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: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:51 pm
It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:51 pm
All times are UTC

Forum rules

XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, Michael, Moderators


 Page 5 of 34 [ 8462 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 34  Next
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 4:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks G, I've tweeted that info! I do think the dates in this case are very significant. Always seem to be on Knox or Sollecito's birthdays! It's karmic law making that happen.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Peeps on Twitter seem rather upset that the date is so far away. I always called it for around January/February 2015. And it would have been, were it not for delays caused by Bongiorno with her requests for the case to be heard by United Sections, so we can blame her for that.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Murder Meredith: In March 2015 the Supreme Court hearing for Sollecito-Knox


Perugia - Fixed for March 25 next year the hearing in the Supreme Court for the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito for the murder of Meredith Kercher. A deal with the proceedings - ANSA learns from legal sources - will be the fifth section. Knox and Sollecito were sentenced to 25 and 28 and a half years of imprisonment by the Assize Court of Florence. Both have always proclaimed unrelated to the crime committed in Perugia.

The appeal against the conviction of two young men will be examined on the same day, March 25, in which the Supreme Court in 2013, at the time the first section, it was already occupied in the process. The device was read the next day when the judges annulled the acquittal on appeal in Perugia disposed of two young (25 and sentenced to 26 years imprisonment in the first degree ever in Perugia), by providing a new process of the second degree. This time in Florence to procedural issues.

Meredith Kercher was killed in Perugia on the night between the first and 2 November 2007 Four days after police arrested Sollecito, Knox, then his girlfriend, and Patrick Lumumba, the result then, however, totally unrelated to the crime, and then acquitted. In cell instead ended on 20 November, that Rudy Guede, tried under the summary procedure, is serving a final sentence to 16 years in prison.

Sollecito and Knox were instead convicted at first instance, then acquitted on appeal coming and going free (the girl is returned to her Seattle). So the decision of the Supreme Court and the new process in Florence with the condemnations which have made use of their defenders. Next March will once again be the supreme courts to rule.


ISLECOLOXIX

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

Meredith, the last chapter in sight for Amanda and Raffaele? The Supreme Court decides

The endless judicial history that began in 2007 may finally closed in 2015 with the hearing of the Supreme Court will have to decide whether to cancel the sentence or make it permanent


The last chapter in the history of judicial infinite Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito - first convicted, then acquitted, then convicted again - could go on stage next March 25, 2015 in Rome before the Supreme Court (Supreme Court) where the lawyers of former boyfriends have resorted after the verdict unfavorable to Florence as part of the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher.


The appeal bis Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were sentenced to 25 and 28 and a half years of imprisonment by the Assize Court of Florence. Both have always proclaimed their innocence.



PERUGIA TODAY

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


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Link to the previous page (p.4) -->> viewtopic.php?p=123159#p123159

For those who didn't see your post with an announcement.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks, G :)

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

If deliberations go into the night, then we can see a verdict being issued along with his immediate arrest, right on Raffaele's birthday.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Latest, from Andrea Vogt:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt now25 seconds ago
Italy cassation magistrate Bruno Paolo Antonio lead reviewer when #amandaknox & sollecito case goes before court March 25, 2015.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 5:58 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Countdown timer to appeal: TIMER

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 6:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi, Michael. The court convenes at 10:00, not 9:00 AM I believe. Is it also possible to have link to Timer on the front page as well, appeal for Amanda Knox AND Raffaele Sollecito?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 6:17 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Latest, from Andrea Vogt:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt
Cassation judge who is reportedly lead reviewer on #amandaknox case made news earlier this yr for upholding Lavitola conviction.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 6:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Hi, Michael. The court convenes at 10:00, not 9:00 AM I believe.


No problem, it'll make sure everyone gets there early :)

Ergon wrote:
Is it also possible to have link to Timer on the front page as well, appeal for Amanda Knox AND Raffaele Sollecito?


Already done. I did that right after I made the timer. A link to it is at the top of every page of the forum :)

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


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

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 6:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

As someone said publication of the DM article, with photos of Knox flaunting her new beau, was deliberately timed to coincide with the announcement about the date of the final appeal, to distract the public from this important news. I wonder how many anglo media outlets will report today the date of the Supreme Court hearing?
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh, it was totally contrived. Just as almost everything that comes out of America about Knox is. Marriott has a paparazzi on speed dial.

The Anglo media probably won't report on it until tomorrow. Although, we may get a short write-up from Andrea or/and Barbie as soon as tonight.

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


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

That explained those photos, I was trying to work out what thoughts were driving Mad Pax's facial expression, I did not try to analyse Knox's expression, I cannot put my finger on how she comes across, something like a director at a concentration camp.

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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

guermantes wrote:
As someone said publication of the DM article, with photos of Knox flaunting her new beau, was deliberately timed to coincide with the announcement about the date of the final appeal, to distract the public from this important news. I wonder how many anglo media outlets will report today the date of the Supreme Court hearing?


Well, IMO it was a terrible decision showing her looking so... bad. Couldn't they have shown her looking a little better? Or can they at this point?

angel-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

dgfred wrote:
guermantes wrote:
As someone said publication of the DM article, with photos of Knox flaunting her new beau, was deliberately timed to coincide with the announcement about the date of the final appeal, to distract the public from this important news. I wonder how many anglo media outlets will report today the date of the Supreme Court hearing?


Well, IMO it was a terrible decision showing her looking so... bad. Couldn't they have shown her looking a little better? Or can they at this point?

angel-)


Yeah, you'd have thought she'd have made an effort with her appearance. After all, wasn't it her looks that won her fans to begin with and endeared her to the US mainstream media? Marriott may be good at PR, but Knox herself is NOT.

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


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

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

zorba wrote:
That explained those photos, I was trying to work out what thoughts were driving Mad Pax's facial expression, I did not try to analyse Knox's expression, I cannot put my finger on how she comes across, something like a director at a concentration camp.


It looks like Knox is carrying on with the grimacing or pulling back of her mouth that we saw in recent interviews. She would finish of a sentence with a grimace and a tightening of her neck muscles , iguana neck style. It may be a physical reaction to give weight to her lies.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

For those interested in the effect of ECHR rulings in Italy, I found this interesting: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=983897&Site=COE

Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/palomar/italy015_2011.html
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Still clinging to that Forlorn hope Diocletian, that doesn't even apply to the murder, rape and theft convictions?

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Still clinging to that Forlorn hope Diocletian, that doesn't even apply to the murder, rape and theft convictions?

Right . . . sort of. She hasn't appealed those convictions yet. Problem is that if her calunnia appeal is admitted by the ECtHR and she wins, all hell will break loose. First, as a practical matter, the calunnia thing would be all over, because they would be out of time for a retrial. There would also be a huge problem with the other convictions, even though not yet before the ECtHR, because the statements that underlie the callunnia conviction (which the ECtHR will have declared unusable) were used in those convictions as well. What a mess.

Also, my money says that the US will not extradite someone whose foreign conviction was obtained in a process that violated her human rights.


Last edited by Diocletian on Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocetian wrote:
Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/paloma/italy015_2011.html


This isn't even relevant. Knox's complaint is not in regard to whether she got a fair trial (art. 6), an aspect Knox isn't appealing, but instead her complaint concerns her treatment during her evening of questioning. And in the above example, the sentence came into question because Italy's own Constitutional Court (not ECHR) found that article 630 contravened Italian constitutional law (and will have since been amended). Knox's appeal does not concern article 630 or any article that that is in breach of Italy's own constitution.

It requires extremely grave legal errors to annul an Italian trial sentence. The things that Knox is complaining about, don't qualify in that league. At most, Knox would see compensation. But, she won't even get that, as she doesn't have a case. The ECHR will reject her complaint.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Still clinging to that Forlorn hope Diocletian, that doesn't even apply to the murder, rape and theft convictions?

Right . . . sort of. She hasn't appealed those convictions yet. Problem is that if her calunnia appeal is admitted by the ECtHR and she wins, all hell will break loose. First, as a practical matter, the calunnia thing would be all over, because they would be out of time for a retrial. There would also be a huge problem with the other convictions, even though not yet before the ECtHR, because the statements that underlie the callunnia conviction (which the ECtHR will have declared unusable) were used in those convictions as well. What a mess.

Also, my money says that the US will not extradite someone whose foreign conviction was obtained in a process that violated her human rights.



No. Calunnia is a State crime, felony level, and as such, is not subject to the Statute of Limitations. It won't run out of time. Secondly, the errors would have to be legally grave enough to constitute a retrial in the first place, which they are not. And finally, her complaint isn't about the legality of the trial process in any case, only how she was handled by the police that night.

Knox is not being extradited for calunnia, but for rape, murder and theft.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocetian wrote:
Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/paloma/italy015_2011.html


This isn't even relevant. Knox's complaint is not in regard to whether she got a fair trial (art. 6), an aspect Knox isn't appealing, but instead her complaint concerns her treatment during her evening of questioning. And in the above example, the sentence came into question because Italy's own Constitutional Court (not ECHR) found that article 630 contravened Italian constitutional law (and will have since been amended). Knox's appeal does not concern article 630 or any article that that is in breach of Italy's own constitution.

It requires extremely grave legal errors to annul an Italian trial sentence. The things that Knox is complaining about, don't qualify in that league. At most, Knox would see compensation. But, she won't even get that, as she doesn't have a case. The ECHR will reject her complaint.


Her appeal will be for violation of Art. 6, in particular, denial of counsel, deprivation of right against self-incrimination, no translator, and other mistreatment at the hands of the police/prosecution.

If she succeeds, then a new trial will be necessary. But it won't matter because she would never be extradited if a human rights judgment is rendered against Italy in this matter.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Knox is not being extradited for calunnia, but for rape, murder and theft.


Rape murder and theft convictions that are derivative of a statement that (if she succeeds) will have been adjudged to have been extracted in violation of her human rights.

Frankly, it would be ballsy of Italy to even request extradition under those circumstances.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocetian wrote:
Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/paloma/italy015_2011.html


This isn't even relevant. Knox's complaint is not in regard to whether she got a fair trial (art. 6), an aspect Knox isn't appealing, but instead her complaint concerns her treatment during her evening of questioning. And in the above example, the sentence came into question because Italy's own Constitutional Court (not ECHR) found that article 630 contravened Italian constitutional law (and will have since been amended). Knox's appeal does not concern article 630 or any article that that is in breach of Italy's own constitution.

It requires extremely grave legal errors to annul an Italian trial sentence. The things that Knox is complaining about, don't qualify in that league. At most, Knox would see compensation. But, she won't even get that, as she doesn't have a case. The ECHR will reject her complaint.


Her appeal will be for violation of Art. 6, in particular, denial of counsel, deprivation of right against self-incrimination, no translator, and other mistreatment at the hands of the police/prosecution.

If she succeeds, then a new trial will be necessary. But it won't matter because she would never be extradited if a human rights judgment is rendered against Italy in this matter.



Knox was given counsel for her trial. Article 6 concerns the trial only, not the investigation phase. Knox waived her own right not to incriminate herself...she has the right to waive her own rights. Her written statement, which was used to convict her of calunnia, was written by her while alone in her cell, without prompting, and accepted by police via her own insistence. She also waived her right to a lawyer, despite being warned by him beforehand, in her statement to Mignini (a statement which was not used in her trial for her calunnia conviction, in any case). Her 1:45 statement isn't applicable, as she was a witness who did not request a lawyer and has no right to one. Only formal suspects and/or those under arrest have the right to a lawyer. It was not used against her in her calunnia trial, in any case. Therefore, she has no grounds for complaint.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.


Hm. That's an interesting take.

So Italy can be adjudged in breach of its obligations under an international human rights treaty, and the US would still have to extradite the person whose rights were violated? I don't think so.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox is not being extradited for calunnia, but for rape, murder and theft.


Rape murder and theft convictions that are derivative of a statement that (if she succeeds) will have been adjudged to have been extracted in violation of her human rights.

Frankly, it would be ballsy of Italy to even request extradition under those circumstances.


No, they are a derivative of witnesses, her lack of and contrasting alibis, and the evidence at the crime scene. For her murder, rape, staging and theft convictions, her statements to police hardly figured. It might be different in a case where someone was convicted on the basis of only one or two pieces of evidence and then one of those pieces of evidence was found to be completely unsound. That circumstance does not apply to Knox at all, since her convictions were based on a whole heap of evidence not remotely connected to her evening of questioning on the night of the 5th.

You're clutching at straws here.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocetian wrote:
Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/paloma/italy015_2011.html


This isn't even relevant. Knox's complaint is not in regard to whether she got a fair trial (art. 6), an aspect Knox isn't appealing, but instead her complaint concerns her treatment during her evening of questioning. And in the above example, the sentence came into question because Italy's own Constitutional Court (not ECHR) found that article 630 contravened Italian constitutional law (and will have since been amended). Knox's appeal does not concern article 630 or any article that that is in breach of Italy's own constitution.

It requires extremely grave legal errors to annul an Italian trial sentence. The things that Knox is complaining about, don't qualify in that league. At most, Knox would see compensation. But, she won't even get that, as she doesn't have a case. The ECHR will reject her complaint.


Her appeal will be for violation of Art. 6, in particular, denial of counsel, deprivation of right against self-incrimination, no translator, and other mistreatment at the hands of the police/prosecution.

If she succeeds, then a new trial will be necessary. But it won't matter because she would never be extradited if a human rights judgment is rendered against Italy in this matter.



Knox was given counsel for her trial. Article 6 concerns the trial only, not the investigation phase. Knox waived her own right not to incriminate herself...she has the right to waive her own rights. Her written statement, which was used to convict her of calunnia, was written by her while alone in her cell, without prompting, and accepted by police via her own insistence. She also waived her right to a lawyer, despite being warned by him beforehand, in her statement to Mignini (a statement which was not used in her trial for her calunnia conviction, in any case). Her 1:45 statement isn't applicable, as she was a witness who did not request a lawyer and has no right to one. Only formal suspects and/or those under arrest have the right to a lawyer. It was not used against her in her calunnia trial, in any case. Therefore, she has no grounds for complaint.


This is wrong. Article 6 protections attach as soon as someone is a suspect (de factor or de jure) or placed under arrest. If she was deprived of her right to counsel, then the violation lasts until she gets counsel, thus rendering all statements prior to the 8th unusable for purposes proceedings against her.

Honestly, they really fucked up with the callunnia prosecution. The whole process would have been much cleaner if they had left that issue alone.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.


Hm. That's an interesting take.

So Italy can be adjudged in breach of its obligations under an international human rights treaty, and the US would still have to extradite the person whose rights were violated? I don't think so.


Yes, if no provision for it is included in the treaty. The treaty is clear, only Italian jurisdiction is recognised within it, not that of third parties.

If you can find any clause in the treaty that is in any way relevant to any ruling the ECHR might make, I'd love to see it.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox is not being extradited for calunnia, but for rape, murder and theft.


Rape murder and theft convictions that are derivative of a statement that (if she succeeds) will have been adjudged to have been extracted in violation of her human rights.

Frankly, it would be ballsy of Italy to even request extradition under those circumstances.


No, they are a derivative of witnesses, her lack of and contrasting alibis, and the evidence at the crime scene. For her murder, rape, staging and theft convictions, her statements to police hardly figured. It might be different in a case where someone was convicted on the basis of only one or two pieces of evidence and then one of those pieces of evidence was found to be completely unsound. That circumstance does not apply to Knox at all, since her convictions were based on a whole heap of evidence not remotely connected to her evening of questioning on the night of the 5th.

You're clutching at straws here.


Again, the problem here is that Cassazione (and I guess Nencini) made a big hairy deal out of the callunnia conviction. I wouldn't expect the ECHR to try to unwind all of the strands of evidence. They'll just look at whether the callunnia thing was a material element in the conviction, which Cassazione says it was, and that will be the end of it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.


Hm. That's an interesting take.

So Italy can be adjudged in breach of its obligations under an international human rights treaty, and the US would still have to extradite the person whose rights were violated? I don't think so.


Yes, if no provision for it is included in the treaty. The treaty is clear, only Italian jurisdiction is recognised within it, not that of third parties.

If you can find any clause in the treaty that is in any way relevant to any ruling the ECHR might make, I'd love to see it.


So what if Italy got a US citizen to confess to a crime by torturing him, convicted him, the ECHR ruled that the torture was illegal, and then the guy escaped to the US. The treaty would require the US to extradite him and the US would do it? No way.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
This is wrong. Article 6 protections attach as soon as someone is a suspect (de factor or de jure) or placed under arrest. If she was deprived of her right to counsel, then the violation lasts until she gets counsel, thus rendering all statements prior to the 8th unusable for purposes proceedings against her.

Honestly, they really fucked up with the callunnia prosecution. The whole process would have been much cleaner if they had left that issue alone.


But she wasn't suspected. Even when they arrested her, she wasn't suspected. The police thought, because of her, Patrick Lumumba had committed the murder, not her. But, that's beside the point, only when formally made a suspect or/and arrested, do such legal rights come into force.

In any case, you are also completely ignoring the point, that Knox herself waived her right to a lawyer, even when formally warned she would have one. An individual has the right to waive their rights. Even in the US, in Seattle, Ted Bundy waived his right to legal representation in his trial and defended himself. Nobody questioned his right to waive his rights, or whether his trial was fair or legal as a result. You can't impose rights on an individual, otherwise they are no lobger "rights" but something else entirely.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.


Hm. That's an interesting take.

So Italy can be adjudged in breach of its obligations under an international human rights treaty, and the US would still have to extradite the person whose rights were violated? I don't think so.


Yes, if no provision for it is included in the treaty. The treaty is clear, only Italian jurisdiction is recognised within it, not that of third parties.

If you can find any clause in the treaty that is in any way relevant to any ruling the ECHR might make, I'd love to see it.


So what if Italy got a US citizen to confess to a crime by torturing him, convicted him, the ECHR ruled that the torture was illegal, and then the guy escaped to the US. The treaty would require the US to extradite him and the US would do it? No way.


Torture is illegal under Italian law. It wouldn't even need to go to ECHR, it would be ruled against by the Italian courts. Your hypothetical situation, therefore, would never arise and as such, is bogus.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
This is wrong. Article 6 protections attach as soon as someone is a suspect (de factor or de jure) or placed under arrest. If she was deprived of her right to counsel, then the violation lasts until she gets counsel, thus rendering all statements prior to the 8th unusable for purposes proceedings against her.

Honestly, they really fucked up with the callunnia prosecution. The whole process would have been much cleaner if they had left that issue alone.


But she wasn't suspected. Even when they arrested her, she wasn't suspected. The police thought, because of her, Patrick Lumumba had committed the murder, not her. But, that's beside the point, only when formally made a suspect or/and arrested, do such legal rights come into force.

In any case, you are also completely ignoring the point, that Knox herself waived her right to a lawyer, even when formally warned she would have one. An individual has the right to waive their rights. Even in the US, in Seattle, Ted Bundy waived his right to legal representation in his trial and defended himself. Nobody questioned his right to waive his rights, or whether his trial was fair or legal as a result. You can't impose rights on an individual, otherwise they are no lobger "rights" but something else entirely.


Oh, we've been all through this. I say that they arrested her solely on the basis of statements and information that was known to them before she signed the 1:45 statement (see arrest warrant), and therefore she was obviously suspected before they asked her to sign and she should have had a lawyer.

Yes, there can be a waiver, but this isn't a waiver case. Italy would bear the burden of showing a knowing and voluntary waiver, and absent a statement in the writings about such waiver, it's not going to work. Frankly, I'd be surprised if they even go down that road because it makes them look bad. I think they'll stick with the old "she wasn't a suspect" and not resort to "OK, she was a suspect but we say that she told us she didn't want a lawyer."
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Knox is not being extradited for calunnia, but for rape, murder and theft.


Rape murder and theft convictions that are derivative of a statement that (if she succeeds) will have been adjudged to have been extracted in violation of her human rights.

Frankly, it would be ballsy of Italy to even request extradition under those circumstances.


No, they are a derivative of witnesses, her lack of and contrasting alibis, and the evidence at the crime scene. For her murder, rape, staging and theft convictions, her statements to police hardly figured. It might be different in a case where someone was convicted on the basis of only one or two pieces of evidence and then one of those pieces of evidence was found to be completely unsound. That circumstance does not apply to Knox at all, since her convictions were based on a whole heap of evidence not remotely connected to her evening of questioning on the night of the 5th.

You're clutching at straws here.


Again, the problem here is that Cassazione (and I guess Nencini) made a big hairy deal out of the callunnia conviction. I wouldn't expect the ECHR to try to unwind all of the strands of evidence. They'll just look at whether the callunnia thing was a material element in the conviction, which Cassazione says it was, and that will be the end of it.



But none of them rested their conviction for murder upon it. A single brick doesn't make a wall and removing a single brick from a wall doesn't make the wall fall down. It was a brick in the wall, not a pillar for her murder conviction. You may argue the opposite, but you make it as an argument of convenience rather then substance and as such, it has little weight.

But again, you are ignoring Knox's right to waive her rights. You are not even attempting to tackle that and the silence is deafening. Because, that fact is the keystone that brings her whole complaint down.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
The Italy/Us extradition treaty does not include a clause regarding the ECHR. That means, as far as the treaty is concerned (which is legally binding), the ECHR doesn't exist.


Hm. That's an interesting take.

So Italy can be adjudged in breach of its obligations under an international human rights treaty, and the US would still have to extradite the person whose rights were violated? I don't think so.


Yes, if no provision for it is included in the treaty. The treaty is clear, only Italian jurisdiction is recognised within it, not that of third parties.

If you can find any clause in the treaty that is in any way relevant to any ruling the ECHR might make, I'd love to see it.


So what if Italy got a US citizen to confess to a crime by torturing him, convicted him, the ECHR ruled that the torture was illegal, and then the guy escaped to the US. The treaty would require the US to extradite him and the US would do it? No way.


Torture is illegal under Italian law. It wouldn't even need to go to ECHR, it would be ruled against by the Italian courts. Your hypothetical situation, therefore, would never arise and as such, is bogus.


Well, violating the right to counsel and the right against self incrimination is against Italian law, too.

Anyway, US authorities won't care what human rights law (domestic or treaty) Italy violated. They'll just care that Italy violated human rights.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 9:59 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

If Amanda Knox wants her partisans to effectively argue on her behalf, perhaps she ought to release the appeal filed by Carlo Dalla Vedova? As Annella famously retorted when I asked her for details, "why would we do that so you can pick it apart?" :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
But again, you are ignoring Knox's right to waive her rights. You are not even attempting to tackle that and the silence is deafening. Because, that fact is the keystone that brings her whole complaint down.

There's no way that Italy can prove a knowing waiver. You can't have the guys who conducted an illegal interrogation be the proof of waiver.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
If Amanda Knox wants her partisans to effectively argue on her behalf, perhaps she ought to release the appeal filed by Carlo Dalla Vedova? As Annella famously retorted when I asked her for details, "why would we do that so you can pick it apart?" :)


I'd like to see it. I think you can get a copy if you go in person to the court.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
This is wrong. Article 6 protections attach as soon as someone is a suspect (de factor or de jure) or placed under arrest. If she was deprived of her right to counsel, then the violation lasts until she gets counsel, thus rendering all statements prior to the 8th unusable for purposes proceedings against her.

Honestly, they really fucked up with the callunnia prosecution. The whole process would have been much cleaner if they had left that issue alone.


But she wasn't suspected. Even when they arrested her, she wasn't suspected. The police thought, because of her, Patrick Lumumba had committed the murder, not her. But, that's beside the point, only when formally made a suspect or/and arrested, do such legal rights come into force.

In any case, you are also completely ignoring the point, that Knox herself waived her right to a lawyer, even when formally warned she would have one. An individual has the right to waive their rights. Even in the US, in Seattle, Ted Bundy waived his right to legal representation in his trial and defended himself. Nobody questioned his right to waive his rights, or whether his trial was fair or legal as a result. You can't impose rights on an individual, otherwise they are no lobger "rights" but something else entirely.


Oh, we've been all through this. I say that they arrested her solely on the basis of statements and information that was known to them before she signed the 1:45 statement (see arrest warrant), and therefore she was obviously suspected before they asked her to sign and she should have had a lawyer.

Yes, there can be a waiver, but this isn't a waiver case. Italy would bear the burden of showing a knowing and voluntary waiver, and absent a statement in the writings about such waiver, it's not going to work. Frankly, I'd be surprised if they even go down that road because it makes them look bad. I think they'll stick with the old "she wasn't a suspect" and not resort to "OK, she was a suspect but we say that she told us she didn't want a lawyer."



Arrest is not an "idea" or a thought, it is a fact. Either she was arrested, or she was not. And she was not arrested until Mignini ordered her arrest at 5:45, that is a fact. If they didn't arrest her, she wasn't under arrest. You can't secretly arrest someone, it's a legal impossibility.

At no point, has Knox claimed she requested a lawyer and that request was refused. At no point, did Knox, in any court, challenge the statements by police and prosecution that she waived her rights. That is legal fact or claim them to be false.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If Amanda Knox wants her partisans to effectively argue on her behalf, perhaps she ought to release the appeal filed by Carlo Dalla Vedova? As Annella famously retorted when I asked her for details, "why would we do that so you can pick it apart?" :)


I'd like to see it. I think you can get a copy if you go in person to the court.



No, we're talking about her appeal to the ECHR, not to the Italian court.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


Her appeal will be based on violations of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

I wouldn't expect the State Department to say anything other than that they are monitoring the situation. If the ECtHR rules against Italy, then maybe someone at the SD would say something; on the other hand, maybe they would just be content to let it die.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If Amanda Knox wants her partisans to effectively argue on her behalf, perhaps she ought to release the appeal filed by Carlo Dalla Vedova? As Annella famously retorted when I asked her for details, "why would we do that so you can pick it apart?" :)


I'd like to see it. I think you can get a copy if you go in person to the court.



No, we're talking about her appeal to the ECHR, not to the Italian court.


Yeah, I read just today on the ECHR website that you can go to the court and look at the file.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


An excellent question.

Diocletian seems to think that a positive ECHR ruling for Knox would trigger a US refusal to extradite (despite it not being covered in the legally binding treaty), the doing of which would (aside from breaking international law) by definition, be a public admission that the US Government itself was at fault, in it's monitoring of Knox's case and safeguarding her rights. Sounds like one more reason to me, why they would comply with the treaty. The US government would never consider Knox to be more important then the US Government.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Arrest is not an "idea" or a thought, it is a fact. Either she was arrested, or she was not. And she was not arrested until Mignini ordered her arrest at 5:45, that is a fact. If they didn't arrest her, she wasn't under arrest. You can't secretly arrest someone, it's a legal impossibility.


Yeah, but when they arrested her at 5:45, their "probable cause" was all of the stuff that they knew before 1:45. So, she should have had a lawyer before 1:45.

Michael wrote:
At no point, has Knox claimed she requested a lawyer and that request was refused. At no point, did Knox, in any court, challenge the statements by police and prosecution that she waived her rights. That is legal fact or claim them to be false.


I don't know about that. I bet her appeal says that she was not apprised of her counsel rights. It would be helpful to the Italian cause if they had tapes of her declining counsel or if the written statements contained a statement affirmatively waiving counsel, but alas.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Ergon wrote:
If Amanda Knox wants her partisans to effectively argue on her behalf, perhaps she ought to release the appeal filed by Carlo Dalla Vedova? As Annella famously retorted when I asked her for details, "why would we do that so you can pick it apart?" :)


I'd like to see it. I think you can get a copy if you go in person to the court.



No, we're talking about her appeal to the ECHR, not to the Italian court.


Yeah, I read just today on the ECHR website that you can go to the court and look at the file.


A quote would be nice :)

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


An excellent question.

Diocletian seems to think that a positive ECHR ruling for Knox would trigger a US refusal to extradite (despite it not being covered in the legally binding treaty), the doing would (aside from breaking international law) by definition, be a public admission that the US Government itself was at fault, in it's monitoring of Knox's case and safeguarding of her rights. Sounds like one more reason to me, why they would comply with the treaty. The US government would never consider Knox to be more important then the US Government.


I don't really see it playing out that way. I don't think anyone expects the US government to be monitoring every travelers human rights all the time. But they sure as hell don't expect the US government to be plucking citizens off the streets and delivering them up to proven human rights violators (should that turn out to be the case here).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

One has to wonder why Raffaele Sollecito never appealed to the ECHR.

In his book he describes how he was threatened with violence and how he accidentally confused the night he was questioned about because he was not allowed to look at a calendar.

In his opinion, this case is nothing more than a big misunderstanding.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
A quote would be nice :)


Quote:
General rule

Article 40 § 2 of the Convention provides that documents deposited with the Registrar are accessible to the public unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.

The Rules of Court provide for two exceptions:

documents deposited with the Registry in connection with friendly-settlement negotiations are not accessible to the public (Rule 33 § 1);

in cases referred to the Court under Article 5 §§ 2 to 5 of Protocol No. 11, documents composing the case file of the former Commission, including all pleadings, remain confidential unless the President of the Chamber decides otherwise (Rule 106 § 4 of the Rules of Court).

Practical arrangements

Requests for permission to consult files should be made using the online form.

You must give the exact references of each case you wish to consult (application number, date, etc.). To avoid unnecessary travel and expense, it should be noted that the internal documents of the Court are not accessible. The parties are reminded that “documents deposited with the Registrar” by the Government are forwarded for information or comments to the applicant and vice versa.

If the request is accepted the documents may be consulted at the European Court of Human Rights by appointment only, made at least 15 working days in advance.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Nell wrote:
One has to wonder why Raffaele Sollecito never appealed to the ECHR.

In his book he describes how he was threatened with violence and how he accidentally confused the night he was questioned about because he was not allowed to look at a calendar.

In his opinion, this case is nothing more than a big misunderstanding.


He hasn't been finally convicted of anything yet, so he can't appeal yet. He'll appeal after Cassazione affirms, if they do.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Arrest is not an "idea" or a thought, it is a fact. Either she was arrested, or she was not. And she was not arrested until Mignini ordered her arrest at 5:45, that is a fact. If they didn't arrest her, she wasn't under arrest. You can't secretly arrest someone, it's a legal impossibility.


Yeah, but when they arrested her at 5:45, their "probable cause" was all of the stuff that they knew before 1:45. So, she should have had a lawyer before 1:45.

Michael wrote:
At no point, has Knox claimed she requested a lawyer and that request was refused. At no point, did Knox, in any court, challenge the statements by police and prosecution that she waived her rights. That is legal fact or claim them to be false.


I don't know about that. I bet her appeal says that she was not apprised of her counsel rights. It would be helpful to the Italian cause if they had tapes of her declining counsel or if the written statements contained a statement affirmatively waiving counsel, but alas.


It doesn't matter what mental contortions you try and make about "probable cause", there was no arrest until Knox was arrested. The police do not have the legal power to make an arrest in any case (so your claim is a legal contradiction in its very essence), only a judge can make an arrest. Mignini, was the judge who then placed her under arrest. Your whole argument is an intellectual and emotive one, not a legal one. The ECHR are only interested in legal arguments.

Knox was appraised of her counsel rights by Mignini when she requested to be heard by him and again, by the policeman who she passed her written memorial to. This was all testified to at Knox's trial and was not challenged by the defence, or Knox herself in a spontaneous statement. If Knox, therefore, makes this claim to the ECHR, their immediate response would be "Then why did you not challenge this at the trial?". And the ECHR is quite clear, all avenues must first be exhausted in the national courts first. Since Knox did not challenge this in the Italian courts, then she's automatically in breach of the ECHR requirement.

It is not the requirement of Italy to prove to the ECHR that they are innocent of the charges levied by Knox, rather it is Knox who has to prove they are guilty. The legal onus is on the one that accuses. Knox has no proof or evidence, only claims. Courts deal in evidence, not claims, assertions or unsupported accusations.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:29 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Nell wrote:
One has to wonder why Raffaele Sollecito never appealed to the ECHR.

In his book he describes how he was threatened with violence and how he accidentally confused the night he was questioned about because he was not allowed to look at a calendar.

In his opinion, this case is nothing more than a big misunderstanding.


He hasn't been finally convicted of anything yet, so he can't appeal yet. He'll appeal after Cassazione affirms, if they do.



Agreed on the former. We'll have to see on the latter. I don't see what grounds he'd have. He can't make claims about his questioning at the Questura as Knox has done, since none of that was used to formulate any charges against him in his trial.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:30 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
It doesn't matter what mental contortions you try and make about "probable cause", there was no arrest until Knox was arrested. The police do not have the legal power to make an arrest in any case (so your claim is a legal contradiction in its very essence), only a judge can make an arrest. Mignini, was the judge who then placed her under arrest. Your whole argument is an intellectual and emotive one, not a legal one. The ECHR are only interested in legal arguments.


The ECHR cares about when somebody is reasonably suspected of a crime. She was suspected before she was arrested. The question is: how long before she was arrested. I say that she was suspected before 1:45, because just before they asked her to sign the 1:45 statement, they had all of the evidence that is cited in the arrest warrant as the justification for arresting her. In fact, they had most of it before they even started to interrogate her.

Michael wrote:
It is not the requirement of Italy to prove to the ECHR that they are innocent of the charges levied by Knox, rather it is Knox who has to prove they are guilty. The legal onus is on the one that accuses. Knox has no proof or evidence, only claims. Courts deal in evidence, not claims, assertions or unsupported accusations.


Actually, if Italy is going to claim waiver, then yes they do have to prove it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
A quote would be nice :)


Quote:
General rule

Article 40 § 2 of the Convention provides that documents deposited with the Registrar are accessible to the public unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.

The Rules of Court provide for two exceptions:

documents deposited with the Registry in connection with friendly-settlement negotiations are not accessible to the public (Rule 33 § 1);

in cases referred to the Court under Article 5 §§ 2 to 5 of Protocol No. 11, documents composing the case file of the former Commission, including all pleadings, remain confidential unless the President of the Chamber decides otherwise (Rule 106 § 4 of the Rules of Court).

Practical arrangements

Requests for permission to consult files should be made using the online form.

You must give the exact references of each case you wish to consult (application number, date, etc.). To avoid unnecessary travel and expense, it should be noted that the internal documents of the Court are not accessible. The parties are reminded that “documents deposited with the Registrar” by the Government are forwarded for information or comments to the applicant and vice versa.

If the request is accepted the documents may be consulted at the European Court of Human Rights by appointment only, made at least 15 working days in advance.



Thank you.

Lot of hoops, aren't there? Why can't Knox just give it to us...or to you? If she has such a strong case, why the need to hide it?

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:33 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.


LOL. What about Ergon? I thought this was his board and he's in my time zone.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
A quote would be nice :)


Quote:
General rule

Article 40 § 2 of the Convention provides that documents deposited with the Registrar are accessible to the public unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.

The Rules of Court provide for two exceptions:

documents deposited with the Registry in connection with friendly-settlement negotiations are not accessible to the public (Rule 33 § 1);

in cases referred to the Court under Article 5 §§ 2 to 5 of Protocol No. 11, documents composing the case file of the former Commission, including all pleadings, remain confidential unless the President of the Chamber decides otherwise (Rule 106 § 4 of the Rules of Court).

Practical arrangements

Requests for permission to consult files should be made using the online form.

You must give the exact references of each case you wish to consult (application number, date, etc.). To avoid unnecessary travel and expense, it should be noted that the internal documents of the Court are not accessible. The parties are reminded that “documents deposited with the Registrar” by the Government are forwarded for information or comments to the applicant and vice versa.

If the request is accepted the documents may be consulted at the European Court of Human Rights by appointment only, made at least 15 working days in advance.



Thank you.

Lot of hoops, aren't there? Why can't Knox just give it to us...or to you? If she has such a strong case, why the need to hide it?


Beats me. I'm sure we'll see it some day.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
It doesn't matter what mental contortions you try and make about "probable cause", there was no arrest until Knox was arrested. The police do not have the legal power to make an arrest in any case (so your claim is a legal contradiction in its very essence), only a judge can make an arrest. Mignini, was the judge who then placed her under arrest. Your whole argument is an intellectual and emotive one, not a legal one. The ECHR are only interested in legal arguments.


The ECHR cares about when somebody is reasonably suspected of a crime. She was suspected before she was arrested. The question is: how long before she was arrested. I say that she was suspected before 1:45, because just before they asked her to sign the 1:45 statement, they had all of the evidence that is cited in the arrest warrant as the justification for arresting her. In fact, they had most of it before they even started to interrogate her.

Michael wrote:
It is not the requirement of Italy to prove to the ECHR that they are innocent of the charges levied by Knox, rather it is Knox who has to prove they are guilty. The legal onus is on the one that accuses. Knox has no proof or evidence, only claims. Courts deal in evidence, not claims, assertions or unsupported accusations.


Actually, if Italy is going to claim waiver, then yes they do have to prove it.


"Reasonably suspected" is a legal term, which roughly translates as, when it can reasonably be considered that the police had enough evidence to formally make someone a suspect, or/and place them under arrest. The key here, is evidence. Once the police had enough evidence to meet that requirement, they indeed made her a suspect at 1:45 AM. On the basis of her voluntarily confirming that evidence and providing more evidence after waiving her right to a lawyer, a judge then placed her under arrest. Someone cannot be made a suspect or/and arrested until that material requirement is met. Once it was, Italian law enforcement complied fully with their legal obligations, both to Knox and to the State. Without evidence, any arrest or formalisation of suspect status would have been illegal. THAT is what the ECHR cares about.

They've already proven the waiver by providing evidence of it in court, evidence that was not challenged by Knox or her defence. The evidence automatically stands as proof in court if not challenged by the defence.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
A quote would be nice :)


Quote:
General rule

Article 40 § 2 of the Convention provides that documents deposited with the Registrar are accessible to the public unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.

The Rules of Court provide for two exceptions:

documents deposited with the Registry in connection with friendly-settlement negotiations are not accessible to the public (Rule 33 § 1);

in cases referred to the Court under Article 5 §§ 2 to 5 of Protocol No. 11, documents composing the case file of the former Commission, including all pleadings, remain confidential unless the President of the Chamber decides otherwise (Rule 106 § 4 of the Rules of Court).

Practical arrangements

Requests for permission to consult files should be made using the online form.

You must give the exact references of each case you wish to consult (application number, date, etc.). To avoid unnecessary travel and expense, it should be noted that the internal documents of the Court are not accessible. The parties are reminded that “documents deposited with the Registrar” by the Government are forwarded for information or comments to the applicant and vice versa.

If the request is accepted the documents may be consulted at the European Court of Human Rights by appointment only, made at least 15 working days in advance.



Thank you.

Lot of hoops, aren't there? Why can't Knox just give it to us...or to you? If she has such a strong case, why the need to hide it?


Beats me. I'm sure we'll see it some day.



We'll also all be dead some day.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:44 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.


LOL. What about Ergon? I thought this was his board and he's in my time zone.


Wherever did you get the idea it was Ergon's board? Ergon, is an Admin here, not the owner.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


An excellent question.

Diocletian seems to think that a positive ECHR ruling for Knox would trigger a US refusal to extradite (despite it not being covered in the legally binding treaty), the doing would (aside from breaking international law) by definition, be a public admission that the US Government itself was at fault, in it's monitoring of Knox's case and safeguarding of her rights. Sounds like one more reason to me, why they would comply with the treaty. The US government would never consider Knox to be more important then the US Government.


I don't really see it playing out that way. I don't think anyone expects the US government to be monitoring every travelers human rights all the time. But they sure as hell don't expect the US government to be plucking citizens off the streets and delivering them up to proven human rights violators (should that turn out to be the case here).


That is actually, their obligation to their citizens. Moreover, Knox's family actually complained to the State Department. The SD took no action because they saw no evidence that Italy had a case to answer. Several times, the State Department has publicy stated that they're monitoring the case. They have a duty of care and the media and public know this.

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


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

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
It doesn't matter what mental contortions you try and make about "probable cause", there was no arrest until Knox was arrested. The police do not have the legal power to make an arrest in any case (so your claim is a legal contradiction in its very essence), only a judge can make an arrest. Mignini, was the judge who then placed her under arrest. Your whole argument is an intellectual and emotive one, not a legal one. The ECHR are only interested in legal arguments.


The ECHR cares about when somebody is reasonably suspected of a crime. She was suspected before she was arrested. The question is: how long before she was arrested. I say that she was suspected before 1:45, because just before they asked her to sign the 1:45 statement, they had all of the evidence that is cited in the arrest warrant as the justification for arresting her. In fact, they had most of it before they even started to interrogate her.

Michael wrote:
It is not the requirement of Italy to prove to the ECHR that they are innocent of the charges levied by Knox, rather it is Knox who has to prove they are guilty. The legal onus is on the one that accuses. Knox has no proof or evidence, only claims. Courts deal in evidence, not claims, assertions or unsupported accusations.


Actually, if Italy is going to claim waiver, then yes they do have to prove it.


"Reasonably suspected" is a legal term, which roughly translates as, when it can reasonably be considered that the police had enough evidence to formally make someone a suspect, or/and place them under arrest. The key here, is evidence. Once the police had enough evidence to meet that requirement, they indeed made her a suspect at 1:45 AM. On the basis of her voluntarily confirming that evidence and providing more evidence after waiving her right to a lawyer, a judge placed her under arrest. Someone cannot be made a suspect or/and arrested until that material requirement is met. Once it was, Italian law enforcement complied fully with their legal obligations, both to Knox and to the State. Without evidence, any arrest or formalisation of suspect status would have been illegal. THAT is what the ECHR cares about.

They've already proven the waiver by providing evidence of it in court, evidence that was not challenged by Knox or her defence. The evidence automaticall stands as proof in court if not challenged by the defence.


Quote:
Persons in police custody enjoy both the right not to incriminate themselves and to
remain silent and the right to be assisted by a lawyer whenever they are questioned.These
rights are quite distinct: a waiver of one of them does not entail a waiver of the other.
Nevertheless, these rights are complementary, since persons in police custody must a fortiori
be granted the assistance of a lawyer when they have not previously been informed by the
authorities of their right to remain silent (Navone and Others v. Monaco, § 74; Brusco
v. France, § 54). The importance of informing a suspect of the right to remain silent is such
that, even where a person willingly agrees to give statements to the police after being
informed that his words may be used in evidence against him, this cannot be regarded as a
fully informed choice if he has not been expressly notified of his right to remain silent and if
his decision has been taken without the assistance of counsel (Navone and Others v. Monaco,
§ 74; Stojkovic v. France and Belgium, § 54).
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


An excellent question.

Diocletian seems to think that a positive ECHR ruling for Knox would trigger a US refusal to extradite (despite it not being covered in the legally binding treaty), the doing would (aside from breaking international law) by definition, be a public admission that the US Government itself was at fault, in it's monitoring of Knox's case and safeguarding of her rights. Sounds like one more reason to me, why they would comply with the treaty. The US government would never consider Knox to be more important then the US Government.


I don't really see it playing out that way. I don't think anyone expects the US government to be monitoring every travelers human rights all the time. But they sure as hell don't expect the US government to be plucking citizens off the streets and delivering them up to proven human rights violators (should that turn out to be the case here).


That is actually, their obligation to their citizens. Moreover, Knox's family actually complained to the State Department. The SD took no action because they saw no evidence that Italy had a case to answer. Several times, the State Department has publicy stated that they're monitoring the case. They have a duty of care and the media and public know this.


No way would the State Department have jumped out in front of this. They don't do that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
A quote would be nice :)


Quote:
General rule

Article 40 § 2 of the Convention provides that documents deposited with the Registrar are accessible to the public unless the President of the Court decides otherwise.

The Rules of Court provide for two exceptions:

documents deposited with the Registry in connection with friendly-settlement negotiations are not accessible to the public (Rule 33 § 1);

in cases referred to the Court under Article 5 §§ 2 to 5 of Protocol No. 11, documents composing the case file of the former Commission, including all pleadings, remain confidential unless the President of the Chamber decides otherwise (Rule 106 § 4 of the Rules of Court).

Practical arrangements

Requests for permission to consult files should be made using the online form.

You must give the exact references of each case you wish to consult (application number, date, etc.). To avoid unnecessary travel and expense, it should be noted that the internal documents of the Court are not accessible. The parties are reminded that “documents deposited with the Registrar” by the Government are forwarded for information or comments to the applicant and vice versa.

If the request is accepted the documents may be consulted at the European Court of Human Rights by appointment only, made at least 15 working days in advance.



Thank you.

Lot of hoops, aren't there? Why can't Knox just give it to us...or to you? If she has such a strong case, why the need to hide it?


Beats me. I'm sure we'll see it some day.



We'll also all be dead some day.


Amen, brother.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Diocletian


Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 11:43 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.


LOL. What about Ergon? I thought this was his board and he's in my time zone.


Wherever did you get the idea it was Ergon's board? Ergon, is an Admin here, not the owner.


Oh. I think that's just the general consensus. I have no idea who's who.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.


LOL. What about Ergon? I thought this was his board and he's in my time zone.


Wherever did you get the idea it was Ergon's board? Ergon, is an Admin here, not the owner.


Oh. I think that's just the general consensus. I have no idea who's who.




Yes you do, you've been around long enough and had enough socks on this board in the past, to know exactly who is who. You may have been born yesterday, but I was not. So don't lie to me!

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 10:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Ergon wrote:
What "human rights" were violated, and why didn't the State Department speak up then?


An excellent question.

Diocletian seems to think that a positive ECHR ruling for Knox would trigger a US refusal to extradite (despite it not being covered in the legally binding treaty), the doing would (aside from breaking international law) by definition, be a public admission that the US Government itself was at fault, in it's monitoring of Knox's case and safeguarding of her rights. Sounds like one more reason to me, why they would comply with the treaty. The US government would never consider Knox to be more important then the US Government.


I don't really see it playing out that way. I don't think anyone expects the US government to be monitoring every travelers human rights all the time. But they sure as hell don't expect the US government to be plucking citizens off the streets and delivering them up to proven human rights violators (should that turn out to be the case here).


That is actually, their obligation to their citizens. Moreover, Knox's family actually complained to the State Department. The SD took no action because they saw no evidence that Italy had a case to answer. Several times, the State Department has publicy stated that they're monitoring the case. They have a duty of care and the media and public know this.


No way would the State Department have jumped out in front of this. They don't do that.


Yes, they do, that's their job!

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Time's up. Foaker Tuesday is officially over.

Thank You.

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
By the way, Diocletian, you've got half an hour, then you turn into a pumpkin. It's 11:30 PM my way, so FOAKer Tuesday is almost over. Just an FYI.


LOL. What about Ergon? I thought this was his board and he's in my time zone.


More passive aggressive rudeness in the Bruce Fischer mold. Bruce knows I'm only one of the editors on the Meredith Kercher Wiki but keeps arguing that I'm the 'owner' there even after I and Ed McCall, who's the real owner, corrected him.

For the record, most of the work there was done by Ed, with a lot of help from contributors across the PMF community. It's a towering achievement, brought about by many of us who felt the hijacking of the case by Knoxites on Wikipedia had to be countered. No wonder they had to create a copycat Wiki :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Peeps on Twitter seem rather upset that the date is so far away. I always called it for around January/February 2015. And it would have been, were it not for delays caused by Bongiorno with her requests for the case to be heard by United Sections, so we can blame her for that.


I will admit to being one of those upset peeps. I guess after seven years I'm getting gate fever & simply wish for the Kercher's ordeal to end at this stage. That said, I was aware of defence delaying tactics also, I just wish the system would move faster. I'm aware that different countries do things in different ways & have different systems, so I reckon I was looking at things via the ways of my country, where they'd have already been into their madatory life sentence. Ironically, they'd have been more than likely paroled after about 17 years though.
Hopefully Cassation should finalize their convictions and they can be buried in the sytem & forgotten about.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
For those interested in the effect of ECHR rulings in Italy, I found this interesting: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=983897&Site=COE

Also, here is a good piece of follow-up information: http://www3.unisi.it/dipec/palomar/italy015_2011.html


Hi Diolcetian,

I'm not sure why you guys put so much hope into the ECHR, as there's little if anything they can do regarding this case. They certainly don't quash or overturn convictions as I'm sure you're aware.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Michael wrote:
Still clinging to that Forlorn hope Diocletian, that doesn't even apply to the murder, rape and theft convictions?

Right . . . sort of. She hasn't appealed those convictions yet. Problem is that if her calunnia appeal is admitted by the ECtHR and she wins, all hell will break loose. First, as a practical matter, the calunnia thing would be all over, because they would be out of time for a retrial. There would also be a huge problem with the other convictions, even though not yet before the ECtHR, because the statements that underlie the callunnia conviction (which the ECtHR will have declared unusable) were used in those convictions as well. What a mess.

Also, my money says that the US will not extradite someone whose foreign conviction was obtained in a process that violated her human rights.


Her rights weren't violated, there's no legal or indeed valid reason why the US won't extradite.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

corpusvile wrote:
Michael wrote:
Peeps on Twitter seem rather upset that the date is so far away. I always called it for around January/February 2015. And it would have been, were it not for delays caused by Bongiorno with her requests for the case to be heard by United Sections, so we can blame her for that.


I will admit to being one of those upset peeps. I guess after seven years I'm getting gate fever & simply wish for the Kercher's ordeal to end at this stage. That said, I was aware of defence delaying tactics also, I just wish the system would move faster. I'm aware that different countries do things in different ways & have different systems, so I reckon I was looking at things via the ways of my country, where they'd have already been into their madatory life sentence. Ironically, they'd have been more than likely paroled after about 17 years though.
Hopefully Cassation should finalize their convictions and they can be buried in the sytem & forgotten about.



Having followed this case for 7 years, I suppose I've become resigned to the slowness of the Italian system and am simply grateful that anything is happening at all. I can fully understand though, how others not so used to it, would be feeling a great deal of frustration at the snail pace.

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


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 12:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

That Dio fellow is such a nice chap, I'm sure he will/she will/it will volunteer to be locked up with Knoxious, I hope on a Papillon type island so will not need to hear from any of them again.

Meanwhile, Sollecito the other convicted killer is out doing real ordinary stuff, just as if he were some good young gentleman, however, gentle in the equation is a contradiction in terms, and an act, since the worm of a man has told such awfully cruel lies It is absolutely obvious that he was fully involved in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Everything about his behaviour displays a range of personality characteristics typical of a truly self-centred and nasty bastard, again typical of someone with a very warped character, who lost his spine somewhere and is for that reason, bent, a crook, a criminal, a liar. His behaviour and his father's response astounds me again and again, for many a good father would surely cut the crap and offer to pay his fare and accommodation fee at Digitas, poor old dad, the man has about as much sense as nonsense.

I could say some properly nasty stuff about these people but taking the piss out of them at least saves me from adopting their utterly vile behaviour, my words may sound cruel but give us a break, what Sollecito did, that is CRUEL. I'm glad of this chess-like predicament where there are almost no pieces left on the board, it's check mate, matey, whatever that shit means as I hate chess, all I knows is they is stuck comrades.


Mr Sollecito, to reserve a room at the Digitas Hotel in your favourite country where they just love you, simply call 111 3245 12347 and everything, including you, will be taken care of, for you.

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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 1:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
corpusvile wrote:
Michael wrote:
Peeps on Twitter seem rather upset that the date is so far away. I always called it for around January/February 2015. And it would have been, were it not for delays caused by Bongiorno with her requests for the case to be heard by United Sections, so we can blame her for that.


I will admit to being one of those upset peeps. I guess after seven years I'm getting gate fever & simply wish for the Kercher's ordeal to end at this stage. That said, I was aware of defence delaying tactics also, I just wish the system would move faster. I'm aware that different countries do things in different ways & have different systems, so I reckon I was looking at things via the ways of my country, where they'd have already been into their madatory life sentence. Ironically, they'd have been more than likely paroled after about 17 years though.
Hopefully Cassation should finalize their convictions and they can be buried in the sytem & forgotten about.

Having followed this case for 7 years, I suppose I've become resigned to the slowness of the Italian system and am simply grateful that anything is happening at all. I can fully understand though, how others not so used to it, would be feeling a great deal of frustration at the snail pace.

Same here. Happy there is a date. Same as 2 years ago it seems. People were disappointed then as well and were hoping it would have been before Christmas. It is not meant to be. Another birthday gift for RS :mrgreen:
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 5:54 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

An anniversary present.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 5:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

malvern wrote:
zorba wrote:
That explained those photos, I was trying to work out what thoughts were driving Mad Pax's facial expression, I did not try to analyse Knox's expression, I cannot put my finger on how she comes across, something like a director at a concentration camp.


It looks like Knox is carrying on with the grimacing or pulling back of her mouth that we saw in recent interviews. She would finish of a sentence with a grimace and a tightening of her neck muscles , iguana neck style. It may be a physical reaction to give weight to her lies.


Yes the thing where she bows the head as if on cue, and, she also does not truly connect, with eyes, only fleetingly, them looks down and to the side, thing is, people who are telling the truth are able to change the way they formulate things, they do not (need to) keep saying a thing in exactly the same way like some robot, they do not need to use the very same wording, phrasing, and the rest.

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

Offline zinnia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am

Posts: 56

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

m-)) Amanita Knox looks more like her angry, Hamburger Helper father every day.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:46 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The hand flapping is still there, from when she was trying to 'help' the Italian detectives.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:49 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael... Sorry to raise a 'Tuesday Night' guest argument late, I wasn't around last night. I assume Diocletian will pop by or be back next week.

It's just that the endless hunting for justifications for the ECHR to kick the whole thing into touch is so reminiscent of arguments in the last weeks with Scottish nationalists over how an independent Scotland would magically have remained in the EU.

First it was Scotland will leave the UK because they don't want to be dragged out of the EU by England.
When it's pointed out that leaving the UK automatically means leaving the EU you are first met with a barrage of derision, abuse and bluster over how ill-informed you must be. Salmond himself claimed it was nonsense and that he had received 'legal advice' on the issue. When the advice was finally revealed it was shown to be flawed. Salmond then fell back to his fall back bluster of how the EU would fall over themselves to fast track a Scottish membership in the eighteen months between the referendum and the actual exit. The small problem of course is that EU officials from Barrosso down repeatedly stated that there would be no special exceptions for Scotland. Throw into the mix the problems that an application would involve joining the Euro and that Spain was publicly lined up to veto the application anyway and you have the basis for the mother of all bullshit arguments.

Every EU treaty and rule and every generalisation over the impossibility of 'expelling' a country already integrated into EU law was endlessly trotted out. Reasons why the EU would fall over themselves to allow membership on Salmond's terms magically conjoured. Others simply asserted that Scotland would automatically remain a member as they cannot be 'expelled'. There is no clause for expelling a country. End of. No matter what the EU actually says, they don't mean it. No matter what Salmond himself unfortunately admitted.

Now some of the cyber nats were just interested in bullying all objectors into submission regardless of the arguments. But there was one I was arguing with who reminds me a great deal of Diocletian. I don't doubt his/her sincerity but the whole edifice rested on wishful thinking. Reasons for a course of action that contradicts the statements and rules of the EU and its officials were endlessly sought and floated. It boiled down to everybody bluffing on everything that they ever say except good old Wee Eck, and even him when he unfortunately acknowledged part of the truth. The obvious, that the bluffer and gambler was Salmond himself rather than everybody he comes into contact with, could never be entertained. Reminiscent of Knox herself. The bounds of credibility are stretched until they break as each official, policeman, witness etc must be painted as a liar or an idiot until the whole edifice is so complex that it is contradictory for each different part of the story. The obvious, that Knox is the liar who concocts different lies to escape each small part of the puzzle and consequently creates the obvious contradictions and even contradicts herself can never be admitted.

I really don't see the ECHR focus as anything more than wishful thinking. The application to it seems to rest more in the world of PR than genuine legal hopes. Knox's rights were not violated. It's a simple truth that cannot be admitted by the disciples. Consequently there is no reason to apply to a court of human rights. Trying to conjure a violation out of thin air is a waste of time and effort that nobody serious would undertake. Why do it?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:04 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Morning everyone :) Latest info from Andrea Vogt:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt
#amandaknox cassation judge relevant because he has experience with delicate, clamorous cases: Marta Russo, Lavitola among them.

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


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:28 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

zinnia wrote:
m-)) Amanita Knox looks more like her angry, Hamburger Helper father every day.



Right, what is being served as food down at the golf club, it's one pot and then back to the clubhouse for half a dozen snacks, but seriously, he looks like he has a bad temper, fancy using your underage kids as a pawn in the media publicity game then whining when all the milk gets spilt.
The hate campaign, the ridicule, the brainwashing attempted, just d not cut it when you are talking about a country with thousands of years history and culture, including, the arts, with science, philosophy, music, architecture, fashion engineering industries all there with innovations hardly seen anywhere else in the world, what and dad jumbo burger things he'll cut the mustard with such ridiculously weak nonsense, well, I hope his daughter winds up marrying Marriot.

Anyone for tennis?
A burger
10 burgers washed down with 10 gallons of beer????

Who is angry?

Who is mentally deranged.

Who is an accomplice to murder by knowing the truth and hiding it at all costs.

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

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 879

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:32 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Michael... Sorry to raise a 'Tuesday Night' guest argument late, I wasn't around last night. I assume Diocletian will pop by or be back next week.

It's just that the endless hunting for justifications for the ECHR to kick the whole thing into touch is so reminiscent of arguments in the last weeks with Scottish nationalists over how an independent Scotland would magically have remained in the EU....

I really don't see the ECHR focus as anything more than wishful thinking. The application to it seems to rest more in the world of PR than genuine legal hopes. Knox's rights were not violated. It's a simple truth that cannot be admitted by the disciples. Consequently there is no reason to apply to a court of human rights. Trying to conjure a violation out of thin air is a waste of time and effort that nobody serious would undertake. Why do it?


Good post. The ECHR is not a part of the EU though, Russia is a member among others.

Is there really still great hope being placed in it? It would be great to see quotes.

There are several posts on TJMK explaining why it is going nowhere, and the current Interrogation Hoax series is headed to make all "violations of human rights" arguments drop dead.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... ean_court/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... partment_/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... onfession/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... _to_italy/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tj ... ican_laws/

Knox's mixing with the drug kingpin brought out here by Ergon, Nell, etc, is another kiss of death.

Highly illegal harassment of victims family too. DOA.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fast Pete


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:06 pm

Posts: 879

Location: New York

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:39 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
Michael wrote:
corpusvile wrote:
Michael wrote:
Peeps on Twitter seem rather upset that the date is so far away. I always called it for around January/February 2015. And it would have been, were it not for delays caused by Bongiorno with her requests for the case to be heard by United Sections, so we can blame her for that.


I will admit to being one of those upset peeps. I guess after seven years I'm getting gate fever & simply wish for the Kercher's ordeal to end at this stage. That said, I was aware of defence delaying tactics also, I just wish the system would move faster. I'm aware that different countries do things in different ways & have different systems, so I reckon I was looking at things via the ways of my country, where they'd have already been into their madatory life sentence. Ironically, they'd have been more than likely paroled after about 17 years though.
Hopefully Cassation should finalize their convictions and they can be buried in the sytem & forgotten about.

Having followed this case for 7 years, I suppose I've become resigned to the slowness of the Italian system and am simply grateful that anything is happening at all. I can fully understand though, how others not so used to it, would be feeling a great deal of frustration at the snail pace.

Same here. Happy there is a date. Same as 2 years ago it seems. People were disappointed then as well and were hoping it would have been before Christmas. It is not meant to be. Another birthday gift for RS :mrgreen:


Of course the case would have been over late 2009 (par for the course in UK and US) if (1) there had been no right to automatic appeal; grounds were flimsy at best; (2) the Hellmann court had not been hijacked costing everyone three years. (Judge Chiari and Prosecutor Comodi both made the fact of the hijacking quite public, and Cassation in 2013 was fully aware; hence in part why their language was so sharp. Hellmann got edged out.)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 11:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Diocletian wrote:
Nell wrote:
One has to wonder why Raffaele Sollecito never appealed to the ECHR.

In his book he describes how he was threatened with violence and how he accidentally confused the night he was questioned about because he was not allowed to look at a calendar.

In his opinion, this case is nothing more than a big misunderstanding.


He hasn't been finally convicted of anything yet, so he can't appeal yet. He'll appeal after Cassazione affirms, if they do.


I disagree. In order to be able to successfully appeal to the ECHR, one has to exhaust all legal venues first. To my knowledge Raffaele Sollecito has not even filed a formal complaint concerning the alleged threats and abuse suffered by police.

All we have is the nonense published in his book. That's all his complaint amounts to. It's not good enough.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 12:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Reutterrrs

Reports are just coming in that the maniacs in the Middle East using a warped version of Islam as an excuse for violence will be smoked out of their holes by means of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the main one involves 24-hour broadcasting of Eastenders.

_________________
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: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 12:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

ECtHR isn't a Tuesday night argument when we discuss it, SqueakE :)

The previous appeal was received in December of last year. Knox's people haven't released any information, so it's unclear it's even been accepted or not. It's a long shot, much hand flapping.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 12:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Interesting comment on TJMK:

Quote:
Hi Bjorn

As you obviously see, Knox was extremely difficult to calm down or shut up!

The use of hard drugs on 5 Nov (tip from Sollecito camp) may mean neither has any clear recollection of the sessions that night.

Knox had been in touch with her drug kingpin that same day. Phone records prove that and police have known it all along. Remember they delayed coming to the questura for 2 hours that night, and yet again Knox was acting weird.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 10/01/14 at 08:31 AM | #


So AK was high Nov. 05 as well? Interesting. Pity no blood tests taken upon arrest, only a hair analysis too early to show meaningful results. But yes, her behavior that night was quite manic.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Meredith Kercher murder trial will reach Italy's highest court in March... a year after Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were found guilty of killing her

* Meredith Kercher case will reach highest court of appeal in Italy
* The British student was stabbed to death in 2007, in Perugia
* Knox and Sollecito found guilty, but freed on appeal in 2011
* In January this year, a Florence court found the pair guilty again
* If guilty verdict is upheld, extradition process for Knox may begin

By Sara Malm for MailOnline

Published: 13:23, 1 October 2014 | Updated: 14:12, 1 October 2014



DAILY MAIL

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


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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Wow... from the looks of things at IIP and JREF, poor Dio must have been falling to sleep so decided to come over.

Now it is not so much Mignini the prosecuter-devil.
Now it is not so much lying in court by Forensics.
Now it is not so much the planting of the knife.
Now it is not so much the BARE footprints in beet juice.
Now it is not so much her wondering if it was her blood mixed with Meredith's.
Now it is not so much RS's dna on the bra-clasp.
Now it is not so much the phone contact with a drug dealer before and after the murder.
Now it is not so much AK's and Meredith's dna on the knife.
Now it is not so much the missing Raw Data Files.
Now it is not so much the obviously staged break in.
Now it is not so much that BOTH accused have behavior before the murder that is suspect.
Now it is not so much that AK accused an innocent man of murder.
Now it is not so much that RS has basically dropped her alibi altogether.
Now it is not so much about all the lies and inconsisties told to LE.
Now it is not so much about her behavior after the murder... even tho RS might still think so.
Now it is not so much about RS's BARE footprint on the bathmat.
Now it is not so much that no hitting of AK was done by LE. Proven in court.

It's a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION... yeah, that's the ticket. pro-)


la-) sur-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 5:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

They forgot the burn the witch argument, dgfred :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:20 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueaqEMouse wrote:
First it was Scotland will leave the UK because they don't want to be dragged out of the EU by England.
When it's pointed out that leaving the UK automatically means leaving the EU you are first met with a barrage of derision, abuse and bluster over how ill-informed you must be. Salmond himself claimed it was nonsense and that he had received 'legal advice' on the issue. When the advice was finally revealed it was shown to be flawed. Salmond then fell back to his fall back bluster of how the EU would fall over themselves to fast track a Scottish membership in the eighteen months between the referendum and the actual exit. The small problem of course is that EU officials from Barrosso down repeatedly stated that there would be no special exceptions for Scotland. Throw into the mix the problems that an application would involve joining the Euro and that Spain was publicly lined up to veto the application anyway and you have the basis for the mother of all bullshit arguments.



It was exactly the same thing over keeping Pound Sterling. All manner of ridiculous claims, shot down, followed by even more ridiculous claims. And to listen to Salmond, the streets of Scotland would be paved with gold, it would be a rose garden and all manner of utter claptrap. Oil would flow from the tap that would never stop. Snake oil, that is. I'm so glad to see the back of Salmond.

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


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

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 7:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

zorba wrote:
Reutterrrs

Reports are just coming in that the maniacs in the Middle East using a warped version of Islam as an excuse for violence will be smoked out of their holes by means of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the main one involves 24-hour broadcasting of Eastenders.



That's the one that makes Knox's acting look convincing. They'll soon give up shouting 'Allahu Akbar' and replace it with shouting 'Yer doin' my 'ead in'. Sorrrted.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
zorba wrote:
Reutterrrs

Reports are just coming in that the maniacs in the Middle East using a warped version of Islam as an excuse for violence will be smoked out of their holes by means of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the main one involves 24-hour broadcasting of Eastenders.



That's the one that makes Knox's acting look convincing. They'll soon give up shouting 'Allahu Akbar' and replace it with shouting 'Yer doin' my 'ead in'. Sorrrted.



You have a good point there Bubble n Squeakus, a lot can be blamed on that lot, as a means of torture, bread n water and endless repeats.. I'll come quietly guv said Achmed, it's a fair cop as he tosses his heat seeking rocket launcher aside, interrogation, just give em a day locked up in a cell with Dot.
Talking about nuts, there's some lunatic on that channel TLC, calls herself a medium and goes around messing with hurt people's heads, she is almost as irritating as Eastbenders, phewee! Worra a way to earn a living.

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


Last edited by zorba on Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Just musing here, but now that it has been revealed that the police knew all along from Knox's phone records that she had been in regular contact with a drug dealer and that her bank statements show an unaccounted for haemorrhage of cash, it looks like she would have been better off coming clean on yet another score. If I remember rightly, influence of drugs is yet another accepted excuse that could have secured her a reduced sentence. If she had gone for fast track... no Calunnia of course, drug influence etc. She would have had a better chance of shifting more responsibility onto the others too, if she had been more subtle about it. The trial judges gave her more than merited leniency on the possibility of pre meditation. Even trained judges seem to have difficulty with seeing a woman being the prime mover in such a crime. She might very well have been looking at getting out in 2015 instead of going in.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

zorba wrote:
SqueakEMouse wrote:
zorba wrote:
Reutterrrs

Reports are just coming in that the maniacs in the Middle East using a warped version of Islam as an excuse for violence will be smoked out of their holes by means of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the main one involves 24-hour broadcasting of Eastenders.



That's the one that makes Knox's acting look convincing. They'll soon give up shouting 'Allahu Akbar' and replace it with shouting 'Yer doin' my 'ead in'. Sorrrted.



You have a good point there Bubble n Squeakus, a lot can be blamed on that lot, as a means of torture, bread n water and endless repeats.. I'll come quietly guv said Achmed, it's a fair cop as he tosses his heat seeking rocket launcher aside, interrogation, just give em a day locked up in a cell with Dot.
Talking about nuts, there's some lunatic on that channel TLC, calls herself a medium and goes around messing with hurt people's, she is almost as irritating as Eastbenders, phewee! Worra a way to earn a living.



I've got cable now; a multitude of channels and all of them mind numbingly crap. I flick through and there is must-buy jewellery that starts for sale at £800 and is given away at £32 at a tragic loss to the sellers (though strangely they will be there next week to suffer such eye-watering losses again). There's TV Roulette which seems to be like Russian Roulette without the tension and only your wallet gets a hole blown in it. The same movies at three different times and they pop up in a month again anyway. Just how many time does The Incredible Hulk have to be shown? All I actually watch now is the repeats on the channel that does the classic serials. Funny isn't it, all these channels and all I watch are the ones I last saw in black and white when we had three channels. Looking forward to The Sweeney. But I don't mind the latest episode of Kojak, The Professionals or Lovejoy either.

''We're The Sweeney son, and we haven't had any dinner'' They don't write 'em like that any more. Knox had it easy with Mignini. If it had been seventies London she could have had Jack Reagan.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
Just musing here, but now that it has been revealed that the police knew all along from Knox's phone records that she had been in regular contact with a drug dealer and that her bank statements show an unaccounted for haemorrhage of cash, it looks like she would have been better off coming clean on yet another score. If I remember rightly, influence of drugs is yet another accepted excuse that could have secured her a reduced sentence. If she had gone for fast track... no Calunnia of course, drug influence etc. She would have had a better chance of shifting more responsibility onto the others too, if she had been more subtle about it. The trial judges gave her more than merited leniency on the possibility of pre meditation. Even trained judges seem to have difficulty with seeing a woman being the prime mover in such a crime. She might very well have been looking at getting out in 2015 instead of going in.




Nooo, you don't get mitigation for being on drugs or alcohol.

Aside from committing the crime of course, her greatest mistake was not opting for the abbreviated rite. Knox and her supporters are looking at Rudy and dripping with envy over his sentence. The fault for that, lies in one place only.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 7:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I have to say, it's quite interesting to see what has been happening as a result of Knox's recent self-serving "Me! Me! Me!" article. On Twitter, nobody was was Tweeting it, just a mere handful of people (aside from the groupies of course). Soooo, because of the slow uptake, Knox felt she had to do something herself and has taken to Twitter herself to tweet the article, albeit only once. And again, there's been no uptake, relatively few reTweets. The fact that Knox could only get her article published in a local magazine nobody had ever heard of (not even locals) speaks volumes. It would appear, that while the media still seem to have an interest in writing about the latest developments on the case (or in the US's case, does so with a delay on writing about new developments as it waits for Marriott and crowd to write the new development for them with their own spin and omissions on it)...they do not appear to be too interested in Knox herself any more. At least, not unless it's related to sex. How the Media Princess has fallen!

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


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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
zorba wrote:
SqueakEMouse wrote:
zorba wrote:
Reutterrrs

Reports are just coming in that the maniacs in the Middle East using a warped version of Islam as an excuse for violence will be smoked out of their holes by means of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the main one involves 24-hour broadcasting of Eastenders.



That's the one that makes Knox's acting look convincing. They'll soon give up shouting 'Allahu Akbar' and replace it with shouting 'Yer doin' my 'ead in'. Sorrrted.



You have a good point there Bubble n Squeakus, a lot can be blamed on that lot, as a means of torture, bread n water and endless repeats.. I'll come quietly guv said Achmed, it's a fair cop as he tosses his heat seeking rocket launcher aside, interrogation, just give em a day locked up in a cell with Dot.
Talking about nuts, there's some lunatic on that channel TLC, calls herself a medium and goes around messing with hurt people's, she is almost as irritating as Eastbenders, phewee! Worra a way to earn a living.



I've got cable now; a multitude of channels and all of them mind numbingly crap. I flick through and there is must-buy jewellery that starts for sale at £800 and is given away at £32 at a tragic loss to the sellers (though strangely they will be there next week to suffer such eye-watering losses again). There's TV Roulette which seems to be like Russian Roulette without the tension and only your wallet gets a hole blown in it. The same movies at three different times and they pop up in a month again anyway. Just how many time does The Incredible Hulk have to be shown? All I actually watch now is the repeats on the channel that does the classic serials. Funny isn't it, all these channels and all I watch are the ones I last saw in black and white when we had three channels. Looking forward to The Sweeney. But I don't mind the latest episode of Kojak, The Professionals or Lovejoy either.

''We're The Sweeney son, and we haven't had any dinner'' They don't write 'em like that any more. Knox had it easy with Mignini. If it had been seventies London she could have had Jack Reagan.



Yes, I have similar, but, as I cannot stand listening to ads every second, there's not as lot I can watch, I switch back n forth to avoid ads, yesterday there was a thing on about WW2, only it was all in colour, as a child bombarded (thankfully not with bombs as I arrived afterwards) with stuff about the war it was all a bity too much to grasp, but I'm still affected by it now, as regards realisation of how it was for people, so nasty, the colour though, it really brings it home, since all that black n white footage shown in the 60s seemed like something unreal, seeing it all in colour makes you see how people were just like us now, and in that time, there was the present day modernity too, they looked back and that was old, we look back and that seems old, but I see it more and more how close it all was, born 12 years after that hell finished.

Anyhow, I cannot even watch BBC much anymore, day in and day out the same old sanctimonious rubbish, maybe there are benefit cheats but the people who present these types of shows make me sick, why is it necessary to have these awful programmes stuffed down one's neck every day? For the rest, those at the helm at the BBC seem to think everyone needs to watch food crap all day and night and look at people with way too much money buying up properties to earn profit and push prices up even higher, to me it is all speculation and then antiques all the time, yawn. I can't imagine what happened, but why would a whole nation want to watch antiques programmes all the time?

What you were saying about the road the two could have taken, well, I did study up on that too, and it's true what you said, it's written in the Italian Penal Code, and those who commit crimes while high, could be said to have not known what they were doing, so it's similar to someone who is not in control and, therefore, cannot be held fully accountable, however, it's too late to start trying to pull that out of the bag as a last resort, no way it would be accepted. Just wait, as the days pass and the court sits, Sollecito is going to dung up his pantaloons, this man who has tried to have people think he's this gentle, calm guy, is going to wind up foaming at the mouth, since there is no way he is going to go quietly, he will try anything, even say it was all Knox's fault...... G$ASP, all say aye at department Seattle and how dare he, etc.
I was just trying to help you see All Ye Judges, please forgive me,
I had no idea what I was doing.


Meanwhile, departmental Knoxious: The high court judges are obviously all criminals and members of the mafia, take no notice of them, they cannot have our murderer, she belongs to us.

Too little way too late.

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


Last edited by zorba on Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:05 pm   Post subject: NENCINI TRANSLATION TO BE AVAILABLE SOON   

ORG has announced the translation of the Nencini Motivations Report will be available soon. Congratulations to the team, looking forward to it! r-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:09 pm   Post subject: Re: NENCINI TRANSLATION TO BE AVAILABLE SOON   

Ergon wrote:
ORG has announced the translation of the Nencini Motivations Report will be available soon. Congratulations to the team, looking forward to it! r-((



Seconded! :)

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thanks to Bedelia at ORG for this find, Senator Maria Cantwell's latest statement on behalf of La Knox. I certainly hope she will not interfere with the extradition request, but given that she's a politician, who knows?


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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Her last statement is already much more political then her first one where she attacks the whole Italian justice system including a personal attack on mr. Mignini.
http://www.cantwell.senate.gov/public/i ... 9e9345e68c
Of course after the acquittal she is suddenly calling the trial fair. Haha...what a joke of a senator.
http://www.cantwell.senate.gov/public/i ... 8254405eb6
Top Profile 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 1:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
The fact that Knox could only get her article published in a local magazine nobody had ever heard of (not even locals) speaks volumes.


Knox's article in the October issue of the SeattleMet magazine:

What It Feels Like to Be Wrongly Accused
Published Oct 1, 2014, 8:00am
By Amanda Knox

SEATTLE MET
Top Profile 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 2:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
SqueakEMouse wrote:
Just musing here, but now that it has been revealed that the police knew all along from Knox's phone records that she had been in regular contact with a drug dealer and that her bank statements show an unaccounted for haemorrhage of cash, it looks like she would have been better off coming clean on yet another score. If I remember rightly, influence of drugs is yet another accepted excuse that could have secured her a reduced sentence. If she had gone for fast track... no Calunnia of course, drug influence etc. She would have had a better chance of shifting more responsibility onto the others too, if she had been more subtle about it. The trial judges gave her more than merited leniency on the possibility of pre meditation. Even trained judges seem to have difficulty with seeing a woman being the prime mover in such a crime. She might very well have been looking at getting out in 2015 instead of going in.




Nooo, you don't get mitigation for being on drugs or alcohol.

Aside from committing the crime of course, her greatest mistake was not opting for the abbreviated rite. Knox and her supporters are looking at Rudy and dripping with envy over his sentence. The fault for that, lies in one place only.


Yes, they are green with envy.

How many times have you heard the old- RG got a deal crap?

stup-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline johnnyyen


User avatar


Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 2:22 pm

Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 3:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Let's start a campaign to remind the American media that the US extradited an American murderer named "Dylan Ryan Johnson" last year:

"US Citizen Extradited To Mexico For 10 Year Old Murder With Conflicting Accounts"

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/us-ci ... pkYtvO2.99

"U.S. national sentenced to 13 years in Guanajuato murder"

http://www.mexicogulfreporter.com/2013/ ... rs-in.html

Quote:
Guadalajara -
Dylan Ryan Johnson, a 29 year old American citizen from Greene County, Pennsylvania, has been sentenced to 13 years in prison after a Mexican judge convicted him in the 2003 murder of a 16 year old Guanajuato boy.

Greene was extradited to Mexico by U.S. authorities in December 2012, and was recently tried by a state district criminal court. He was also ordered to pay restitution of 32,000 pesos to his victim's parents - less than $2,700 dollars.

Continued...



Please tweet the above stories and retweet the below:

https://twitter.com/_JohnnyYen_/status/ ... 8798874624

Thank you.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 4:28 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The lady herself opines: ''When you’re accused of a horrific act you didn’t do, you inevitably experience shock, disorientation, confusion. There’s tension above your right eyebrow and below your right nostril that sometimes triggers both to twitch uncontrollably, making you self-conscious about looking people in the face. There’s a pinpoint knot that spasms between your shoulder blades, behind your heart, making it hard to sit still. There’s pressure that squeezes your temples and tingles on the edges of your eyeballs, making it hard to concentrate.''


It's funny, but I don't react that way when somebody accuses me of something I didn't do. All the above are signs of inner tension which is usually caused by the strain and disconnect of maintaining a façade of falsehoods. Me? I just get bloody angry. Then I set out to prove them wrong by assembling the evidence of what I DID do and presenting it in a simple, logical and chronological order of events. It never fails to show that the smear is baseless. Nobody gets to try to shift the blame onto Squeaky Clean Mouse. I work in finance and when there is a big foul-up, certain types of people think they can make the blame pour downhill. It doesn't work like that. It's very simple to show what you did do. You use specifics. The accusations are inevitably and deliberately hazy about timings. You take it apart piece by piece. Who did what and when. That's what police do and oh dear, the facts differ to all this vague righteousness.

Little Miss Amelie on the other hand has never managed to make two stories chime, is hazy and self-contradictory about times and events, demonstrably lying about multiple facts, melodramatic to distract attention, snide, emotional only about her own plight and a terrible but obvious liar. She endlessly seeks to confuse with drama instead of clarifying with simple statements and facts. That is a tactic only used to obscure facts and we may ask why it is endlessly used. Even her simplest utterances to say that she did not commit the crime are loaded with multiple interpretations and questions that go begging. A less articulate version of Bill Clinton or Bliar, playing with words to effect an escape. But those two are very smart, accomplished at the game and legally trained. Knox is none of those. Her games are always lost.

Nervous ticks are a dead give away of inner conflict. In Orwell's 1984, Smith passes an outer party member with a small twitch. He instantly knows that that man is a dead man. The twitch will be noticed and he'll be picked up by the Thought Police to find out why his inner world is in conflict with his outer party one.

''You sometimes feel dizzy, dazed, disoriented, forgetful, disconnected from your own body. You wake up drained, your whole body weighed down by a lethargy you can’t shake off. You feel a sometimes dragging, sometimes crushing weight. You’ll be tense from your ears to your lower abdomen, struggling to swallow, struggling to breathe. ''

Bollocks! That's the reaction of fear and dread gnawing away at you as you wonder if any of your lies have been exposed. The strain of maintaining the confident façade during seemingly endless waiting is what wears you out physically and emotionally. You only get that when you're trying to hide something. As ever with this woman, her writings do say something, but not what she intended.

''All of it, even years later, can transform into a full-blown panic attack—triggered by a ghost of a memory, or by a casual and unrelated event''. Push it all to the back of your mind and pretend it didn't happen but it will just keep popping out again. The harder you box it in, the harder it seeks an escape. That's mentally and physically draining. The horrors of prison? Bollocks! You had a cushy time. That's not the reason for the memory suppression.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:08 pm   Post subject: OSCAR PISTORIUS SECRETLY CALLED HIS EX THAT NIGHT   

Shocking news: Daily Mail

Quote:
Secret call: Oscar Pistorius spoke to ex-girlfriend Edkins, 25, who was called Babyshoes in his phone, for nine minutes on the eve he shot Reeva Steenkamp

Mobile phone data uncovered by South African journalists Barry Bateman and Mandy Wiener during the research for their forthcoming book Behind The Door, show that Pistorius was on the phone to Miss Edkins on the eve of the killing. Miss Edkins, who was stored in Pistorius’ phone book as ‘Babyshoes’, is one of the few former lovers to speak out in support of the Paralympian after the killing.


Police did not discover the nine-minute phone call, and Miss Edkins never gave a statement to the authorities The Mirror

Quote:
Mobile phone data showed Pistorius was on the phone when he arrived home that evening.

Further investigations have revealed that the number was used by Edkins but had been registered in her father’s name.

It appears police investigators did not make this connection.

Jenna was never questioned by the authorities and she never gave them a statement.

The prosecution has declined to comment on how this potential piece of evidence was missed.


I also do not believe that the full story of Amanda Knox's cell phone calls has been revealed to us yet.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline johnnyyen


User avatar


Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 2:22 pm

Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

WOW! Thank you Mr. Ergon! That right there is clearly grounds for the prosecution to appeal Pistorius' murder one charge. I really hope that they do that.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jester


User avatar


Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:24 pm

Posts: 2500

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 7:59 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Feist, Knox's favourite band when she was a convicted murderer in prison in Italy.

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

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:00 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Well, any person wishing to become a terrorist, would in all probability, be accepted by God's adversaries, operating from Syria, this means Knox and Sollecito can apply for a job there. They are mainly looking for butchers, who can make a murder look like ritual slaughter.

It's a pity Sollecito's dad has/had so much money, if it is the first of the two options, then it means son, one day, no matter how he suffers for his crimes locked away, will still have the luxury of money, while not having to pretend any longer that he ever needed to get a job.

I doubt Italians have some gang-thinking hatred against Americans, but, I reckon he probably does not like them anymore, his accomplice wouldn't have him round, at home, whatever it is, there in Seattle, Knoxious probably slanted it ll towards his corner, so they did not actually want to be seeing him, that way, they can and could carry on acting like it's all that boy up the road, all his fault, Dad Sollecito, I expect he speaks of the Le Puttana Americana (The American Whore) a good title for some strange book.

_________________
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: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:04 am   Post subject: SOMEWHERE, THE UNIVERSE IS LAUGHING AT AMANDA KNOX   

I clicked on the Knox "wrongful accusation" promo article @SeattleMet Magazine COINCIDENCES and this ad popped up right above the title, honest.

Somewhere, the Universe is laughing at Amanda Knox.


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: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Coincidence 2 :)

cart·wheel


[kahrt-hweel, -weel]

4. Slang. an amphetamine tablet.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 8:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jester wrote:
Feist, Knox's favourite band when she was a convicted murderer in prison in Italy.

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



Feist ? If they play the prison circuit they should call themselves Heist.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:00 am   Post subject: Re: OSCAR PISTORIUS SECRETLY CALLED HIS EX THAT NIGHT   

Ergon wrote:
Secret call: Oscar Pistorius spoke to ex-girlfriend Edkins, 25, who was called Babyshoes in his phone, for nine minutes on the eve he shot Reeva Steenkamp


Although Pistorius gives every indication of being a certifiably sick puppy and all-around complete bastard, I think that credit should be given where it is due. If he's the one who came up with the name "Babyshoes," then if nothing else the man certainly is an original thinker.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:51 am   Post subject: Re: SOMEWHERE, THE UNIVERSE IS LAUGHING AT AMANDA KNOX   

Ergon wrote:
Somewhere, the Universe is laughing at Amanda Knox.


Well, except for the murder and resultant misery that it's caused so many people, I've always found Knox to be a rich source of amusement. If her "fans" weren't the sort of people to take her and themselves so seriously, I think they might see that Knox with all her crazy antics and pratfalls is really the Lucille Ball of our time.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 2:33 pm   Post subject: ANOTHER LUCY SHOW   

The Desi Arnaz's got tired of being used as props, Earl, but yes, I Love Lucy was always a rich source of amusement. Not taking away from the heinousness of the crime, but wouldn't Madison Paxton make a great Ethel Mertz?

Quote:
Synopsis: Lucy Ricardo is the wacky wife of Cuban bandleader Ricky Ricardo. Living in New York, Ricky tries to succeed in show business while Lucy -- always trying to help -- usually manages to get in some kind of trouble that drives Ricky crazy. Their best friends are Fred and Ethel Mertz, who are also their landlords. Usually, Ethel becomes Lucy's less-than-willing partner in crime. Ricky and Lucy welcomed little Ricky in 1953, whose birth was a national TV event. Later in the show's run, the Ricardos (and the Mertzes) moved to Hollywood, where Ricky tried to become a movie star.


Is a little Amanda on the way, covered by that poncho? Does Hollywood beckon? Boyfriend trying to be a rock star? :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Earl Grey


User avatar


Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:38 pm

Posts: 236

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 2:51 pm   Post subject: Re: ANOTHER LUCY SHOW   

They'd better hurry up if they want to follow in the footsteps of Lucy, Ricardo, the Mertzs, etc., and put together a sitcom. They've only got about six months to do it. After that, Lucy-Amanda will be looking at some serious time in the pokey.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator


User avatar


Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4894

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Innocence Project Northwest's photos:

FACEBOOK

What do Knox's "praying hands" mean? "Please believe me, I'm innocent, too." (?)

Check out other photos by clicking on "previous" / "next". ;)
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 3:36 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

You look at the FB pages, guermantes, and aside from her elbowing her way on to the stage, she never attended any other events. The focus is on the real exonerees and volunteers, glad to see. The list of restrictions on DNA access is also very good, shows why she wasn't accepted as a Innocence Project, only Greg Hampikian shoe horned her in from Idaho in his own private capacity.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2014 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

guermantes wrote:
Innocence Project Northwest's photos:

FACEBOOK

What do Knox's "praying hands" mean? "Please believe me, I'm innocent, too." (?)

Check out other photos by clicking on "previous" / "next". ;)



Fcuk, can't get over it, she just looks like that someone, in those old Nazi films, who turns out to be the wickedest of all

Apart from that though, does she ever look as nutty as a fruitcake...

Her chums there, they look like extras on one flew over the wotszit, that or the local would-be rapist club, I mean, one of them may be transgender but as far as my eyes can see, they're all male.

Me next, me next, just looks so wrong and praying to the Devil isn't going to help her one bit.

The black bloke is a traitor, or, simply as thick as two short planks, if it he'd had been in Perugia 2 Nov, he may well have ended up still being there now thanks to his friends there

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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:06 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

The McCanns 'murder' again. In the UK you are not allowed to think for yourself so if anyone actually starts to question why 2 top sniffer dogs found cadaver and blood smell in the McCanns apartment, car and on their clothes then they are a troll or hater. It seems to be ok to openly harass and threaten the people that don't follow the McCanns horrendous PR campaign. The result is another death. I am sure this will be covered up again. Sick. JMO.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -home.html
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I saw that, max. The daily Mail and Mirror calling her names even after the poor woman was hounded to kill herself. I've been following her story, and Brenda Leyland's tweets were never as abusive as the media made out to be. There were anonymous people who really were awful, but they made her the scapegoat. The so called "journalists", Martin Brunt of Sky News and Carole Malone of the Mirror, came out looking like muck.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:52 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

It scares me what is going on there.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 10:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

In the headline of the article:

Quote:
Last week Gerry McCann said an example should be made of 'vile' trolls



I'm wondering...is Gerry McCann now happy with the "example" he's made?

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 11:02 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Just to preserve the record, here's the link to a text file of her tweets: http://greptweet.com/u/sweepyface/sweepyface.txt

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

"Concerned citizens" sent a "dossier" of all the different tweets to the police. Rupert Murdoch Sky News reporter Martin Brunt ambushed her and warned she was being "investigated" by Scotland Yard. She killed herself. The McCanns have run a PR campaign much like Knox's parents did, right down to the commercialization of a crime.

On that note, I'd like to remind people that is why we keep a close eye on comments here and elsewhere. Not one known member of PMF has said or done anything beyond the level of free speech and permitted discourse that we know of, but the Knoxii made much about 'investigating' us and 'reporting' to the police, people like David Anderson, Bill Williams, Michael B., Karen Pruett, Steve Moore and Bruce Fischer.

There are many similarities I noted about the case of Madeleine McCann and Meredith Kercher, but right now, I just feel very sorry for the family of Brenda Leyland. May she rest in peace.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:53 pm   Post subject: SHRIEN DEWANI MURDER TRIAL STARTS TODAY   

Cali Deeva has a new article out about the Shrien Dewani Murder trial beginning in South Africa today. Justice4Ever

I hope their judiciary doesn't cock up the trial the way they did Oscar Pistorius, but then, OP was a native son, so don't expect any thing else here but a fair trial.

Anni Hindocha, RIP r-((
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 5:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

What happened when Martin Brunt of Sky News confronted Brenda Leyland https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/517558345738493953 Within days, she was dead. RIP.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:03 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Didn't take long for IIP to start gloating: Clive Wismayer Is A Shit Eating Troll

Quote:
Re: Amanda Knox Case Public Discussion Forum 2-8-2011

Post by Clive Wismayer » Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:14 pm

"The fun may soon be over for the anonymous haters."

"McCann 'Twitter troll' found dead in hotel"


Clive Wismayer is an Amanda Knox dm-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I'd like to say, since nobody else here seems to have bothered to do so, that Kate and Gerry McCann should be considered victims rather than perpetrators unless and until some evidence is found that implicates them in the disappearance and presumed murder of their child. It sickens me every time you bring up your "knowledge" of their guilt.
It saddens me that that poor woman committed suicide, so I would add that I concur with the RIP expressed above. The McCanns did not in any way endorse that outing of some of the most persistent internet trolls btw, just in case anyone assumes they did so due to their pre-existing prejudice against them.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 7:12 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
The McCanns have run a PR campaign much like Knox's parents did, right down to the commercialization of a crime.

There are many similarities I noted about the case of Madeleine McCann and Meredith Kercher


Hmm, how best to put this? Bollocks.

PS Some of the "evidence" re the McCanns published in the UK has very recently been found legally to be..how best to put it? Bollocks. Strange that you didn't happen to mention that on this board as you have shown such interest in what happened.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Didn't take long for IIP to start gloating: Clive Wismayer Is A Shit Eating Troll

Quote:
Re: Amanda Knox Case Public Discussion Forum 2-8-2011

Post by Clive Wismayer » Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:14 pm

"The fun may soon be over for the anonymous haters."

"McCann 'Twitter troll' found dead in hotel"


Clive Wismayer is an Amanda Knox dm-)



Aren't they missing the point? Knox is twice convicted of rape and murder (along with other crimes with more trials for other offences pending) while the McCanns are not. The McCanns are not even charged with any offence. There is absolutely no way Knox and the McCanns are similar in status, legal or otherwise.

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


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

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 8:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
I'd like to say, since nobody else here seems to have bothered to do so, that Kate and Gerry McCann should be considered victims rather than perpetrators unless and until some evidence is found that implicates them in the disappearance and presumed murder of their child. It sickens me every time you bring up your "knowledge" of their guilt.
It saddens me that that poor woman committed suicide, so I would add that I concur with the RIP expressed above. The McCanns did not in any way endorse that outing of some of the most persistent internet trolls btw, just in case anyone assumes they did so due to their pre-existing prejudice against them.


I'd been mulling over what to post most of the afternoon. I sympathise with your anger. This sort of thing is becoming a regular occurrence too and practiced wholesale by the media and even our politicised charities.

I think the whole saga is a salutary lesson that people who engage in trolling and those who ostensibly engage in outing them can come perilously close to becoming the same thing. The attacks on the McCanns seemed to take on the vitriol and certainty of many a conspiracy theory, pursued despite an inability to provide evidence. They are labelled murderers while active leads are still being pursued by the UK police into known paedophiles. As far as I am aware no investigation is being pursued against the McCanns. The Sky reporters are really not much better, engaging in a trial by media with the odds stacked in favour of one outcome. Such door-stopping techniques are part of the entertainment world, not genuine news or investigation. Trolls often turn out to be sad inadequates with their own mental health issues. The proper authority to engage in investigation and if necessary, prosecution is the police and CPS. That applies both to the original crime and the trolling. Anything else becomes a media witch hunt, mainstream or not. To report and comment on evidence and information in the public domain is valid, but not to construct allegations around suppositions and then pursue the target as if these have become established fact.

The same sanctimonious and zealous attitudes are cropping up across the spectrum. The RSPCA began 'naming and shaming' those they prosecuted. One such was a very elderly lady with a multitude of cats that she could not care for. She couldn't even care for herself and had mental health issues. Yet the RSPCA triumphantly broadcast her picture and details which inevitably made her a hate target for so-called animal rights vigilantes whose actions are far worse than anything this sad lady ever did. Hate campaigns that target suppliers and relatives of workers at 'unapproved' companies often revolve around snide campaigns of paedophile slurs. They can be extremely damaging and distressful and stick even when the source of the campaign is identified as these 'rights' people who have no idea what rights actually are, let alone responsibilities.

The media, especially the BBC is sailing at the very least very close to the wind with reporting of the Yewtree investigations. The circus around Cliff Richard's house search was a sickening mix of shock entertainment and self righteous witch hunting by the very organisation that spent decades covering up multiple abuses.

We all have a responsibility as to the way we engage with the outside world. While free speech is a precious right, it is not an absolute one. There is not a right to attack and victimise somebody with a hate campaign of slurs that have not been established as having a basis by the police.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 9:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Ergon wrote:
The McCanns have run a PR campaign much like Knox's parents did, right down to the commercialization of a crime.

There are many similarities I noted about the case of Madeleine McCann and Meredith Kercher


Hmm, how best to put this? Bollocks.

PS Some of the "evidence" re the McCanns published in the UK has very recently been found legally to be..how best to put it? Bollocks. Strange that you didn't happen to mention that on this board as you have shown such interest in what happened.


That's a pretty vague riposte from a newly arrived member. Could you make a specific point if you want to get away with name calling? I'm quite familiar with the case and its legal status and mismanagement by Scotland Yard, politicians, and PR gurus BTW. If I didn't mention that on the board it's because a) I already commented several times before on the similarities between the two cases but didn't want to let it distract from our primary purpose, and b) it is apropos in view of the whole debate about online trolls, of which perhaps this group is more sinned against than sinners :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2014 9:56 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
I'd like to say, since nobody else here seems to have bothered to do so, that Kate and Gerry McCann should be considered victims rather than perpetrators unless and until some evidence is found that implicates them in the disappearance and presumed murder of their child. It sickens me every time you bring up your "knowledge" of their guilt.
It saddens me that that poor woman committed suicide, so I would add that I concur with the RIP expressed above. The McCanns did not in any way endorse that outing of some of the most persistent internet trolls btw, just in case anyone assumes they did so due to their pre-existing prejudice against them.


Thanks for telling us what you think. Do tell where we discussed specific "knowledge" of their guilt. Some are of the opinion the McCanns have a great deal to answer for, and are at least guilty of gross neglect, the kind that would get child protective services on their case if they were poor people living in a council estate. And Gerry McCann did make statements that now appear very prescient in knowing exactly what was going to happen to some poor person. He called for an example to be made of someone, and lo and behold, that was done.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:22 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Do those reporters even know what an 'internet troll' really is? If not then they should come here and look on a Tuesday sometimes :mrgreen:

Quote:
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:26 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

In the case of the McCanns, I don't know their case inside out like Meredith's and so do not feel qualified to declare them "guilty". However, I have seen enough to raise some red flags for me. In addition, they can hardly be said to have given their full co-operation to an investigation they have claimed to want to see reach the truth. Moreover, I have to agree with others that there was a degree of child neglect which had it have been done by people of a different social class they'd have been roundly condemned. I also know, that like Knox, they've been running a rather over bearing PR campaign. PR campaigns are run by those who have something they want to sell and the fact of their running one is an implicit admission that people may not be keen to buy what they're selling. As I see it, at the very least, the McCanns have brought some of their problems on themselves by their own actions. While I do not quite feel I can condemn them, as yet, I do also find it very difficult to feel sympathy for them.

I think, for these reasons, the McCann case is always going to be a very controversial and divisive one that splits people right down the middle.

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


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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

That is a very intelligent post Michael. I fully understand people arguing that they are not sure if the evidence is conclusive or that there legally is not enough evidence to convict. If only these were the discussions in the Meredith Kercher case. As we all know this is not what happens. People really want them to be innocent and go into full denial about any evidence there is. The same happened in the McCann case. It is hard to admit being influenced by media and nationalistic feelings, but it is obvious from the anti-Portugal and anti-Italian attitude that this plays a major role in both the McCann and Kercher case. The way I look at these kind of cases is first by not caring all that much and have an open mind, and second I just try to be mathematical. What are the chances that the Luminol traces reacted to 'something else' in the context of the crime scene? What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else? Once you start looking further without feeling the need to makeup a bunch of excuses, you will see that all the discrepancies and contradictions in alibis and statements aren't just confusions or mistakes because they were upset or didn't have a calendar in their back pocket. There are reasons for why suspects can't keep their stories straight. Again, I fully understand the neutral voters but just going into full denial about any evidence there is is hard for me to understand. Heck, I have no idea who killed those 3 boys in West Memphis. JMO.

http://whathappenedtomadeleinemccann.bl ... media.html

Or lets just ask them :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4Jzrpx-eM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RToxD_spv08

P.S. I don't mean to start any discussions about the evidence in the McCann case. If anyone doesn't agree and finds the evidence all nonsense then that is just fine with me. As long as you know there is a lot of 'nonsense' that all points to the McCanns being involved in the disappearance of their daughter.
Top Profile 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:48 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Everyone is entitled to their own view on the McCann's, personally for them to responsible for their daughter's disappearance requires them on finding her dead to override normal parental reaction to the death of their child and to make an on the spot decision to cover the whole thing up fooling their closest friends and the police in the process so well that years later the body hasn't been found.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 7:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I think it speaks for itself that parents that coverup their involvement in the death of their child do not follow 'normal parent reaction'. Indeed the body has not been found, but there is no need to make up stuff about on the spot decisions or fooling friends. We don't know that. They certainly didn't fool the Portuguese police who made them suspects.

The translated Nencini report is available :)
Top Profile 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Nencini's motivations report now available in English


Perugiamurderfile.org has released the English translation of the Nencini motivations report.

Follow this link to download a copy.

I would like to thank all translators and proofreaders for working so hard to make a translation available to the public. They are all making a difference.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:27 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Brogan wrote:
Everyone is entitled to their own view on the McCann's, personally for them to responsible for their daughter's disappearance requires them on finding her dead to override normal parental reaction to the death of their child and to make an on the spot decision to cover the whole thing up fooling their closest friends and the police in the process so well that years later the body hasn't been found.


As Michael says, the McCann case is so polarizing opinion splits down the middle. I think for most people, Cognitive Dissonance kicks in. How could any parent do this, how could so many people cover up? A conspiracy of silence? But it happens. The rumours, and they are so awful I won't repeat them, though they're discussed in other forums? They are quite believable, but in charity I will see it as an accident, and a cover up. I look at Kate McCann, and I see Patsy Ramsey, a case that really affected America. Projection perhaps, but there you go.

I used to wonder about the Knox/Mellas family. They must know, but they covered up, with the help of the nastiest PR I've seen (rather like the McCanns, who promptly called the politicians and the PR in)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Nell wrote:
Nencini's motivations report now available in English


Perugiamurderfile.org has released the English translation of the Nencini motivations report.

Follow this link to download a copy.

I would like to thank all translators and proofreaders for working so hard to make a translation available to the public. They are all making a difference.


Thanks, Nell! And a great thank you to the translators and proof readers at ORG. IIP has been waiting at length, with many snipy comments from Rev. Screech and his ilk, and now ORG releases it on time for FOAKER Tuesday! Thanks, much hugz-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:34 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Nell wrote:
Nencini's motivations report now available in English


Perugiamurderfile.org has released the English translation of the Nencini motivations report.

Follow this link to download a copy.

I would like to thank all translators and proofreaders for working so hard to make a translation available to the public. They are all making a difference.


Yes, great work by those on Org to get this done. Much appreciated, thanks guys!

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:57 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
That is a very intelligent post Michael. I fully understand people arguing that they are not sure if the evidence is conclusive or that there legally is not enough evidence to convict. If only these were the discussions in the Meredith Kercher case. As we all know this is not what happens. People really want them to be innocent and go into full denial about any evidence there is. The same happened in the McCann case. It is hard to admit being influenced by media and nationalistic feelings, but it is obvious from the anti-Portugal and anti-Italian attitude that this plays a major role in both the McCann and Kercher case. The way I look at these kind of cases is first by not caring all that much and have an open mind, and second I just try to be mathematical. What are the chances that the Luminol traces reacted to 'something else' in the context of the crime scene? What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else? Once you start looking further without feeling the need to makeup a bunch of excuses, you will see that all the discrepancies and contradictions in alibis and statements aren't just confusions or mistakes because they were upset or didn't have a calendar in their back pocket. There are reasons for why suspects can't keep their stories straight. Again, I fully understand the neutral voters but just going into full denial about any evidence there is is hard for me to understand. Heck, I have no idea who killed those 3 boys in West Memphis. JMO.



http://whathappenedtomadeleinemccann.bl ... media.html

Or lets just ask them :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-4Jzrpx-eM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RToxD_spv08

P.S. I don't mean to start any discussions about the evidence in the McCann case. If anyone doesn't agree and finds the evidence all nonsense then that is just fine with me. As long as you know there is a lot of 'nonsense' that all points to the McCanns being involved in the disappearance of their daughter.




Yes. I think the difference is, with Knox and Sollecito we have a lot of hard evidence, evidence that forms a clear pattern which has been established in court and ticks all the required boxes for a safe conviction. In the McCann case, things are more tenuous where there is a set of "clues" along with some shady behaviour. While the former provides enough to declare guilt, the latter does not, only suspicion, which may warrant further investigation and perhaps going to court, although probably, that will never happen.

Whatever one feels about the McCanns, there are valid questions to be asked. And it's quite wrong, I feel, for strong-arm bullying tactics to be used to silence people simply for asking those questions. Whatever way one looks at it, the hounding of poor Sweepyface to her death to "set an example" was just plain WRONG and I am absolutely appalled by the behaviour of Sky News and the McCanns in this matter. This must be roundly condemned, for it sets a worrying precedent for anyone that may wish to ask valid questions of the Establishment (as it certainly can be argued that the McCanns are just that, being fully supported by it) and as such, effects us all.

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:46 pm   Post subject: PETITION DAVID CAMERON   

There's Tuesday gone as we all read the Nencini Report, but one thing I will ask: there's a petition going on at Change.ORG

Quote:
Petitioning David Cameron
Launch a public inquiry into trial by television. Reference must be made to Brenda Leyland, denied legal representation by SKY News, threatened with jail. And now dead.
Petition by
Tom Delargy
Glasgow, United Kingdom


Please read, and consider signing.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:14 pm   Post subject: Re: PETITION DAVID CAMERON   

Ergon wrote:
There's Tuesday gone as we all read the Nencini Report, but one thing I will ask: there's a petition going on at Change.ORG

Quote:
Petitioning David Cameron
Launch a public inquiry into trial by television. Reference must be made to Brenda Leyland, denied legal representation by SKY News, threatened with jail. And now dead.
Petition by
Tom Delargy
Glasgow, United Kingdom


Please read, and consider signing.


Almost a thousand signatures to support this cause after only a few hours. This is the kind of public response Amanda Knox can only dream of.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
DrStrangeglove wrote:
I'd like to say, since nobody else here seems to have bothered to do so, that Kate and Gerry McCann should be considered victims rather than perpetrators unless and until some evidence is found that implicates them in the disappearance and presumed murder of their child. It sickens me every time you bring up your "knowledge" of their guilt.
It saddens me that that poor woman committed suicide, so I would add that I concur with the RIP expressed above. The McCanns did not in any way endorse that outing of some of the most persistent internet trolls btw, just in case anyone assumes they did so due to their pre-existing prejudice against them.



SqueakEMouse wrote:
I think the whole saga is a salutary lesson that people who engage in trolling and those who ostensibly engage in outing them can come perilously close to becoming the same thing.


This is precisely what I thought, when I saw your response, Ergon, to Dr Strangelove, instead of engaging, you immediately go down the path of demeaning him/her with your attempt at sarcasm but all I sense is that you seem to operate on the basis of ''us and them'' and if the innocence project is a bunch of shite then so is taking the opposite side of the fence so much so as to be on sites ranting off all day and night, that is also the reason I just cannot appreciate the Machine's manner, I thought we are people with own minds, I will never belong to ta group unless half the Beatles are dug up and they invite me to play the triangle for the day on a cooking programme censored so as to be a Twitter cooking programme with few ingredients. Therefore son, no not of God, er, if you say, they immediately engage a PR firm and the politicians, well I for one have no idea what you are on about so if you are splashing that about, then you ought to substantiate it squire, but not with a reel of incomprehensible Twitter feed as long as the Nile.

I'll continue reading Mouse's post now, it's just I started writing the same thing earlier but thought fuck it and chucked it.

_________________
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: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 3:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Zorba, there are some people I just won't engage with, including Dr. Strangeglove who showed up out of nowhere with comments about how much "hatred" he felt for Knoxia. The same with your attempts to engage with me about my spiritual beliefs that I express elsewhere or my work on Twitter, isn't your business, but do, please, continue to express your opinion.

If you couldn't be arsed to learn about what The Machine does or how Twitter works then criticizing him in an open forum for his manner when he isn't around much to defend himself is typical of you. I don't care what you think about me, but try to behave decently with someone (TM) who's done a great deal more for Meredith's cause than most.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 302

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 6:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


I can't wait to see those sniffer dogs in court. 'Objection your lordship. Counsel is leading the witness'
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 07, 2014 7:21 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


They do the same with 'weed puppies' when they search your home or vehicle in alot of cases.
If they think they are going to find something... I guess it is just a little pinch on the dog by the handler. Then they claim the dog 'hit' on something and are allowed to search even further.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:26 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Latest from Andrea Vogt:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt 34s35 seconds ago
New legal troubles for #sollecito & British ghostwriter, plus latest #amandaknox court dates & translations:
http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox ... cher-case/

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


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

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 12:31 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.

More like 1%. You really not see this is exactly how Knox supporters argue? Just attack Stefanoni or in this case the dog handler. Based on what? Dismiss all the Luminol evidence because the TMB test was negative. Dismiss all the dog alerts because they did not find enough chemicals? How silly. That is not what the dogs are trained to find. They find the smell of a dead body. That is all. They were never wrong which they have proven over and over again in many cases. Stupid police keeps using sniffer dogs. How ironic.
http://news.sky.com/story/1279830/madel ... iffer-dogs
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 12:43 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


I can't wait to see those sniffer dogs in court. 'Objection your lordship. Counsel is leading the witness'

The dog handler will testify as happened in the Caylee Anthony case for example. Welcome to the forum :)
Top Profile 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 2:12 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
I think it speaks for itself that parents that coverup their involvement in the death of their child do not follow 'normal parent reaction'. Indeed the body has not been found, but there is no need to make up stuff about on the spot decisions or fooling friends. We don't know that. They certainly didn't fool the Portuguese police who made them suspects.

The translated Nencini report is available :)


In the event of a domestic non accidental injury, death or disappearance of a child the parents are automatically suspects the police start with those in the proximity and work outwards, In the recent Alice Gross case the first person who will have been asked about their whereabouts will have been her dad, it's standard procedure. Oddly while searching a park for a possible burial site the Met's dogs failed to detect the main suspects body hanging off a tree, where he had been for a couple of weeks.
Top Profile 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:18 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.

More like 1%. You really not see this is exactly how Knox supporters argue? Just attack Stefanoni or in this case the dog handler. Based on what? Dismiss all the Luminol evidence because the TMB test was negative. Dismiss all the dog alerts because they did not find enough chemicals? How silly. That is not what the dogs are trained to find. They find the smell of a dead body. That is all. They were never wrong which they have proven over and over again in many cases. Stupid police keeps using sniffer dogs. How ironic.
http://news.sky.com/story/1279830/madel ... iffer-dogs


http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online ... rivacy-law

Quote:
A recent study of three years of data from an Illinois police precinct found a 56% erroneous alert rate.[8] Only 44% of the alerts resulted in discovery of drugs, and the error rate was even worse for Hispanic drivers (suggesting that human handlers have some influence over the process).[9]


The false positive alert rate for Hispanic drivers was 73%. Handlers have significant influence.
Top Profile 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:33 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

A dog alerts to smell, he is not trained to find anything other than that. These kind of articles are very misleading. In the McCann case, I am supposed to believe the dog handler was part of some conspiracy to frame the McCanns by leading the dogs only to items related to the McCanns and making them give false positive alerts. Sounds a bit far fetched to me, and I don't see any evidence of that. The fact that he was later hired by the FBI does not show him (and his dogs) being that unreliable. I don't see any reason why a professional dog handler would be (mis)leading a cadaver dog, and I don't understand the comparison with drug puppies. I also don't understand how you can explain police all over the world using sniffer dogs if they are so unreliable. Makes no sense to me.

Quote:
The results of this study indicate that the well-trained cadaver dog is an outstanding tool for crime scene investigation displaying excellent sensitivity (75-100), specificity (91-100), and having a positive predictive value (90-100), negative predictive value (90-100) as well as accuracy (92-100).

http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2008/12/cad ... ing-death/

I suggest we leave the McCanns and focus on the Nencini report.
Top Profile 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:35 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Adding...

Animal Cognition
May 2011, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 387-394,

Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes

Abstract
Our aim was to evaluate how human beliefs affect working dog outcomes in an applied environment. We asked whether beliefs of scent detection dog handlers affect team performance and evaluated relative importance of human versus dog influences on handlers’ beliefs.
[...]
Handlers’ beliefs that scent was present potentiated handler identification of detection dog alerts. Human more than dog influences affected alert locations. This confirms that handler beliefs affect outcomes of scent detection dog deployments.
Top Profile 

Offline Itchy Brother


User avatar


Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 11:35 pm

Posts: 423

Location: California/U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:51 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
A dog alerts to smell, he is not trained to find anything other than that. These kind of articles are very misleading. In the McCann case, I am supposed to believe the dog handler was part of some conspiracy to frame the McCanns by leading the dogs only to items related to the McCanns and making them give false positive alerts. Sounds a bit far fetched to me, and I don't see any evidence of that. The fact that he was later hired by the FBI does not show him (and his dogs) being that unreliable. I don't see any reason why a professional dog handler would be (mis)leading a cadaver dog, and I don't understand the comparison with drug puppies. I also don't understand how you can explain police all over the world using sniffer dogs if they are so unreliable. Makes no sense to me.

Quote:
The results of this study indicate that the well-trained cadaver dog is an outstanding tool for crime scene investigation displaying excellent sensitivity (75-100), specificity (91-100), and having a positive predictive value (90-100), negative predictive value (90-100) as well as accuracy (92-100).

http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2008/12/cad ... ing-death/

I suggest we leave the McCanns and focus on the Nencini report.


Sorry, but ever since I was introduced to Steve Moore and Jim Clemente I have a hard time accepting that "The FBI" constitute the last word on credible crime investigation.

No one is saying that scent detection dogs can't be useful. However, I would not consider a scent dog alerting on a suspect's car as proof of guilt. And neither would any reasonable court (I hope).
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:55 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hello Everyone, I've created an Epub version (for Ebook readers) of the Nencini Report translation. If anyone is interested in a version in that format let me know and I'll upload it along with the standard PDF format to a permanent home on the forum later today.

Cheers,

Michael

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:29 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I just want to add on the McCanns/Sweepyface events...these were the sorts of tweets being sent to Sweepyface by McCann supporters. Sky News didn't appear interested in going after these people (WARNING - Vile & Obscene!!!): https://twitter.com/spudpan/status/519413671345524736

When you have nasty tweets going BOTH ways in an online dispute and as a media outlet you select one person from one side, without an adequate explanation of why, and go out of your way to expose them and their whole lives, then that smacks of agenda.

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:14 pm   Post subject: INITIAL REVIEW NENCINI   

Review of Nencini

I finished Nencini last night. It was refreshingly readable, all the way through. I would have liked an index but it was missing in the original so can't be helped.

He summarizes the evidence in the Massei and Hellmann courts neatly and succinctly.

He gets to the heart of Massei: the evidence establishes the guilt of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. This is done in consideration of the whole, as required by the Supreme Court, but it's a pleasure to read how simply and elegantly he does that.

Guede: He makes it clear Guede was present and involved in the murder and sexual assault. He also separates Guede's trial from that of Knox and Sollecito, which effectively demolishes their current appeal to the Supreme Court.

Guede could not have broken Filomena's window (p.91) or entered from there when there was an easier access point (90); this establishes Knox let him in. He could not have attacked and restrained as well as kill Meredith on his own. It is res judicata he did not steal the money, therefore it is credible that a fight over money escalated into violence, assault, murder.

Forensic Evidence: There was a hurried clean up after Guede left. Mixed blood, Knox's footprint in Meredith's blood confirmed, (Plate 7 of the Rinaldo-Boemia Report) the bathmat foot print belongs to Sollecito, not Guede, there was no need to test the 'stain' on the pillow case as it would not prove anything for the purposes of the trial.

There is possible evidence of a woman's shoe print on the pillow case, obscured because of a fold.

Luminol revealed markings show presence of accomplices (210)

Time of Death: Between 9:00 PM and 0:10 AM (69) He does not tie Capezzali, Dramis or Monacchia to TOD, only to a "woman's scream" and running footsteps. Formica is mentioned because she didn't see the broke down car. Her testimony of a "dark man" is mentioned for form's sake only.

False Accusation: She accused Lumumba because he could not implicate her, VS Rudy, who could (115)

Behaviour: But above all no explanation behaviour defendants (191)

Alibis: Quintavalle and Curatolo are credible witnesses. Last human interaction RS computer 9:10 PM does not exclude him from involvement crime.

DNA: It cannot be proved contamination of knife took place (213)

Independent experts C&V are "objectively deceptive" (214)

Objecting party can't just conjecture, must prove path of contamination (215)

Gubbiotti/Finzi testimony shows clear chain of transport of knife, no chance of contamination (217)

He lists the seized knives including the two jack knives, the Spyderco and CKRT (219) Listing the presence of Knox and Sollecito's DNA on the CKRT knife seems to indicate he thinks, even if he does not say, that this is the second knife used on Meredith.

The cardboard box could not possibly be a path of contamination for the kitchen knife (220)

He vindicates Stefanoni. The presence of negative and positive controls shows there was no contamination (224)

Professor Torricelli, DNA consultant for the civil parties (229) and others show Meredith is the single contributor, it is definitely her DNA on trace 36B of the knife (232)

Nencini agrees there is a debate on LCN DNA amongst forensic scientists but then it is up to judges to adjudicate (233)

Yes the knife is LCN but it definitely is Meredith as a single contributor to the trace 36B (237)

The use of negative controls and other testimony shows absence of contamination.

"Strong condemnation of the behaviour of Professor Carla Vecchiotti" (238)

Professor Novelli confirmed absence of contamination exhibit 165B (the bra clasp) Hellmann should not have accepted independent experts without even considering opposing opinions from such as Novelli, who is "at least of equal stature as C&V" (239)

There is more :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Brogan


Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 2:41 am

Posts: 306

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:50 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
I just want to add on the McCanns/Sweepyface events...these were the sorts of tweets being sent to Sweepyface by McCann supporters. Sky News didn't appear interested in going after these people (WARNING - Vile & Obscene!!!): https://twitter.com/spudpan/status/519413671345524736

When you have nasty tweets going BOTH ways in an online dispute and as a media outlet you select one person from one side, without an adequate explanation of why, and go out of your way to expose them and their whole lives, then that smacks of agenda.


I totally agree we don’t want to be side tracked with the report translation just being released, I also agree with there being a skewed agenda from the press over the sweepyface tweets, it’s a bit rich when the gutter press particularly News International try to take the moral high ground.

If you want to see really nasty abuse try making my mistake. Following last week’s Cannel 4 documentary To catch a Paedophile, I commented on the Stinson Hunters amature facebook page version of To Catch a Predator. All I suggested was that while I had no sympathy for the people he catches his methodology was flawed and counterproductive to CPS charging options and that as one of the people featured in the show was NFA’d by the CPS something may have been edited out. I was immediately deluged by what appears to be hundreds of outraged chimps with keyboards accusing me all manner of misdeeds although as most of it was either misspelt or in text speak it was difficult to tell suffice to say I won’t be rattling that cage anytime soon.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 7:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi Everyone,

I've uploaded the Nencini Report translation to a permanent home on the board, along with an ePub version for eBook readers and also the original Italian. Its home is here: JUDGE NENCINI SENTENCING REPORT, FILED APRIL 29, 2014 in the "Legal Context" subforum.

Cheers,

Michael

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


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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 8:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Uh oh... looks like RS and Gumbel might better start their panic too.

That book was a seriously bad idea.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:01 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
I just want to add on the McCanns/Sweepyface events...these were the sorts of tweets being sent to Sweepyface by McCann supporters. Sky News didn't appear interested in going after these people (WARNING - Vile & Obscene!!!): https://twitter.com/spudpan/status/519413671345524736

When you have nasty tweets going BOTH ways in an online dispute and as a media outlet you select one person from one side, without an adequate explanation of why, and go out of your way to expose them and their whole lives, then that smacks of agenda.


I just wanted to say that I agree with Ergon's and Michael's opinions and those of others who are critical of the McCann's.

I am not saying they killed Madeleine, but in my view her disappearance would have been completely avoidable if the McCann's would have been responsible parents and not gone out to dine leaving their kids unattended and unsupervised.

I have no sympathy for them, partly, because I've ever only heard them complaining about the Portuguese police and how they were allegedly negligent in not pursuing all leads. In the few appareances I've watched, the McCann's have never expressed any remorse or guilt for having left their children without supervision, but they are very outspoken when it comes to criticising others.

Further I would like to add that there are more important things to worry about in life than evaluating if the McCann's agree with my expressed opinion. Who are they to judge?


Regarding the poor woman who committed suicide and Michael's comment quoted above, I suspect that the reason she was singled out is not because she did anything wrong that made her stand out from the crowd, but because she was probably the easiest and quickest to locate. If you look at Bruce Fischer's forum IA/IIP, that has been their critera as well. They need no reason as long as they can find you. They have a mob mentality.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Nell

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:38 pm

Posts: 5041

Images: 0

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 9:14 pm   Post subject: Re: INITIAL REVIEW NENCINI   

Ergon wrote:
Review of Nencini

I finished Nencini last night. It was refreshingly readable, all the way through. I would have liked an index but it was missing in the original so can't be helped.

He summarizes the evidence in the Massei and Hellmann courts neatly and succinctly.

He gets to the heart of Massei: the evidence establishes the guilt of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. This is done in consideration of the whole, as required by the Supreme Court, but it's a pleasure to read how simply and elegantly he does that.

Guede: He makes it clear Guede was present and involved in the murder and sexual assault. He also separates Guede's trial from that of Knox and Sollecito, which effectively demolishes their current appeal to the Supreme Court.

Guede could not have broken Filomena's window (p.91) or entered from there when there was an easier access point (90); this establishes Knox let him in. He could not have attacked and restrained as well as kill Meredith on his own. It is res judicata he did not steal the money, therefore it is credible that a fight over money escalated into violence, assault, murder.

Forensic Evidence: There was a hurried clean up after Guede left. Mixed blood, Knox's footprint in Meredith's blood confirmed, (Plate 7 of the Rinaldo-Boemia Report) the bathmat foot print belongs to Sollecito, not Guede, there was no need to test the 'stain' on the pillow case as it would not prove anything for the purposes of the trial.

There is possible evidence of a woman's shoe print on the pillow case, obscured because of a fold.

Luminol revealed markings show presence of accomplices (210)

Time of Death: Between 9:00 PM and 0:10 AM (69) He does not tie Capezzali, Dramis or Monacchia to TOD, only to a "woman's scream" and running footsteps. Formica is mentioned because she didn't see the broke down car. Her testimony of a "dark man" is mentioned for form's sake only.

False Accusation: She accused Lumumba because he could not implicate her, VS Rudy, who could (115)

Behaviour: But above all no explanation behaviour defendants (191)

Alibis: Quintavalle and Curatolo are credible witnesses. Last human interaction RS computer 9:10 PM does not exclude him from involvement crime.

DNA: It cannot be proved contamination of knife took place (213)

Independent experts C&V are "objectively deceptive" (214)

Objecting party can't just conjecture, must prove path of contamination (215)

Gubbiotti/Finzi testimony shows clear chain of transport of knife, no chance of contamination (217)

He lists the seized knives including the two jack knives, the Spyderco and CKRT (219) Listing the presence of Knox and Sollecito's DNA on the CKRT knife seems to indicate he thinks, even if he does not say, that this is the second knife used on Meredith.

The cardboard box could not possibly be a path of contamination for the kitchen knife (220)

He vindicates Stefanoni. The presence of negative and positive controls shows there was no contamination (224)

Professor Torricelli, DNA consultant for the civil parties (229) and others show Meredith is the single contributor, it is definitely her DNA on trace 36B of the knife (232)

Nencini agrees there is a debate on LCN DNA amongst forensic scientists but then it is up to judges to adjudicate (233)

Yes the knife is LCN but it definitely is Meredith as a single contributor to the trace 36B (237)

The use of negative controls and other testimony shows absence of contamination.

"Strong condemnation of the behaviour of Professor Carla Vecchiotti" (238)

Professor Novelli confirmed absence of contamination exhibit 165B (the bra clasp) Hellmann should not have accepted independent experts without even considering opposing opinions from such as Novelli, who is "at least of equal stature as C&V" (239)

There is more :)


Thanks for the summary Ergon.

I wonder if Carla Vecchiotti will ever be called as an independent expert by the courts again given her record. It was not the first time she has been accused of behaving less than professional. She has now quite a reputation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

GOOGLE TRANSLATION:

New process for Raffaele Sollecito: the injured pm will be defended by lawyers casertani Sciascia and Cesaro
Sollecito and American journalist Paul Gambal are accused of libel and defamation for insulting the work of the judiciary and the PS


Caserta / Florence - Florence ll Prosecutor has requested the indictment against Raffaele Sollecito and Andrew Gambal Paul, American journalist, following a complaint filed by the prosecutor Giuliano Mignini, the prosecutor at the court in Perugia, which supported the 'accusation against Sollecito and Amanda Knox for the murder of British student Meredith Kertcher.
Sollecito and Gambel, authors of the book Honor Bound, published in the United States and elsewhere, will have to answer for the crimes of aggravated defamation and contempt for having grievously offended the work of the judiciary, dr. Mignini and the State Police.
A preliminary hearing has already been scheduled for the day before the GUP to Florence 22/01/2015.
At trial, Dr.. Mignini deemed a civil action under the auspices of its legal advisors the criminal Cesaro Domenico di Aversa and prof. adv. Maximian Sciascia profiles for purely statutory.



INTERNO18

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


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

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hahaha... I wish Dio would stop by next Tuesday and let us know why so many are downloading the translation even though they are not going to read it.

stup-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

They are downloading it but seem to have a hard time understanding it, dgfred ;)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Oh, I see. Maybe he/she meant 'could not' instead of 'would not'.

wm)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zorba


User avatar


Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:11 am

Posts: 4233

Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Zorba, there are some people I just won't engage with, including Dr. Strangeglove who showed up out of nowhere with comments about how much "hatred" he felt for Knoxia. The same with your attempts to engage with me about my spiritual beliefs that I express elsewhere or my work on Twitter, isn't your business, but do, please, continue to express your opinion.

If you couldn't be arsed to learn about what The Machine does or how Twitter works then criticizing him in an open forum for his manner when he isn't around much to defend himself is typical of you. I don't care what you think about me, but try to behave decently with someone (TM) who's done a great deal more for Meredith's cause than most.




I would not hope it is my business Ergon, it's you who introduces stuff like predicting things because of the position of planets and stuff, you do it here, did it here, as a regular thing, as if that is a normal thing, I do not believe in that, but you having your position here, then would seem to be speaking for others, I just like to make it clear, particularly because you have the approach of, oh but they think the three did it so we should not criticise a thing they say, and I totally disagree with that clumping together of people, you are you, and you do not represent me, also, I feel some people imagine their own importance to be very high, but, the only thing I see as important, in this, is the courts in Italy, not people who engage with lunatics all the time on Twitter and other places, I think people are deluding themselves about their own importance.

I think you may be living in that kind of world. I noticed, often, you cannot take (constructive) criticism.

I feel you encourage certain lunatics, for example, the way you kept writing here, just as though you were having a direct conversation with the Chief Fur Coat Lunatic, it's none of my business, why should I have to read that crap that you write to him here, it's none of my business, I do not want his business to be any of mine, but you force me to see it, his fucking name all the time too, why in hell would I want to have such a nasty shit wicked bastard flying about in my head? All you do by paying attention to him is give him credibility, his SIDE thinks he is important through the fact that he gets taken seriously by you and others with similar ideas.


What it would be best to do, I feel, is have it out with him, not kick him up the Harry Rollocks physically, instead enter group therapy, just kidding, but you seem obsessed with the man.

You seem to have a lot of time on your hands.

I remember at a Shivaratri get together in Nepal, that a well-off business man, Indian, broke down when in the company of a true renunciate, he cast away everything, having, in a flash, seen how ridiculous his life was, part of the focus at Shivaratri, for some sadhus, is somehow accentuating how ridiculously futile an exercise it is to live your life thinking you are so important, illusionary self-importance is a waste of time, and nobody in relation to what happened to Meredith, should be profiting from what happened to her in any way, there are people who say they are on the side of justice for Meredith yet who I do not trust, some pontificate about their education, loving the exercise of showing off their knowledge, others write books, others have books, that never sold, some make film, though how can you draw the sky if you've never seen it whole?

I've got John Kercher's book, I mean, to me it's like a holy relic, I have not read it yet, I haven't because I know it would upset me too much at this moment, or up until now, but I will read it.

My opinions may be wrong, for someone else, but to me, they are correct, they could even in FACT be incorrect, but, I cannot see how talking to an invisible person and making it everyone's business is a good thing old bean.

I would need to observe Mr Dr Strangelove, to believe your fears/anxieties/prejudices/poor vision, whatever it is, you are obviously saying he's one of those spies, could be, probably trained in the former soviet Union.
I like the Russians me, I never realised how nice they can be.

Dr Strangelove, are you there, our Ergon here thinks you are a spy, could you please not disagree with anything anyone says here?
You must be a good spy as I detected nothing odd.

On a happy note, very pleased the thick bastard British opportunist would-be journalist, damn he probably even wears those ridiculous braces like that old fellow, Larry King, is getting taken to court, at least he will not get to profit further by doing a Kington, a Popham, and the rest, by loving the good life down in Italy while slagging everything Italian off.

Sollecito: Oh they are all a nonsense. He was forced into writing the book, an the Brit misinterpreted him, I did not understand English your excellence.

Okay, some of us have to work for a living.

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


Last edited by zorba on Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:26 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 Oct 09, 2014 5:16 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Zorba, there are some people I just won't engage with, including Dr. Strangeglove who showed up out of nowhere with comments about how much "hatred" he felt for Knoxia. The same with your attempts to engage with me about my spiritual beliefs that I express elsewhere or my work on Twitter, isn't your business, but do, please, continue to express your opinion.

If you couldn't be arsed to learn about what The Machine does or how Twitter works then criticizing him in an open forum for his manner when he isn't around much to defend himself is typical of you. I don't care what you think about me, but try to behave decently with someone (TM) who's done a great deal more for Meredith's cause than most.


I know exactly what the Machine does, that's the part I disagree with, and not around much, are you kidding yourself?

You do seem to care what I think of you since you take things so seriously, including yourself in my humble opinion, that's the bit I do not like a bout nicey nicey types who are that up until someone disagrees then they seem to go nuts, now just look at Knox.


Take the trouble to learn about, come on, you are really kidding, just because you happen to spend days and nights on Twitter, does not mean that everyone has to become a sheep and do the same, I hate the bastard thing and the culture that goes with it of complete superficiality and minimalism.

That what you say about the Machine is the part I mean, where people are deluded with their own importance, I do not like the way he says things as if he is God, and yes then the name is right, Machine, I dislike that way, and that is my right, it is my right to dislike it Ergon, without having anyone talk to me in a sanctimonious tone, like an aunty telling me off, bullshit.


His multiple posts damage the case, I think as far as making people think people who don't believe Knox are like a bunch of robots, yes that they are like machines, writing in a way as though they are the judges, it may be true, that they will be convicted as they were, not hard to see that, yet to say it like you are the judges, is for me going too far. Arrogance is what I call that. That's my opinion on the good man/woman, machine whatever it is.


I think it's good that you are unlikely to be a violent man, because those who are nicey nicey people, then turn nasty as soon as someone doesn't worship every word they say, are dangerous types.
In my view.
Where is your sense of humour?

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

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

dgfred wrote:
Hahaha... I wish Dio would stop by next Tuesday and let us know why so many are downloading the translation even though they are not going to read it.

stup-)


How long do you think it will be before a bootleg translation bearing all the hallmarks of a plagiarised copy, appears as an 'all my own work' tome from one of the disciples?

It does amaze me that there are still supporters left. Right from the start there have been outrageous claims and falsehoods spoon fed to the disciples, each of which in turn turns out to have been fake. From 'the knife was thrown out', out of control prosecutor, all night interrogation, etc etc. How many times does somebody have to be confronted with the evidence that they have been duped before they finally understand how they have been played and walk away? Nobody is quite THAT thick surely. So I can't help but think that there are no misinformed believers left (apart from the truly certifiable loons) The others KNOW. They are just looking for arguments for their sinking (often financial) cause. But the media don't have any excuses to hide behind now. It doesn't take much effort to get the information instead of swallowing Mr Marriott's bullet point leaflet.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline SqueakEMouse


User avatar


Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:25 pm

Posts: 184

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

dgfred wrote:
Hahaha... I wish Dio would stop by next Tuesday and let us know why so many are downloading the translation even though they are not going to read it.

stup-)


I hear Diocletian has referred the publishing of the translation to the ECHR as a breach of Knox's human rights. This will destroy the whole trial and result in a multi trillion compensation payment to Knox.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline hugo


Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:20 pm

Posts: 302

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 7:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

dgfred wrote:
hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


They do the same with 'weed puppies' when they search your home or vehicle in alot of cases.
If they think they are going to find something... I guess it is just a little pinch on the dog by the handler. Then they claim the dog 'hit' on something and are allowed to search even further.


I'm not sure it takes a pinch. The dogs just know. They may be able to smell when the handler goes into a heightened state of attention, because the handler's familiar smell will alter as different hormones start coursing. (Our springer would whine and pine as soon as the bitch at the farm 800 yards up the lane came on heat.) We're not sure how they do it, but they do it. There's the Illinois study referenced by Itchy, there was the English study where the dogs were videoed at work and seen to be reacting to cues from the handlers, and there was the awful Australian experience where they had to stop police using 'drug sniffer' dogs against people at random in public places because the false-positive rate was so bad it became obvious that the dogs were barking at anyone they thought the handler didn't like the look of. (Small clue: they're dogs.)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 7:24 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

SqueakEMouse wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Hahaha... I wish Dio would stop by next Tuesday and let us know why so many are downloading the translation even though they are not going to read it.

stup-)


How long do you think it will be before a bootleg translation bearing all the hallmarks of a plagiarised copy, appears as an 'all my own work' tome from one of the disciples?

It does amaze me that there are still supporters left. Right from the start there have been outrageous claims and falsehoods spoon fed to the disciples, each of which in turn turns out to have been fake. From 'the knife was thrown out', out of control prosecutor, all night interrogation, etc etc. How many times does somebody have to be confronted with the evidence that they have been duped before they finally understand how they have been played and walk away? Nobody is quite THAT thick surely. So I can't help but think that there are no misinformed believers left (apart from the truly certifiable loons) The others KNOW. They are just looking for arguments for their sinking (often financial) cause. But the media don't have any excuses to hide behind now. It doesn't take much effort to get the information instead of swallowing Mr Marriott's bullet point leaflet.



Now it will be... but where is the timeline for the entire night of the murder??? mop-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 8:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

For those who'd rather "not go there", Injustice Anywhere posters' criticisms of the Nencini Report translation so far include (and are mostly limited to):

Nencini's actual intention was not to review the legal soundness of the verdict but to confirm guilt by twisting the facts of the case, and he found a way to do so despite the obvious innocence of Tweedledum & Tweedledee. Nencini is a liar employed by conspirators.

The translators of the document's actual intention was not to provide an accurate translation of the document but to confirm guilt by twisting Nencini's words. The translation is deliberately misleading in order to make it appear that the case against Tweedledum & Tweedledee is sound.

In my experience when all that you can bring to a debate is baseless character assassination and wishful speculation its usually a sign that you should concede the argument and change your opinion.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 8:37 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Good luck with them changing their minds Doc. Not likely.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline corpusvile


Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:38 pm

Posts: 352

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 8:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Quote:
I know exactly what the Machine does, that's the part I disagree with, and not around much, are you kidding yourself?

Take the trouble to learn about, come on, you are really kidding, just because you happen to spend days and nights on Twitter, does not mean that everyone has to become a sheep and do the same, I hate the bastard thing and the culture that goes with it of complete superficiality and minimalism.

You disagree with making use of a very effective medium and think others who recognise the significance of such a medium are sheep, just to clarify?

Quote:
That what you say about the Machine is the part I mean, where people are deluded with their own importance, I do not like the way he says things as if he is God, and yes then the name is right, Machine, I dislike that way, and that is my right, it is my right to dislike it Ergon, without having anyone talk to me in a sanctimonious tone, like an aunty telling me off, bullshit.

Importance doesn't come into it, as TM backs up his points with primary factual sources.


Quote:
His multiple posts damage the case, I think as far as making people think people who don't believe Knox are like a bunch of robots, yes that they are like machines, writing in a way as though they are the judges, it may be true, that they will be convicted as they were, not hard to see that, yet to say it like you are the judges, is for me going too far. Arrogance is what I call that. That's my opinion on the good man/woman, machine whatever it is.

Multiple posts certainly do not damage the case and most certainly not this campaign for justice. Again Twitter is a very effective medium that gets the message across to relevant parties such as the media, regardless of one's personal feelings on it as an actual social media outlet.

Not sure what your problem or disagreement is really. If you don't like twitter then don't post there, but your critique of others for posting there isn't valid, again due to it being a very effective medium. If you have apparent personal issues with certain people then don't respond to them but give your opinions on the progression of the case, rather than pointlessly squabbling with them. If you must squabble then you should really squabble via pm, rather than engaging in drama on a forum in public.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 8:56 pm   Post subject: ENOUGH ALREADY   

No one's forcing you to read me, zorba. You can block any time or scroll by.
No one's stopping you from expressing your oft repeated opinions.
I reply only when you address me. That does not mean I "care" for your opinion, any more than I "care" when I reply to Bruce Fischer or Jim Clemente.
Others on this board like astrology, yet here you are, complaining when I write about it.
When other members bring back information about the FOA's doings you mute your criticism, but seem to act as some sort of guardian of what I should say.
There are other people on this board who've written twice the number of tweets I have, but you seem to think I have "way too much time"? That is personal, and it is abusive.
You're welcome to your opinion about social media, don't criticize people who do use it. I'm addressing your criticism of The Machine btw. We're all volunteers here, who are you to say what harms the 'cause'? I asked dozens of times that people not criticize ORG or TJMK but still seems to happen.
And yes, I am a bit energetic on various forums. So? Could be said about a lot of people, but you were saying about 'aunty criticism'?
Now if you'll excuse me, I'd rather read a good motivations report.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:09 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Brief answer, dgfred:
Nencini doesn't make up a timeline or speculate on motive. He only addresses the various testimonies and evidence then puts it together as a rigorous whole.
But he does make note of the transport of the knife to the cottage in the bag.
Will have to read the report a few more times to be able to get a better overview, but it is an impressive document, very clear, maybe a bit too difficult for the likes of IIP, but, it seems judgment proof at the Supreme Court level.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 152

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:00 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I am pretty new here, but I know The Machine from .org and Twitter. Surly Twitter itself is somehow an odd media - one can hardly say much, there are just short slogans - also this requests a know-how. I find that The Machine is just great on tweetting - and very effective - he can just make public the truth, he knows perfectly how to get people's attantion and Foa-kers nervous and mad. I can understand other people who do not like this Twitter or even hate it - it is really a strange interhuman communication. Anyway, the Machine is ABLE USING IT FOR THE GREAT PURPOSE - TO SPREAD THE TRUE EVIDENCE ABOUT MEREDITH'S MURDER, and so make a big and effective work for the Justice for Meredith, R.I.P. I am sure, it is not easy for him, I could read terrible reactions from FOA-kers, sometimes I asked myself how The Machine can edure all that horrible aggressions. But he went on with his program and I know by now, his work on Twitter has a system and a programm and I could already see partly his big success at Reporters and other publics. I admire him that he can do it so effective and perfect.
Please, let us be so different as we are and let's find everybody's difference as an interesting part of our world - of course, excluded people like Knox and such. Please, don't get aggressive about other personaly habits - it is so great not to be uniform. Sorry for my bad language and Long Explanation. Tnx.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:08 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

elisa wrote:
I am pretty new here, but I know The Machine from .org and Twitter. Surly Twitter itself is somehow an odd media - one can hardly say much, there are just short slogans - also this requests a know-how. I find that The Machine is just great on tweetting - and very effective - he can just make public the truth, he knows perfectly how to get people's attantion and Foa-kers nervous and mad. I can understand other people who do not like this Twitter or even hate it - it is really a strange interhuman communication. Anyway, the Machine is ABLE USING IT FOR THE GREAT PURPOSE - TO SPREAD THE TRUE EVIDENCE ABOUT MEREDITH'S MURDER, and so make a big and effective work for the Justice for Meredith, R.I.P. I am sure, it is not easy for him, I could read terrible reactions from FOA-kers, sometimes I asked myself how The Machine can edure all that horrible aggressions. But he went on with his program and I know by now, his work on Twitter has a system and a programm and I could already see partly his big success at Reporters and other publics. I admire him that he can do it so effective and perfect.
Please, let us be so different as we are and let's find everybody's difference as an interesting part of our world - of course, excluded people like Knox and such. Please, don't get aggressive about other personaly habits - it is so great not to be uniform. Sorry for my bad language and Long Explanation. Tnx.



Hi Elisa. I agree, Twitter can be a very powerful medium if one knows how to use it and The Machine certainly does some sterling work with it, especially in bringing important case documents and facts to the attention of journalists who all have Twitter accounts and monitor Twitter closely. It certainly isn't a waste of time and clearly, the FOAKers don't think is either since they work so hard on Twitter to try and counter our efforts there, which is proof of the pudding.

Welcome to PMF, Elisa!!! :)

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


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

Offline elisa


Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:43 pm

Posts: 152

PostPosted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:22 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sorry, would like to add - mean dare to add - Ergon seems to me a person with a very big heart and profound feelings. He may live in three different worlds then the average does, besides the real world he has also the irreal and surreal world around him. It makes him not strange but even most likely better then the average persones living in the only reality like perhaps me. I never felt that he wants to be something like a Guru for us - he just has another view of things what is interesting anyway, even if we do not agree always. If somebody doesn't like that kind so should not care. But i feel Ergon is a very nice Person and doesn't deserve any attacks. Also he is doing a great work for the Justice for Meredith. I hope i has not been too personell. Good night all together.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hey E, what I meant was that they are running mighty low on talking points. Seems a couple of the last survivors are the timeline one and TOD one. Not that either matter at this point in time. They mostly just want one of us to argue it over there so they can pile on with the same old crap. Amazing.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:13 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

hugo wrote:
dgfred wrote:
hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


They do the same with 'weed puppies' when they search your home or vehicle in alot of cases.
If they think they are going to find something... I guess it is just a little pinch on the dog by the handler. Then they claim the dog 'hit' on something and are allowed to search even further.


I'm not sure it takes a pinch. The dogs just know. They may be able to smell when the handler goes into a heightened state of attention, because the handler's familiar smell will alter as different hormones start coursing. (Our springer would whine and pine as soon as the bitch at the farm 800 yards up the lane came on heat.) We're not sure how they do it, but they do it. There's the Illinois study referenced by Itchy, there was the English study where the dogs were videoed at work and seen to be reacting to cues from the handlers, and there was the awful Australian experience where they had to stop police using 'drug sniffer' dogs against people at random in public places because the false-positive rate was so bad it became obvious that the dogs were barking at anyone they thought the handler didn't like the look of. (Small clue: they're dogs.)

And then there is the dog expert who knows perfectly well how he should handle his dogs. I am sorry but I get tired when 'internet experts' think they know better than a police expert at work. No drug dogs were involved. We are talking about a cadaver and a blood dog. They did not sniff any people so even if the dog handler was a racist, this did not influence his dogs. He explains it himself anyway. He is well aware how he should behave to eliminate any chance of him leading the dogs.

Quote:
FALSE ALERTS
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200 criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal. My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour. This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour other than to direct the search.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

200 out of 200 is 100%. If you think it is actually 10% then he must be lying and committed fraud in 180 cases without anybody every noticing. That is ridiculous. The dog alerts concentrated on one car, and in one apartment out of many so that already excludes any randomness. I expected from PMF members that before they accuse an expert of spreading lies and serious misconduct to have hard evidence, but all I get is some misleading examples about a different type of dog. I rather stick with the real expert. If a well-trained cadaver dog makes 12 alerts inside your house then you can be certain there once was a dead body in your house. I understand that it is legally not enough to convict, but it is more than enough to figure out what happened with Madeleine McCann. That is all there is to it. JMO and all that :)
Top Profile 

Offline malvern


Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:27 pm

Posts: 503

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:16 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

We all fight the fight in our own way and it's all valid because the intention is just. Strategies
may differ but collectively our voice is strong. Personally I cringe at any infighting!! Let's focus on the Nencini report which I'm blown away by. I was 100% convinced of their guilt , it's now 110% if that's possible. The visual image of the attack and what role each played became much clearer. Nencini methodically constructed a scenario of know facts tying them together so the events on November 1 were understandable and impossible to dispute.The translated version cannot be dismissed without seeming foolish or just too lazy to read it.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:57 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

dgfred wrote:
Hey E, what I meant was that they are running mighty low on talking points. Seems a couple of the last survivors are the timeline one and TOD one. Not that either matter at this point in time. They mostly just want one of us to argue it over there so they can pile on with the same old crap. Amazing.


You might have missed the stomach contents person who wanted an "American expert" hbc) to publish an opinion on it, and those who have "confirmation bias" hotkeys, as in Nencini wrote a report based on, dgfred huh-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline max


Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:55 am

Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:09 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
dgfred wrote:
Hey E, what I meant was that they are running mighty low on talking points. Seems a couple of the last survivors are the timeline one and TOD one. Not that either matter at this point in time. They mostly just want one of us to argue it over there so they can pile on with the same old crap. Amazing.


You might have missed the stomach contents person who wanted an "American expert" hbc) to publish an opinion on it, and those who have "confirmation bias" hotkeys, as in Nencini wrote a report based on, dgfred huh-)

For some reason, every time I visit JREF I see the stomach contents discussed as well. Last time one poster referred to a study that indicated it would never take longer than 2 hours or you end up in the hospital with cramps and all that. The funny part is that he did not realize that this is against their main theory that 3 hours is completely normal and expected. This poster simply fixed the obvious problems in the timeline by stating that therefore they must have eaten after 7:30pm. Hilarious.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:07 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Amanda Knox Trial Update: Reconvicted in Italian Court, Knox and Sollecito Awaiting Court Decision


By Virnelli Mercader , Christian Post Contributor
October 9, 2014|3:59 pm



THE CHRISTIAN POST

(Nothing new, only the fact that US mainstream media appear to still be ignoring it)

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


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

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:36 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

max wrote:
hugo wrote:
dgfred wrote:
hugo wrote:
max wrote:
What are the chances that two top sniffer dogs give specific alerts in the McCann's apartment, to their clothes and car and nowhere else?


Extremely high, due to the handlers' prior knowledge. And in those circumstances, the chances of a false positive are over 90 per cent, and the dogs' reactions were in fact false positives, since no trace of the 'corpse chemicals' they were supposed to react to was ever found. Nor was Madeleine's DNA ever found in the hire car, as is often falsely alleged. Sniffer dogs react principally to what they think their handlers are interested in.


They do the same with 'weed puppies' when they search your home or vehicle in alot of cases.
If they think they are going to find something... I guess it is just a little pinch on the dog by the handler. Then they claim the dog 'hit' on something and are allowed to search even further.


I'm not sure it takes a pinch. The dogs just know. They may be able to smell when the handler goes into a heightened state of attention, because the handler's familiar smell will alter as different hormones start coursing. (Our springer would whine and pine as soon as the bitch at the farm 800 yards up the lane came on heat.) We're not sure how they do it, but they do it. There's the Illinois study referenced by Itchy, there was the English study where the dogs were videoed at work and seen to be reacting to cues from the handlers, and there was the awful Australian experience where they had to stop police using 'drug sniffer' dogs against people at random in public places because the false-positive rate was so bad it became obvious that the dogs were barking at anyone they thought the handler didn't like the look of. (Small clue: they're dogs.)

And then there is the dog expert who knows perfectly well how he should handle his dogs. I am sorry but I get tired when 'internet experts' think they know better than a police expert at work. No drug dogs were involved. We are talking about a cadaver and a blood dog. They did not sniff any people so even if the dog handler was a racist, this did not influence his dogs. He explains it himself anyway. He is well aware how he should behave to eliminate any chance of him leading the dogs.

Quote:
FALSE ALERTS
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200 criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal. My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour. This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour other than to direct the search.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

200 out of 200 is 100%. If you think it is actually 10% then he must be lying and committed fraud in 180 cases without anybody every noticing. That is ridiculous. The dog alerts concentrated on one car, and in one apartment out of many so that already excludes any randomness. I expected from PMF members that before they accuse an expert of spreading lies and serious misconduct to have hard evidence, but all I get is some misleading examples about a different type of dog. I rather stick with the real expert. If a well-trained cadaver dog makes 12 alerts inside your house then you can be certain there once was a dead body in your house. I understand that it is legally not enough to convict, but it is more than enough to figure out what happened with Madeleine McCann. That is all there is to it. JMO and all that :)



A cadaver dog is trained to detect odours, a couple of which can be obtained as commercial preparations.
The fact that a dog reacts in a particular area, leaving aside Handler influence, merely indicates that the dog thinks it has detected those specific smells. That is evidence of nothing since a smell can not be categorized or dated and the dog can not be questioned.

When used as a search aid, the discovery of a drug or a body provides actual evidence and dogs are obviously useful in that respect. It is disappointing that some courts have accepted speculative inferences but there is a history of junk science being embraced by Judges and juries. Some experts can be very forceful and persuasive.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Latest from Andrea Vogt:

Andrea Vogt ‏@andreavogt
Rudy Guede requested early prison release before Rome judges panel today. Panel reserved right to reflect & rule later. #amandaknox


https://twitter.com/andreavogt/status/5 ... 0406037504

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 12:47 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
That is evidence of nothing since a smell can not be categorized or dated and the dog can not be questioned.


In and of itself, in a court of law, no. But, we the public, are not a court of law. I think those that are arguing that the McCanns have a case to answer are not arguing that there is enough evidence to convict them in a trial, but that there is enough evidence and clues against them to warrant a criminal investigation against them and perhaps at the end of it even a committal to trial. It is certainly a feature of this case that there was pressure on the authorities to cease investigating the McCanns too closely and what investigations there were, the McCanns failed to co-operate with. There is, in my view, at the very least, an argument for such an unfettered investigation to be carried out. It is, after all, standard procedure in most investigations that those closest to the victim immediately be regarded as persons of interest, if not outright suspects. And it must be remembered here, the McCanns had sole responsibility for Madelaine's welfare and were the last to see her alive. And I have also yet to see, any evidence for the existence of any third party involvement.

Since this is still an open criminal investigation, one must approach the case with a policeman's head on, not that of a High Court judge. You have to follow what clues there are to where they point.

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:42 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Yes, it's called circumstantial evidence, from which judges and juries are allowed to draw any inference, including and up to, guilt, intray. As has been shown in the case of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

If a drug sniffer dog gave off an alarm on sniffing someone's suitcase, I'd assume it came in contact with drugs. If a cadaver dog trained to detect cadaverine sniffed something at a specific location I will assume it detected a body had been present there. I would not stretch 'logic' that far to assume someone sprayed a "commercial preparation" at that location. Or turnip juice, remember that? Absent other evidence, no I would not convict, but I would not accept junk logic or retrofitted psychology that the handler may have signaled something to the dog, please.

I would rather accept the many studies that show how accurate drug and cadaver dogs can be, data and statistics widely available on the net. Funny how we accept media reports on some cases but not others, and claims of 'junk science' by some and not others. Funny how some elevate 'science' to levels of perfection above the rest of us but somehow, we muddle along quite well, thank you.

That is why the verdict is acceptable, because human beings, a judge and jury, made the final determination, and not 'scientists' like Kassin, Hampikian, Gill, and Carla Vecchiotti.

But I digress. The McCanns have much to answer for. I already commented many times (here on the board since 2011 and not Twitter) the many similarities between the McCann disappearance and this case. Obviously they have not been charged with anything, and I made no pronouncement of guilt, JMO. If I were on a jury, I would act differently, but here on this board, ALL opinions are valid.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Yes, it's called circumstantial evidence, from which judges and juries are allowed to draw any inference, including and up to, guilt, intray. As has been shown in the case of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

If a drug sniffer dog gave off an alarm on sniffing someone's suitcase, I'd assume it came in contact with drugs. If a cadaver dog trained to detect cadaverine sniffed something at a specific location I will assume it detected a body had been present there. I would not stretch 'logic' that far to assume someone sprayed a "commercial preparation" at that location. Or turnip juice, remember that? Absent other evidence, no I would not convict, but I would not accept junk logic or retrofitted psychology that the handler may have signaled something to the dog, please.

I would rather accept the many studies that show how accurate drug and cadaver dogs can be, data and statistics widely available on the net. Funny how we accept media reports on some cases but not others, and claims of 'junk science' by some and not others. Funny how some elevate 'science' to levels of perfection above the rest of us but somehow, we muddle along quite well, thank you.

That is why the verdict is acceptable, because human beings, a judge and jury, made the final determination, and not 'scientists' like Kassin, Hampikian, Gill, and Carla Vecchiotti.

But I digress. The McCanns have much to answer for. I already commented many times (here on the board since 2011 and not Twitter) the many similarities between the McCann disappearance and this case. Obviously they have not been charged with anything, and I made no pronouncement of guilt, JMO. If I were on a jury, I would act differently, but here on this board, ALL opinions are valid.
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
That is evidence of nothing since a smell can not be categorized or dated and the dog can not be questioned.


In and of itself, in a court of law, no. But, we the public, are not a court of law. I think those that are arguing that the McCanns have a case to answer are not arguing that there is enough evidence to convict them in a trial, but that there is enough evidence and clues against them to warrant a criminal investigation against them and perhaps at the end of it even a committal to trial. It is certainly a feature of this case that there was pressure on the authorities to cease investigating the McCanns too closely and what investigations there were, the McCanns failed to co-operate with. There is, in my view, at the very least, an argument for such an unfettered investigation to be carried out. It is, after all, standard procedure in most investigations that those closest to the victim immediately be regarded as persons of interest, if not outright suspects. And it must be remembered here, the McCanns had sole responsibility for Madelaine's welfare and were the last to see her alive. And I have also yet to see, any evidence for the existence of any third party involvement.

Since this is still an open criminal investigation, one must approach the case with a policeman's head on, not that of a High Court judge. You have to follow what clues there are to where they point.




There was a criminal investigation. The McCanns were named as suspects, no substantive evidence was produced, no charges were brought forward, not even child neglect. You may argue that political pressure was a factor but there was considerable leakage of information. The lead detective wrote a book, which is the subject of legal action. I am not aware of any evidence cited, either within that book, or released via back channels.

You are correct of course in stating that the parents should have been considered as suspects, but discretion is required and other lines of inquiry should also be pursued. Any individual being named as a suspect should automatically stop talking and engage a lawyer. The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.
They were also professional people with a reputation to protect, their use of PR was not inappropriate considering the huge amount of media pressure.

A bottle of Calpol an unidentified bloodstain and a barking dog were not really adequate grounds for unleashing the media upon that unfortunate couple.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:54 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Yes, it's called circumstantial evidence, from which judges and juries are allowed to draw any inference, including and up to, guilt, intray. As has been shown in the case of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

If a drug sniffer dog gave off an alarm on sniffing someone's suitcase, I'd assume it came in contact with drugs. If a cadaver dog trained to detect cadaverine sniffed something at a specific location I will assume it detected a body had been present there. I would not stretch 'logic' that far to assume someone sprayed a "commercial preparation" at that location. Or turnip juice, remember that? Absent other evidence, no I would not convict, but I would not accept junk logic or retrofitted psychology that the handler may have signaled something to the dog, please.

I would rather accept the many studies that show how accurate drug and cadaver dogs can be, data and statistics widely available on the net. Funny how we accept media reports on some cases but not others, and claims of 'junk science' by some and not others. Funny how some elevate 'science' to levels of perfection above the rest of us but somehow, we muddle along quite well, thank you.

That is why the verdict is acceptable, because human beings, a judge and jury, made the final determination, and not 'scientists' like Kassin, Hampikian, Gill, and Carla Vecchiotti.

But I digress. The McCanns have much to answer for. I already commented many times (here on the board since 2011 and not Twitter) the many similarities between the McCann disappearance and this case. Obviously they have not been charged with anything, and I made no pronouncement of guilt, JMO. If I were on a jury, I would act differently, but here on this board, ALL opinions are valid.
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
That is evidence of nothing since a smell can not be categorized or dated and the dog can not be questioned.


In and of itself, in a court of law, no. But, we the public, are not a court of law. I think those that are arguing that the McCanns have a case to answer are not arguing that there is enough evidence to convict them in a trial, but that there is enough evidence and clues against them to warrant a criminal investigation against them and perhaps at the end of it even a committal to trial. It is certainly a feature of this case that there was pressure on the authorities to cease investigating the McCanns too closely and what investigations there were, the McCanns failed to co-operate with. There is, in my view, at the very least, an argument for such an unfettered investigation to be carried out. It is, after all, standard procedure in most investigations that those closest to the victim immediately be regarded as persons of interest, if not outright suspects. And it must be remembered here, the McCanns had sole responsibility for Madelaine's welfare and were the last to see her alive. And I have also yet to see, any evidence for the existence of any third party involvement.

Since this is still an open criminal investigation, one must approach the case with a policeman's head on, not that of a High Court judge. You have to follow what clues there are to where they point.




There was a criminal investigation. The McCanns were named as suspects, no substantive evidence was produced, no charges were brought forward, not even child neglect. You may argue that political pressure was a factor but there was considerable leakage of information. The lead detective wrote a book, which is the subject of legal action. I am not aware of any evidence cited, either within that book, or released via back channels.

You are correct of course in stating that the parents should have been considered as suspects, but discretion is required and other lines of inquiry should also be pursued. Any individual being named as a suspect should automatically stop talking and engage a lawyer. The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.
They were also professional people with a reputation to protect, their use of PR was not inappropriate considering the huge amount of media pressure.

A bottle of Calpol an unidentified bloodstain and a barking dog were not really adequate grounds for unleashing the media upon that unfortunate couple.


Sorry. My response to Michael was wrongly posted under Egons's comment
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:54 pm   Post subject: CONGRATULATIONS, MALALA !   

BBC News

Quote:
Malala and Kailash Satyarthi win Nobel Peace Prize
Pakistani child education activist Malala Yousafzai and Kailash Satyarthi, an Indian child rights campaigner, have jointly won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Yes indeed it is a great honour for her, but not Pakistan. The first prize winner Abdus Salam, driven out because he was an Ahmadi Muslim. The second, shot in the head by an extremist because she wanted an education. And the other Nobel Prize winner http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... ates/2006/ well we can't claim that honour because we drove East Pakistan out with our failures as a nation.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:15 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Sheesh. The media wasn't unleashed on the McCanns, but on Brenda Leyland. The media aided and abetted the McCanns, who used the sympathy generated by the media to collect donations used to pay off their mortgage and hire 'detectives' now under investigation for fraud. They used those donations to set up an LLC and not a charitable trust and their reasons are specious. Their major expenses were legal fees to Carter Ruck all dissent and attempts to hold them accountable. It now appears the "dossier" was handed over to the McCanns who then leaked it to Murdoch's Sky News.

Their story is no more acceptable to me as a thinking person than Amanda Knox's, and their use of PR is similar to Knox's, along with threats against any and all dissenters, some of whom are more vulnerable than others, just saying.

And, to be fair, I find the behavior of some on 'our' side to be a bit over the top too, and a neutral observer might say we are just a tad obsessed ourselves. But I understand where people are coming from. There is an injustice, and we feel passionately about injustice. If Brenda Leyland, by all accounts a decent person who felt strongly, not just about Madeleine McCann, but was contacting Downing Street about all the pedophile cover ups, was made an example of, maybe someone needs to speak up for her too.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:19 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

re coverage in the uk press:

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/40624

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/42240

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... fore-truth
==================================================================
re how long after death before a body emits odours or core temperature drops dogs can detect:

http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html

This would seem to indicate that for Madeleine's body to have been sensed by the dogs she would have to have been left in the room, dead, for a considerable period of time, and this before of course being spirited away by her parents to somewhere that has never been found by dogs or humans, within a very short time period (unless some resort staff and all dining companions lied to cover up for them). Add this to the fact that forensic investigations found no trace of Madeleine actually bleeding or dying in her room that night and no evidence of a clean-up to erase such traces, and what have you got?


Last edited by DrStrangeglove on Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:23 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
The media aided and abetted the McCanns, who used the sympathy generated by the media to collect donations used to pay off their mortgage

Anything approaching "evidence" here?...Didn't think so.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:25 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
Their major expenses were legal fees to Carter Ruck.

Or this (assuming you mean their fund as opposed to personal costs, as that is what you seem to imply)?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:32 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
It now appears the "dossier" was handed over to the McCanns who then leaked it to Murdoch's Sky News.

This is also untrue.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
There was a criminal investigation. The McCanns were named as suspects, no substantive evidence was produced, no charges were brought forward, not even child neglect.


That is because the investigation against them was actively pressured from outside and wasn't permitted to run its full course.

I might remind you, no substantive evidence or evidence of any kind (substantive or not) was found supporting the involvement of any third party. However, there were clues pointing to the McCanns.

It is a fact that many crimes go unsolved or the culprits are never brought to trial or acquitted if when they are, due to a lack of evidence for a safe conviction. That however, does not necessarily mean that they are innocent.

Were that not the case, then we would have to conclude that since there is not enough evidence in this case to charge ANYONE, that no crime was actually committed and Madelaine is actually at home safe and well. That would be ridiculous. SOMEONE took Madelaine and the fact that there's not enough evidence to charge them for it doesn't change the fact.

What is fact, is that the ONLY clues in this case that exist, all point to the McCanns.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Ergon wrote:
The media aided and abetted the McCanns, who used the sympathy generated by the media to collect donations used to pay off their mortgage


Anything approaching "evidence" here?...Didn't think so.



Is there anything approaching evidence pointing to anyone "else"? If so, I'd love to hear it.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Is there anything approaching evidence pointing to anyone "else"? If so, I'd love to hear it.


To the best of my knowledge, there is none.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.


This is a bit of a stretch, surely? You do know they have been awarded damages for newspapers stating that they obstructed the police?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:39 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.


This is a bit of a stretch, surely? You do know they have been awarded damages for newspapers stating that they obstructed the police?


No, that was for some of the more salacious accusations by the papers.

Nobody, even the most generous, can say the McCanns went out of their way to help the investigation or aid investigators eliminate them as suspects. That is the definition of non-cooperation. And for me, the excuses made for them on that matter cut no ice. This was their daughter at stake, yet they prioritised number one. That is no "stretch", it's a fact in the case history.

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:02 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
DrStrangeglove wrote:
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.


This is a bit of a stretch, surely? You do know they have been awarded damages for newspapers stating that they obstructed the police?


No, that was for some of the more solacious accusations by the papers.

Nobody, even the most generous, can say the McCanns went out of their way to help the investigation or aid investigators eliminate them as suspects. That is the definition of non-cooperation. And for me, the excuses made for them on that matter cut no ice. This was their daughter at stake, yet they prioritised number one. That is no "stretch", it's a fact in the case history.


You have clearly missed their latest damages award then, as it was for exactly this.
Here is a link to Gerry McCann's reaction to it in last week's Guardian:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... fore-truth
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I think any idiot can make out for themselves whether they co-operated with the investigation or not. They clearly did not. I don't require a civil claims court to tell me how to think, do you?

And I'm certainly not arranging my thinking by what Gerry McCann dictates!

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Nope. Its just that your response to me pointing out what the meat of the story they were last awarded damages over was, was to say that that wasn't what the damages were awarded for. It was though.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
I'm certainly not arranging my thinking by what Gerry McCann dictates!


Neither am I. I'd just like people to stick to the facts when discussing the McCann's guilt or otherwise. That is all.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:18 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Nope. Its just that your response to me pointing out what the meat of the story they were last awarded damages over was, was to say that that wasn't what the damages were awarded for. It was though.


I think you'll find "withholding evidence" is a little different to not co-operating, the latter being my opinion. If you want to lecture me from the high ground regarding facts, you best make damned sure you're actually standing on it.

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
DrStrangeglove wrote:
This is a bit of a stretch, surely? You do know they have been awarded damages for newspapers stating that they obstructed the police?

No, that was for some of the more salacious accusations by the papers.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I have nothing against you expressing your opinions, and concede that your suspicions may well be right. I was just providing a link to the latest settlement, no offence intended. No hard feelings, my friend.
I really appreciate all the effort that has gone into this forum and the rest of the site, which has helped me make up my mind on who murdered Meredith Kercher. I'd like to thank you for that.
Peter.


Last edited by DrStrangeglove on Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:43 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Ergon wrote:
The media aided and abetted the McCanns, who used the sympathy generated by the media to collect donations used to pay off their mortgage

Anything approaching "evidence" here?...Didn't think so.


Anything approaching annoying gittery, as in asking and replying to your own question, without waiting for a response? I don't think you're worth my time, sorry. I don't see what purpose you've served so far; kindly try not to disrupt the forum.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:46 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Please see above. The edit was just to add the words "and the rest of the site".
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:48 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Michael wrote:
DrStrangeglove wrote:
This is a bit of a stretch, surely? You do know they have been awarded damages for newspapers stating that they obstructed the police?

No, that was for some of the more salacious accusations by the papers.


We were discussing my assertion regarding their lack of co-operation. You then made a switch of what I was discussing to what the damages were for which were allegations regarding "withholding evidence", in effect, creating a straw man. At no time did I claim they withheld evidence. My argument was, and remains, that they did not co-operate with the enquiry. Even intray, who also defends them, admits the McCanns refused to answer police questions, albeit with excuses made on their behalf.

If you want to engage in FOAKer style gotchas, then this isn't the place for you. I'm detecting a degree of intellectual dishonesty going on here and I really don't like it. If you have something of substance to add to the debate, then add it. But don't play games with me, that will get you on my bad side.

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:49 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I genuinely don't see how saying that if you're going to accuse the McCanns of using donations to pay off their mortgage you should provide some sort of evidence for it, is disrupting the forum.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:53 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael, I didn't intend to create a straw man, display intellectual dishonesty, or get on your bad side. Its clear even to me that I have done at least one of these things, and for that I apologise.
As I said I really do appreciate this place. I have not been posting for long ("thank God", I can hear the admins thinking), but have read much and learned an awful lot.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:55 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Michael, I didn't intend to create a straw man, display intellectual dishonesty, or get on your bad side. Its clear even to me that I have done at least one of these things, and for that I apologise.
As I said I really do appreciate this place. I have not been posting for long ("thank God", I can hear the admins thinking), but have read much and learned an awful lot.



Of that, I am glad.

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


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

Offline DrStrangeglove


Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 12:54 am

Posts: 24

Location: Belfast, Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:06 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Thank you, and apologies to everybody I wound up. I'll go back to not posting from now on#, as I believe that'd be best for us all.
Best wishes,
Peter.

#I'll probably join in the cheering when the verdicts are finally finally confirmed though.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:10 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
I have nothing against you expressing your opinions, and concede that your suspicions may well be right. I was just providing a link to the latest settlement, no offence intended. No hard feelings, my friend.
I really appreciate all the effort that has gone into this forum and the rest of the site, which has helped me make up my mind on who murdered Meredith Kercher. I'd like to thank you for that.
Peter.


Just as, and I fully concede, they could be completely innocent (except of neglect, of course). My thesis is simply that things don't "look" that way and part of the reason for that is the fault of the McCanns themselves. When that is combined with certain clues, which admittedly cannot be construed as hard evidence in and of itself, in addition to the fact that there's a lack of clues, let alone evidence, indicating any third party, then it must be said that it is difficult to blame people for looking at the McCanns with suspicion. Is there grounds to say they did it (whatever "it" was)? perhaps not. But, is there grounds to suspect them? Certainly.

I will pass on one very good piece of wisdom. Selfish people are capable of doing some very bad things, when there's the need to protect their self-interest.

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:14 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
Thank you, and apologies to everybody I wound up. I'll go back to not posting from now on#, as I believe that'd be best for us all.
Best wishes,
Peter.

#I'll probably join in the cheering when the verdicts are finally finally confirmed though.


You don't need to go into "not posting" mode. Simply, give thought to the way you present your debate. After all, the only way we can judge each others character and angle here are by each others words.

And I would add, on that point, none of us, including myself, are perfect.

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


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

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:21 pm   Post subject: MORE MCCANNS   

And, not addressed to any one in particular, but from the link above Unintended Consequences

Quote:
The shortest post-mortem interval for which we received a correct response was one hour and 25 minutes. However, the post-mortem interval for which we received a consistently correct response from all dogs involved is 2.5 - 3 hours


So, not to accuse or absolve the McCanns, the scenario is Madeleine died in the apartment for whatever cause, her body removed and hidden somewhere, then transported in the rental car later.

For now, I trust the Italian, er, Portuguese investigators, I do not believe the Knoxes, er, McCanns, and the dogs got it right. JMO.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

DrStrangeglove wrote:
I genuinely don't see how saying that if you're going to accuse the McCanns of using donations to pay off their mortgage you should provide some sort of evidence for it, is disrupting the forum.


Read your own words: "I don't think so" without waiting for a reply.

Remember how people here questioned whether the Knoxes really went into debt and mortgaged their homes. Some said (the Knoxes) were lying, and my understanding was they did the proper searches, even if they didn't publish their findings. Did you demand "evidence" then?

Beyond that, I think the McCanns are beyond an earthly justice thanks to their enablers. But as far as discussion goes, the only context in which I brought it up was to express sympathy for Brenda Leyland and what I saw was a concerted effort by their PR prior to her death to distract from an ongoing trial process (their libel trial against Portuguese inspector Goncalo Amaral, a decent man treated exactly the same way as PM Giuliano Mignini)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:52 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Apropos of nothing, Jim Clemente of the FBI challenged me to a debate on his YouTube channel, then said "I don't think so" before I even had a chance to respond :)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline dgfred


Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:19 pm

Posts: 1082

Location: N.C., USA

Highscores: 13

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:13 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Haha.

You want a piece of me? What? You do? Uhhhhh, nevermind.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.




Apologies, I was posting during a brief lunch break and responded to the wrong thread. I note that the heated debate continued apace.

"Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice".

They had been told they were now suspects. I venture to suggest that most people would react in a similiar fashion. There were fears that their children could be taken into care and there was the threat of arrest. It was a very serious sitution. You are aware that the lead detetective has a perjury conviction related to the alleged inimidation of a woman in a similar case. 'A decent man' according to Ergon.

I followed this case at the time and the delight in the prospect of the McCann's arrest was everywhere. Once the DNA results
were confirmed it would all be over. Where did that DNA information come from? Who leaked it?
That of course, was the true rubbish. The missing child's DNA was'nt in the hire car, no one with any sense ever thought it would be, except inept investigators clutching at straws.

I do not want to divert the board from the real agenda, I started with a feeble joke and got sucked in, but there ought to be standards. For Knox, OJ or anyone else. Evidence. Produce the evidence and make the case. Innuendo is really not enough.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 906

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:45 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Has anyone seen this guy?

Image


He's gone missing from the JREF thread ever since the Nencini translation was published.
Top Profile 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 906

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:51 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

I've got a question for the old timers: Did Halkides ever post at PMF or Haloscan?

He does not seem to fare well when he is not protected by moderation (i.e., selective banning) via the furrier or LashL.

Is he still welcome to participate here on Tuesdays?

(He seems quite upset by Nencini, but the scientifically-illiterate buffoons on the JLOL thread don't seem to be up to the task of delving into the issues raised.)


Last edited by Jackie on Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:04 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
They had been told they were now suspects. I venture to suggest that most people would react in a similiar fashion.


No, I don't think so. The priority for most people, would be their missing daughter, not covering their butts.

Like I said, this wasn't some stranger or acquaintance who was at stake, but their child.

And why need act in such a fashion if you've nothing to hide? Why not just answer the damned questions? You'll only look guilty if you actually are.

And this is rather more then innuendo. They went out partying with their pals. Their child ended up missing. There is no evidence of any break-in or any third party involvement. That alone means they have some explaining to do, in my book. For years now, one police department or another and various supporters, have been looking for a phantom "one-armed-man" with not so much as a scrap of evidence for their existence coming to light. It is therefore, clear the investigation needs to be centered closer to home.

Let me present it this way. Imagine that a precious diamond is placed in my care to guard. Then imagine, the diamond goes missing. I claim, that someone must have entered my property and stolen it. Imagine then, that a subsequent police investigation with many officers lasting weeks, turns up not a shred of evidence to support my assertion that someone else has stolen it. And despite the fact that no diamond is found anywhere in my possession, what would most people conclude? And would they be coming to that conclusion based on innuendo, or simply from smelling a great big dirty rat?

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


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

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:11 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie wrote:
I've got a question for the old timers: Did Halkides ever post at PMF or Haloscan?

He does not seem to fare well when he is not protected by moderation (i.e., selective banning) via the furrier or LashL.

Is he still welcome to participate here on Tuesdays?



Hi Jackie. No, not as far as I can recall. Not under his real name at least. It isn't an invitation, but were he to come here on a Tuesday and post, provided he obeyed the forum rules, that would be permissible.

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


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

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 906

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Michael wrote:
Jackie wrote:
I've got a question for the old timers: Did Halkides ever post at PMF or Haloscan?

He does not seem to fare well when he is not protected by moderation (i.e., selective banning) via the furrier or LashL.

Is he still welcome to participate here on Tuesdays?



Hi Jackie. No, not as far as I can recall. Not under his real name at least. It isn't an invitation, but were he to come here on a Tuesday and post, provided he obeyed the forum rules, that would be permissible.


Still and Tom just filled me in. It seems he posted as "Chris_H" (17 times) and then disappeared in 2010.

What's he afraid of?

PS What's your prediction on the extradition question, Michael?


Last edited by Jackie on Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top Profile 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:31 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

intray wrote:
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.




Apologies, I was posting during a brief lunch break and responded to the wrong thread. I note that the heated debate continued apace.

"Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice".

They had been told they were now suspects. I venture to suggest that most people would react in a similiar fashion. There were fears that their children could be taken into care and there was the threat of arrest. It was a very serious sitution. You are aware that the lead detetective has a perjury conviction related to the alleged inimidation of a woman in a similar case. 'A decent man' according to Ergon.

I followed this case at the time and the delight in the prospect of the McCann's arrest was everywhere. Once the DNA results
were confirmed it would all be over. Where did that DNA information come from? Who leaked it?
That of course, was the true rubbish. The missing child's DNA was'nt in the hire car, no one with any sense ever thought it would be, except inept investigators clutching at straws.

I do not want to divert the board from the real agenda, I started with a feeble joke and got sucked in, but there ought to be standards. For Knox, OJ or anyone else. Evidence. Produce the evidence and make the case. Innuendo is really not enough.


I could post reams of "evidence", but then it really would take this board off track, would it?

I could mention the direct question Kate McCann avoided "were you involved in the death or disappearance of your daughter" which she replied to with a "no comment". That is it, as far as I am concerned.

FSS backtracked very quickly on the DNA getting into the same argument of 'misinterpretation" we were getting from Gill, humbug.

As for Goncalo Amaral, "Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence" and this relates to the murder of Joana Isabel Cipriano
Quote:
Both the mother and uncle were convicted of murder and sentenced to 16 years in jail

and it really cheeses me off when people barge onto this board with throwaway accusations or assuming I don't know what I'm talking about before I say something or that I want context instead of links hoping no one will follow up, ahem.
Nice try at slurring a decent man, "intray". Same thing happened to Mignini, BTW.

It seems you want 'higher standards' applied only to the horse you rode in on, LOL. What happened to JREF? Wouldn't they miss that sort of argumentation if you hung around here?

Now please excuse me, but I was working on far more important things.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 10:35 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Chris Halkides now does throwaway comments on Ground Report and was there on Huffington Post UK awhile. Just call him Chris Van Winkle, poor chap's still stuck in 2011.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:41 pm   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Ergon wrote:
intray wrote:
Michael wrote:
intray wrote:
The McCanns are not stupid, there is no point in castigating them for seeking legal advice.


Rubbish. This was not some stranger or acquaintance to them that was abducted, or worse, murdered. This was their own daughter whom they claimed they would do anything, no matter what it took, to help find or at least provide answers to her disappearance. Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice" in this circumstance does not go over.

It is at the very least, proof that their primary concern was to look after number one (which is certainly a theme with them), not help police get to the bottom of what happened to their daughter. At worst, it was a blatant attempt to stonewall the investigation because they had something to hide. All else is excuses.




Apologies, I was posting during a brief lunch break and responded to the wrong thread. I note that the heated debate continued apace.

"Hiding behind the claim of "legal advice".

They had been told they were now suspects. I venture to suggest that most people would react in a similiar fashion. There were fears that their children could be taken into care and there was the threat of arrest. It was a very serious sitution. You are aware that the lead detetective has a perjury conviction related to the alleged inimidation of a woman in a similar case. 'A decent man' according to Ergon.

I followed this case at the time and the delight in the prospect of the McCann's arrest was everywhere. Once the DNA results
were confirmed it would all be over. Where did that DNA information come from? Who leaked it?
That of course, was the true rubbish. The missing child's DNA was'nt in the hire car, no one with any sense ever thought it would be, except inept investigators clutching at straws.

I do not want to divert the board from the real agenda, I started with a feeble joke and got sucked in, but there ought to be standards. For Knox, OJ or anyone else. Evidence. Produce the evidence and make the case. Innuendo is really not enough.


I could post reams of "evidence", but then it really would take this board off track, would it?

I could mention the direct question Kate McCann avoided "were you involved in the death or disappearance of your daughter" which she replied to with a "no comment". That is it, as far as I am concerned.

FSS backtracked very quickly on the DNA getting into the same argument of 'misinterpretation" we were getting from Gill, humbug.

As for Goncalo Amaral, "Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence" and this relates to the murder of Joana Isabel Cipriano
Quote:
Both the mother and uncle were convicted of murder and sentenced to 16 years in jail

and it really cheeses me off when people barge onto this board with throwaway accusations or assuming I don't know what I'm talking about before I say something or that I want context instead of links hoping no one will follow up, ahem.
Nice try at slurring a decent man, "intray". Same thing happened to Mignini, BTW.

It seems you want 'higher standards' applied only to the horse you rode in on, LOL. What happened to JREF? Wouldn't they miss that sort of argumentation if you hung around here?

Now please excuse me, but I was working on far more important things.



Hi Ergon. I pointed out that a detective had a conviction for perjury. It seems Zorba was correct, you do not like criticism.
I do not like people being accused of crimes without evidence, so we all have our little foibles.

"Mr Amaral was found guilty of falsifying documents and given an 18-month suspended sentence"

Not quite "The same thing happened to Mignini"
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:47 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Actually, no, intray, I suffer fools to a certain point then suggest you get out of my way. Mignini was found guilty of illegal wiretapping and received a suspended sentence, overturned because the trial wasn't held in the proper jurisdiction. He claims, and I believe him, that his prosecution was politically motivated. Likewise, Goncalo Amaral claims that his trial was politically motivated to get him out of the McCann investigation, and therein lies the similarities. From my perspective, you're a troll, and haven't established your bonafides. Six posts, and you're the one picking a fight. Not interested in sterile jackassery, sorry. Now when someone says they don't want to talk to you, good manners require that you comply.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Ergon

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:58 am   Post subject: NENCINI TABLE OF CONTENTS   

Now, to get to what I really dropped in on the board for, here's a revised Table Of Contents for the Nencini Report I was working on till I got er, interrupted.

The English PDF doesn't have page numbers so I matched it to the PDF. All you have to do is enter the page number while reading and voila, you're there.

But even better, I hear from someone who wants to remain "someone who adds to the inexorable" is working on an index, hurray. I reviewed it and it's awesome.

ETA: Bugger PDF to Word conversions, the formatting's wonky. Unbracketed number matches the PDF page, sorry.


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: 7201

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 2:33 am   Post subject: HOPE THIS HELPS, THEN   

(Revision of original table by Tom M OF PMF.ORG)

Table of Contents

(The PMF translation of the Nencini Report does not have its own page numbering, table of contents, or annotated index. The original table was for page numbers found in the original Nencini Report (in Italian). The convention employed was to insert a bolded, bracketed number at the point where one page ends and the next page begins. Page number in the English PDF is unbracketed).

Title 1

Disclaimer 2
Case caption, parties and representation 3

Accusations against the defendants [ii] 3

Appellants [iii] 3

Petitioners [iv] 8

History of the Case [1] 10

Reasons for the Decision 42

1. Introduction [31] 42

2. The context in which the murder took place. 47
Cause and time of death of Meredith Kercher. [37] 47

3. Post Delictum 76

The alteration of Filomena Romanelli’s room [63] 77
The alteration of the murder scene [80] 94

The theft of two telephones used by Meredith Kercher [85] 100

4. The Calunnia 107

The false alibi [92] 107

The calunnia [94] 110

The false alibi [102] 118

5. Evidence that can be drawn from the statements
of the defendants and of the witnesses. [146] 163

The reconstruction of the events of 2 November 2007
according to the statements of Amanda Marie Knox [147] 164

6. The genetic investigations of the evidence [175] 194

1) The knife [178] 198

2) The bra clasp [178] 198

3) The three swabs taken from the body of Meredith Kercher [178] 198

4) The white bra spotted with presumed blood (Exhibit no. 59) [179] 199

5) Imitation leather purse found inside the victim’s room
(Exhibit no. 166) [179] 199

6) Light blue sweatshirt soaked with presumed blood found in the
victim's room (Exhibit no. 171). [180] 200

7) Light blue bathmat positioned on the flooring in front of the washbasin/
sink, affected by traces of presumed blood (Exhibit no. 22). [180] 200

8) Sample of presumed blood collected from switch plate of the
light in the small bathroom adjacent to Meredith Kercher'ʹs room
(Exhibit no. 23). [181] 200

9) Sample of presumed blood collected from the front surface
of the washbasin faucet in the small bathroom adjacent to
Meredith Kercher'ʹs room (Exhibit no. 24). [181] 200

10) Sample of presumed blood collected from the edge of the drain
in the bidet of the small bathroom adjacent to Meredith Kercher'ʹs
room (Exhibit no. 66). [181] 201

11) Samples of blood collected from the transparent plastic
cotton-bud container located on the ledge of the washbasin
(on the left-hand side) and from the inside the basin of the
wash basin in the small bathroom adjacent to Meredith Kercher's
room (Exhibits Nos. 136 and 137). [181] 201

12) Sample of presumed blood collected from the toilet-seat [cover]
in the small bathroom adjacent to Meredith Kercher'ʹs room
(Exhibit no. 139). [182] 201

13) Sample of presumed blood collected from the right-hand
external side of the door-frame, about 50 cm above the floor
of the small bathroom adjacent to Meredith Kercher'ʹs room
(Exhibit no. 140). [182] 202

14) Fragment of toilet paper found inside the toilet bowl of the
large bathroom (Exhibit no. 25). [182] 202

15) Exhibits 119-120 and 122. [183] 202

16) Cigarette butt (D) collected [from] inside the blue glass ashtray
situated on the table of the kitchen corner in the living room
(Exhibit no. 145). [183] 202

17) Exhibits 186, 187, 188, 189, 190 and 191. [183] 203

18) Exhibits Nos. 176 and 177. [184] 203

19) Exhibits nos. 178, 179 and 180. [184] 204

20) Exhibit no. 183. [185] 204

Exhibit no. 36 [198], [208] 217, 226

Exhibit no. 165 B [202], [237] 220, 255

7. Shoeprints and footprints [250] 268

The footprints revealed by luminol [260] 279

8. The attempted fabrication of evidence at the appeal level.
The declarations of Aviello and Alessi. [263] 281

9. The statements made by Rudy Hermann Guede [289] 305

10. Conclusions [308] 325

11. Sentencing [328] 344
P.Q.M. (for these reasons) [337] 354
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Jackie


User avatar


Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:38 am

Posts: 906

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 7:03 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

When a guy goes from 20 posts per day to ZERO, you have to worry. Please join the search!


Image
Top Profile 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 10:10 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie wrote:
When a guy goes from 20 posts per day to ZERO, you have to worry. Please join the search!


(IMAGE)



LOL.

Don't worry, Jackie. I somehow suspect he'll be back...armed with some ridiculous new talking point.

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


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

Offline intray


Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:38 am

Posts: 18

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 10:11 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Hi Ergon.
I had intended to disengage a few posts back but since you rapidly proceeded to gratuitous insults I thought
a few last words may be appropriate.

You are really not helping the cause by the attitude which you adopt. I have been reading these boards since before the original trial. I am aware of the work which you have done and I know that your motivations are good, but as others have observed, none of us are that important, except perhaps in the area of public perception. Rude or condescending behavior will have a negative effect on that public view.
I for one will not be posting here again. I wish you all the best in your continuing endeavors.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 10:17 am   Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 -   

Jackie wrote:
Michael wrote:
Jackie wrote:
I've got a question for the old timers: Did Halkides ever post at PMF or Haloscan?

He does not seem to fare well when he is not protected by moderation (i.e., selective banning) via the furrier or LashL.

Is he still welcome to participate here on Tuesdays?



Hi Jackie. No, not as far as I can recall. Not under his real name at least. It isn't an invitation, but were he to come here on a Tuesday and post, provided he obeyed the forum rules, that would be permissible.


Still and Tom just filled me in. It seems he posted as "Chris_H" (17 times) and then disappeared in 2010.

What's he afraid of?

PS What's your prediction on the extradition question, Michael?



Well, I think that unless some extraordinary rabbit is pulled out of a hat, and it would have to be VERY extraordinary, extradition isn't in doubt. Personally, I think it's the end for Knox and her motley crew of social rejects.

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


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 5 of 34 [ 8462 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 34  Next


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 1 guest

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

  

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


29,735,151 Views