage or gone to the corner store.”

The corner store wasn't mentioned by Knox in her email:

"i assumed someone in the house was doing
exactly what i just said, taking out the trash or talking really
uickley to the neighbors downstairs. so i closed the door behind me
but i didnt lock it, assuming that the person who left the door open
would like to come back in." ~Knox's email Nov 4, 2007

It made it to her testimony in 2009 though:

I thought
maybe someone had gone out very quickly, or just downstairs to
get something, or to take out the trash, or something. When I
went in, I called out "Is anybody there?" and no one answered, so
I closed the door, but I didn't lock it, because I thought maybe
someone would come, maybe they had just gone out to get
cigarettes
or whatever.

Doesn't the corner store theory suffer the same flaw as the taking out the trash theory, that is their paths would have crossed on her walk home.


Are there several differnt paths one could take?

The bigger problem I have with those statements is her taking a shower, and prancing thru the cottage naked with the front door still unlocked. Still not knowing if that 'someone' might come back in.

nw)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

louiehaha wrote:
Here, he says he and Amanda both switched off their cell phones. His dad hired a consultant to try to convince the court he left his cell phone on all night IIRC.

"In the meantime, Jovana dropped by again and told Amanda that I didn’t need to drive her to the bus station after all. Now we didn’t have to leave the apartment. The evening was ours, and we couldn’t have been happier. We switched off our cell phones, finished watching Amélie, and discussed what to make for dinner"

Wonder if Papa has read this?

So at 8:18 Amanda receives the famous text message and then they start discussing what to make for dinner? Bit unbelievable when you are supposed to go to work you don't plan on having dinner sooner. By 8:42 this whole dinner is over and Raf's washing dishes, or does he now claim that he was washing dishes before dinner? Dinner, mop, washing dishes, phonecall. This all messed them up so badly. I looked up some old stuff. Massei made it simple. They were lying, and for a reason.

Amanda's 6 November Note
Quote:
One of the things I am sure that definitely happened the night on which Meredith was murdered was that Raffaele and I ate fairly late, I think around 11 in the evening, although I can't be sure because I didn't look at the clock. After dinner I noticed there was blood on Raffaele's hand, but I was under the impression that it was blood from the fish. After we ate Raffaele washed the dishes but the pipes under his sink broke and water flooded the floor.

Amanda's email
Quote:
i also needed to grab a mop because after dinner raffael had spilled a lot of water on the floor of his kitchen by accident and didnt have a mop to clean it up.

Raf's 5 November statement
Quote:
I went to my house alone at 21.00, while Amanda said that she was going to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet with her friends.

At this point we said goodbye. I went home, I made a joint. Had dinner, but I don’t remember what I ate.

About 23.00 my father called me on my house phone line. I recall Amanda was not back yet.

Prison Diary
Quote:
I don't remember in reality at what time I ate, but certainly I ate and Amanda ate with me.

Massei
Quote:
The court noted the discrepancies in Knox’s various statements about the time they ate dinner: in one statement 9:30 to 10 pm and, in another, 11pm. The court noted that both of these times are contradicted by the declarations of Sollecito’s father that his son had indicated that they had eaten and washed up before 8:42.

Oh, I see what Raf is trying to say. He washed dishes twice and the pipe broke twice. This way both his father and Amanda were not lying...lol..
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:56 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Max, your post is golden in terms of the timelines of what they said. There it is FoA, FMK, IIP, or whomever else wants to chime in. It is not our opinion that is damning, it is their own words. Read 'em and weep. Or light a freakin' candle, or sniff some potpourri, or whatever. But, read their words. Your argument is with the lovebirds.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:19 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Napia5 wrote:
Max, your post is golden in terms of the timelines of what they said. There it is FoA, FMK, IIP, or whomever else wants to chime in. It is not our opinion that is damning, it is their own words. Read 'em and weep. Or light a freakin' candle, or sniff some potpourri, or whatever. But, read their words. Your argument is with the lovebirds.

Oh, I have no hopes for those kind of people. They think it is funny to argue that the world is flat or something. So even if I was kidding, I would not be surprised that there will be claims that they washed dishes twice and the pipe leaked twice.

For me, looking at old quotes is just a reminder what a horrible liar Raf (and Amanda) is. His father was not lying and of course they had dinner before she was supposed to go to work. They planned and shopped for this earlier in the evening. Dishes were washed after dinner, and pipe leaked during the dish washing. This is all rather simple and it wouldn't have been a disaster for them to tell the truth were it not that Amanda had the great idea to use it as their alibi. Then Raf got into trouble when phone records showed his call with his father was at 8:42pm (and not at 11pm) and knowing what he had talked about with his father, he then explained that it was Amanda who had made him to lie.

So it was Amanda who came up with the idea to use dinner as their alibi, and she got into trouble when Raf started messing up. In Amanda language: "I am sure that definitely happened...although I can't be sure". It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Raffaele's prison diary is a good source for showing that he was in panic mode about the knife, AND the rags.
There were 6 rags documented on the list of evidence posted on IIP. I have the link in another, earlier post. I will
retrieve it. Why worry about rags? Why even comment on them?

Logically speaking, there is water on the floor, wipe it up, or throw rags or towels on it. If you have 6 rags, you don't need a mop. Sop it up, ring them out, repeat as necessary. This is not rocket science.

My take? The knife presented as evidence is the murder weapon. It needed to be cleaned somewhere.
Raff's sink? Most probably. Mops and wet kitchen floors and rags are part of the clean-up scenario.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Found the YouTube video of the heckler at the Seattle book signing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP2t4XmT3Bk
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 904

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 - ANGLO   

Would you turn to an engineer that doesn’t know what a vector is?

A doctor that doesn’t know what the heart and lungs are for?

How about a dentist that doesn’t know what a tooth is?

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (Proof lies on him who asserts, not on him who denies).

That rule has marked the upward surge of mankind since (at least) the 6th Century and its corollaries (the presumption of innocence and the right to silence) have been enshrined in the constitutional law of every western democracy you can name.

One is hard pressed to think of a rule of evidence more fundamental to the heart of either the civil or common law system.

In “Anglo’s” own jurisdiction, in 1935, Lord Sankey rather famously described this rule (placing the onus on the prosecution) and its corollaries as “the Golden Thread” running through the common law of England (Woolmington v. The DPP, in the House of Lords).

In the USA, the rule and its corollaries are covered by the 5th, 6th and 14th amendments; in Canada, they are enshrined under Section 11 of their Constitution’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms; Catnip can cover OZ for us; and in Italy (and the 46 other member states of the Council of Europe) they’re covered under Article 6 of the ECHR:

“..the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself, are generally
recognised international standards which lie at the heart of the notion of a fair
procedure under Article 6…” (per Saunders v. United Kingdom in 1996, the European Court of Human Rights)


Why, then, does “Anglo” make posts like the following?

Image


"...was Raffaele's 'failure' to give evidence...a tactical move by Mignini to keep him quiet?"

ARE YOU ****IN' KIDDING ME, ANGLO?!!!

It’s one thing for a lay person like “Mary_H” to fall for this BS from Sollecito, but it’s another thing altogether for a so-called “lawyer” to think that Mignini could, if he wished, compel Sollecito to testify in criminal proceedings against him.

At this point, it’s impossible for me to believe that “anglo" (whomever that person might really be) has completed a 3 year law degree at an accredited university.

That no one at the JREF has called him/her on this (his/her latest and greatest) blunder stands as an indictment of their self-proclaimed status as ‘true skeptics’ and ‘trained rational thinkers’.

Image


Last edited by Jackie on Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Napia5


User avatar


Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm

Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXV. MAIN DISCUSSION, MAY 28 -   

Priceless, Jackie, absolutely priceless.
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 10 of 12 [ 2830 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests

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

  

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


29,421,628 Views