Comedian explains why she organized Amanda Knox comedy show fundraiser

By | February 1, 2010 at 3:04 pm | 1,217 comments | News | Tags: ,

Renee Perrault

Comedian Renee Perrault organized a comedy benefit for convicted murderer Amanda Knox, whom many people feel was not given a fair trial.

Last week, Punchline Magazine posted a news post on about a comedy fundraiser that was held in Seattle for Amanda Knox, the 22-year-old American college student convicted in Italy of murdering her British roommate. Due to the outcry of fairness, decency, guilt and innocence that this conversation inspired, we decided to contact Renee Perrault, the comedian who organized the event. Here’s what Perrault had to say about the fundraiser, the Knoxes, and the controversy surrounding the court case and guilty verdict.

What prompted you to organize a comedy event, in specific, on Amanda Knox’s behalf?
I have been doing stand-up comedy for three years. I’m in a comedy group and we have done fundraising for Gilda’s Club, Susan B. Komen, breast cancer, MS and Rise N’ Shine for AIDS. A comedy event is something I know how to do and have had success with. We have been criticized for doing a comedy show and people actually suggested or blogged that we were going to make fun of Meredith Kercher and her family.  That couldn’t have been farther from the truth. Our intent was to entertain,  we did not make jokes about Italy, or any mention of the trial or the Kercher family. The Kercher family has our deepest sympathies. We were just raising money for a cause we believe in.

What did you hope to accomplish with it? Do you feel you met your goals?

My goal was to help the Knox family and raise money for Amanda’s Defense Fund.  Yes, that goal was met. We brought people together, entertained them and raised money.

I read online that you’re a friend of the Knoxes. How long have you been acquainted with them? Did they ask you to do this, or did you come up with the idea?

I worked with Curt at Macy’s in the 1980’s when  we were still known as The Bon Marche. In those days, before mergers and downsizing, we actually had time for coffee breaks and lunch. There was a group of us that did just that– coffee and lunches; we were work friends. There are people in your life that come and go, sometimes you don’t see them for years but when you do, the friendship is still there. I hadn’t seen Curt in a few years but had followed the trial. It was so hard to watch all of the negative publicity and when the verdict was announced it was just devastating to hear. I approached the Knox family with the idea of a fundraiser. As I said, comedy is what I do now….I really couldn’t think of a better way to raise money. I have gotten to know quite a few local northwest comics and every single one that I approached immediately wanted to be part of the show. The other comics in the show included Xung Lam, John Gardner, Geoff Lott and Billy Wayne Davis.

Amanda Knox

Amanda Knox

Given the notoriety of the situation, could you tell me something about the Knox family and Amanda that the public might not know?
After months of watching the TV and newspaper coverage I have come to realize that the Knox family is incredibly brave and have put everything on the line to help their daughter, granddaughter, sister, niece, cousin. The entire family, and remember, Amanda’s parents are divorced, have all come together. There is also another layer of “step” family that is working just as hard. We’re always hearing about dysfunctional families, this family has come together and is an example of what a “modern” family is made up of. I don’t know Amanda but have come to know her through the emails her family send to supporters, detailing their visits with her.  I think she has demonstrated bravery under constant criticism.

What do you have to say to those out there who believe that Amanda is guilty and received a fair trial?
People are always going to have their opinions. There has been so much in the media: some right, some wrong and some just total sensationalism. Then there are the crazy bloggers who contribute, anonymously of course, all sorts of wrong facts to add fuel to the fire. My opinion is that the evidence presented at the trial was circumstantial at best. If I [say]say all the things that I believe were wrong with the trial, it will release a shit-storm of blogging from the crazy people. I will just say, I have followed the case, and I am convinced, along with many many other people, that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent and the true murderer has been convicted.  I believe the next trial will refute whatever findings are presented by the jury.

About the Author

Emma Kat Richardson

Emma Kat Richardson is a Detroit native who received her BA in professional writing and women and gender studies from Elizabethtown College in 2008. Her journalism and feature writing has been published in Alternative Press, Bitch, Punchline Magazine, Bookslut, and Real Detroit Weekly.

  • Ava

    She can believe what she wants, the judges in Italy get the final say. Amanda could have ended up like Natalee Holloway – she should be glad she didn’t considering the people she associated with.

    her parents should maybe address the drinking and drug problem their daughter has.

  • Guest

    Renee, like AK parents, probably doesn’t know Amanda as well as she thinks she does.
    We will, indeed, see what happens in a year in court.

  • Guest

    Bad karma. Bad, bad karma.

  • Sherri

    obviously the comments made before me are by some really shallow minded people…Renee Perrault answered the questions very well and to the same reasoning that so many others feel..That also includes me..thank you for all your efforts for the Knox family and for Amanda.

  • http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php Harry Rag

    The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.

    Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:

    1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

    2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.

    3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.

    4. Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.

    5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.

    6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.

    7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci and Dr. Stefanoni.

    Amanda Knox’s footprints were found set in Meredith’s blood in two places in the hallway of the new wing of the cottage. One print was exiting her own room, and one print was outside Meredith’s room, facing into the room. These bloody footprints were only revealed under luminol.

    A woman’s bloody shoeprint, which matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith’s body. The bloody shoeprint was incompatible with Meredith’s shoe size.

    Two independent imprint experts categorically excluded the possibility that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat could belong to Rudy Guede. Lorenzo Rinaldi stated: ““You can see clearly that this bloody footprint on the rug does not belong to Mr. Guede, but you can see that it is compatible with Sollecito.”

    The other imprint expert print expert testified that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot.

    An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. Meredith’s bra was removed some time after she had been killed and Rudy Guede had fled the scene.

    The murder dynamic implicates Knox and Sollecito.

    Barbie Nadeau wrote the following:

    “Countless forensic experts, including those who performed the autopsies on Kercher’s body, have testified that more than one person killed her based on the size and location of her injuries and the fact that she didn’t fight back—no hair or skin was found under her fingernails.”

    Judge Paolo Micheli claimed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith’s murder that they could have only known if they were present when she was killed.

    Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. She stated on at least four separate occasions that she was the cottage when Meredith was killed.

    Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito both gave multiple conflicting alibis and lied repeatedly. Their lies were exposed by telephone and computer records, and by CCTV footage. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis for the night of the murder despite three attempt each.

    Legal expert Stefano Maffei stated the following:

    “There were 19 judges who looked at the evidence over the course of two years, faced with decisions on pre-trial detention, review of such detention, committal to trial, judgment on criminal responsibility. They all agreed, at all times, that the evidence was overwhelming.”

  • John Winters

    Well done Renee Perrault. Comedy was just the thing to redress the balance in favour of Amanda getting a little justice for a change.
    Just because the States has hardware which can knock this little globe off its axis and out of orbit does not mean that its individual citizens should be treated as ‘arrogant’ if they cry foul when dealing with people like Mignini abroad.
    Apologists should take a reality check because they don’t know when they are being laughed at, and not by Renee Perrault.

  • maryville

    It is expected that a court of law finds the accused to be guilty only if there is supporting evidence. When there is a lack of a believable motive, no evidence of the accused at the murder scene, and no creditable witnesses, a verdict of ‘guilty’ is laughable!

  • John Winters

    Just check the previous blog by Harry Rag if you want to know who’s laughing.

  • maryville

    Harry Rag: Quit spewing your filthy hate. All you do is repeat the prosecution’s disproved case. Yes, the prosecutor is convicted of ‘abuse of office’.

  • Theo Stanopoulos

    Wonderful night Renee. Loved the one about Jim Kirk.

  • Sherri

    DNA evidence….what DNA evidence…enough said..

  • maryville

    harry rag posted: Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:
    1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

    ——

    The Knife — The knife that does not match the victim’s wounds; the knife that does not match the real murder weapon’s profile on the bloody sheet; the knife which was so sanctimoniously selected to be ‘the knife’ from a drawer full of knifes; the knife that was supposedly transported to and from the crime scene; the knife that was tested for LCN DNA by a laboratory not equipped to do LCN testing; the knife that had numerous recorded notes made by Stefanoni of ‘too low’; the knife which is still hoarding dates/times of testing because the prosecution is still withholding information; the knife for which DNA results cannot be verified by a second test. This form of LCN DNA evidence amounts to, simply, “The defendant is guilty because we say so.”

    In addition, how can this knife be the supposed murder weapon wielded by Amanda Knox when there is positively no evidence of her in the victim’s bedroom? Does this mean that Amanda stood in the hallway reaching in to do this ‘slashing’? By her stature, it doesn’t appear that she has long enough arms.

  • Quentin Zoerhoff

    Harry Rag seems not to have a job but instead posts the same discredited nonsense more or less promiscuously on every site he can find. He is the classic “F” student. He believes what he believes and no amount of real evidence can convince him otherwise. Quoting discredited figures like Nadeau and Micheli at this point in the legal battle is pathetic.

    For anyone willing to do some real homework, all of the following is true:

    • Amanda’s “confession” was certainly false and coerced.
    • The kitchen knife wasn’t the murder weapon.
    • The bra clasp is completely worthless as an indicator of guilt.
    • The bare footprints were certainly not made in the victim’s blood.
    • There was nothing strange about the mixed blood and DNA in the bathroom—it was exactly what you would expect under the circumstances.
    • The other Luminol stains are very likely not indicative of blood, and are, in any event, just part of the background noise of the case.
    • The theory of a staged break is wild speculation not in any way supported by the facts.
    • The prosecution witnesses were uniformly and bizarrely unreliable.
    • The idea that there had been a cleanup is not only not supported by evidence, but absurd on the face of it given the circumstances at the cottage.

    The conviction has all the hallmarks of a wrongful conviction, including: 1)a false confession, 2) an overzealous (and now disgraced) prosecutor, and 3) a witch hunt atmosphere characterized by character assassination and the acceptance of preposterous conclusions.

    Those who say that there is literally no case at all here have it exactly right.
    __

  • maryville

    harry rag posted: Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on: 2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.
    3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.
    4. Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.
    5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.
    6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged

    ———-

    Amanda lived in this flat! Why would one not expect to find her DNA there?

  • Kim Bailey

    One thing Renee did get right. The true murderers (all 3 of them) have been convicted.

  • Guest

    Ugh whatever
    At this point, whether she’s guilty or innocent doesn’t matter, let those who think she’s innocent do what they want, and those who think she’s guilty do what they want, so long as it doesn’t reflect poorly on schools, cities or politicians.

    in other words, let’s keep it clean and classy people

  • slimjim a crazy

    Emma the ?comedian? said:
    If I say all the things that I believe were wrong with the trial, it will release a shit-storm of blogging from the crazy people. I will just say, I have followed the case, and I am convinced, along with many many other people, that Amanda and Raffaele are innocent and the true murderer has been convicted.
    *********************

    That would have been the funniest line of the night if it did not display such arrogance and ignorance.
    Glad you “followed the trial to support that assine snarky grade school quality comment.

    19 independent jurists and 8 independent jurors “followed” the evidence a bit more closely than your highness, and *unanimously concluded guilt.

    end of story

  • maryville

    harry rag posted: Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:

    7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci and Dr. Stefanoni.

    ———-

    The Bra Clasp – This is the clasp which was collected 47 days late with a two minute staged ‘show and tell’ charade for the camera lens; this clasp was retrieved only after a shoe print attributed to Raffaele (the only evidence against him) was determined to instead be Guede’s; this is the clasp for which DNA results cannot be verified by performing another test; this is the clasp revealing DNA of yet to be identified individuals.

    How and why is DNA of these unidentified individuals on this clasp? Are these unidentified individuals involved in the assault/murder? Are the Italian police attempting to identify these individuals in order to bring them to justice?

    There is a lack of a specified amount of Raffaele’s DNA found on the clasp. In court it was said to be “abundant” and when questioned further, Dr. Stefanoni quoted a number. But when the defense asked to see the actual paperwork on this quoted amount, none was produced.

  • Theo Stanopoulos

    Guest said:

    ”….so long as it doesn’t reflect poorly on schools, cities or politicians.

    in other words, let’s keep it clean and classy people”

    That sounds like not picking up the stone to examine its underside. ‘Fraid that’s already been done however, and one of the things stuck to the stone was given 16 months.

  • maryville

    Guest said

    am February 1 2010 @ 4:54 pm

    Ugh whatever
    At this point, whether she’s guilty or innocent doesn’t matter,

    ————

    Why don’t you write Amanda Knox and tell her that you think whether she is guilty or innocent doesn’t matter.

  • maryville

    harry rag posted: “A woman’s bloody shoeprint, which matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith’s body. The bloody shoeprint was incompatible with Meredith’s shoe size.”
    ______________

    The once ambiguous bloody shoe print on the pillow was shown to have been made by Guede’s outbreak-2 tread pattern shoe when Professor Carlo Torre pointed out that a crease in the pillow had made the shoe print to appear smaller than its actual size.

    Also, Amanda did not and does not own shoes with the outbreak-2 tread pattern. Sorry, Harry!

  • maryville

    harry rag posted:

    “Two independent imprint experts categorically excluded the possibility that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat could belong to Rudy Guede. Lorenzo Rinaldi stated: ““You can see clearly that this bloody footprint on the rug does not belong to Mr. Guede, but you can see that it is compatible with Sollecito.”

    The other imprint expert print expert testified that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot.”
    ________

    The human eye is all that is needed to see that the bathmat footprint is more likely to be Guede’s instead of Sollecito’s. The bathmat has a bloody blob imprint where the tip of the toe next to the big toe would have hit the mat. This bloody blob extends beyond the big toe–i.e., the person’s toe next to the big toe is longer than the big toe. This fits Guede’s foot and not Sollecito’s foot.

    The human eye disproves the prosecution’s ‘expert’ witnesses!

  • maryville

    The last word:

    The coroner testified that one or more assaulters may have been involved in the assault/murder. Strange, he was relieved of his duties shortly there after.

    Amanda didn’t ‘know’ details that she wouldn’t have been aware unless she had been there. She learned of these details from flatmates that saw into the room as the victim’s bedroom door was opened. Nothing fishy here at all.

    When all has been said, society desires justice based on motive, proof of presence, and eye witnesses. In the absence of these indicators of guilt, it’s incredulous that the Court of Assizes found Amanda and Raffaele guilty. Shame on you Italy!

    It’s hard to imagine that people like harry rag rail on and on with lies and ignorance in an attempt to see innocent people confined to prison for long periods of time. If they believe in a higher power, they might want to do a little soul searching.

  • J.T. Lund

    QUOTE from “Maryville”:

    “The Bra Clasp – This is the clasp which was collected 47 days late”

    ——————————————–

    There is no statute of limitations on the submission of evidence for a charge of murder.

    That bra clasp could have been submitted 47 YEARS from now.

    Further, the clasp was sitting in a SEALED crime scene – it was merely collected on the 2nd evidence sweep of the cottage, 6 weeks after the first sweep.

    Who told you that the police only get one sweep of a crime scene?!

  • Rick Bonin

    Harry Rag is such a slimebad internet troll. Nice job putting him in his place, maryville.

    Free Amanda and Rafaelle

  • http://www.chaseroper.com Chase Roper

    Ok, I just have one question after reading these extensive comments.

    Where can I buy my own Double DNA knife?

  • Kim Bailey

    Even Knox’s attorneys who sat through 11 months of testimony, talked to Knox for more than a year, reviewed all the evidence – could not say that she was innocent. The lead attorney stated that there was enough doubt. I don’t care about reasonable doubt, there was evidence to indicate that she was involved in this crime, no matter how minute. I am very glad that she did not get away with murder.

  • Crazies

    So Curt banged Renee in the 80s and apparently did such a fine job that she still does anything for him. How brain washed some of these people are, she calls everyone who has followed the trial and noticed the overwhelming evidence against Amanda as “Crazies.” The only crazy nut is the person holding a comedy fund raiser for a convicted murderer and his dad who abandoned the girl at age two!

  • John Winters

    Chase Roper says:

    ”Where can I buy my own Double DNA knife?”

    You don’t have to buy one. Just pop round to Amanda’s house and take a knife (any one will do), from the kitchen drawer. Send it to Rome’s criminal forensics laboratory where they will be happy to add some DNA from a person of your choosing.

    And when they send it back to you, prepare yourself to find it parcelled in something really witty like a sheet of giftwrap with pictures of Santy Claus on it.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    A court of law in a free and democratic sovereign nation has unanimously ruled, after a trial lasting 11 months, that based on the evidence presented in court, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are guilty of all charges.

    A comedy club in a free and democratic sovereign nation has unanimously decided to hold a comedy show in honor of a convicted murderer.

    I don’t have a problem with either event.

    Viva la democrazia! Viva la liberta`!

  • Lucinda

    I am very glad to hear there were no jokes about Italy or the trial. I think the people who did the comedy show meant well, but it is unfortunately bad press again for Amanda. I believe she and her boyfriend are innocent, and I don’t understand why people are so convinced of their guilt. There wasn’t much of a case against them.

  • John Winters

    ”A court of law in a free and democratic sovereign nation has unanimously ruled, after a trial lasting 11 months, that based on the evidence presented in court, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are guilty of all charges.”

    Don’t be absurd.

  • John Winters

    ”Further, the clasp was sitting in a SEALED crime scene – it was merely collected on the 2nd evidence sweep of the cottage, 6 weeks after the first sweep.”

    Please see video of ”SEALED” crimescene on:

    You Tube ”Amanda Knox – 47 days is a long time – The bra clasp discovery”

    where the door of the crimescene is wide open during the ”sweeping” and the entire crimescene has been extensively altered with clothes and all other items in the room moved around and piled on top of each other etc. as one would expect in a crimescene where all of the potential DNA evidence has been appropriately bagged before these things are moved (in this case 47 days before).

    The statute of limitations applies to potential DNA items which have been uninterfered with between the event and their discovery. It does not apply to items which were ”forgotten” for 7 weeks and whose location has changed from their original location at the time of crimescene establishment.

  • Robin

    Oh I can die happy; there are true-blue well-spoken sensible people talking here. Thank-you Renee,Quentin,Theo,John and Maryville for setting the facts down correctly.

    To J.T. Lund and his comment that the bra clasp found after 47 days was in a “sealed” crime scene. Have you seen the police crime scene photos of them finding the bra clasp?(you can still find it somewhere on the web) They very carefully pick the bra clasp up from a pile of rubbish on the floor. That bra clasp had been kicked around and moved along with that pile of debris on the floor. DNA can be picked up from “mingling” with anything. Having mingled with a huge pile of debris the bra clasp DNA was worthless.

  • Bill

    Look at the photo of Amanda Knox in the article. Who smirks at a murder trial? Must have been funnier than heck. She didn’t laugh when the verdict was read, now did she?

  • http://freeamanda.livejournal.com Harry R. Wilkens

    Twittering for Amanda
    http://twitter.com/FreeAmandaKnox

    http://freeamanda.livejournal.com (with link to our Facebook)

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Robin writes: “DNA can be picked up from “mingling” with anything. Having mingled with a huge pile of debris the bra clasp DNA was worthless.”

    AND WHERE EXACTLY DID THE BRA CLASP FIND RAFFAELE’S DNA TO “MINGLE WITH AND PICK UP”? DID THE BRA CLASP GO ALL THE WAY TO HIS APARTMENT, “PICK UP” SOME DNA FROM HIM, AND CAME BACK TO THE HOUSE?

    YOU DON’T PICK UP “ANY DNA” FROM “MINGLING WITH ANYTHING”. YOU PICK UP DNA IF YOU COME INTO CONTACT WITH IT. AND SINCE THERE WAS NO DNA FROM RAFFAELE IN THAT ROOM, THEN HOW DID THE CLASP PICK IT UP?

    DO YOU THINK THAT WE ARE ALL GULLIBLE FOOLS?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    John Winters said: “The statute of limitations applies to…..blah, blah..”.

    And where did you study the rules on limitations in the Italian law?

    Making them up, uh? As usual when you don’t know S**T.

  • Tony Del Balzo

    Three quick points:
    No photos were allowed during the trial. However, they were allowed during breaks. (Except for Knox’s final testimony) So any smiling or grinning was at family members who were only allowed to visit a scant 6 days a month. She spent over 700 days in prison in an HIV infested environment before being convicted.

    Second, the failure of a person to demonstrate reactions that meet your expectations is NOT an indication or guilt or even guilt by association.

    Third, I love this forum. I can type any hate filed, ignorant flame that I want. I can demonstrate ignorance, bad taste and character assassination I want, unfortunately…

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “The Bra Clasp – This is the clasp which was collected 47 days late”

    So???

    249 prisoners in America have been exonerated from having committed the crime for which they were convicted in the past few years. 17 of them from death row.

    The average years these innocent people have already spent in prison is 13 years, before their release. One of the, James Bain, was released last month after 35 years in prison.

    This was done thanks to testing on DNA collected YEARS after the crime.

    DNA lasts longer than 6 weeks. It doesn’t expire and it doesn’t change over time to assume the characteristics of DNA from other people.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    In an attempt to justify the presence of Meredith’s DNA in one of his kitchen knives (the murder weapon), Raffaele writes to his father from prison that it happened one day when Meredith was at his apartment and he was preparing dinner for her, when accidentally he pricked her with that knife.

    It turned out that Meredith never had dinner at his apartment and had never gone to his apartment for any reason. She hardly knew him.

    Why would you come up with a story like that if you weren’t trying to cover up your guilt?

    I bet it must be hard to hide the truth that you’re a crazy murderer from your father.

  • Tony Del Balzo

    Believe her or not, Amanda Knox is still a frightened, somewhat naive young lady who choose to stay in Italy to comfort Meredith’s father and stayed in Perugia to help the police rather than seek shelter with relatives in Germany.

    Let’s flood her cell with Valentines on February 14 (after Saint Valentine whose feast is on February 14. He was imprisoned and buried at the Via Flaminia north of Rome on February 14.) Please mail by February 1 and packages will NOT be allowed into the prison.

    Amanda Knox
    c/o Casa Circondariale
    Strada Pievaiola
    06100 Capanne (PG)
    Italy

    Bless you!

  • John Winters

    ”19 independent jurists and 8 independent jurors “followed” the evidence a bit more closely than your highness…..”

    When they weren’t falling asleep….

  • John Winters

    Al-Fak myselfoneofthesedays:

    ”AND SINCE THERE WAS NO DNA FROM RAFFAELE IN THAT ROOM, THEN HOW DID THE CLASP PICK IT UP?”

    Raffaele tried to force Kercher’s room’s door so his DNA was on the door handle used by CSI’s to get into it. That’s just one place his DNA might have been IN HIS GIRLFRIENDS HOUSE!!

    ”And where did you study the rules on limitations in the Italian law?
    Making them up, uh? As usual when you don’t know S**T.”

    And you don’t know me so how do you know what I’ve studied and haven’t studied.

    Oh and by the way, I do know Scot. He’s the one who beams people up only judging by the fact that I am still here with you, the particle exchanger must be misfunctioning.

  • Just me

    I take it that Renee Perrault spent many days attending the court in Perugia and listened to all the evidence????

  • Just me

    Of course Renee Perrault didn’t notice that a naturalised Italian from the Ivory Coast and a rich Italian were also convicted of the crime.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Raffaele tried to force Kercher’s room’s door so his DNA was on the door handle used by CSI’s to get into it.”

    Oh yeah! What a coincidence!

    It’s interesting that whenever the DNA of Amanda and Raffaele is mixed with the victim’s blood or on the victim’s clasp, it got there accidentally.

    If the blood in the bathroom was the result of Rudy washing his bloody hands, how come they didn’t find his DNA mixed with that blood, but instead they found Amanda’s DNA mixed with it? Isn’t strange?

    Rudy also supposedly broke into the house through that bedroom window, searched the bedroom for valuables (which he didn’t see even though it was on top of the furniture), and yet they found no DNA or fingerprints from him. The only DNA they found in that bedroom was Amanda and it was mixed with the victim’s blood.

    Coincidence once again. She lived there after all (although that wasn’t her bedroom).

    Somehow whenever Raffaele’s or Amanda’s DNA seems to incriminate them, it’s because of a coincidence or contamination.

    You think that we are all a bunch of idiots that you can fool anyway you like, don’t you?

    Obviously the judges there weren’t fooled by your nonsense, were they? But you can still hope in the appeal judges of course. Maybe the next judges will be a bunch of gullible fools who’ll believe your BS.

  • Just me

    Tony Del Balzo said

    am February 1 2010 @ 9:02 pm

    Believe her or not, Amanda Knox is still a frightened, somewhat naive young lady who choose to stay in Italy to comfort Meredith’s father and stayed in Perugia to help the police rather than seek shelter with relatives in Germany…

    Of course! That explains why none of the Knox/Mellas’s have ever spoken to the Kerchers to offer their condolences.

    It explains why Amanda went out for a meal with Raffaele at the same time as Meredith’s fellow students held a candle light vigil in her memory.

  • Tony

    Of course Amandais innocent her family have paid good money to a PR firm to make sure the accepted evidence is discredited in the US media. Luckily the trial was in an Italian court and not the Seattle PI. Three defense teams lost to the same evidence, if this murder had happned here you would be sayng that 26 years is not enough. Get over yourselves she did it and has to pay the price.

  • Mary H.

    Harry Rag wrote: “Legal expert Stefano Maffei stated the following:”

    “There were 19 judges who looked at the evidence over the course of two years, faced with decisions on pre-trial detention, review of such detention, committal to trial, judgment on criminal responsibility. They all agreed, at all times, that the evidence was overwhelming.”

    Kim Bailey wrote: “Even Knox’s attorneys who sat through 11 months of testimony, talked to Knox for more than a year, reviewed all the evidence – could not say that she was innocent.”

    It’s hard to get nineteen blithering-idiot judges and a couple of defense lawyers to agree on anything, but if it’s going to happen anywhere, it’s going to happen in Perugia.

    They all must have decided they’d like to prolong their lives for awhile.

  • pat az

    Perrault displays a sad arrogance – claiming a superiority of knowledge and intelligence over any who have doubts as to Knox’s innocence. In her case, any who doubt are “crazy bloggers” pushing “wrong facts”. Never mind that some of those “crazy bloggers” may have spent hundreds of hours translating material from italian, material including daily news articles of the testimony during the trial and the 100+page judges report from Guede’s trial.

    At this time there is a pervasive cognitive dissonance expressed in defending Knox; we exist in a state where there simultaneously “no evidence” against knox while at the same time hearing countless arguments against the evidence presented at the trials. One previous commenter above posted at least 9 points in his “discredited evidence” comment. Knox supporters would do better with their case if they instead approached it from the angle of “all of the evidence is flawed”; but of course this isn’t as nice a sound bite (or worthy of a case) as stating “there is no evidence”.

    Some of those “crazy bloggers” also point out the cognitive dissonance expressed when negating the reliability of the DNA evidence against knox while simultaneously propping up the DNA evidence against Guede. We are to believe that the lab is apparently a bunch of back-woods incompetents in any of the evidence that points to Knox; while at the same time utterly reliable in any evidence that points away from Knox.

    From what I’ve read the defence tried to discredit the evidence during the trial and failed. Thus at this point in time it is only in the american media that any of the evidence could be said to be “discredited”.

    For a full explanation of why the italian jury came to the conclusion they did, we’ll have to await the report coming out in the next few weeks.

  • CHAR

    Why don’t Amanda and Rafaelle’s final alibis match?

    In the final version of her alibi, Amanda claims she was at Rafaelle’s house. In HIS final version, he says he was alone from 9pm-1am while she went out somewhere.

    If they are innocent, why don’t their alibis match?

  • michael j butler

    Well done on the fundraiser Renee, keep up the good work, and lets get Amanda home to her family, where she belongs, God Bless you and your endeavors.

  • msanc

    Al_Fakh-yougud said: ” …This was done thanks to testing on DNA collected YEARS after the crime… ”

    You may wanna rethink that. The DNA was collected at the times of the crimes, DNA testing was generally unavailable at the times of the crimes. You should practice greater precision in your writing.

  • msanc

    Harry Rag (The Machine) said: “Amanda Knox’s footprints were found set in Meredith’s blood in two places in the hallway of the new wing of the cottage.”

    This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. There were no tests for blood on any footprints in the hallway. You post your lies everywhere to the extent that you begin to believe them.

  • CHAR

    Oh and Renee, did you hold a fundraiser for Amanda when Curt repeatedly blew off his child support payments when she was growing up?

    Better start working on a lot of material, because the Knox/Mellas clan is going to need $$$ for trips to Italy for the next 26 years to visit their very guilty daughter. The only way she’ll get home sooner is to show remorse for what she did, and thus receive time off her sentence.

    Maybe if her family and friends weren’t trying to make her into some kind of victim, she’d have the courage to admit the truth about her part in the murder.

  • maryville

    Crazies said:

    “So Curt banged Renee in the 80s and apparently did such a fine job that she still does anything for him.”

    ————-

    This post warrants a slander charge!

  • sadjoe

    The one FACT that we KNOW is true is that Amanda Knox did NOT receive a fair trail with impartial jurors where she was presumed innocent until proven guilty.
    Until she can get a FAIR trail with an impartial jurors any discussions of the other facts of this case are superfluous.

  • CHAR

    The one FACT we know is that sadjoe (above) knows NOTHING about how the trial was conducted.

    Seriously, sadjoe, I think even your fellow FOAKers will agree that idiotic and ignorant statements like yours above do not help Amanda in any way.

    She was presumed innocent and was found guilty by a panel of impartial jurors. The very humane and defendent-friendly Italian justice system guarantees her an appeal (that the US system would NOT) and the overwhelming amount of evidence against her– especially her & Rafaelle’s many, many lies and changing/unmatching alibis– will undoubtedly confirm her guilt.

    In the meantime, you should take a little time to read up on the actual facts of the case so that you don’t make a further fool of yourself posting by nonsense.

  • Shilo

    maryville said
    am February 2 2010 @ 12:01 am
    Crazies said:

    “So Curt banged Renee in the 80s and apparently did such a fine job that she still does anything for him.”

    ————-

    This post warrants a slander charge!
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    you mean “libel”, Maryville

    and Curt/Renee would need to show damages/ economic harm

    and that the anonymous poster was the “proximate cause” of that harm

    and Curt/Renee would need to hope that it couldn’t be proven to be true on a balance of probabilities

    and where are they going to find the money to retain defamation lawyers?! (they have already turned to charity to pay for criminal lawyers)

    I’ve noticed you like to threaten people with “slander charges” in other comment sections, yet you appear to know as little about the law in this regard as you do about the evidence inculpating Amanda & her boyfriend

  • Mary H.

    pat az, there is little advantage to being able to translate the documentation; it all ends up in English eventually. I have conversed on blogs with a couple of people who claim superiority on account of their skill in Italian while they simultaneously demonstrate their inability to use reason and logic to analyze the available information. What good is that?

    It also doesn’t help to know Italian if you are guided by hatred for the suspects or by blind patriotism, as many are.

    There is no dissonance between saying there is no evidence and discrediting what it being claimed as evidence. It’s just a matter of semantics. Amanda’s supporters try to explain and illustrate how the claimed pieces of evidence are not actually evidence in case anyone wants to further their understanding of the problems.

    There is also no dissonance between calling the DNA evidence for Guede reliable and the DNA evidence for Amanda unreliable. Guede left copious evidence at the crime scene, which was collected as a matter of course in the investigation and routinely tested. His arrest followed.

    What is being claimed as evidence against Amanda was selectively searched for after she was arrested, not before, and was collected under such suspicious conditions that it would not be admissible in most modern courts. Many professional scientists have evaluated the test results and called them invalid.

    You wrote: “From what I’ve read the defence tried to discredit the evidence during the trial and failed.”

    It’s not that they failed to discredit the evidence, it’s that the jury failed to pay attention and/or to defy the prosecutors and the judges. The “evidence” is discredited, with or without the approval of the court.

  • CHAR

    Mary H, please explain why Amanda and Rafaelle’s alibis don’t match.

  • jim

    miss renee u are crazy , not the bloggers for hosting this event for a convucted felon, an evil beast. who came to ur event either racist rednecks who believe in white supermacy still, thats why u and rest of the folks who came in ur comedy show are supporting this beast amanda. had she been dark u and rest of ur gang will be the first to indict her on the basis of circumstantial evidences. even u are saying that her guilt is proven on the basis of circumstantial evidence. donnt u think u sound crazy saying this? aren”t murder cases proven on circumstantial evidences? like oj simpson and scott peterson?criminals like this evil amanda erase the evidence with bleach.why wuld she buy bleach 6:45 in the morning?why wuld she be standing with her sick boyfriend in front of the house with mop and a bucket?why wuld she change her story and then blame it on a black man?if u are innocent u atleast will not blame it on someone else? isnt all this enough to say that she is a decietful and compulsive liar? how come all other roomates alibis when they were questioned by police went through except her and her boyfriend? not only that even her boyfriend told cops that she had told him loads of bullshit and that she made him lie!how come these evidences dont convince people like u. i know why these evidnces dont convice people like u. becuz u and whoever came to this comedy show are believers of whiter supermacy and will do anything to support evil racist murderers like amanda knox. by the way amnda is also a racist as well, becuz she once told a jew in seattle in a cafe she used to work saying and laughing my people killed ur people. hope this murder charming psycopath rot in jail for 26 yrs and u and amanda’s family are ot brave, but shameful white supermacist

  • jim

    maryville, knowing the villes in this country u must be some redneck white supermacist from some small town racist ville , ignorant as usual and thererfore ignoring the facts about this case and hence supprting this evil, beast and charming psycopath. dont be too excited this beast will rot in that hole in itlay for 26 yrs.just answer one thing, why did she blame it on someone else if she is innocent?

  • Amber Preston

    Why can’t the Mellases and Knoxes at least exhibit some dignity in public. They could have learned a thing or two about it from the family of the real victim.

    This article has such a defensive tone to it that I can’t help but think that the fundraiser was a disaster from a PR standpoint.

    Rest in Peace, Meredith Kercher.

  • @ Mary H

    Careful, now. Your nose is going to start growing again.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters and Mary H, [who is really Candence the Cook, apparently]:

    here’s Jooohhhnnnyyyyyy ….

    Missed you bud, where have you been.

    It’s always a pleasure to read your comments; you’re so right of course, as is Mary H.

    Keep up the good work — and don’t forget Valentine’s Day — flowers for Amanda, ok ?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @CHAR:

    You’ve got it all wrong, Char!

    They do match … it’s just that Amanda can’t remember how they match [yet] and Raffaele was doped out to even remember if he porked her!

    I know from first hand experience how easy it is to forget a really good bang the night before; it happens to the best of us.

    There is NO proof, and no-one has offered any, that Amanda was even in Perugia that night!

    So how could she be guilty ?

  • Kim Bailey

    Tony Del Balzo said “So any smiling or grinning was at family members” nonsense. Knox was hugging and kissing her attorneys and anyone else she could get her hands on. Her testimony is online, as well as others. Oh yeah the cameras were there the entire time. “naive young lady who choose to stay in Italy to comfort Meredith’s father and stayed in Perugia to help the police.” MORE NONSENSE, Knox was caught at the door by the police MOP-IN-HAND. She could not run so instead she blamed the black bartender.

    Renee said; “the evidence presented at the trial was circumstantial.” You are admitting that there was evidence against Knox and don’t even realize it. Who is the crazy?

  • NOSEE’EM’s

    Ride high on your “denial waves”…. those that choose to look the other way and proclaim amanda knox’s “innocence.”
    Just make sure that you take her back to the U.S.A.
    if she gets out on appeal– nobody else in the world wants her.

  • Shane

    “Some of those “crazy bloggers” also point out the cognitive dissonance expressed when negating the reliability of the DNA evidence against knox while simultaneously propping up the DNA evidence against Guede.”

    Not even Guede’s own defense team disputed the forensic evidence against him. It’s possible for an innocent person’s DNA to end up on a bra clasp that kicked around the crime scene for a month and a half, even if that person never touched it. Inside the victim’s vagina? Not so much.

  • Shane

    “MORE NONSENSE, Knox was caught at the door by the police MOP-IN-HAND. She could not run so instead she blamed the black bartender.”

    I’m sorry, but what you’ve posted is nonsense. Knox and Sollecito were waiting in the garden when the police arrived, not standing at the door with a mop. Don’t bother checking the facts, though.

  • Mary H.

    Char ~ Amanda and Raffaele spent the night together at his apartment. That is the truth, that is what they told the police and that was what was accepted for four days after the murder, until Mignini got a bee in his bonnet and hauled them off to jail for reasons unknown.

    Amanda changed her story under duress during the interrogation; she has explained why several times. In addition to telling her she would go to prison for thirty years and never see her family during that time, the police lied to her about there being evidence of her at the crime scene and said that Raffaele was no longer providing her with an alibi.

    Similarly, the police put Raffaele in isolation, interrogated him in spite of his protests, and lied to him about what Amanda had been saying.

    Both of these young people trusted and believed the police and eventually conformed their mental images to the images the police described. It is a phenomenon that does occur, as those who are knowledgeable in legal, forensic and psychological matters will confirm.

    Amanda reverted to her original alibi the day after the interrogation; Raffaele, as a native Italian, was more vulnerable to the authority of the police, so continued for awhile to believe that Amanda had been at the crime scene; recently he publicly conceded that was impossible.

    Contrary to popular belief, neither suspect offered multiple or often-changing alibis. Amanda offered two — one before the interrogation, and one during the interrogation; after the interrogation she went back to the first one. The same with Raffaele, except that he, more often than Amanda, tried to “fill in the blanks” in an attempt to make sense of what the cops told him.

    The main problem with focusing on the inconsistent alibis is that people forget that Amanda and Raffaele became suspects for no reason before they provided the false explanations under duress. In other words, if they had never been taken in for interrogations, the false explanations would never have been made.

    It isn’t fair to hold that testimony against them if they were there under false pretenses. The fact is, the police could have brought any young person into an interrogation and persuaded them they were at the scene of the crime, if that’s what they wanted them to admit. The police were not taking no for an answer.

    The focus should be on whether there was any evidence against Amanda and Raffaele before they went unaccompanied into the interrogations. People call them liars because they became confused, but it was the police who were doing all the lying.

  • Mary H.

    Kim wrote: “MORE NONSENSE, Knox was caught at the door by the police MOP-IN-HAND.”

    Kim, when the two police officers gave their depositions, they did not say they caught Amanda at the door with a mop in her hand. They said Amanda and Raffaele were sitting in the yard (or the garden) waiting. If you like to look at it for yourself, you can find it here:

    http://unionesarda.ilsole24ore.com/Articoli/Articolo/105013

    I could be wrong, but I believe there is also no mention of a mop or bucket in Judge Micheli’s sentencing report.

    If you are getting your information about the case from the truejustice website, I suggest you broaden your horizons by looking at original sources. truejustice withholds a great deal of information from its readers.

  • privatedoberman

    Wow! Lots of posters turning up for this one. It sure as heck gets confusing. Who to believe? Maybe we should go back to that long post by Harry Rag. You know the one. Right near the beginning.

    He outlines a whole heap of evidence against Miss Amanda. Looks pretty convincing to me. However then Ol’ Miss Maryville says “Harry Rag: Quit spewing your filthy hate.” Hmmmm let’s chew this one over.

    Any evidence presented in court and accepted by the jury is “filthy hate” Any statement by people over in good ol’ Seattle that they just pluck out of the air is the truth.

    About sums it up for me.

  • See the UK Documentary

    Watch the documentary that the last fund raiser paid for.

    You’ll see the lisping “Mary H” – just look for the old chick sporting the Nixon nose & jowls over a massive wattle.

    (Looks as though lying affects your neck line as much as it does your nose!)

  • privatedoberman

    Perhaps Mary H has a point when she says

    “It’s hard to get nineteen blithering-idiot judges and a couple of defense lawyers to agree on anything, but if it’s going to happen anywhere, it’s going to happen in Perugia.”

    Hard to go against anything as conclusive as this. Let’s see…. Miss Amanda is in stir because all nineteen judges are mad. Good argument? Do we have any psychiatrist reports to back it up?

    I’m beginning to think that Harry Rag is looking much more convincing now.

  • Jiminy

    The Adventures of Pinocchio didn’t tell us the whole story, but the UK documentary on Amanda does.

    One look at the food blogger and you will realize that, in addition to abnormal nose length, lying can also cause the following to develop:

    Nixon-like jowls;
    Massive neck whattle;
    Lisping; &
    Inability to Reason.

  • Jim E. Nee

    The Adventures of Pinocchio didn’t tell us the whole story, but the UK documentary on Amanda does.

    One look at the food blogger and you will realize that, in addition to abnormal nose length, lying can also cause the following to develop:

    Nixon-like jowls;
    Massive neck whattle;
    Lisping; &
    Inability to Reason.

  • johnny law

    Dear Renee:

    Here’s a quote from my Harvard-educated evidence law prof that will help you out:

    “Circumstantial evidence is just that: E V I D E N C E.”

  • Fielding Zimmerman

    Gee Doberman, and I always had you down for a fool! Seems that you have got this case weighed up real good.

    However, have you forgotten Miss Amanda’s written statement, which concludes:

    “Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith’s death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truth that I have been able to think.”

    This girl has certainly tried real hard to think some truths. You’ve got to give her that!

  • John Winters

    Pat Az sounds like a person who has not been educated.

  • privatedoberman

    Hi Fielding.
    You know what? Perhaps I’m not so bright after all, but my posts seem to have gone missing. What was it I said?

  • John Winters

    Oh yeah, and for anyone who wants to know why Amanda’s DNA was found in Romanelli’s room, it is not surprising if Amanda explored that room. She could not get to her own and Kercher’s rooms without going past Romanelli’s room, the door of which was open with broken glass on the floor, visible from the lounge. Amanda might easily have ventured in out of curiosity having seen the glass. This is not a mansion. It is a small living space Amanda shared with 3 adult females.

  • Stash Kadowski

    What I don’t get is why Amanda said that she saw blood on Raphael’s hands. I know that she presumed it was from the fish that they ate, after the shower that they took. It seems like a very small detail for one who says that she could remember very little on account of all the hash they smoked. But the again:

    “Everything Ii have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith’s death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truths I have been able to think”

    So that explains it.

  • John Winters

    zzzzzzzzzzzzz

  • jiminy

    QUOTE:

    “Amanda might easily have ventured in out of curiosity having seen the glass.”
    ————————————

    in bare feet?

    there was broken glass all over the place

  • jiminy

    I just read an interesting assertion.

    It’s claimed that the 46 day delay on the collection of the bra clasp was due to the DEFENSE.

    Apparently, they were dragging their feet (deliberately) when it came to setting a date to witness the police collection of the clasp.

  • Stash Kadowski

    It seems that Miss Amanda and Young Rafe were under suspicion from the start. Usually we commend the police when they go by their hunches, but suspicious behavior doesn’t count for some. It wasn’t only the police who were suspicious. The other flat mates were also uncomfortable about these two.

    Miss Amanda wasn’t hauled in by the police. She went to accompany young Rafe. While she was relaxing, doing her yoga and a bit of gym work, he was in with the police blowing her alibi by saying that she was out from 9.00 to 1.00. Worth investigating, I would think.

    With her alibi blow, Miss Amanda came up with one of her other truths. But you’ve got to hand it to her. They were the best truths she was able to think.

  • Dilemma

    What I want to know is why was she lingerie shopping in a kinky shop the day after she found her housemate murdered?She was seen on CCTV with the boyfriend present.

  • Dilemma

    Also do people not realise the delicacy of this situation?A girl was murdered and another sent to prison for an excess of 25 years.Two lives lost effectively and they are having a comedy night!!!??Stupid woman just wants publicity!

    I am not an american,italian or british person and I think that is sick!Fundraising night for a convicted murderer?That’s shocking.

  • Mary H.

    Were all these last several posts written by the same person? They certainly sound like it. Lot of variety in the names, not a lot of variety in the mantras.

    dobermna, you don’t have to be mad to be a blithering idiot; it also counts if you’re just cowed by Mignini, like everyone involved with the trial was. Wanting to avoid those broken kneecaps and all, you know.

    Stash Kadowski has got to be another pseudonym for Harry Rag a/k/a “La Machine,” etc., etc., etc. He’s always very big on the phrase “it seems.” He writes whole pages full of “it seems” on truejustice and the little lambs just follow right along. Who needs facts when “it seems” that lies are true?

    Let Candace Dempsey write her non-fiction book — the boys at truejustice are producing some gripping novels.

    Fielding, better watch yourself, you’re giving aid to the enemy — Amanda’s lapse in grammar is evidence in itself that she was under stress. She went to a Jesuit high school and had to be in the top 15% of high school students to get into UW.

    jiminy wrote: “I just read an interesting assertion. It’s claimed that the 46 day delay on the collection of the bra clasp was due to the DEFENSE.”

    Guess what, jiminy. I just read an interesting assertion, too. It’s claimed you are and your buddies are all morons. No documentation necessary.

    Hopefully, I’ll catch some of the truejustice crowd on here and they’ll believe me. After all, they’ll believe anything.

  • Mary H.

    Dilemma wrote: “What I want to know is why was she lingerie shopping in a kinky shop the day after she found her housemate murdered?She was seen on CCTV with the boyfriend present.”

    I’m not sure the shop owner thinks of his or her store as “kinky.” Amanda’s cottage was a crime scene; she was locked out. She needed underwear.

    Too bad Mignini didn’t expend as much energy surveilling the interrogations as he spent stalking the apple of his eye and her boyfriend.

  • Mary H.

    From John Winters:

    Chase Roper says:

    ”Where can I buy my own Double DNA knife?”

    “You don’t have to buy one. Just pop round to Amanda’s house and take a knife (any one will do), from the kitchen drawer. Send it to Rome’s criminal forensics laboratory where they will be happy to add some DNA from a person of your choosing.

    And when they send it back to you, prepare yourself to find it parcelled in something really witty like a sheet of giftwrap with pictures of Santy Claus on it.”

    ——————-

    Sorry, I missed that one before, John. Very funny and very true. LOL!

  • slimJim

    But you omit the rest of the story (ever so convenient for your ilk).

    While buying the non granny panty type underwear, the shop owner *testified* that they were giggling about what hot sex they were going to go home and have have with the new purchase.

    Does not a murder make, but hardly the type of behavior one would expect from an innocent Jesuit educated young woman who has just had her “close friend” brutally stabbed to death and raped…by someone else of course.

  • Dilemma

    Yes the shop owner may not have called his shop ‘kinky’ but he overheard the ‘wild sex’ comments Knox was spewing to her boyfriend while discussing which sexy thong to purchase.Then again she may have been to high on drugs to know what she was doing.Maybe the photos taken of her in the shop sucking the boyfriends face were just some kind of comfort to her in light of the situation.

  • slimJim

    Samanda’s grammar:

    Sorry, I do not believe her lack of writing skills was due to “stress” or in any conceivable stupid stretch proves improper police action.

    I suggest you read any of her many readily available written discourses from pre-Perugia.

    They all are rife with the type of infantile errors common to elementary school compositions.

    “Honors student” is more of a misnomer that is to be expected from the product of a pseudo Catholic School that expends resources pleading causes of convicted killers and encouraging more student self expression than simple literary skills.

  • slimJim

    Dumbest Defense of the day:

    Winters whose impartiality is without bounds asserts that Amanda’s DNA was in the other room because she naturally walked in there out of normal curiousity.

    UH_HUH…

    PS: the floor was covered in glass from the break in they were convicted of staging, and…she was in her bare feet….remember

    OOOOPS.

  • Mary H.

    “Does not a murder make…”

    You got that right.

  • Dilemma

    You cannot justify her actions in that store!

    Guess she thought she was really gonna get away with her ‘blame the black guy’ story.

  • Shane

    I am SO gonna be lurking on the True Justice sites when Knox and Sollecito are acquitted. The howls of outrage are going to be immense! It’ll be even better than Mignini’s guilty verdict.

  • Shane

    “You cannot justify her actions in that store!”

    Who cares? It’s entirely irrelevant to the case. Although if you feel it to be relevant, I completely understand why you think they’re guilty…

  • privatedoberman

    Gee lady, can’t you stick to the facts of the case. People come here and point out some very obvious problems with the defence and then they get insulted. The nerve of it!

    So let’s get it straight, what you are saying is not that the jury and the judges involved were “blithering idiots” but that they were forced to support the prosecution on fear of getting their knee caps busted?

    O.K. an interesting theory, now where is your proof?

  • privatedoberman

    Hi Stash!

    I read your quote from Miss Amanda:

    “Everything I have said in regards to my involvement in Meredith’s death, even though it is contrasting, are the best truths I have been able to think”

    Funnily enough, I didn’t spot the bad grammar, but then again I was none too good at English. So what do you think about Mary’s theory that the bad grammar is proof that she was innocent?

    Mary didn’t mention the blood. So much blood in this case? How about that nasty prick that poor old Ralph got when he cooked the girls dinner? Must have been nasty! By the way, did anyone confirm his story? Did he give dates? He only knew them for six days, so it could not have been hard.

    In any case, why did he have to mention pricking his finger at all? All very confusing.

  • grim

    I predict a vast silence when the Knox appeal fails. All you so called self serving hysterical supporters will say
    “Oh Well! I guess they were both guilty after all.” Then you can forget all about them both and go on to your next pathetic crusade. Never mind there’s always the Drew Peterson trial you can vent your anger on.

  • peg

    She is guilty. Great post by Harry Rag….and the others who know she is guilty and are a great deal more informed than her supporters!

    She was drinking and drugging….that changes people and their character. Amanda is not the innocent sweet girl that her parents believe her to be.

    The jurors of Perugia did their job correctly! Let’s keep her there.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    msanc said
    am February 1 2010 @ 11:25 pm

    ” …This was done thanks to testing on DNA collected YEARS after the crime… ”
    The DNA was collected at the times of the crimes, DNA testing was generally unavailable at the times of the crimes.”

    DNA IS COLLECTED AND USED AFTER MANY YEARS FOR MANY SCIENTIFIC REASONS, NOT JUST FOR FORENSIC. JUST DO SOME RESEARCH ON GOOGLE.

    ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ME THAT AFTER A LONG TIME YOU CAN HAVE INSTANCES OF DNA APPEARING IN PLACES WHERE THE DNA’S OWNER IS NEVER BEEN BEFORE?

    I’VE NEVER BEEN TO ANTARTICA. DO YOU THINK THAT IF WE WAIT LONG ENOUGH MY DNA MIGHT SHOW UP THERE ONE DAY?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    privatedoberman said
    am February 2 2010 @ 9:53 am

    “Mary didn’t mention the blood. So much blood in this case? How about that nasty prick that poor old Ralph got when he cooked the girls dinner? Must have been nasty! By the way, did anyone confirm his story? Did he give dates? He only knew them for six days, so it could not have been hard.”

    IT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE POLICE THAT MEREDITH’S DINNER AT HIS APARTMENT NEVER HAPPENED. MEREDITH HAD NEVER BEEN TO HIS APARTMENT FOR ANY REASON, EVER, THEREFORE THAT PRICKING INCIDENT COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. IT WAS JUST AN ATTEMPT RAFFAELE MADE TO JUSTIFY THE PRESENCE OF THE VICTIM’S DNA IN THAT KNIFE TO HIS FATHER.

    UNFORTUNATELY THIS OBVIOUS LIE BY RAFFAELE SOLLECITO WAS NOT ADMITTED AS EVIDENCE IN COURT AGAINST HIM. IT DIDN’T QUALIFY AS “SPONTANEOUS DECLARATION” BY A SUSPECT. IT WAS IN FACT A LETTER TO HIS FATHER, NOT TO THE POLICE.

  • Robin

    to Dilemma-

    The “kinky’ lingerie shop was, and is, a general store. She had no clothes-(they were in that sealed crime scene) and needed underware.

    At that time she spoke almost no Italian- she had only just gotten there remember. They were talking quietly. If you have ever been to that store it is extremely loud with lots of outdoor noise, too, and you would have to shout to be overheard. They couldn’t have been overheard-no matter what the witness said-not unless he was standing right next to them which he wasn’t.

    Witnesses are notoriously wrong and see and hear things that never happened-or see them wrong.And don’t forget it was that witnesses 15 minutes of fame-he wouldn’t be human-and Italian-and let that opportunity pass without alittle pizzazz to be remembered by. It’s a story he can tell for the rest of his life-to a very willing audience-and I mean audience because it was nothing more than a performance-just like this is nothing more than a play to alot of people with the “trial” just being another act.He had a bit part but to him-and alot of the supposed witnesses-it’s probably the only real part they will ever have on the world stage.

    And by the way this “witness” shopowner doesn’t speak English which is what they had to be speaking in for the most part because Amanda didn’t speak Italian-she was just learning it.

    All of these facts are still able to be found for anyone with the desire to look. I think, though, that alot of you aren’t the ones to look very hard for the real facts and have no doubt read the English and Italian tabloids for your edification.You will not get anything correct from those sources-just alot of puff and nonsense leaked from the man-who-can’t be-named-or he-might-sue-us.

  • grim

    With any luck at all because of the slander charges she will get an additional four years.

    Twist in the wind you narcissistic moronic Knox supporters.

    After all she’s just a poor little misunderstood girl who killed her room mate. Oh the tragedy, Oh the pathos. Hope she rots when she’s sent to a really rough jail.

    I pray to God she gets very very old in jail.

  • Robin

    Simmer down Al-Fakh you are screaming louder and louder but it’s all hot air signifying nothing-put it into a tuba and it will get you farther.

  • grim

    And by the way robin. you don’t need to know another language in order to exchange money to buy bleach. Obviously you are some kind of retarded self serving idiot. Comments such as yours are laughable. why not audition for the comedy show the (in Denial) parents put on. sicko……………………..

  • Robin

    DNA evidence that is used years after a crime is DNA evidence that was sealed right away and has remained untampered-with ,sealed, for years-not intermingled in piles of dity clothes on the floor.

    This bra clasp was not sealed until 47 days after the fact-and it it was thus ruined as DNA evidence.It had not only Raffaele’s DNA on it but bits of many other people’s DNA on it too which were unable to be matched to anyone in particular.

  • IVSTITIA

    Mary H. and John Winters.

    All I have to do is google Amanda Knox news and I find you there.

    If you write from Seattle you need to sleep a little. You were up all night to write your nonsense that only the two of you and a handful of others are still believing.

    I don’t think your PR campaign effort is working too well. It’s still the same five or six people who agree with your theories. Everybody else either doesn’t believe you or doesn’t care.

    I also checked the Italian blogs and newspapers this morning. Couldn’t find any Amanda news anymore. Not a word. Not even in all the Perugia or Umbria newspapers. I guess they moved on to the hot news of the day (the ubiquitous Berlusconi and his legal troubles).

    And you know, John and Mary, it’s the Italians who should be the target of your campaign, not the people from Seattle. Ultimately it will be the residents of the Province of Perugia who’ll be called to serve as juror in court. It won’t be anybody from King County, Washington.

  • Robin

    Oh Grim go chase your tail.

  • IVSTITIA

    Robin: “This bra clasp was not sealed until 47 days after the fact-and it it was thus ruined as DNA evidence.It had not only Raffaele’s DNA on it but bits of many other people’s DNA on it too which were unable to be matched to anyone in particular.”

    Could you provide the sources of what you’re saying? (not bloggers comments, Thank you).

    You still didn’t say how Raffaele’s DNA could have ended up on a clasp in a sealed room, of a sealed house, if he hadn’t been in that room. Unless you can prove that the DNA flew from his apartment, through the key hole into the room and onto the clasp.

  • PhanuelB

    Probably the most important deficiency in the Italian judicial system is that the court record for this case is not fully available for public inspection. This has meant that important public debate such as this is based on second-hand incomplete information, often taken out of context and sometimes simply wrong.

    In the United States anyone can go to a courthouse and make copies of any non-sealed court document. They can scan it and place it on the internet without limitation. In Federal cases and some state courts documents are available now on court web-sites. In the Carlo Parlanti case, documents and transcripts, chosen by the Defense, are available right now for download.

    It’s important in a democracy that the public can come in and see for themselves if justice has been done. The record of Amanda’s case is presumably available at the courthouse but Italian law apparently does not allow “digitization” and “publication” of such documents. We need it here and we don’t have it.

    In this case the pro-Amanda camp has largely relied on reports from major media outlets dealing with the argument that she didn’t do it because Rudy did it. The anti-Amanda camp tends to show up with edited accounts of her interrogation and say why did she lie? The pro-Amanda information is of course only as good as the reporters and organizations that gathered it, but that is usually pretty good. The interrogation evidence, particularly as presented here, often does not tell the whole story. It shouldn’t be in court unless the defense has access to ALL electronic records of her interrogations so they can present what they deem to be important.

    I would also be curious to know the status of any and all recordings of Amanada’s interrogation. Has each and every policeman or prosecutor who was there been asked under oath what they know about electronic recordings of the interrogation? It goes that without saying that all such records would be fully available to the defense through discovery.

    If electronic records of her interrogation were never made, it’s because a corrupt prosecution team wanted to make sure that only their version of what happened would come out. Surely we cannot be asked to take the word of a prosecutor who has now been convicted of corruption in another case.

  • John Winters

    Terrible Trivium says:

    “Amanda might easily have ventured in out of curiosity having seen the glass.”
    in bare feet?
    there was broken glass all over the place”

    Apparently, the broken glass was all over Romanelli’s bed which apparently had no clothes on it when she left.
    Do you ever get the feeling that all those criminal documents Romanelli types up for a job have gone to her head. The only person who could tell us the truth about what was in that room is the burgling killer who
    didn’t bother taking her”jewellery.” Aaaaah.

  • MikeW

    The truth seems to be lost over the internet. Each side keeps repeating themselves, ad nauseum.

    When the complete report is issued on Mar.4th, things may change.

    This is somewhat similar to the Kennedy assassination. No one could believe that Oswald did it alone, or that only his bullets could have done all that damage.

    This led to a vast amount of misinterpretation of evidence, making it look like more were involved. Once it was out there, it wouldn’t go away. People are still convinced Oswald had accomplices.

    I fear this is what has happened to Amanda and Raffaele. Despite overwhelming circumstantial evidence, much of it their own fault, they are innocent.

    Why didn’t Rudy Guede scream out their names from the moment he was apprehended?

    Doesn’t it mean anything that they barely knew him, and never did anything remotely like this in their lives – utterly out of character?

    Sometimes the truth is simple!

  • CHAR

    @PhanuelB, the “interogation” you speak of a) lasted less than 2 hours and b) was made when Amanda was a witness, not a suspect, hence it wasn’t taped. She’d come to the station on her own and they weren’t planning to talk to her. The very second she became a suspect, by admitting she was there, the interview stopped. In nany case, that confession was never used against her in court. It was her hand-written confession– that she made voluntarily– that was used.

    Mignini’s case is being appealed, just liked Amanda’s. The charge against him is more about inter-departmental politics than any actual corruption. Mignini claims he was authorized to do the wiretaps, others say not. Unlike Amanda, he’s already been cleared of the charges once. In any case, there has been no charge of abuse of power in the Meredith Kercher murder trial.

    @ Mary H, nice try on the alibis, but you still haven’t been able to produce an innocent reason why Rafaelle to this day insists that Amanda was not in his aprtment from 9pm-1am. Yes, he says he thinks she is too “sweet” to have done the murder but he will not alibi her for that time period. Basically he’s saying, “I don’t know where she was for four hours, but I don’t think she’s involved.” Amanda insists she was with Rafealle the whole time. SEE THE PROBLEM?

    Also, Amanda started lying before she ever saw a policeman. She lied to Filomena about having called the police to the cottage. She never called the police and Rafaelle only did after officers were already at the cottage.

  • msanc

    grim said

    am February 2 2010 @ 12:33 pm

    “And by the way robin. you don’t need to know another language in order to exchange money to buy bleach. ”

    There is no testimony of AK buying bleach. (The shop owner had some vague recollection a year later of seeing someone resembling her in the “cleaning products” aisle of the two-aisle store.) Another BS story from the haters.

  • @ Renee

    Reading through the posts above, it looks to me as if the bloggers supporting Amanda are even “crazier” than the one against her.

  • IVSTITIA

    “If electronic records of her interrogation were never made, it’s because a corrupt prosecution team wanted to make sure that only their version of what happened would come out”

    Why do you make such assumption? The police almost never tapes depositions by witnesses. The law doesn’t require it and it’s not done.

    The law (art. 141/bis of the Code of Penal Procedure) requires taping of only interrogations of suspects held under detention, if the interrogation occurs outside of a regular hearing.

    Amanda was interrogated as a witness by the police. Mignini wasn’t even present. Once she was declared a suspect because she made self incriminating statements, the interrogation had to stop and no more questions could be asked. At that point the police had to tell the suspect Amanda that she was advised to seek legal counsel, and also warned that from that moment on any spontaneous declaration could be used against her.

    The self incriminating statement which made her transition from witness to suspect is not admissible in court (see art. 63 of the Code of Penal Procedure). This rule is also reinforced by a Supreme Court decision of 1996, which was used to exclude these declarations from the trial against Amanda for Murder. However those self incriminating statements could be used in the Lumumba vs. Knox case, because although art. 63 prohibits the use of self incriminating statements against herself, it admits them as incrimination against others.

  • colonelhall

    John Winter says:

    “Terrible Trivium says:”

    No John Winter I am Terrible Trivium!

  • Kim Bailey

    Mary H. Knox explain that she accused Lamumba becuase the Italian police beat her. Is she still claiming that?

    “She went to a Jesuit high school and had to be in the top 15% of high school students to get into UW.” I went of a Catholic high school and was in the top 3% of my class. That is proof that I am not capable of murder.

    Not only are your post irrelevant they are very stupid.

  • colonelhall

    John Winters:
    “Do you ever get the feeling that all those criminal documents Romanelli types up for a job have gone to her head. ”

    Now you are attacking the flatmates. Do you think that there anyone involved with this case that is not stupid or a liar?

    No! Don’t say “Amanda” there is absolutely no way that one could not say that she is a liar.

  • Kim Bailey

    Mary H. How many law suits have there been in the US alone against the Catholic church because some priest has ruined little boys and girls lives? To put it politely.

    The rest of you, I apologize for going back to that stupid post.

  • Kim Bailey

    John Winters “She could not get to her own … without going past Romanelli’s room” Could you explain why she would go and take a shower after seeing “the door of which was open with broken glass on the floor” Who would take a shower after finding the front door open, bedroom in disarray, and blood on the bathroom sink?

  • Kim Bailey

    Shane said: “Knox and Sollecito were waiting in the garden.” You couldn’t be more wrong. Knox was at the door holding the mop. And I am sure you have heard her lame attempt to explain her reason for having the mop. Some ignorance about a pipe bursting the night before at Raffaele’s.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Amanda and Raffaele are two coke-heads. Everybody in Perugia knew it.

    Raffele had also a conviction for drug possession in his own hometown.

    When you get too much drugs in your system you do crazy things, whether you went to Catholic school or not, or whether your sister is a police officer or not.

    Why don’t the FOAkers realize they are defending a drug addict and murderer? What’s wrong with Seattle?

    It must be because they’re just a bunch of soft on crime drug smoking liberals. I bet Mary H. stands for Marijuana Hashish.

  • billyryan

    two very important things have happened since amandas conviction.the judge refused a defence request for an independant review of the dna evidence believing he was qualified to evaluate it himself,and he accepted that the knife was a part of the muder.since then ten respected dna experts have have condemed the lcn test on the knife being any proof of merridiths dna.despire what the amanda haters say no independant forenzic expert has supported the prosecutions assertions.
    as the trial came to a close mignini was cleared of all charges of coruption and the judge had to take it for granted that he would also be cleared at the appeal by the prosecution.but he was wrong, mignini is now convicted of planting evidence of trying to blackmail a prosecuter and attempting to put innocent people in jail.suddenly the reason for not taping the interrogation,or destroying the tapes afterwards,the deliberate destroying of computer hardrives,when no evidence of amanda and raffaela could be found at the crime scene legitimally, migninis old tricks came into play he could have got away with it too only for the panel of judges in florence.whoever made the call of the bombscare where merridiths two mobile phones were found was very likely to be the person who dumped them there.mignini made sure that this person was not identified,he did not leak this name to the press.a judge at one of the detension hearings took mignini word that amanda and raffaela should be detained for fear that they might flee or interfere with the evidence,in the light of mignini conviction that judge must now be avoiding looking at himself in mirrows.
    the judge now in summing up his conviction and sentence,has to show total disreguard for international dna experts.rubbish the three judges in florrence and try to save face.or just mabey he can decide that this misscarriage of justice has gone far enough.
    anyway congrats to renee perrault and all involved in this fundraiser,dont get too concerned about the amanda haters who post here.they are getting paid to do it they are very few in number they just post under a lot of different names.

  • Pico Bella

    Your all very sick people shame on you. Harry Rag said it all she is gulty and her mother isnt much better.

  • Enzo Zoff

    It doesn’t matter how many blogs you read you will ALWAYS find the same ridiculous arguments put forward by proAmanda stooges who are driven by the PR machine that was hired to to discredit and distort the truth.

    If you carefully analyse the MO of a typical one-eyed proKnox supporter it follows the same pattern:

    1. all their comments are never referenced; usually, their source is the US media of their choosing, like Donald Trump;

    2. they will make ‘blanket’ statements like ‘it’s anti-american sentiment’ which can never be fully debated let alone rebutted to fools and idiots;

    3. at best, they will state half-truths like ‘italian juries are not sequestered’ but will ALWAYS neglect to admit that it’s the same in the US;

    4. when they do say the entire truth it leaves you speechless : ‘… the italian judiciary is different to ours.” Riveting stuff.

    5. you will never, ever, ever get a positive view of the italians, like maybe, ‘every defendant gets an automatic appeal – gee, even we don’t have that’ or the like, never;

    6. they make off-the cuff, throw-away lines like: ‘it’s a travesty of justice’; but NEVER articulate the injustice. It just is !!!;

    7. they will manipulate the truth to their ends, e.g., Ciolino on 48Hours has 3 people running on the asphalt road and then with a straight face says: ‘listen, listen, no noise’. But no-one has the courage to say that the 3 suspects ran up an IRON stairway that which apparently is deafening. What does that say about the integrity of your media?[ My suspicion is that Winters is really Ciolino;]

    8. like 3 year olds with soiled nappies, their stupidity has no bounds; ‘don’t travel to Italy in protest, boycott italian products.’ That’s why the French love you so much;

    9. the double-standards, hypocrisy and sheer myopia displayed by proK supporters is nothing less than sad; I actually get embarrassed reading some of their comments. Eg, you will always get negative association linking an isolated incident that was then meant to prove the whole; but when one attempt to rebut this with say the Cermis incident or Guantenamo Bay injustices proK, supporters get indignant: ‘ …. it doesn’t equate’, they say;

    10. Rationality, common sense and logic does not exist within the proK mindset mainly because it cannot be allowed to exist; Eg: Timothy Egan writing in TNYT: ‘ … there is no DNA evidence supporting Knox’s involvement and whatever there is has been contaminated or tainted, BUT, there is for Guede’! But Tim, Guede points the finger at K/S. Yes, but G is a liar! But Tim, K & S changed their story 4 times! Yes, but that’s because she was beaten by the police. But Tim, she confessed on the stand that the written confession was freely given by her as a ‘gift’. Yes, but she didn’t have a lawyer present; she was upset; she was confused; she was under influence; she was on her periods, etc ……;

    11. ProK supporters always, invariably, argue their case ‘piece-meal’, that is, they will pick on just ONE piece of evidence, attack it whilst totally dis-regarding the rest; this is a tried and tested political PR strategy based on the premise that the ordinary person cannot handle/digest/process more than one piece of information, a variant of the ‘divide and conquer rule’ dictum;

    12. it’s impossible to challenge, correct or debate their point of view without being accused of being proProsecution;

    13. which reminds me of another proven political strategy: ‘ … debate the issue; if you cannot, attack the person; if this fails, invent distractions’. Eg: Magnini;

    14. to find K/S innocent, YOU have to do ALL the work,i.e., you would have to disregard the testimony of 80 witnesses, scientific evidence ( but not for Guede), all circumstantial evidence and all post behavioural displays by K/S. In fact, one would have to resist with every fibre in his body everything that tells him ‘something just doesn’t add up here”. In other words, you will NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER see or hear an element of doubt, suspicion or questioning about K’s testimony from ProK spouters;

    15, Because Amanda Knox was an innocent, young, attractive (??), studious, fun-loving Jesuit all America gal, she could NOT have committed murder. ProK supporters will never accept that EVERY murder, at some point in their life, were also young, innocent and fun-loving – google: Matthew Hardman in Wales for a comparison, Winters;

    16. Circumstantial evidence has been the prime mover in convictions prior to the reliance on recent advancement in DNA forensic science for centuries. But in Knox’s case circumstantial evidence is totally dismissed because, well, it just doesn’t suite proKnox and no other reason;

    17. lastly, NEVER, will you get a balanced comment; e.g., something like: ” from what ‘I’ know, based on the limited information provided by the ‘media’ ‘I’ say that it would ‘appear’ that the italian judiciary did its best to be ‘fair’ BUT ‘I’ ‘feel’ that the jury ‘may’ have got the verdict wrong. NO, it’s always unfair, corrupt and incompetent and usually from dipsticks who freely preface it with: ‘ … I haven’t followed the case AND I haven’t read the Micheli judgement, but ….. “.

    What is at stake here is more than posting an ‘opinion’ we think makes a difference.

    What does make a difference is to note how we get manipulated by the media/PR agencies and sheer idiots acting on their behalf.

    Dixi

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyryan:

    Your writing skills are horrible. You must have gone to the same Jesuit school Amanda went to.

  • http://www.chaseroper.com Chase Roper

    It would be awesome if Nancy Grace would comment here. That would be a “get.”

  • brickhouse

    The rhetoric on the pro-Amanda side of this issue is disappointing, but familiar. The name calling on both sides is childish and only obfuscates the real issues. There’s more heat than light being shed, which is a shame.

    I was an Amanda/Raffaele innocence supporter for quite a number of months, then I was challenged by a few informed people on the superficiality of my arguments (There’s “no” evidence, the police are thugs, Guede did it alone, Italian courts are backward, the prosecutor’s a monster, etc). In response, I researched the issues of the case. A deeper examination of the actual physical evidence (especially the delayed repositioning of Ms Kercher’s body), of the checks and balances of the Italian justice system and a number of other detailed and well-documented data points resulted in an evolution of my position.

    Suffice it to say that Amanda and Raffaele received a fair trial which included multiple levels of independent judicial review. The evidence is more than compelling – it can be argued on both sides, but it cannot be ignored or dismissed out of hand with any degree of intellectual honesty.

    I find the FOA-syle arguments inherently superficial, as mine once were.

    And then we have this gem:

    “Mary H. said
    February 2 2010 @ 7:43 am

    jiminy wrote: “I just read an interesting assertion. It’s claimed that the 46 day delay on the collection of the bra clasp was due to the DEFENSE.”

    Guess what, jiminy. I just read an interesting assertion, too. It’s claimed you are and your buddies are all morons. No documentation necessary.”

    Nice. It just so happens that jiminy is correct. The Italian system permits both the prosecution and the defense to be present during evidence collection. The delay was the result of the defense having problems setting a suitable date. Does that mean they’re guilty? No. Innocent? No. It does mean that the investigators can’t be painted with quite as large of an “incompetence” brush, though.

  • brickhouse

    ps – Excellent post Enzo. Good observations.

  • CHAR

    billyryan said
    am February 2 2010 @ 2:53 pm
    ____

    Wow. That is a whole lot of inaccuracy, delusion and bad spelling in just one post. Bravo. You win the Biggest Idiot in The Thread Award, hands down.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    To offset the STUPID BOYCOTT of Italian products and travel advocated by the foakers and Trump, I propose that WE, who happen to believe the Italians did the right thing in this court case, start INCREASING THE PURCHASE OF ITALIAN PRODUCTS, and even start booking out NEXT VACATION TO ITALY, if possible, preferably Perugia and Assisi.

    I’m going to the store right now. I need some Prosciutto di Parma and some Chianti, and for dessert, some Perugina chocolates.

  • msanc

    Enzo Zoff said: “It doesn’t matter how many blogs you read you will ALWAYS find the same ridiculous arguments put forward by proAmanda stooges…”

    “2. they will make ‘blanket’ statements…”

    Irony, much?

  • Jeanette

    am February 2 2010 @ 3:09 pm
    Enzo Zoff said: Well, a lot of stuff.

    The problem is, Enzo could well be describing any of the “hate Amanda” posters. Actually, I see that the haters get very emotional while the “Amanda innocent” people tend to be a lot more logical in their posts.

    Just an observation.

  • Chuk

    “the judge now in summing up his conviction and sentence,has to show total disreguard for international dna experts”

    The Judge only has to be concerned with people that are directly involved in the case, in this case the Italian DNA experts. Why would he have to consider outside influence ???

    “rubbish the three judges in florrence”
    Absolutely no connection with the GR, AK and RS case at all.

    Couple of things:-
    1. Many cases, even ones where a body hasn’t been found, are successfully tried on ‘circumstantial evidence’. Being circumstantial dosn’t automatically mean they should not be allowed, but cases are more difficult to prove.
    2. Motive does not have to be proven in a crime to gain a conviction.

    Lastly, in the Italian judicial system in any DNA testing for a major crime, the defence are invited to attend. AK’s defence declined this invitation, and therefore they have no course to challange the findings at a later stage. Neither does the Judge have to throw open the results of the test for further testing as all proper procedures could have been verified by the defence ‘if they had chosen to’ at the earlier stage.

    I don’t know if AK and RS are innocent or guilty as I am not party to all the presented evidence in the case, but it looks like that there wasn’t enough argumental strength in the defence team to refute the evidence presented. If there are so many claims now of a miscariage of justice, then these points should have been made in a manner that could be substantiated, during the trial. This does not seem to have happened, and I would have to trust that the presented facts convinced the jury of their guilt. The due report should clarify this outcome.

  • CHAR

    Jeanette said
    am February 2 2010 @ 3:52 pm

    am February 2 2010 @ 3:09 pm
    Enzo Zoff said: Well, a lot of stuff.

    The problem is, Enzo could well be describing any of the “hate Amanda” posters. Actually, I see that the haters get very emotional while the “Amanda innocent” people tend to be a lot more logical in their posts.

    Just an observation.
    ____

    Why do you think we “hate” Amanda? We don’t hate her, we believe her to be guilty. Using your logic, the “Amanda is innocent” posters must “love” Amanda. Do you love Amanda?

    As for your assertion about emotion, please re-read billyryan’s post above.

    Your post makes little to no sense.

    Just an observation.

  • Mary H.

    Kim Bailey, what the heck are you talking about? My point was about Amanda’s ability with the English language, not about her ability to commit murder.

  • Mary H.

    Enzo wrote: “What does make a difference is to note how we get manipulated by the media/PR agencies and sheer idiots acting on their behalf.”

    Good point, Enzo. I think it would be beneficial to all of the Amanda-haters to note how manipulated they have been by the tabloids, the truejustice website, hearsay and gossip.

    If you would like to feel you are not being manipulated, you are more than welcome to scour the internet on your own, instead of relying on biased sources. Many of the documents from the trial are available; you can read those and if you have analytical skills, you will see for yourself how the truth has been misrepresented.

  • Is my IP showing?

    Why has this comment section become so important to the paid-to-blog members of Amanda’s million dollar PR team?

    All the usual suspects are here, with the same tired, old lies about the evidence.

    I just can’t figure out why they are out in force here…

    Collecting IP addys perhaps?

  • CHAR

    Mary H., most of us that believe Amanda guilty (yet do not “hate” her) HAVE, in fact, taken a lot of time to “scour the internet” and read about the trial, in many cases in the orginal Italian.

    My experience is that the Amanda-lovers get all their information from the Marriot PR firms talking points, which is why they all harp on the same things over and over and sound so alike.

    BTW, you still haven’t explained why Rafaelle doesn’t alibi Amanda.

    And, while you are at it, why did Rafaelle feel it necessary to come up the an explanation (easily proven to be a lie, BTW) for how Meredith’s DNA was on the knife? If the knife is “discredited” why did Rafaelle feel it vital to explain away the DNA by claiming he once pricked Meredith while preparing dinner?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Many of the documents from the trial are available”

    Original documents?

    Show us!

    The only original documents available on the net are the Micheli’s report, GIP Matteini’s report and the recordings of all of Amanda’s testimony, which are no longer available since Quotidiano.net took it off its site.

    None of the above are available in English, therefore only a couple of us could understand them.

    Most people therefore rely totally on the media reports and on the blogs.

    And you think your judgement is better than the judges and jurors who sat in court every single day and listened to all of the evidence?

    PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEE!

  • Chuk

    Mary H said:-
    “you will see for yourself how the truth has been misrepresented.”

    Are you saying that the truth has been misrepresented in the media or in the trial ?? If you imply ‘in the media’ then that must cover all sides of the case, both for and against Amanda. If you imply ‘in the trial’, then you have to, again, cover all sides. By your own admission, the only outcome is that the people in the positions to prosecute, defend and try the case came to the only known ‘truth’ there is ?? If something can be put on the table during the appeal process which changes this ‘truth’, then that change would also have to be accepted.

  • Mary H.

    Kim wrote: “You couldn’t be more wrong. Knox was at the door holding the mop. And I am sure you have heard her lame attempt to explain her reason for having the mop. Some ignorance about a pipe bursting the night before at Raffaele’s.”

    Kim, this is at least the second or third time you have claimed that. Last night I gave you the link to the deposition of the responding officers, who testified that when they arrived, Amanda and Raffaele were waiting in the garden, I will give it to you again; if you don’t look at it this time, I will assume you are much happier with your beliefs about what happened than with the truth.

    http://unionesarda.ilsole24ore.com/Articoli/Articolo/105013

    It must be very confusing for people who get their information from truejustice when they find out they have been fooled.

    True justice is run by independently wealthy retired men with nothing but time on their hands. They never have to work or raise funds, in contrast to Amanda’s family. One of them is motivated by a personal vendetta against members of the Seattle legal community, and one is motivated by an intense drive to control other people’s knowledge. Nobody there is motivated by justice. If they were, they would spend their money in different ways.

  • Chuk

    Hey, do all you bloggers realise that all the combined time spent writing on this case probably adds up to 26+ years. There’s another life wasted…… why not shut down your connection for an hour and donate the broadband charges to the Haiti relief fund. If your on ‘free’ chuck in a dollar.

    Have a nice day.

  • PhanuelB

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh’s 4:45 post is interesting

    We agree that the court record is not available to the public. Blogs (truejustice is an example) are indeed a terrible place to get information. Media reports are generally a pretty good place to get information. I’m sorry but CNN, CBS, ABC, and the New York Times exist to deliver accurate information to their readers. Sometimes they make mistakes. They all have procedures in place for correcting improperly sourced material.

    The fact that this trial was conducted in Italian is irrelevant. We can get a good idea of what we’re interested in by using the google translator. We’ll take care of the translation. The point is that those with an interest in the case choose what documents we want, we need access to everything, and we should be able to publish anything we get our hands on to the internet without limitation.

    “And you think your judgement is better than the judges and jurors who sat in court every single day and listened to all of the evidence?”

    That’s how democracies work. People who weren’t there sometimes need to come in and see if justice was done properly. We can’t do it here because a corrupt and dysfunctional Italian judicial system doesn’t want the world to see what happened.

    Here is an example of how it’s supposed to work:
    http://www.thepeoplevscarloparlanti.com/atti/indiex%20from%20defence.htm

  • Chuk

    Emmm… Mary H.
    I just went looking at this article you have been directing people to:-

    http://unionesarda.ilsole24ore.com/Articoli/Articolo/105013

    This is a ‘Newspaper Report’ from the Italian Cronicle, on the witness testimony. There is nothing to say that it is complete ??? Also, you have warned us off of reading the ‘misrepresented’ truth in the media. Is the media the only thing you have been reading ?????

  • Mary H.

    Chuck, if you have a problem with accepting the article’s report on the responding police officers’ testimony, feel free to replace my link with a better source.

  • Guest

    Quentin Zoerhoff said

    am February 1 2010 @ 4:49 pm

    Harry Rag seems not to have a job but instead posts the same discredited nonsense more or less promiscuously on every site he can find…

    HAVE YOU _HEARD_ of John WINTERS/[insert name of whatever but his style of writing is so congruent you can pick which one he wrote after 3 martinis?]

    This chick is only going to get herself in more trouble at her appeal. The day she comes up with a decent alibi will be the day hell freezes over, in which case she should pick up a pair of skis for the afterlife (though I doubt very much she believes in God)

  • CHAR

    So, PhanuelB, you can’t see all the documents you want to (yet), but you are able to make the judgement that the Italian justuce system is “corrupt and dysfunctional.” Based on what? The fact that the Italian system is different than the system in the US?

    In the US, Amanda would have been required to swear an oath not to lie in court, wouldn’t have been allowed to speak up in court whenever she chose and wouldn’t be entitled to an automatic appeal either. She would also be stuck in a filthy, over-crowded prison instead of being allowed to wear her own clothes in a cell with private toilet facilities, access to a hairdresser and multiple creative outlets (dance lessons, guitar lessons, cretive-writing contests.)

    Careful, PhanuelB, your xenophobia is showing (along with your FOA-approved, Marriot-generated talking points.)

  • CHAR

    Mary H, guess you are unwilling/unable to address the conflicting alibis and the ridiclous knife-pricking story.

    No surprise there, as both are impossible to explain away innocently and very strong evidence of guilt.

  • PhanuelB

    @Chuk:”Hey, do all you bloggers realise that all the combined time spent writing on this case probably adds up to 26+ years. There’s another life wasted……”

    I suppose those who confronted racism, or the Holocaust, or Mccarthyism were supposed to just quit becasue it took too much time.

    I’m here for a good reason. I see a terrible injustice against two innocent young people. I see hate and hysteria and I think it’s the right time and place to confront it.

    If it’s the right thing to do I don’t care how long it takes.

  • CHAR

    PhanuelB, “hate and hysteria” pretty much define all of your comments about the Italian justice system.

    As for equating Amanda’s situation to the Holocaust or McCarthyism… wow. A wildly and shockingly inappropriate comparison.

  • PhanuelB

    @Char:”So, PhanuelB, you can’t see all the documents you want to (yet), but you are able to make the judgement that the Italian justuce system is “corrupt and dysfunctional.”

    Responsible media outlets have published a lot of information on this case. And there has been important commentary from these outlets condemning this trial in the strongest terms.

    The massive evidence against Rudy Guede and the implausibility of scenarios involving RS and AK form the basis of my reasoning.

    Selectively chosen, second-hand, out of context information about Amanda’s statements forms the basis of the case against her as stated here. Hard evidence in the form of court documents and full unedited recordings of her interrogation is what any other Western Democracy would provide to the public in such an important case.

  • Chuk

    Mary H.
    I have spent a lifetime studying propaganda. Everybody lies….. small lies, big lies, lies to make them look good, lies to make others look bad. Every conversation probably has a sprinkling of lies in it, and every third party recounting of a conversation embelishes them. Somewhere between is the truth.
    Meredith is dead.
    The person/s who killed her know the truth.
    Even if they held their hands up and said they did it, their account would be sprinkled with lies.

    Read all sides, keep an open mind. Unfortunatly people tend to believe what they want to. Is it easier to believe Amanda is innocent or guilty ?? I cant see anything substantial to make me believe that she hadn’t some part in the events. By the same token, I cant see anything to make me believe she stuck a knife in someone.

  • Mary H.

    This blog has some kind of strange formatting. You go away for awhile and there are new posts that actually were posted before your last post but you couldn’t see them then. Anyway…

    Char wrote: “BTW, you still haven’t explained why Rafaelle doesn’t alibi Amanda.

    And, while you are at it, why did Rafaelle feel it necessary to come up the an explanation (easily proven to be a lie, BTW) for how Meredith’s DNA was on the knife? If the knife is “discredited” why did Rafaelle feel it vital to explain away the DNA by claiming he once pricked Meredith while preparing dinner?”

    My guess about the alibi is that Raffaele’s lawyers advised him to keep his mouth shut after he had made mistakes during and after his interrogation. It’s very likely he has told his lawyers that he can indeed provide an alibi for Amanda.

    As for trying to come up with an explanation for the knife, obviously Raffaele was intimidated by the police to the extent that he thought making up a story about the knife would be wiser than telling the cops they were wrong. Young people do things more impulsively than mare mature people.

    No one here knows what they would do when confronted with the assertion that a murder weapon has been found in his kitchen. It seems easy for us Americans — we have never lived under a Fascist government, and we know the constitution protects our right to tell the police, “That’s impossible.” Still, if you were alone with some cops who accused you of something, and you denied it, you still run the risk of the one of the cops asking, “Are you calling me a liar?”

    If you think that what a confused and befuddled young person said when being lied to and tricked is strong evidence of his guilt, then I don’t agree with you.

  • Laughing at this Nutjob

    Do you Americans EVER shut up?

    If you’re not commiting genocide in the Middle East, you’re doing sicko murders in Italy.
    With any luck that sick bitch will be tortured by her cellmates for decades.

    Use some brains you morons, she’s as guilty as sin.

  • Chuk

    Mary H. said,
    “It’s very likely he has told his lawyers that he can indeed provide an alibi for Amanda.”

    Maybe it was, ‘I was in the kitchen with my hands over Amanda’s ears’

  • CHAR

    Mary H, you use your imagination to create certain scenarios that explain away the conflicting alibis and the knife-pricking.

    “It’s very likely he has told his lawyers that he can indeed provide an alibi for Amanda.”

    “if you were alone with some cops who accused you of something, and you denied it, you still run the risk of the one of the cops asking, “Are you calling me a liar?”

    Well, case closed then!

    Except that Rafaelle has said since the trial that he doesn’t think she could have done it but still sticks to his assertion she wasn’t there. So no, it’s not at all “likely” that he can provide an alibi for Amanda.

    And Rafaelle didn’t make his knife-pricking excuse to the cops– he made it to his father! Was his father lying to and tricking him?

    Honestly, that’s about the most pathetic defense of AK & RS that I’ve ever seen. But you have done an excellent job exposing what lies behind the FOAKers defense of Amanda. They just cannot IMAGINE her having done it.

  • Mary H.

    Chuk, you may have spent a lifetime studying proaganda, but you have not spent enough time studying this case. If you knew the facts, you would know there is no middle ground.

    When you write: “I can’t see anything substantial to make me believe that she hadn’t some part in the events,” what you are saying is that you believe a story that is exclusively the product of the prosecution’s imagination.

    It is the same as if some villagers were to say, “She’s a witch,” and you believe them; when asked why, you respond with, “I can’t see anything substantial to make me believe that she hadn’t some part in the events.”

    It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Amanda had some part in the events. It is not Amanda’s responsibility to prove she did not. One cannot prove a negative — a witch can’t prove she’s not a witch.

    Study the documentation from the proceedings — note that most of what the judges write is based on speculation and conjecture — about what “might” have happened. Go to websites that provide scientific proof against the DNA findings.

    Mark Waterbury:
    http://www.sciencespheres.com/

    Ray Turner:
    http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/

    Anyone who followed this case from the beginning had no choice but to read the side that said she was guilty — that is pretty much all the media focused on in the first year. You have to do some digging if you really want to get all the information.

  • colonelhall

    Enzo Zoff and Brickhouse. Thank you for your efforts. Very well reasoned and hard to fault.

    Mary H. Nice try, at least you admit that Rafael was lying. However statements such as “It’s very likely he has told his lawyers that he can indeed provide an alibi for Amanda.” are not convincing. Why is it very likely.

    When you say things like “It seems easy for us Americans — we have never lived under a Fascist government,” one can see why you have been accused of xenophobia,

  • billyryan

    char you are an ape and misfortunatly not a tame one and al_gofuck_yourself amanda knox and i went to school about 5000 miles apart.

    “the judge only has to be concerned with people directly involved in the case.in this case the italian dna experts.why would he have to consider outside influence”
    because in convicting and sentencing two young people he accepted the prosecution evidence and rejected the defence dna experts.international dna experts who have nothing to gain and stand to be abused by apes like “char” on bloggs like this have cast grave doubt on the prosecution dna evidence.also the silence from independent dna experts supporting the prosecution dna claims is deafening.in this situation mignini cant really get a homeless man and bring a drug pusher out of jail to give evidence like he did when none of the local residence would give evidence that they saw amanda and raffaela where they were not.he needs men of reputation this time and he cant provide any

    “rubbish three judges in florence”
    absolutly no connection with “rg,ak,rs”case at all

    the three judges have convicted mignini of abuse of power and decided that he should jailed for the safety of the public.allowing this man to investigate this murder and prosecute this case is like a bank manager giving a convicted bank robber the keys of the bank while he goes on holliday.at this stage the judge in his summing up has to completly disreguard all therios made by mignini the convicted criminal and has to look again at the claims made by the defence of abuse of power in this case.i do not know really what latitude the judge now has,but i am sure he now knows this conviction is not safe,and amanda and raffaela should get bail while waiting for the appeal

  • John Winters

    Char – stop trying to be clever about ”alibis” when you are dealing with a pair of crazy youngsters. Keep that sort of silly, pompous nonsense for Hitchcock characters.

    colonelhall, you are not Pinocchio. That’s Harry Rag. therefore you must be Jiminy. Signed, Paolo Micheli.

    Kim Bailey. I don’t want to get too personal Kim but a broken window wouldn’t stop ME taking a shower if I needed one!

    Billy Ryan’s writing style is bloody brilliant and a breath of spring air against all the po-faced drivel from TJ.

  • Mary H.

    Char, you ask questions, and when someone tries to answer them thoughtfully, you attack them instead of saying thanks, or that you’ll think about it. I see no reason for anyone to answer any more of your questions.

  • CHAR

    Way to prove my point about your complete lack of competence in all areas, billyryan. Again, bravo.

  • CHAR

    Mary H, sharing with me the fruits of your Amanda-worshipping imagination is not “answering questions.”

    Thanks, but no thanks, for your feeble efforts.

  • brickhouse

    Chuk said
    am February 2 2010 @ 5:49 pm

    Mary H.
    I have spent a lifetime studying propaganda. Everybody lies….. small lies, big lies..

    *************

    The only difference is that propaganda is the systematic and deliberate use of those lies or rumors to help or harm a person, group or movement. A well-orchestrated professional PR campaign complete with specific “talking points” is an excellent example of propaganda; individual comment postings or isolated lies are not.

  • Mary H.

    colonelhall, is it also xenophobic to say the Germans lived under a Nazi government during WWII?

  • Chuk

    billyryan said,
    “the three judges have convicted mignini of abuse of power and decided that he should jailed for the safety of the public.allowing this man to investigate this murder and prosecute this case is like a bank manager giving a convicted bank robber the keys of the bank while he goes on holliday”

    I think you will find your timeline is a little bit off there…..how did you guys let O.J. the convicted armed robber ever play football ? Get the point…??

  • John Winters

    BTW Char, think very quickly now, (in fact, everyone can join in with this little game if they like!), where EXACTLY were you last Thursday evening at EXACTLY 9.00pm?

    If you can’t say EXACTLY within 25 seconds(down to which room of the house you were in e.g. and EXACTLY what you were doing):

    1. Don’t worry, I’m not going to hit you across the head to ”help” you remember.

    2. Why do you expect Amanda And Raffaele to be able to perform this feat of recollection.

  • Mary H.

    Thank you, brickhouse. Harry Rag and Enzo Zoff provide ideal illustrations of your description of the truejustice website.

    “A well-orchestrated professional PR campaign complete with specific “talking points” is an excellent example of propaganda…”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhalluselB: “The fact that this trial was conducted in Italian is irrelevant. We can get a good idea of what we’re interested in by using the google translator.”

    I’ve been called for jury duty in a few weeks. The summons says one must be able to understand English to be a juror. Do you think there is a reason for that English proficiency requirement? The summons makes no reference to the possibility to use Google Translator. Why can’t jurors use Google Translators in America?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhalluselB: “People who weren’t there sometimes need to come in and see if justice was done properly.”

    Nobody prevented you from buying a plane ticket and going to Perugia. The trial sessions were open to the public.

  • Chuk

    Brickhouse, I totally agree with your comment,

    “The only difference is that propaganda is the systematic and deliberate use of those lies or rumors to help or harm a person, group or movement. A well-orchestrated professional PR campaign complete with specific “talking points” is an excellent example of propaganda; individual comment postings or isolated lies are not.”

    This is what Amanda’s PR company has been employed to do, and what TJMK also do albeit, unpaid. However, propaganda can also be used by individuals to boost their standing in society, this can take the form of an isolated lie,or indeed an individual posting. The momentium or the desired belief in the statement generates the propaganda. Telling a lie on your resume is propaganda.

  • brickhouse

    Mary H. said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:26 pm

    Thank you, brickhouse. Harry Rag and Enzo Zoff provide ideal illustrations of your description of the truejustice website.

    “A well-orchestrated professional PR campaign complete with specific “talking points” is an excellent example of propaganda…”

    *****

    It exists on both sides of the issue.

  • CHAR

    John Winters said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:25 pm

    BTW Char, think very quickly now, (in fact, everyone can join in with this little game if they like!), where EXACTLY were you last Thursday evening at EXACTLY 9.00pm?

    If you can’t say EXACTLY within 25 seconds(down to which room of the house you were in e.g. and EXACTLY what you were doing):

    1. Don’t worry, I’m not going to hit you across the head to ”help” you remember.

    2. Why do you expect Amanda And Raffaele to be able to perform this feat of recollection.
    ____

    Nice try, John, but I didn’t find out on Friday that my roommate wasn’t murdered the night before and thus my activities of that night aren’t burned into my brain. Most people alive at the time can tell you exactly what they were doing when they heard President Kennedy was dead, all these many years later. It’s the shock that makes it stick it ones mind.

    And, for what it’s worth, no one has asked AK & RS to provide details down to the second. What they did ask was where they were the night before and, from the very beginning, they couldn’t tell a straight story about it.

    Rafaelle first tried to claim they were at a party, but then he switched to Amanda’s story about being home and then said that was “a load of rubbish” and he’d been home and she’d been out between 9pm and 1am. Amanda stuck to her “at Rafaelle’s” story until she heard he was no longer alibing her and then tried to frame Patrick for the murder, claiming she was there but too in shock to remember it. Once Patrick was exonerated (with no help from Amanda), she switched back to her “at Rafaelle’s” alibi.

    Now, if I was being questioned by the police about my own activities last Thursday, I could probably tell them my night was much like the scenario described by Rafaelle in one of his many alibis. I do know for sure we had a late dinner and watched some programs on the internet. I wouldn’t be sure of the exact times, but my internet activity would MATCH my story, which was not the case with RS & AK.

    I know you want those “crazy youngsters” to be held to a different standard than normal, decent human beings. I just can’t figure out why.

    • John Winters

      Okay CHAR, so everyone can remember what they were doing when Kennedy was assassinated can they? Presumably you mean here that everyone can remember what they were doing when they heard that Kennedy was assassinated. Only a tiny minority of the world’s population actually saw it live on TV in Texas. The rest of us heard about it some time later, and that point in time is the critical one in terms of our memory of the event. Keeping in mind that the Perugian police were interested in what Amanda was doing the evening before she found out about Meredith’s death therefore, Amanda can remember to this day quite clearly what she was doing when she discovered Meredith was dead; burned into her brain. But the night before that event had no special meaning for her whatsoever and that is where she developed a problem with Mignini and his team. Now perhaps you can tell us what you were doing the night before Kennedy was assassinated……….memory failed you C? Oh dear.  

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H. (Marijuana Hashish): “It seems easy for us Americans — we have never lived under a Fascist government, and we know the constitution protects our right to tell the police, “That’s impossible.” Still, if you were alone with some cops who accused you of something, and you denied it, you still run the risk of the one of the cops asking, “Are you calling me a liar?””

    Italy has been a democracy since 1945. Mussolini was deposed on July 25, 1943. His Salo’ Republic in Nazi occupied Northern Italy was dismantled on April 25, 1945.

    Raffaele has never lived under Fascism either since he was born only 25 years ago.

    Mary H. stop smoking dope and buy a history book.

  • Chuk

    Mary H. said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:26 pm

    “Thank you, brickhouse. Harry Rag and Enzo Zoff provide ideal illustrations of your description of the truejustice website.

    “A well-orchestrated professional PR campaign complete with specific “talking points” is an excellent example of propaganda…””

    ***************************
    @Mary H.
    Amanda’s parents and FOAK are the ones paying for the professional PR campaign !!!!!! You’ve forgotton which side you are on………….

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary Hashish: “is it also xenophobic to say the Germans lived under a Nazi government during WWII?”

    Yes, if you make that reference to someone who wasn’t born before 1945.

  • brickhouse

    John Winters said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:25 pm

    BTW Char, think very quickly now, (in fact, everyone can join in with this little game if they like!), where EXACTLY were you last Thursday evening at EXACTLY 9.00pm?

    *********

    I have no idea, because nothing life-changing occurred to me the following Friday morning. If a good friend had been murdered the night before, my recollection of that evening would have “saved” on my mental hard drive much more than your randomly selected “last Thursday” example.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Why would a totally innocent person feel the need to hire a Public Relation firm in a Court case to do propaganda on your behalf?

    The only other person I know to do that is Silvio Berlusconi (who owns a media empire to do such propaganda).

    Amanda and Silvio should talk to each other about strategy. Well, one day they might both meet each other in the prison courtyard. God willing!

  • wait a minute

    John Winters said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:25 pm
    BTW Char, think very quickly now, (in fact, everyone can join in with this little game if they like!), where EXACTLY were you last Thursday evening at EXACTLY 9.00pm?
    ————————————–

    wait just a second, John

    to be fair, your test would have to include a traumatic event on Friday that resulted in the police interviewing us about the events of Thurs & Fri

    further, we’d have to be repeating our answers in the face of continued police questioning over the weekend and into this week

    to wit, we would have been re-telling our ‘what I did on Thursday’ story for the 4th day in a row now

    there’s just no getting around the fact that Amanda & Raffaele were basically asked what they did the night before

    yet they can’t even agree on whether they’d had sex together (day 6 of their relationship)

    it’s telling that, to this day, some 2 years later, they still haven’t been able to come up with matching versions, or with versions that matched known facts

    I smell 2 rats

  • brickhouse

    Mary H. said
    am February 2 2010 @ 6:23 pm

    colonelhall, is it also xenophobic to say the Germans lived under a Nazi government during WWII?

    *****

    I re-read your post carefully. In my initial reading I felt as if you were implying that the current police in Italy are representatives of a Fascist government. It was rather offensive.

    In my slower re-read, I gleaned that you may have meant that the history of Italy included Fascism, whereas the US’s didn’t. I think you meant it the second way, but it can be easily construed either way.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “BTW Char, think very quickly now, (in fact, everyone can join in with this little game if they like!), where EXACTLY were you last Thursday evening at EXACTLY 9.00pm?”

    IF I DON’T REMEMBER EXACTLY.

    HOWEVER I KNOW FOR SURE I DIDN’T HEAR ANY BLACK MEN RAPING ANY OF MY FRIENDS IN MY HOUSE WHILE I WAS COVERING MY EARS.

    AND THERE IS NO WAY I’M GOING TO COME UP WITH SUCH STORY UNLESS I’M SUBJECTED TO WATERBOARDING IN GUANTANAMO BAY AND I’M SPECIFICALLY ASKED TO SAY EXACTLY THAT UNDER THREAT OF TORTURE.

  • brickhouse

    “HOWEVER I KNOW FOR SURE I DIDN’T HEAR ANY BLACK MEN RAPING ANY OF MY FRIENDS IN MY HOUSE WHILE I WAS COVERING MY EARS.”

    ***

    Slam dunk.

  • wait a minute

    “PhanuelD Student” wrote:

    “That’s how democracies work. People who weren’t there sometimes need to come in and see if justice was done properly. We can’t do it here because a corrupt and dysfunctional Italian judicial system doesn’t want the world to see what happened.”
    ———————————————

    Other than the OJ trial, it is hard to think of a trial with more of the international press corps in attendance.

    This was an OPEN trial. Open for the WORLD to see.

    That’s why everyone on this blog is talking about it!

    Further, Italy is, in point of fact, a DEMOCRATIC nation – a G8 Nation, no less.

    (Haven’t you heard? They executed Mussolini 65 years ago and outlawed fascist political parties under their constitution.)

    Your xenophobic rants do not speak well of you or your education.

  • PhanuelB

    @FakU:”I’ve been called for jury duty in a few weeks. The summons says one must be able to understand English to be a juror… Why can’t jurors use Google Translators in America?”

    And they should speak Italian to be a juror in an Italian proceeding. Democracy means that the public can come in and inspect the trial record. If you don’t speak the language used in the trial they you have to get it translated. Google Translator would be a helpful tool to focus in on which documents were important. People who don’t speak the language of the trial and who weren’t there have every right to come in and inspect the quality of justice.

    @FakU:”Nobody prevented you from buying a plane ticket and going to Perugia. The trial sessions were open to the public.”

    Not acceptable for a Democracy. Those who weren’t there must have the ability to come in and see what happened. That’s why they have trial records. And in genuine Democracies that record is available to the general public.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    Firstly, I DON’T hate Amanda. I DON’T hate Raffaele, I DON’T hate Rudy. I look at them and all I see is a waste of human potential, opportunities and ruined lives.

    I look at Amanda, and I see my 17 year old daughter who only last year was on a scholarship studying in Florence.

    I look at their parents and family members [be it K/S/G or MK] and I think, but for the Grace of God, there go I. Truly, a parents’s nightmare.

    What I DO hate is people ‘conveniently’ projecting their prejudices and views and passing them off as ‘facts and truths’; like this gem from Mary H:

    “Good point, Enzo. I think it would be beneficial to all of the Amanda-haters to note how manipulated they have been by the tabloids, the truejustice website, hearsay and gossip.”

    Folks, do see what I mean?

    If you so much as dare challenge,refute or rebutt a proAmanda supporter, then you hate Amanda; the truejustice website is unreliable, BUT, the FOA site is the virtue of truth, justice and the American way; we ‘AmandaHaters should note how manipulated we have been, when in FACT, it’s the ‘AmandaHaters who continually point out the crap in the American media!

    But that’s not all, folks, there’s more:

    “Many of the documents from the trial are available; [ you mean like the Micheli judgement?] you can read those and if you have analytical skills, you will see for yourself how the truth has been misrepresented.”

    Yes Mary H, it’s because we ‘AmandaHaters’ have the analytical skills that you allude to that we ‘dare’ refute the nonsense posted on blogs!

    I guess this is what msanc meant by: ‘irony, much?’

    just an observation, Mary H:

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Char said:

    ”Nice try, John, but I didn’t find out on Friday that my roommate wasn’t murdered the night before and thus my activities of that night aren’t burned into my brain”

    Char that doesn’t make sense. Here I am sitting here writing this post thinking ”now I’d better keep taking perpetual note of what I’m doing here minute by minute in case my next door neighbour is being murdered just now and in 5 days, I have to recall what I was doing right now.”

    Jeez Char, get a life!

  • John Winters

    Char says:

    ”I know you want those “crazy youngsters” to be held to a different standard than normal, decent human beings. I just can’t figure out why.”

    Because when ”normal, decent human beings” are called on by the Perugian police to provide an alibi, the Perugian police haven’t destroyed three hard drives belonging to ol’ normal decent which will prove conclusively the veracity of their alibis or no.

  • wait a minute

    “PhanuelD Student” said:

    “Hard evidence in the form of court documents and full unedited recordings of her interrogation is what any other Western Democracy would provide to the public in such an important case.”
    ————————————-

    Just because you cannot read, write or speak Italian does not mean the documents are “unavailable.”

    As for “full unedited recordings of…interrogation[s,]” do you think these are readily available in American cases?

    For example, can I listen in on the “full unedited recordings” of the interrogations of every prisoner at Gitmo?

    After all, those interrogations are MUCH more “important” to both my personal safety from terror attacks (AND my constitutional rights) than anything at stake in the case of an immature, drug-addled hippie-chick from West Seattle!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB: Italian law prevents divulging those records on the internet to protect the privacy of the parties in the trial.

    You could have gone to Perugia, taken notes or even recorded the proceedings (it was allowed in a separate room) and then used a professional translator (forget Google, that’s garbage)

    Why don’t you want to go to Perugia, uh? Are you scared of Mignini?

    My brother Al-Fakh Yoras says hi too.

  • John Winters

    Okay ”wait a minute,” so there’s a traumatising event happening at my flat a few streets away right now of which I AM TOTALLY UNAWARE (if you can imagine that’s possible given your Amanda Knox fixation). Tomorrow, the police are going to ask me what I was doing right at this moment. And do you know what the answer is….I don’t know, I’m not doing anything in particular, and certainly not anything that’s gonna burn into my brain FOR NO REASON!! I’m just an ordinary person and I haven’t got a clue what I was doing when Michael Jackson died. Leave me alone or I’m gonna have to make something up!!

    • crawler

      More to the point, can you tell us exactly what you were doing on the eve of the day you found out Michael Jackson had died John? I doubt it!

  • CHAR

    PhanuelB, my goodness you are tiresome. “People who don’t speak the language of the trial and who weren’t there have every right to come in and inspect the quality of justice.”

    Wrong. You have no “right” to inspect anything with regard to the justice system in a foreign, sovereign nation.

    The defendants and the family of the victim have had full access to all the court documents. That is their right under Italian law.

    Your opinion on what is or is not “acceptable for a Democracy” is just and only that, an opinion. Personally, I think your xenophobia and endless dead-horse beating is not “acceptable” internet behavior, but I recognize it’s only my opinion and I have no “right” to prevent you from hammering on and on and on and on and on

  • Tony Del Balzo

    So tell me, Oh wizards of the word, how did the Italian Scientific unit manage to short out (destroy)three computers, which would have been very helpful to the Defense? Bad luck, on purpose or just ignorance?

    Was this mistake made by the same AV guy/girl who was supposed to have recorded the interrogations but totally neglected to do so. (another convenience).

    Is this the same unit that tested the kitchen 183 times before they came up with a “match” to Kricher and approximately half of all living Italians?

    Also, how did the Kirchers come up with $33 million for their loss?

  • billyryan

    there an old legal principal “lied in one lied in all” now lets apply this to mignini “planted evidence in one case planted evidence in all” there is daming proof of mignini misconduct in this case.the destroying of interrogation tapes,the deliberate destroying of computer hardrives,the canvassing of drug pushers and homeless people to lie for the prosecution.the planting of dna evidence.the leaking of lies to the press.it was all allright only he was caught.those three judges in florence,just when mignini thought everyone was afraid of him.a lot of prosecution witnesess were caught lying in evidence would any of ye that are so pally with mignini tell us why only amanda knox is facing charges of slander.would any of ye amanda haters here care to tell the rest of us which gives ye the most pleasure.amanda distress at being convicted of a crime she had nothing to do with,or is it deanna or edda distress that excites ye the most

  • wait a minute

    “PhanuelD Student” wrote:

    “Google Translator would be a helpful tool to focus in on which documents were important. People who don’t speak the language of the trial and who weren’t there have every right to come in and inspect the quality of justice.

    @FakU:”Nobody prevented you from buying a plane ticket and going to Perugia. The trial sessions were open to the public.”

    Not acceptable for a Democracy. Those who weren’t there must have the ability to come in and see what happened. That’s why they have trial records. And in genuine Democracies that record is available to the general public.”
    ————————————————

    a) You’ve obviously never tried using Google Translator.

    b) Who, exactly, should pay for the translation and reproduction of court records? The tax payer?!!!!

    c) Why do you presume records do not exist merely because YOU, personally, lack the means to access them?

  • John Winters

    Al-Fakh

    Incidentally, you didn’t tell us what the Italian statute of limitations says about submission of DNA items whose location is uncertain for 47 days subsequent to the establishment of crimescene.

    You mentioned that the duration of the 47 days meant nothing but that only applies to items which obviously have remained untouched, unmoved, static, in one place since the establishment of crimescene. Given that the location of the bra clasp was definitely different 47 days later, how can it be submittable according to the statute of limitations and its implications.

  • CHAR

    Oh, John Winter, first it was how could anyone remember what they were doing five days ago and now you think a normal person couldn’t remember what they were doing the night before?

    I’m pretty damn certain every person here will be able to tell you what they were doing tonight if you ask them tomorrow afternoon. My answer would be “Being amazed by the mental gymnastics the Friends of Amanda are willing to perform to hold on to their belief in her innocence.”

    Really, John, it’s not even worth trying to interact with you because you are clearly deranged.

  • John Winters

    Char said:

    ”Wrong. You have no “right” to inspect anything with regard to the justice system in a foreign, sovereign nation.”

    What’s all this sovereign nation nonsense? Was Pakistan a sovereign nation when a kangaroo court of criminal elements tried Daniel Pearl and found him guilty? What is the difference? Send in the US marine, they’ll sort out the sovereigns!!

  • CHAR

    And, for the second time today, a poster proves my point with their very next post.

    John Winter = deranged.

  • John Winters

    Deranged?

    That’s not what the guys under siege in the US embassy in Tehran were thinking back in 1979.

  • wait a minute

    John Winters said
    am February 2 2010 @ 7:57 pm
    Okay ”wait a minute,” so there’s a traumatising event happening at my flat a few streets away right now of which I AM TOTALLY UNAWARE (if you can imagine that’s possible given your Amanda Knox fixation). Tomorrow, the police are going to ask me what I was doing right at this moment. And do you know what the answer is….I don’t know, I’m not doing anything in particular, and certainly not anything that’s gonna burn into my brain FOR NO REASON!! I’m just an ordinary person and I haven’t got a clue what I was doing when Michael Jackson died. Leave me alone or I’m gonna have to make something up!!
    —————————————–

    I remember what I did LAST NIGHT, what I ate, roughly when I ate it, and I surely remember whether or not I had sex with my girlfriend

    I’m also certain she did not leave the house in the middle of the night

    I’ll also bet my life that my computer will confirm my recollection that I did not download & watch a movie, and that my phone records will match my recollection of the various people I talked to

    I’ll make another million dollar bet that my girlfriend’s account will MATCH mine

    and, yes, all of this can be achieved without the added benefit of a traumatic/discovering a dead housemate type event to really fix the moment, and the day leading up to it, in my mind

    as for you, if you are not as certain of your actions in the past 24 hours, I’m starting to think I know why you are having problems with the facts of this case…

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Winters said
    am February 2 2010 @ 8:10 pm
    “What’s all this sovereign nation nonsense? Was Pakistan a sovereign nation when a kangaroo court of criminal elements tried Daniel Pearl and found him guilty? What is the difference? Send in the US marine, they’ll sort out the sovereigns!!”

    Is that what you think President Obama should do?

    Order the invasion of a democratic nation member of NATO over a drug addict who murdered a roommate and was rightly convicted in accordance to the law?

    And you think the US Government would do such diplomatic folly simply because there are a handful of mentally retarded stalkers who have a crush on the drug addict psycho and want to see her free so that they can stalk her and masturbate at night?

    What do you think would be the political and diplomatic consequences for such action perpetrated by the “Nobel Price” winner, no less?

    You’re clearly a frustrated xenophobic ugly American who is the major reason why some people overseas applaude and rejoyce when terrorists drive airplanes into skyscrapers.

    Why don’t you join the Marines and show us what you can do? You’d probably shit in your pants the minute you’re dropped in foreign soil.

  • Mary H.

    brickhouse wrote: “In my slower re-read, I gleaned that you may have meant that the history of Italy included Fascism, whereas the US’s didn’t. I think you meant it the second way, but it can be easily construed either way.”

    That is exactly what I meant, and I appreciate your taking the time to reread and then discuss it. In fact, I wasn’t thinking of the police at all when I used the word Fascism, I was thinking of Raffaele. I wasn’t thinking about how the police were acting, I was thinking about how Raffaele would likely respond to authority figures under the circumstances.

    Italy’s families are only two generations removed from the rule of Fascism; add to that the fact that a Fascistic government was able to establish itself there in modern times, in the first place. A friend of mine with a doctorate in German has noted that political movements don’t spring out of nowhere — the groundwork must be laid. The Nazis were able to establish themselves in Germany because the German culture was prepared to accept an authoritarian approach. Apparently, Italy’s was, too.

    It is very common in psychological circles these days to understand that we are all products of cultures that have survived generations, and each ethnic, national or family culture changes in very small increments over time, so we are still affected by them generations later. For example, the high occurrence of violence in the African American culture is directly a result of the violence that was perpetrated against slaves in the United States two hundred years ago.

  • Gary

    To Harry Rag;
    All that evidence that was wrote in your comment is nothing but pure fabrication and speculation. First of all you can’t even consider the knife as evidence for the simple fact that it was not the murder weapon. Second of all Amanda’s DNA should be all over the house considering she lived. Third of all the garbage you said about the footprints in blood only being visible using luminal is the craziest thing I have ever heard. You will either have a footprint visible in blood to the naked eye or you will have a footprint that was already there that had blood placed on it during the crime. How do you figure there would be footprints only visible using luminal? That would only be possible if the blood was cleaned up where the footprints were which would leave more than just an outline of a footprint. It would leave evidence of the blood being smeared in a wiping motion as it was cleaned off the floor. That theory just got wiped off the list with just about all the other evidence you said. Fourth thing is the fact that the bra clasp laid on the floor for 6 weeks and was moved multiple times and handled by multiple people therefore being contaminated beyond belief and should have never been allowed in a court room as evidence. Have you ever heard of contamination? You must not live in the U.S because if you did you would know that the bra clasp would have been thrown out of the court room all the way to the moon. Fifth there was a prosecutor who is as crazy as Charles Manson prosecuting the case. Funny how Magini was convicted of abuse of his job and is now facing prison time. In the U.S this man would have never been allowed to prosecute a murder case let alone continue to work at his job period. What a joke that this freak Magini has been convicted of these crimes yet he is still allowed to practice law and prosecute people just because he is appealing his conviction. There is no way in the world this would ever take place in the U.S. And as far as the satanic Halloween ritual goes; this freak Magini tried this before with the Monster of Florence case. Do you not find it sort of strange that this man is obsessed with satanic rituals; and seeing that he couldn’t bring his theory to court in the Monster of Florence case he then proceeded to use it in the Knock case? Face it; the evidence amounts to nothing and these convictions were nothing more than the Italian government and jury being pressured by the people of Italy to convict due to all the made up stories by the news and the fact that they wanted the American girl to go to jail. One last thing I would like to say is that they have the one and only killer; and that is Gueda. Do you not find it strange that his DNA was found all over the place including in Meredith’s purse along with his footprints outlined in blood seeable to the human eye and not under the luminal light? Amanda and Solechito are 100% innocent and the evidence against them is not even close to amounting to a murder conviction. It’s also funny how Gueda’s sentence was reduced to 16 years which now makes the real killers sentence less than the wrongfully convicted ones. Your argument does not hold up. Amanda will be freed on appeal I guarantee it (Especially now that the freak has been convicted of abusing his job.)

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H.: “The Nazis were able to establish themselves in Germany because the German culture was prepared to accept an authoritarian approach. Apparently, Italy’s was, too.”

    Oh sure! They love dictatorships in those countries, they couldn’t wait to have one! It’s so entrenched in their cultures that they’re working to have another one. I’m sure after Angela Merkel they’ll vote for another Nazi.

    YOU’RE FULL OF $HIT AND VERY IGNORANT Ms. H.

    How about analysing the historical context when those movements sprang up?

    How about the fact that both nations were totally destroyed by World War I, unemployment was very high and inflation was so high that people needed a wheel barrow to carry money to shop? How about the fact that people had no food to put on the table? How about the fact that in times of desperation people tend to follow populist leaders who promise the moon? How about the fact that both Mussolini and Hitler, after being appointed Prime Minister and Chancellor respectively, abolished elections and restored martial laws (without asking for the voters’ opinion, I might add).

    It’s not that Italians and Germans were ready for dictatorship and asked for one. It was imposed upon them. And if you didn’t like it, you’d suffer very serious consequences.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    MARY H. “I wasn’t thinking about how the police were acting, I was thinking about how Raffaele would likely respond to authority figures under the circumstances.

    Italy’s families are only two generations removed from the rule of Fascism.”"

    OH PLEAASEE!

    SINCE WHEN ITALIANS ARE AFRAID OF THEIR POLICE BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED TO THEIR GREATGRANDFATHERS?

    POLICE BRUTALITY IS MUCH MORE COMMON IN AMERICA THAN IN ITALY. ITALIAN POLICEMEN ARE REGULARLY BEATEN UP TO THE POINT THAT THEY REFUSE TO GO ON PATROL BY THEMSELVES. (IN FACT IN ITALY THERE ARE NO POLICE PATROLS WITH FEWER THAN 2 PEOPLE)

    MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRAVEL OUTSIDE YOUR STINKING FOXHOLE AND SEE WHICH COUNTRY HAS THE HARSHEST POLICE BEHAVIOUR. YOU CLEARLY HAVE NEVER LIVED OUTSIDE OF YOUR FUNKY TOWN OF TUKWILA.

  • Mary H.

    “…would any of ye amanda haters here care to tell the rest of us which gives ye the most pleasure.amanda distress at being convicted of a crime she had nothing to do with,or is it deanna or edda distress that excites ye the most”

    I LOVE you, billyryan.

  • Benito Mussolini

    “Mary H” is wrong. I am not responsible for Amanda’s conviction. I am dead.

    (So is national authoritarianism in Italy.)

  • John Winters

    Fake-id said:

    ”IF I DON’T REMEMBER EXACTLY.
    HOWEVER I KNOW FOR SURE I DIDN’T HEAR ANY BLACK MEN RAPING ANY OF MY FRIENDS IN MY HOUSE WHILE I WAS COVERING MY EARS.”

    The instructions for the game clearly require the player to recall events in the past in decalarative statement form, that is, as statements of fact intended to relate what they believe truly happened in that past.

    You have just quoted a statement made by Amanda Knox relating events of a past experience of hers. Unfortunately, this particular statement is composed by Amanda in the modal form and is thus unusable in this game. The reason for this, is that the modal form is employed by speakers/writers who intend to detrimentally modify the degree of certainty which their statements are intended to express.

    The modal form is not used to discuss facts. If you need further help with this, please ask Billy Ryan, someone who regularly writes factually and will be able to help you improve your understanding of ‘mood’ in the English language.

    Thank you.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    GAY wrote:
    “Magini tried this before with the Monster of Florence case. Do you not find it sort of strange that this man is obsessed with satanic rituals..”

    WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE MONSTER OF FLORENCE CASE.

    DO YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE SERIAL KILLERS (THERE WERE 3 CONVICTED) CONFESSED AND SAID THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE “UP HIGH” WHO PURCHASED THE BODY PARTS THEY WERE CUTTING UP WHEN THEY KILLED THE COUPLES TO USE IN RITUALS?”

    HIS NAME WAS GIANCARLO LOTTI.

    AND DO YOU KNOW THAT THE POLICE RECEIVED SEVERAL ANONYMOUS LETTERS INDICATING THAT THERE WAS A GROUP WHO WAS USING THE FEMALE VICTIMS’ BODY PARTS FOR RITUALS?

    DO YOU THINK THAT MIGNINI CAME UP WITH THOSE STORIES ON HIS OWN?

  • Candy’s Jowls Make Sick

    Gary said:

    It’s also funny how Gueda’s sentence was reduced to 16 years which now makes the real killers sentence less than the wrongfully convicted ones.
    ————————————————-

    Actually Gary, here’s what you missed in the press:

    The initial sentences were comparable: Rudy got 30, Amanda 26 & Raffaele 25.

    Rudy Guede got 30 years but, because he elected a “fast-track” trial by judge alone, rather than trial by jury (like his co-accused pals, Amanda & Raffaele), he became eligible for an automatic sentence reduction on his (automatic) appeal. 30 became 16.

    Amanda & Raffaele will not be eligible for this ‘automatic’ reduction, they’ll have to ‘earn’ a reduction by winning their appeal on some ground or other. If they fail to do so, their sentences will stand at 26 & 25 years, respectively.

    Looks like Rudy got better legal advice.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Sphincters wrote:

    “The instructions for the game clearly require the player to recall events in the past in decalarative statement form, that is, as statements of fact intended to relate what they believe truly happened in that past.”

    I WAS HAVING DINNER ON THURSDAY AT 9:00 PM. AND I CAN ALSO TELL YOU WHERE I WAS LAST NIGHT AND THE NIGHT BEFORE AND ALSO SATURDAY NIGHT. HOW ABOUT THAT?

    AMANDA WAS ASKED WHAT SHE WAS DOING THE NIGHT BEFORE WHEN SHE WAS FIRST HEARD. SHE WASN’T ASKED A MONTH LATER.

  • Candy’s Lisp

    Amanda told Edda she’d lied when she told the police that her boss, an innocent black man named Mr. Lumumba, helped her kill Meredith.

    Despite the fact Edda was literally surrounded by bilingual consular officials, bilingual lawyers, and bilingual police officials, this is what she told the court when asked why she didn’t tell ANYONE:

    “I don’t speak Italian.”

    As a result, Mr. Lumumba, a completely innocent man, languished in prison for 2 more weeks while the police sorted it out and his wife and infant son lived in terror. He lost his business, his reputation, everything. He and his young family will forever by tainted by Amanda’s lie and Edda’s failure to act.

    Edda’s damn lucky she didn’t do this on American soil. Otherwise, Mr. Lumumba would be able to tort her into the poor house.

  • Candy’s Wattle

    Raffaele’s DNA is on that clasp.

    46 days later, 46 years later, it’s all the same – the crime scene was sealed, and there is no statute of limitations on murder charges.

  • Candy’s Nixon-Nose

    The defense was dragging its heels about setting a date to witness the bagging of the clasp by the police, hence the 46 day “delay” (and the defense team’s predictable/ lame attempt to cry about it at trial).

    A sad ploy.

    Kudos to the jury for seeing right through it.

  • Candy’s Eye Bags

    Your only saving grace, Candy, is that you are not smart enough to spin a convincing lie.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    The Knoxes are all a despicable bunch.

    They’re worse than the Anthony family (the parents of Casey Anthony). At least they didn’t send to jail someone totally innocent.

    Blaming the “black man” is still a very popular sport in America.

  • Edda = Criminal

    Not telling anyone about what Amanda did to Lumumba was CRIMINAL.

    Edda should be in jail for that.

  • Kim Bailey

    “beaten by the Italian police…interrogate for 40 straight hours” I wonder if they are going to put Edda in the same cell with Amanda.

  • colonelhall

    I’ve just wasted ten minutes of my life reading some of this trash!
    Can I remember what I was doing at 9:00 pm on any day of the last week? Yes, easily. For some of those days, I’ll have to think hard. Let me see …. Thursday I was in the theatre watching a play. Not hard. Monday …… At home watching a movie. Simple!
    Can I remember to the second, what I was watching? No. However, I do know that I was not in a completely different location, doing something else.

    Gary, we have heard all of your arguments before, many times. They have been totally refuted. Nobody is going to take the time to go over them again. For instance:
    “the footprints in blood only being visible using luminal is the craziest thing I have ever heard.” you thus explain that you have read nothing about the evidence, or understand nothing. Even CSI could put you straight on this!

  • jim

    mary h, i dont who u are , u sound like her father;s pr machine. i mean the way u explain amanda’s 2 alibis and her boyfriend’s to convince that they did it out of pressure is unbelievably a sick joke. firstly, do u understand that there were other roomates living in that cottage, they were all interviewed, right by cops. so how come they didn’t change their alibis and contradict each other? how come any of other roomates didnt say yes i was not in the cottage and then change to yes i was there ,out of police pressure? how come none of them then blamed it on a black person out of police pressure?since u are basing her alibi changing due to police pressure, how come this doesnt apply to other roomates when they were questioned by cops? its obvious that only the liars were changing stories and then to get out of it blameit on someone else. i mean anyone who analyzes this will come to the conclusion since they had committed the crime thats why they were shaky with the cops and thats why they were lying and contradicting each other. thats why their alibis didnt fly by the cops . on the otherhand other roomates alibis flew by the cops becuz they were actually innocent. imean isn’t this logical to u. also that black guy she blamed was arrested but later released becuz whatever he stated to the cops was corroborated by the evidences too, forexample recipts and the customers at the bar said that he was actually working in his bar that nite. on the other hand her own boyfriend contradicted her and proved her a liar by saying that she maynot have spent the whole nite with him. also there were eywitness that nite who saw both amanda her boyfrind at nite after the murder looking at the cottage from the park. wht about that she was buying bleach 7 am even before the store opened? this was eyewitness account by the very shopownerwho saw her at the cleaning product section of the store. why wuld he lie about it, imean he is just a shopowner who gave this account in the court.meanwhile this contradicted her story that she was sleeping till 10 am or so proving her a liar again. so honestly all these facts prove only one thing that she changed her story because she is guilty thats why she had to make things up to cover her guilt. but what she forgot is that crime personnels arent stupid, thats what they are trained in to pick up suspects on the basis of their lies and contradiction. its becuz do u know any murderer who ever admitted his guilt ? a murderer is a compulsive liar to begin with thats why they have no conscience to kill someone. i used to be on her side too , but maybe u shuld read judge michele’s report instead of lying propaganda media of the world called the american medias, namely NBC and FOX, then u will realize that what a charming, sexy psycopath amanda is, a real cruel murderer. she even wrote a fiction in her diary about drugging and raping a girl as played by 2 brothers kyle and edgar. do u know any normal 20yr old who will write such sickening and strange thing in their diary! imean i am only taliking about few things, meanwhile there so many evidents that prove she did it. isnt circumstantial evidence a basis for proving a murder guilt? take example of oj simpson and scott peterson, both even to this day dont admit their guitl .so murderrs never admit, just like amand. she really deserves where she is along with that sick boyfriend who loved to keep knife in his pocket and was into have u read violent japanese fictions consisting of rap and murder!!! even he was in his own myspace with a meat cleaver and a bottle of bleach!. i mean anyone who is their side has actually the blood of victim on their hands, these 2 are the sickest, cruelest and charming psycopaths liars and murderrs. hope both of them rot in that hole for 26 yrs.

  • billyryan

    the amanda haters hear have such knowledge of everything amanda said while been beaten by the police i am begining to think that mignini cut ye a copy of the interrogation tapes and posted them to ye before he destroyed the origionals.amanda knox did not destroy patrick mumumba the police did they knew well the amount of pressure they put amanda under before she, to use there own words “buckled”it would have been easy for the police to discreetly ask patrick where he was on the night of november 2 2007 and had he any witnesess to back up his claim.but the police new they had something they could use to destroy amandas life,they acted like a bull in a china shop arrested patrick went on tv to say they had merridith three murders in custody,in the worst case scenario amanda would now be facing defamanation charges from patrick destroy the interrogation tapes hope amanda would say she was hit while been interogated then they would also be able to bring charges of defamanation as well.a charge that would carry a two to six year in prison term.from that point on amanda knox chance of justice was decreasing by the day.the reason patrick mumumba lost his business is because the people of perugia stoped frequenting his bar mabey because they did not like how quickly he turned from accused to accuser.but the best laid plans of mice and men,everything that the police leaked to the press has been proved to be lies their ability to investigate a crime has has been shown to the world as the joke it is.the leader of the investigation and prosecution a now convicted criminal.having ratcheded up the media interest in this case they now find they cannot kill the media interest in this miscarriage of justice,they are now reduced to paying traiters,thirty pieces of silver men, to try and win the media war on the internet

  • Mary H.

    jim, since you asked…

    During the first four days after the murder, all of the roommates and all of their friends, including Amanda and Raffaele, were routinely and informally interviewed by the police. They all worked with the police, doing what they could to provide the police with the names of people Meredith knew, or who might have crossed paths with her.

    None of the other young people who were interviewed was motivated to change his or her story because none of them was subjected to a formal interrogation where they were isolated and questioned through the night by a group of police officers. The reason none of them was subjected to a formal interrogation was because they were all out of town visiting their families the night of the murder.

    Amanda and Raffaele were the most vulnerable to being lied about by a prosecutor desperately seeking to find suspects fast.

    The bleach receipts were not mentioned as part of the prosecution’s case. The shop owner did not come forward about having seen Amanda until many months later, after he had seen her picture in the local newspapers dozens of times. Raffaele’s former cleaning woman also worked in the shop and she said she did not see Amanda there that morning.

    Many murderers have admitted their guilt, especially one-time murderers. The Italian police and prosecutors have been working on Amanda and Raffaele for two years. Are they so bad at their jobs that they can’t break two inexperienced kids into admitting they committed murder?

  • John Winters

    ”WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE MONSTER OF FLORENCE CASE.
    DO YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE SERIAL KILLERS (THERE WERE 3 CONVICTED) CONFESSED AND SAID THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE “UP HIGH” WHO PURCHASED THE BODY PARTS THEY WERE CUTTING UP WHEN THEY KILLED THE COUPLES TO USE IN RITUALS?”
    HIS NAME WAS GIANCARLO LOTTI.
    AND DO YOU KNOW THAT THE POLICE RECEIVED SEVERAL ANONYMOUS LETTERS INDICATING THAT THERE WAS A GROUP WHO WAS USING THE FEMALE VICTIMS’ BODY PARTS FOR RITUALS?
    DO YOU THINK THAT MIGNINI CAME UP WITH THOSE STORIES ON HIS OWN?”

    Christ almighty!! What a country! Look I’ll concede that we may have been wrong about how much we understood about the MOF case but after this explanation, NEVER, NEVER EVER again claim that you come from a civilised, sovereign ”nation” for chrissake!!

  • John Winters

    Al Fakyourcat said:

    ”I WAS HAVING DINNER ON THURSDAY AT 9:00 PM. AND I CAN ALSO TELL YOU WHERE I WAS LAST NIGHT AND THE NIGHT BEFORE AND ALSO SATURDAY NIGHT. HOW ABOUT THAT?”

    Nobody’s contesting that these are declarative, factual statements. What we have a problem with, are the later statements she makes under obvious duress, where modal modifiers like ”could” are introduced to describe what ‘could’ have happened albeit that people who can’t even understand English resolutely fail to make that distinction on this blog.

  • Mary H.

    Al Fakyourcat

    LOL.

  • John Winters

    colonelhall said:

    ”Can I remember what I was doing at 9:00 pm on any day of the last week? Yes, easily. For some of those days, I’ll have to think hard. Let me see …. Thursday I was in the theatre watching a play. Not hard. Monday …… At home watching a movie. Simple!
    Can I remember to the second, what I was watching? No. However, I do know that I was not in a completely different location, doing something else.”

    Yeah but you’re old. For that reason alone, your outlook on life even for the span of an evening, is completely different from that of two sexually active, exciting, energetic, young people. Their sheer dynamism separates them from people like you fundamentally. Their perspectives are not ordered like a diary (the theatre?!!); they are randomised and filled with the thrills which chance and opportunity promise to the young. Now let them out of prison you old fogie.

  • Mary H.

    Oh, John, you said some nice things about Amanda and Raffaele. They’re gonna git you fer that.

  • John Winters

    If you were the owner of a large company and were looking for someone competent and impressive to fill some important role or other that had just become vacant in your company, would you employ Mary H. or one of the people she so cleverly tackles on these blogs.

    Case proven m’lud? If this case were tried on this blog, and Mary H. acted as the defense counsel, I think we know who the readership jury would side with.

  • Mary H.

    Thank you, kind sir. Rather than disrupt the illusion ;) , I want to reprint this important post from De Silva on the West Seattle Herald blog (where, by the way, someone has misused your name again, John):

    De Silva wrote:

    Two disturbing quotes from Italy

    “We were able to establish guilt by closely observing the suspect’s psychological and behavioral reactions during the interrogations. We don’t need to rely on other kinds of investigation as this method has enabled us to get to the guilty parties”- Edgardo Giobbi, prosecutor of Amanda Knox.

    ===========================================

    Another Example of Science in the Courtroom!!
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The judge needed to identify the person(s) responsible for changes to the crime scene. He went down the list of roommates and their lovers. Unable to identify anyone, he defaulted to Knox. FROM THE REPORT: Judge Micheli stated that, in his opinion, “this just left Knox who would seem to have an interest in arranging the scene the police would find”.

    In a system where the presumption of innocence is important, Judge Micheli used “guilty because I can’t find any one else to blame” as the basis of his decision making. Moreover, based on this faulty logic, two people have spent over 800 days in a harsh, painful prison.

    May there be a special place in God’s hell for this type of abuse of power.

  • Mary H.

    And here is an excellent argument from Tony del Balzo, also from the West Seattle Herald blog:

    “…But the last theory may work. That theory is the “just because” theory. As the assistant prosecutor stated in the trial (paraphrased) ‘Violence happens for no reason in this day and time’. This is hard to argue against until you look at the suspect’s history. Neither Knox nor Raffe have any violence in their history. The priest in the prison, who has come to know Knox in the two years she has waited for the trial to conclude, had vouched for her by saying that she is not the evil person that the court tried to portray.

    However, if this “just because” theory is good enough to convict Knox of murder, it certainly should work in serving as a defense in the Knox slander case. That is to say, if you put enough policemen and women in a room with a suspect, eventually the police will beat the suspect. Why? Because ‘Violence happens for no reason in this day and time’, even to the police….”

  • Tehran 1979

    Mary H. said
    am February 3 2010 @ 4:01 am

    Al Fakyourcat

    LOL.
    ——————————-

    that’s nothing to laugh at, not when it comes from John “I was at the Embassy in ’79″ Winters

    he sounds like the sort that just might really be dangerous to cats

  • Tehran 1979

    Mary H with a Lisp, Wattle & Jowls said

    “if you put enough policemen and women in a room with a suspect, eventually the police will beat the suspect”

    ————————————-

    is this a law of the universe?

    what happened to you?!

    how does an ordinary, white, 60 year old, big -nosed, food-blogging woman from the pacific northwest wind up more afraid of the cops than rodney king is?!

  • Tehran 1979

    Big Jowls Mary H said:

    “The priest in the prison, who has come to know Knox in the two years she has waited for the trial to conclude, had vouched for her by saying that she is not the evil person that the court tried to portray.”
    ————————–

    Actually the priest said he didn’t think Amanda was in touch with reality.

    He also added that he could NOT vouch for her behavior on the night of the murder, only for her behavior inside the prison.

  • Shane

    “The defense was dragging its heels about setting a date to witness the bagging of the clasp by the police, hence the 46 day “delay” (and the defense team’s predictable/ lame attempt to cry about it at trial).”

    Do you have a link for that? I’ve seen it quite a bit recently, but haven’t seen a source for it. What date exactly were the defence notified the bra clasp was being picked up?

    (I’m assuming you’re not claiming they were also responsible for having left it at the crime scene in the first place…)

  • Shane

    “Rafaelle first tried to claim they were at a party, but then he switched to Amanda’s story about being home and then said that was “a load of rubbish” and he’d been home and she’d been out between 9pm and 1am.”

    I was reading Sollecito’s letters and prison diary the other day, and the funny thing is, in there he says the “load of rubbish” is the idea that Amanda left that night. In fact, he says that it’s “very likely” she was with him all night.

    Does he also say the idea that she was with him all night is a “load of rubbish”? (Genuine question, I only know what I’ve read in the diaries/letters, which seems to be that it’s his statement that she left which is ‘a load of rubbish’).

  • Tehran 1979

    Eye Bags Mary H said:

    “Unable to identify anyone, he defaulted to Knox. FROM THE REPORT: Judge Micheli stated that, in his opinion, “this just left Knox who would seem to have an interest in arranging the scene the police would find”
    ————————

    c’mon, Candace

    that’s your WORST spin yet

    ALL of the other roommates had alibis that checked out

    they were ALL verified as being out of town at the time of the murder

    the ONLY reason to stage the break in was to deflect blame away from the residents of the cottage

    Amanda was the only resident of the cottage in Perugia at the time of the murder

    ergo Amanda staged the break in

    get it?

  • Ask Yourself This…

    Amanda had only known Raffaele for 6 days.

    They spent most of that time at his apartment.

    As a result, Raffaele barely knew Amanda’s roommate, Meredith (only “glimpsed her twice”, according to Raffaele’s sister).

    Yet, after the murder, when the cops asked Raffaele how Meredith’s DNA wound up on the blade of a knife in his home, he said:

    “I accidentally pricked Meredith while cooking dinner for her.”

    But Meredith had never set foot in his home. He barely knew her. He had never cooked dinner for her or “pricked” her accidentally with that knife.

    Nevertheless, Raffaele REPEATED this lie, in writing, after he retained counsel.

    Now WHY would he tell this lie if he were innocent??????????????????????????

  • Tom Rochelle

    I’ve actually become fascinated by all the twisted
    logic and scenarios that show a great discomfort
    with the truth of her innocence. Clearly, some
    have made a substantial emotional investment in
    the belief that Amanda is guilty.
    It was a physical impossibility to participate
    in this horrible crime without leaving substantial
    DNA evidence in the room where the crime took place.
    That’s why Rudy Guede’s forensic evidence is all
    over the room. After all, HE did the crime.
    Now, find one piece of irrefutable evidence that Amanda
    and Raffaele were in the room when the murder took place.
    Just ONE piece of IRREFUTABLE evidence that they were
    there. Like a bloody thumb print. You can’t because
    they weren’t there. Every piece of evidence that was
    offered by the prosecution was demolished by the defense.
    That’s important because Amanda lived at the residence
    and Raffaele had visited several times. One needs to
    establish their presence in the room when the murder took place because she lived at the residence and he visited.
    They are both innocent. I know that the truth of that
    hurts some of you. You want to believe what Amanda wanted to believe: that an innocent person doesn’t get convicted of a crime that they didn’t commit. Very sadly it happens.

    There can be 10,000 or 100,000 or even 1,000,000 pages of evidence about the crime, it’s the interpretation of the RELEVANT evidence that matters.

    They weren’t in the room when the murder took place.

    If they were, the relevant evidence would show that.

    It doesn’t. End of story.

  • Gary

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh said
    The Knoxes are all a despicable bunch.
    They’re worse than the Anthony family (the parents of Casey Anthony). At least they didn’t send to jail someone totally innocent.

    Tell me you’re joking? If you’re not then you have serious problems. First of all Amanda was basically tortured into making that claim after 14 hours of interrogation. The Anthony family may have not sent an innocent person to jail, but they sure the heck are trying there hardest to do so (Zanida, Kronk). In fact they are not only trying to send an innocent person to prison, but they are trying to put them to death by lethal injection. What you just said is the most outrageous thing I have ever heard.

  • PhanuelB

    @WaitaMinute:”Just because you cannot read, write or speak Italian does not mean the documents are “unavailable.”

    Then let’s see one. In Italian is no problem. Unaltered, in it’s entirety and anything that makes it here goes on the internet without limitation. The problem is that they can’t be published to where people can see them and use them. What in the world would be the reason for a law like that except to protect a corrupt judicial system?

    @WaitaMinute:”As for “full unedited recordings of…interrogation[s,]” do you think these are readily available in American cases?”

    Yes

    @WaitaMinute:”For example, can I listen in on the “full unedited recordings” of the interrogations of every prisoner at Gitmo?”

    No. First of all interrogations there relate to national security. If the world knew what the subject was saying it might jeopardize the lives of American, British, and Italian soldiers… and others. Documents legitimately sealed by a court should not be in the public domain either. This might include material that compromises the privacy or safety of victims, witnesses, minors,or investigators.

  • Shane

    “Now WHY would he tell this lie if he were innocent??????????????????????????”

    Perhaps to explain the lie that the police had told him about DNA on the knife blade, and which he didn’t have the scientific knowledge to refute?

    If you lie to suspects, you can’t really complain if you get lies back. See also: the police telling Amanda they had hard evidence she was at the crime scene, the police telling Raffaele they had hard evidence he called the police after the postal police arrived.

  • sarah clinton

    someone removed my post ! – I only said…… ‘knox in a box ‘lighten up !

  • may day

    knox in a box

  • PhanuelB

    @Char:”PhanuelB, my goodness you are tiresome. “People who don’t speak the language of the trial and who weren’t there have every right to come in and inspect the quality of justice.”

    @Char:”Wrong. You have no “right” to inspect anything with regard to the justice system in a foreign, sovereign nation.”

    Truly extraordinary statements. Public access to trial records is a fundamental principal of any democracy.

    See the case of Carlo Parlanti, an Italian in jail in California who many Italians feel is innocent. Trial documents from his case are available online from the link below.

    http://www.thepeoplevscarloparlanti.com/atti/indiex%20from%20defence.htm

  • Mary H.

    Tehran1979, the two posts you’re railing about were written by other people, not me. I quoted them, as noted. No wonder you don’t know the facts of the case — you don’t read carefully.

    And sorry, but for the trillionth time, I am not Candace Dempsey. I wish I were — I’d be coming into some hard-earned cash very soon.

  • http://punchlinemagazine.com/blog/2010/02/comedian-explains-why-she-organized-amanda-knox-comedy-show-fundraiser saywhat?

    Let’s not argue with Maryville or MaryH – they survive under the mantra “Ignorance is bliss” and tacky, and insipid, and moronic, assinine…oh I could go on and on

  • elizabeth

    Mary ,I believe Tehran ’79 referring to you as ‘candace’ was probably sarcasm !?! ,its a similar situation in respect to your understanding of irony- some of you ‘folks’ just don’t get it.

  • Mary H.

    Are you sure about that, elizabeth? Did YOU read carefully?

    I get accused of being Candace almost every day. I have yet to hear it from anyone intending it ironically.

  • Shane

    “Mary ,I believe Tehran ‘79 referring to you as ‘candace’ was probably sarcasm !?! ,its a similar situation in respect to your understanding of irony- some of you ‘folks’ just don’t get it.”

    I doubt it… Anyone who posts in support of Knox/Sollecito’s innocence gets accused of being FOA/a paid PR commenter/Candace Dempsey. The pro-guilty crowd are victims of a bizarre paranoia, amongst other things.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Gay wrote: “First of all Amanda was basically tortured into making that claim after 14 hours of interrogation.”

    WRONG! TWICE!

    Amanda wasn’t interrogated for 14 hours.

    Raffaele was called by the police while they were in a pizzeria for dinner. They would have liked to talk to him.

    He went to the police station after 10:30 pm. Amanda decided to accompany him.

    During Raffaele’s interview with the police, after he was confronted with some inconsistencies in his previous statements he confessed that what he had told the police previously was “un sacco di cazzate”, which for all of you who don’t speak a word of Italian means a “sac of bull$hit” (UN= a, SACCO= sac, DI=of, CAZZATE= a vulgar expression meaning b.s., or more literally, ‘dick’s words or acts – from the word ‘cazzo’=dick, which is not a body part designed to say logical things or do logical things) . He then proceeded to tell them that Amanda left his apartment sometime between 8:30 and 9pm, and he wasn’t sure if she came back after he went to bed at 1:00 am.
    Amanda, who happened to be outside in the hall, was then asked if she wanted to try and see if she could remember some facts that weren’t clear from her first statements. She agreed. It was past 11 pm by that time. When she repeated the story that she was at Raffaele’s all evening, she was then confronted with the fact that Raffaele had just told them that she left the apartment sometime in the eve. to meet some people at the pub (that’s what Raffaele told them). She was therefore confronted about the message: CI VEDIAMO PIU’ TARDI she had in the cell phone. That phrase means literally “we will see each other later on”, but unlike the English counterpart “see you later”, which could mean Good bye, in Italian that phrase means that “we are for sure meeting later on that same evening”. Obviously the police put the two things together:
    1-Raffaele said she left to meet people before 9pm
    2-She sent a SMS saying “we are going to meet later”.
    And at that point they wanted to know whom she met, because at that point the police thought she was covering somebody (nobody would think that she was a murderer, because generally those types of crimes are committed by men).
    Pressured to tell whom she met, she eventually made the statement about her presence in the house with Lumumba at 01:45 am, just over 2 hours after the beginning of the interrogation (not 14).
    At that point she became a suspect (as possible accomplice) and the interrogation had to be stopped, and they had to call a magistrate.

    If you listened to the 2 days of testimony given by Amanda (that was available on the net Mr. PhalluselB), she didn’t say that she was tortured, she said she was given to cuffs on the nape but she wasn’t hurt by that at all, she just said that she was frightened. Learn the language and listen to what she says. Unfortunately you don’t know the language, and that’s why to serve in a jury in America you must understand English.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Sphincters wrote:
    “modal modifiers like ”could” are introduced to describe what ‘could’ have happened albeit that people who can’t even understand English resolutely fail to make that distinction on this blog.”

    I and probably everybody in this blog knows English more than adequately to understand the meaining of modal modifiers like ‘could’.

    Amanda didn’t make a statement using the conditional mode ‘could’, as in: “somebody could have been there killing her while I was at Raffaele”. Instead she put herself in the crime scene, using the ‘indicative’ mode, which she also used to indicate what she did when she heard the scream (I covered my ears).

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    We get it, Mary Ho, you’re not Candiced Dumpsay. You’re just one of her honchos, maybe Turtle Dove or Sept79, who write the same ‘cazzate’ on her blog.

  • Mary H.

    Speaking of “un sacco di cazzate,” Al-Fakh-Only Mizzelph, your last post fits the bill.

    Asking Amanda to come in for a chat at 11:00 p.m. on a school night? A little heavy-handed for a non-suspect, isn’t it? Why not hold off until the next afternoon, and let Amanda know she could bring a lawyer with her?

    Then running out in the middle of the night to drag Patrick out of bed and into jail without due process? You make it sound like the cops were just calm and unsuspecting until Raffaele broke the case wide open. The cops’ behavior says otherwise.

    Raffaele told the cops he hadn’t thought of “the inconsistencies” between his and Amanda’s alibis until the cops kindly informed him of them. Maybe that’s because there weren’t any.

    By the way, Raffaele testified that he told the cops he did not want to be interrogated. He said they isolated him and took his shoes, and of course, did not allow him to consult a lawyer.

  • grim

    Tell Me Mary H.

    After they are both found guilty on appeal. What are you going to do with your life then? Yours must be pretty miserable existence and the classic case of ‘get a life.’ It’s rather sad really, personally I pity you.

  • Mary H.

    Shucks, grim, I’m touched. Hey, while you’re in the mood to extend sympathy to those who actually do spend all their time focused on this case, hop on over to truejustice. Those guys really DON’T have jobs — they don’t need them — and they really DON’T have anything else to think about other than how to stick it to Amanda and Raffaele. Ah, a noble mission.

    THERE”S a full-time PR campaign for you, and one that is self-supporting — no fundraisers necessary. How DO they do it?

  • elizabeth

    mary h ?,it’s you that should read more carefully, I stated that it was probably SARCASM Terhan labeling you candace , not IRONY. Capito ?

  • grim

    Mary H

    Lets See my last post said 12:47, that’s two hours back from the East Coast. Therefore Mary H it’s obvious that you must stay up really late doing your inventing of possible maybes in this case. So sorry, tell me have you washed lately? Just bet you are single, miserable and fat. bad combination all round. Also did welfare buy you a computer so you would just go away?

  • Mary H.

    Right you are, elizabeth. My mistake.

  • Mary H.

    You sound really deep, grim; I want to get to know you.

    The hours other people keep seems to be a common target for the anti-Amanda bigots. You guys will criticize ANYTHING!

  • grim

    Your right Mary your touched yes, But in the head

  • grim

    Right again Mary.
    Sooo you want to get to know me eh? OK give me your full name and address and I’ll come round.
    We can have coffee and solve the worlds problems.

  • elizabeth

    MaryH , glad we cleared that up , apologies for momentarily distracting you from your mission – proclaiming that freaks innocence……. good luck !

  • Mary H.

    grim, can you believe I don’t drink coffee? I may be in one of Seattle’s smallest minorities.

    Thanks for the good wishes, elizabeth. Say, when I told grim I thought he was deep and I wanted to get to know him, was that sarcasm or irony? Both, or not?

    *****

    Now where did Hi’l-Fakh-Only Izzelf go? I wanted to talk about the alibis some more. I never get tired of talking about those ever-relevant alibis.

    Darn it — now, which was that? Irony or sarcasm?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H. (Homey):
    I wonder why the police zeroed in on the two love doves. I also wonder why they decided to tap their phones right after the murder.

    Could it be they figured out they weren’t telling the whole truth from the start?

    I don’t see why you should be so surprised that two coke heads under the influence of drugs were involved in some orgy attempt with a much more proper English girl.

    I don’t find it surprising at all. The newspapers around the world are full of stories like that.

    What’s surprising to me, is that there are people who defend a murderer simply because:

    A- She’s an American abroad.
    B- She killed a foreigner (we know the value that Americans put on foreign people lives, just ask the Afghanis or the Iraqis).
    C- There is a black person you can put the blame on.

    The interesting thing is that if Amanda Knox had been a British or Italian woman (or worse a black foreigner), and Meredith Kercher had been American, the very same people, with exactly the same circumstances and evidence, would now be asking for the head of Amanda Knox.

    We’ve seen that with the incident of that woman disappeared in Aruba (Natalee Holloway), where, in spite of the very scant knowledge of the circumstances and the lack of evidence, all Americans wanted the head of that Dutch Aruban guy.

  • Kim Bailey

    billyryan said “knowledge of everything amanda said while been beaten by the police i am begining to think that
    mignini cut ye a copy of the interrogation tapes.” It was not Mignini who said that she was beaten by the Italian police it was Knox and her parents.

    Mary H., “none of them was subjected to a formal interrogation where they were isolated and questioned through the night.” Since you were there why don’t you tell us who it was that beat Knox.

    Mary H., “Are they so bad at their jobs that they can’t break two inexperienced kids into admitting they committed murder?” Using that premise Guede is innocent too, he still maintains that he did not kill Meredith. The police should release all 3, nobody murdered Meredith.

    Mary H., earlier you mentioned some nonsense about people getting their information from JFM (paraphrase) and then you come up with Judge Micheli used “‘guilty because I can’t find any one else to blame’ as the basis of his decision making.” JFM is starting to look like an excellent source when compared to your source – someone’s own rear-end.

  • colonelhall

    You’re getting out of control, folks! Just because you disagree with someone, there is no need to be abusive. Some of you need to calm dow.

    As for the case, I notice that Mry says “Asking Amanda to come in for a chat at 11:00 p.m. on a school night? A little heavy-handed for a non-suspect, isn’t it? ”

    If you are talking about the night of the gym session at the police station, wasn’t it established that it was Rafael that had been asked to come in. Amanda Knox just accompanied him. on that night.

  • PhanuelB

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh:

    Please provide a source for your 12:24 post. Were you there?

  • Mary H.

    For cripe’s sake, Kim, I didn’t write that, I quoted someone else who did. How many times am I going to have to correct people about that today?

    Not that I disagree with what the guy wrote.

    It’s not JFM, it’s tjmk. Yikes. And for the love of all that is good and holy, go back and reread the first paragraph of your post, in which you address billyryan. You weren’t the one who said she was in the top 3% of her class, were you?

    By the way, how are things going with the mop and bucket mystery?

  • Mary H.

    “I wonder why the police zeroed in on the two love doves.”

    Because they were the only two people who were close to Meredith who weren’t out of town that night. And because it made Mignini mad when he saw them kissing on the news.

    “I also wonder why they decided to tap their phones right after the murder.”

    Because Mignini is a corrupt, law-breaking control freak who sticks his nose where it doesn’t belong.

    “Could it be they figured out they weren’t telling the whole truth from the start?”

    No. They needed some suspects.

    “I don’t see why you should be so surprised that two coke heads..”

    They weren’t using coke; they were smoking pot.

  • Mary H.

    colonel, I was responding to what A-F-Y wrote: “Amanda, who happened to be outside in the hall, was then asked if she wanted to try and see if she could remember some facts that weren’t clear from her first statements. She agreed. It was past 11 pm by that time.”

  • billyryan

    ye are all so good at picking holes in everything amanda and raffaela said under interogation ye only have the police word for what they said.amanda told the police the book she was reading at raffaela apartment.the police gave in evidence at one of the early hearings that the book was found at the cottage where merridith was killed and this was proof amanda was at the cottage during the murder,only to be caught out lying by there own video when they were caught out it was a mistake not deliberate lies by the police.the postal police officer who broke down the door of merridiths bedroom said in evidence that he just looked into the bedroom and did not enter,one of the girls who lived in the house and her boyfriend standing behind him said in evidence he entered the room and lifted the cover off the body and they identified merridith.again the police officer caught out lying.the postal police which became important claimed to have arrived at the cottage before raffaela rang the police.if he did he arrived before he got the call from headquarters to go to the cottage again the police caught out lying.and yet every selective leak from the interrogation is a cast iron fact, i think the perugian police would not reconise the truth if it jumped up and bit them on the neck

  • Kim Bailey

    I can’t read any more of these childish personal attacks that have nothing to do with the case. You all on both sides need to grow up.

  • Mary H.

    Before you go, Kim, what about the mop and bucket?

  • Kim Bailey

    Mary H. I realize that you were quoting someone else. I am telling you that your source is useless.

    Maybe I did use the wrong name for JFM that is because I have never once been to it. Further proving my point.

    I don’t need to reread my statement to billyryan I wrote. You are the one confused.

    That link you provided was not a “police deposition” It was a reporter’s account. As I stated above your source is no better than JFM or TJFM (whatever).

    The only time I came 2nd in my class is the odd occasion that I did not come 1st. But that is not relevant to this case.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary Ho. said

    Because they were the only two people who were close to Meredith who weren’t out of town that night. And because it made Mignini mad when he saw them kissing on the news.

    FILOMENA ROMANELLI WAS ALSO IN PERUGIA THAT NIGHT, STAYING AT HER BOYFRIEND’S. THERE WERE NO INCONSISTENCIES IN HER STATEMENTS, AND SHE WAS NEVER ARRESTED.

    I’M SURE SHE WAS ALSO KISSING HER BOYFRIEND. YOUR SPECULATION ABOUT MIGNINI IS JUST THAT: SILLY SPECULATION BASED ON NOTHING.

    Because Mignini is a corrupt, law-breaking control freak who sticks his nose where it doesn’t belong.

    DO YOU KNOW THE MEANING OF THE WORD CORRUPT? MAYBE HE’S A ZEALOUS MAGISTRATE, BUT NOT CORRUPT.

    No. They needed some suspects.

    NO THEY NEEDED SOME COOPERATION FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE VICTIM TO TRY TO CATCH THE CULPRIT. THEY GOT A BUNCH OF LIES INSTEAD, WHICH OF COURSE MADE THEM SUSPICIOUS. HAVE YOU HEARD OF CASEY ANTHONY’S CASE?

    They weren’t using coke; they were smoking pot.

    THAT’S WHAT THEY SAID. BUT LIARS ARE NOT NECESSARILY TO BE BELIEVED.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB says:
    “Please provide a source for your 12:24 post. Were you there?”

    No I wasn’t there, but I have the original Sentence Motivation document relative to the disposition of cautionary detainment given by the GIP. It’s in Italian, written in very technical legalese language, and it’s saved in my hard drive. I just gave you a quick recount of what’s in it. I don’t remember where I found it. Probably some Italian media site.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    cont’d to PhallicB.

    Some of it was from Italian media accounts too.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H.
    “By the way, Raffaele testified that he told the cops he did not want to be interrogated. He said they isolated him and took his shoes, and of course, did not allow him to consult a lawyer.”

    I HEARD THAT IT HAPPENED TO SEVERAL SUSPECTS IN GUANTANAMO BAY AS WELL.

    THE ONLY DIFFERENCE RAFFAELE WASN’T WATERBOARDED. ITALY USES LESS INVASIVE METHODS THAN IN THE US.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary Ho: “Raffaele told the cops he hadn’t thought of “the inconsistencies” between his and Amanda’s alibis until the cops kindly informed him of them. Maybe that’s because there weren’t any.”

    Have you thought that maybe the police by then had discovered that:
    - His father had called him at 20:42 and not after 23:00 as he first declared.
    - His ISP couldn’t confirm internet navigation from 11:00 pm to 01:00 am.
    - His call to 112 on the morning of Nov. 2 was after the police had already arrived at the scene.
    - His initial deposition was not matching Amanda’s about their whereabouts on Nov. 1.
    - And maybe, that some depositions by Filomena Romanelli were in conflict with his.

    Maybe there was some good reason for the police to be puzzled by those inconsistencies. Don’t you think?

  • Jeanette

    “THE ONLY DIFFERENCE RAFFAELE WASN’T WATERBOARDED. ITALY USES LESS INVASIVE METHODS THAN IN THE US.”

    Yeah, like hitting, oh right, “cuffing” women on the back of the head.

    I’m American, I didn’t vote for Bush, I did vote for the other guy. I don’t like waterboarding and I don’t like anyone being hit on the back of the head. They are both wrong and, as I’m sure your mum told you, two wrongs don’t make a right. And, that “less invasive” argument is utterly ridicules.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Jeanette:
    “Yeah, like hitting, oh right, “cuffing” women on the back of the head.”

    That is what Amanda said. But is it true??

    Lots of prisoners accuse the police of mistreatment. But is it true they were mistreated?

    You assume that whatever Amanda says is the truth, nothing but the truth, except for when she incriminates herself. Then she’s not telling the truth.

    WATERBOARDING WAS AMPLY PROVEN AND CORROBORATED BY TESTIMONIES AND EVIDENCE.

    AMANDA’S ALLEGATIONS WERE NOT! AS A MATTER OF FACT SHE COULDN’T EVEN RECOGNIZE THE POLICEWOMAN WHO ALLEGEDLY DID IT.

    AND BY THE WAY. THE INCIDENTS OF POLICE BRUTALITY IN AMERICA ARE FAR MORE COMMON THEY’LL EVER BE IN ITALY. JUST GOOGLE: POLICE BRUTALITY IN USA, AND YOU’LL SEE HOW MANY HITS.

  • Calling “PhanuelD Student’s” Bluff

    @WaitaMinute:”As for “full unedited recordings of…interrogation[s,]” do you think these are readily available in American cases?”

    Yes
    ———————————–

    okay, let’s put that to the test with a few well known suspects

    show me the police interrogation recordings, full and unedited, of:

    O J Simpson
    Michael Jackson
    Timothy McVeigh
    Lee Harvey Oswald

    remember, to fit your standards, it has to be readily available to non-English speaking foreigners & free

    (good luck)

  • Jeanette

    “AMANDA’S ALLEGATIONS WERE NOT! AS A MATTER OF FACT SHE COULDN’T EVEN RECOGNIZE THE POLICEWOMAN WHO ALLEGEDLY DID IT.”

    Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Amanda wasn’t hit.

    You know, many police departments in America have learned, usually the hard way, that audio or video tapes of any interrogation need to be made. In some states/cities it is even the law. Then there is no he said/she said arguments. Maybe this case will be a wake up call for Italy.

  • Candy’s Lisp

    Mary H. said
    am February 3 2010 @ 11:21 am

    And sorry, but for the trillionth time, I am not Candace Dempsey. I wish I were — I’d be coming into some hard-earned cash very soon.
    ______________________________________________

    Candy, you give yourself away so easily.

    As for hard-earned cash, I’ll bet your book advance was a paltry sum.

    Something on the order of $4000 or so. Face facts:

    You’ve NEVER written a book before (despite the fact you’re 60 years old);

    You have no legitimate press credentials – you are an amateur BLOGGER;

    Your grammar is scarcely better than that of Amanda; &

    You are not writing a balanced book, you’re righting a one-sided propaganda piece for Amanda and her family.

    After Curt, Edda, Chris and your sister buy a copy, your sales will halt.

    People interested in this case (and unrelated to Amanda) want to hear a balanced account, not poorly contrived spin.

    The day that you make decent money from sales of the dreadfully disingenuous pro-Amanda tripe that you spew on your blog, well…that’s the day I’m an astronaut.

    The book, if it ever comes out, will go straight to the ‘discount bin’ for a brief respite before heading to the pulp mill for recycling.

    Was it worth re-traumatizing Meredith’s family and undermining justice for them just so you could squeeze out a $4000 advance?

    Your publisher wouldn’t have touched an aging, never-was like you if it weren’t for your ACCESS to Amanda’s mom and the case file she holds.

    In a way I feel sorry for you: You had to sell your soul to devil (Edda) to get a book published before you die, and now you can’t give the OTHER side of the story even if you wanted to.

  • Jeanette

    Just curious and wondering if Amanda’s new attorney will bring up the “rush to judgement” defense that seems to hold up so well in US courts. I usually scoff at such defense tactics but after reading about this case I’ve become a believer. It can and does happen. Certainly there’s no denying that the police/prosecution did an all out galloping run to judgement in this case. There’s even tapped quotes from those involve to prove it.

  • ALL ABOUT CANDACE

    FOUND THIS POSTED ON ANOTHER SITE:

    Candace Dempsey had the habit of posting to her own blog under different aliases and she was caught out commenting positively on her own post using different aliases.

    She got caught one day (a PDF capture has been taken), forgetting to log out as Candace Dempsey and signed the post with a complete different name.

    In that post she congratulated the original poster (herself, Candace Dempsey) on writing such a refreshing and sensible post.

    I have the same level of respect for Candace Dempsey as I have for the murderess and her family.

    Deal with it.

  • Gman

    Jeanette, you’re not too smart, are you?

    “Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Amanda wasn’t hit.”

    I guess there’s no proof you haven’t hit me either, is there?

    Here’s a little life lesson for you: The onus is on the accuser to prove that an incident DID occur. Surely you should have learnt *something* from this case.

  • IVSTITIA

    Jeanette: “Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Amanda wasn’t hit”.

    According to the rules of evidence the burder of proof is on those who make a charge, not those who receive it. In addition the rules of evidence require that you prove a positive statement not a negative one.

    Otherwise I can accuse you, Jeanette, to steal money and then say:
    “Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Jeanette is not a thief”.

    Also, the prosecutor cannot start any investigation of the police behaviour until Amanda actually files a lawsuit against the police for that mistreatment. That type of crime does not start ex officio, as it would be for murder. Amanda must file a lawsuit first.

    _____________

    “Just curious and wondering if Amanda’s new attorney will bring up…”
    ________________
    Amanda has no new attorney. The same attorneys will be arguing the case for her in appeal (unless Amanda will decide to retain someone else).

    The attorney from Philadelphia they hired is not allowed to argue the case in an Italian court, in addition he doesn’t know Italian law and penal procedure, and he doesn’t even speak the language. His primary role will be that of advisor and liaison between the Italian lawyers and the family (and the US press). He will have primarily a Public Relations role, rather than a legal one.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Jeanette said:
    “Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Amanda wasn’t hit”.

    I say:

    Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Jeanette isn’t a mentally retarded idiot.

    As a matter of fact her last post is sufficient proof she is.

  • PhanuelB

    @Calling “PhanuelD Student’s” Bluff:
    “show me the police interrogation recordings, full and unedited, of:

    O J Simpson
    Michael Jackson
    Timothy McVeigh
    Lee Harvey Oswald”

    All of the above cases pre-date the development of the pdf format so one would have to go to the courthouse and get paper copies. That is still the only way to do it with most state courts. I will NOT be going to a courthouse in California or Texas to prove a point. That point has been sufficiently proven with the links to the Carlo Parlanti case.

    If it’s part of the trial record and non-sealed, you or I or anyone else can go to the courthouse, pay $1 per page and get it. Period. And once we have it we can put it on the internet without limitation.
    Any and all records of interrogations in the US are fully discoverable by the defense. Period. If an interrogation occurred and neither side wanted it in the record it might not be available to the public.

    The defense in Amanda’s case has requested such electronic records of her interrogations.

    Any interrogation of Michael Jackson would presumably be sealed because it involved minors.

    From the PACER System:
    5:95-cr-00110-RPM USA v. McVeigh
    Date filed: 08/10/1995
    Date terminated: 02/20/1996
    Date of last filing: 02/23/1996
    983 Documents. Many sealed. None in PDF format. All non sealed documents available at courthouse or by mail.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB:

    Why don’t you want to go to Perugia and make the photocopies yourself?

    If it’s true (and I don’t know since you’re saying it but who would believe you?) that Italian law doesn’t allow for those records to be put on the net, what do care? You’re not within the jurisdiction of Italian law if you come back to the US? Just come back with the photocopies, scan them and put them on your own website. If the Italian authorities don’t like it, too bad. They can tell the ISP’s in Italy to scramble or make your website unavailable, but they are not going to do anything to you in the US!

    Why do you expect that the Italian authorities should put those records on the net for you?

    Are you boycotting travel to Italy? Or you simply have no money to go?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    And by the way, the poor Patrick Lumumba got bad news today in Italy.

    He appealed his paltry 8,000 Euros damages award by the State for his wrong conviction (he was asking for 516,000 Euros).

    But the Supreme Court confirmed the original settlement amount of 8,000 Euros from the State. And of course he won’t get any of the damages from Amanda, since she’s got nothing.

    Poor chap! He even went out of business and had to close his pub when he was arrested and had to defend himself. Giving that job to Amanda wasn’t certainly a good investment for him. She’s bad news for anybody who meets her.

  • billyryan

    al_fak_yugoudh any chance you would tell us the real reason you want an innocent young girl in jail.stop repeating the now mostly discredited lies of the convicted criminal mignini.who is paying you,are you mignini. mabey his wife his eldest daughter.mabey his eldery mother. i have a suspission you are a jew maskerading as an arab.you once asked edda out,she told you her standers were a lot higher than a slimeball like you.you were convicted in the wrong yourself and you are looking for revenge,you asked deanna for a date and she rang the police and said you were hasling her.there is something i cant quite figure out in relation to you

  • http://www.friendsofamanda.org/ Hector

    http://amandadefensefund.org/

    Obviously A LOT of people think Amanda’s innocent, otherwise you wouldn’t see Al-Fakh posting as 8 different people to show otherwise. How loserish.

  • Mary H.

    ALL ABOUT CANDACE, you forgot the part where I asked the writer to provide the PDF capture, and she evaporated into thin air, never to be heard from again.

    Typical truejustice M.O. — Accuse someone of something but provide no documentation. Or supply half the information that is available, and pretend it is the whole story.

  • Mary H.

    Gman and Ivstitia, you certainly are giving jeannette a hard time for saying, “Neither have I seen or heard any proof that Amanda wasn’t hit.”

    Odd, considering about 95% of the people who believe Amanda is guilty are using exactly the same reasoning. Just yesterday, Chuk wrote: “I can’t see anything substantial to make me believe that she hadn’t some part in the events.”

    I didn’t see you ridiculing his logic.

  • Mary H.

    Kim, you don’t have to use my source to do some research on the mop and bucket. As I suggested earlier, though, it is apparent you are happier with your beliefs about the case that with the facts.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyryan said: “..blah..Innocent Girl….blah blah. Mignini convicted criminal…”

    YES, AMANDA IS OFFICIALLY INNOCENT FOR NOW. THE ITALIAN CONSTITUTION STATES THAT A DEFENDANT IS CONSIDERED INNOCENT UNTIL THERE IS A DEFINITIVE SENTENCE RENDERED BY THE SUPREME COURT.

    BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN MIGNINI IS ALSO STILL INNOCENT.

    AND SO IS RUDY GUEDE. WHO STILL HASN’T EXHAUSTED HIS APPEAL RIGHTS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.

    WAS FOUND GUILTY IN THE FIRST TRIAL OF A LEGALLY ESTABLISHED COURT OF LAW OF A FREE AND SOVEREIGN NATION. SHE HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL.

    “blah..blah…Jew masquerading as an Arab…”

    I PREFER IT TO JUDAISM. THERE ARE NO 72 VIRGINS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

    “..asked edda out…deanna rang the police..blah blah.”

    NEVER MET ANY OF THE KNOX CLAN THEREFORE I NEVER ASKED THEM OUT. I DID ASK YOUR MOTHER OUT THOUGH BILLYRYAN. ASK HER HOW IT WAS. BUT MAKE SURE SHE DOESN’T SIT DOWN ON A HARD SURFACE, IN CASE IT STILL BURNS.

    AND FINALLY BILLYRYAN: CAN YOU PLEASE LEARN HOW TO SPELL ENGLISH A LITTLE BETTER? NOW I KNOW WHY YOU FIND AMANDA SO APPEALING. SHE CAN’T WRITE EITHER.

  • Mary H.

    A-F-Y wrote: “Have you thought that maybe the police by then had discovered that:
    - His father had called him at 20:42 and not after 23:00 as he first declared.
    - His ISP couldn’t confirm internet navigation from 11:00 pm to 01:00 am.
    - His call to 112 on the morning of Nov. 2 was after the police had already arrived at the scene.
    - His initial deposition was not matching Amanda’s about their whereabouts on Nov. 1.
    - And maybe, that some depositions by Filomena Romanelli were in conflict with his.”

    Are you saying the police had all that dirt on Raffaele before his interrogation? If so, there is no reason to believe them when they say he was a witness, not a suspect. They were asking him about himself, not about the crime. His legal rights were violated when he was not provided with a lawyer and the interrogation was not taped.

    While we’re discussing this, I have a question. From what I understand, the postal police say they arrived at the cottage around 12:35, but didn’t call in to the station to make a report about the cell phones until 1:00. Would you happen to know what they talked about in that phone call? Did they say they were looking for the owner of one of the cell phones, who was missing, or did they just call to report in?

    According to one of the responding officers, when they got to the cottage, Amanda took him into the bathroom and showed him spots of blood. I guess that would have been around 12:40? So then what? For twenty minutes, they did not try to break down Meredith’s locked door?

    They called in at 1:00, but they didn’t find the body until 1:15. That would actually make it 40 minutes between the time they say they got there, were told Meredith was missing and her door was locked, and the time they broke down the door.

    That’s kinda slow.

  • Mary H.

    Oh, I just realized I have to add A-F Y to my post at 7:01 about bullying jeannette.

  • John Winters

    Al Kafupyourcommunications said:

    ”Amanda didn’t make a statement using the conditional mode ‘could’, as in: “somebody could have been there killing her while I was at Raffaele”.”

    The term ”could” is not being used here as a ”conditional mode” (I think this must be some sort of special Italian point of grammar because it doesn’t exist in English), but as a modal auxiliary the function of which is to invest the semantic properties of the verb it accompanies (in this case, ”to be”), with as much uncertainty attached to its contextual activation as is necessary to effectively undermine its import as a statement of fact.

    Furthermore, the phrase ”somebody could have been there killing her while I was at Raffaele” could not possibly be treated as a conditional clause or sentence, it not adhering to the grammatical regulations specifically designating the zero, first, second, third, nor indeed, mixed conditional structures.

    Oh and while we’re at it, the expression ”see you later” in English refers to an unspecified time in the future. See you later can mean ”later today” or ”later, whenever!”

    Now that we’ve established this, shall we start all over again, and get Amanda to sit down and be reinterviewed, this time with somebody present who speaks English, gobbledygook, and that strange linguistic hinterland metalanguage which exists between these two language forms familiar only to intrepids like Amanda Knox and Jim Kirk.

    Beam me up S##tty!!

  • brickhouse

    Well this has been fun, catching up. Does everyone like their new nicknames? Do we need to put some more sand in the sandbox, what with all this 3rd grade wrestling and rhetoric?

    Obviously for an actual discussion of the evidence and issues in this case, one needs to find another venue.

  • Gary

    To; Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    when I said tortured I did not mean physiclly but mentally which is much more worse in most cases. I am stll totaly disscutted that you said Amanda is worse than the Anthony’s (Please elaorate more on that).I guarentee 100% of people would dissagree with that statement. You were either joking or your truly sick in the head. I dont need to read the rest of the testimony because it mens nothing. Now that freaky Magini hads been found guilty of abusing hid job, planting evidence,fraudulant wire taping anf false confessins his credability is as good as Casey Anthony’s.

  • John Winters

    Al Fakupyourshopping

    Stick to making comments about your mystery train. That’s about all you English is good for.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    you say:

    “Typical truejustice M.O. — Accuse someone of something but provide no documentation. Or supply half the information that is available, and pretend it is the whole story.”

    or, better still, visit Anne Bremner’s web-site and try and open the letter of protest sent by Judge Heavey to the his italian counter-parts – NOTHING, it has been conveniently removed. And then, try finding the letter of apology by the same Judge – not there.

    How arrogant and up yourself would you have to be to even contemplate directing another Judge, let alone in another country, to take up your suggestions?

    Anyway,

    This is link is dedicated to John Winters and you Mary H:

    http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

    10,000 innocent people convicted in each in the US.

    But don’t let the truth get in the way of your fiction.

    dixi

  • Hector Malloy

    As if Mignini couldn’t make himself look any stranger…HE JUST DID:

    http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2010/02/around-amanda-knox-case.html

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Sphyncters:

    “Oh and while we’re at it, the expression ‘’see you later” in English refers to an unspecified time in the future. See you later can mean ”later today” or ”later, whenever!”

    Now that you’ve shown your knowledge of useless grammatical definitions which are of no interest to anybody except for some linguist, please sit down, dumbass, and re-read the evidence of the case.

    Amanda didn’t write “see you later” in English in her message. She wrote “ci vediamo piu’ tardi” in Italian. That sentence in Italian means that we will FOR SURE meet a few hours later ON THE SAME DAY, not at some unspecified time in the future. If you’are a policeman who’s worth his salt, you will definitely insist to know whom she met after reading that message.

    PS: My English may not be as great as yours, but it’s sure better than your loving Amanda, and definitely better than your Italian, dumbass.

  • @ “PhanuelD Student”:

    “PhanuelD Student” said:

    “If it’s part of the trial record and non-sealed, you or I or anyone else can go to the courthouse, pay $1 per page and get it. Period. And once we have it we can put it on the internet without limitation.
    Any and all records of interrogations in the US are fully discoverable by the defense. Period. If an interrogation occurred and neither side wanted it in the record it might not be available to the public.

    The defense in Amanda’s case has requested such electronic records of her interrogations.”
    ———————————————————

    Why do you PRESUME the same access is unavailable in Italy?

    Have you ever actually gone to an Italian courthouse and requested trial transcripts?

    As for police interrogation records, why do you PRESUME they are not also discoverable by Italian defense counsel?

    Apparently, you are unaware of the fact that Amanda’s lawyers successfully requested that records of the police interrogation be EXCLUDED from evidence at trial and, therefore, kept off the public record.

    They did this with good reason, too, for that is the interrogation in which she admitted to a role in the killing & falsely accused an innocent black man.

    That you can’t find this record is the direct result of a defense motion, rather than some covert wrongdoing on the part of the Italian government!!!

    Why do you go to such lengths to distort the truth?

  • @ Mary H (aka Candace the Hack)

    Mary H. said
    am February 3 2010 @ 6:47 pm

    “ALL ABOUT CANDACE, you forgot the part where I asked the writer to provide the PDF capture, and she evaporated into thin air, never to be heard from again.

    Typical truejustice M.O. — Accuse someone of something but provide no documentation. Or supply half the information that is available, and pretend it is the whole story.”
    ———————————————–

    But you just said you were NOT Candace.

    Oooops.

    Man, you’re dumb, Candy.

  • @ “PhanuelD” Student

    “PhanuelD” Student said:

    “All of the above cases pre-date the development of the pdf format… If an interrogation occurred and neither side wanted it in the record it might not be available to the public… Any interrogation of Michael Jackson would presumably be sealed because it involved minors… USA v. McVeigh
    Date filed: 08/10/1995
    Date terminated: 02/20/1996
    Date of last filing: 02/23/1996
    983 Documents. Many sealed. None in PDF format. All non sealed documents available at courthouse or by mail.

    __________________________________________

    ah ha!

    so, even in America, you are NOT, as you tried to suggest, able to get FREE access to “FULL, UNEDITED RECORDINGS” of POLICE INTERROGATIONS in high profile cases, replete with TRANSLATION into ANY language a foreigner might request

    note also that the the McVeigh file you listed took over a year to become semi-complete, with many documents remaining sealed to this day – seems unfair to expect the Italian court to be any faster at completing the public record!

    Amanda’s trial ended just over 8 weeks ago! Give ‘em a chance!

  • Shane

    Enzo Zoff wrote: “This is link is dedicated to John Winters and you Mary H:

    http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

    10,000 innocent people convicted in each in the US.

    But don’t let the truth get in the way of your fiction. ”

    I must be missing something. A link about innocent people getting convicted is supposed to convince us of Knox and Sollecito’s guilt…?

  • Mary H.

    Nice segue, Enzo. Change the subject much? You must have forgotten to take your ADD meds today.

  • Mary H.

    I’m not sure, Shane, but I THINK he’s trying to tell us the American police make mistakes so we don’t have any right to criticize the Italian police.

    Maybe the Australians are perfect; that’s why Enzo gets to criticize EVERYBODY.

  • Mary H.

    Hector Malloy, thanks for the link — that’s amazing. Somebody should put that guy in a straight jacket.

  • Mary H.

    “@ Mary H (aka Candace the Hack),” I am the one who asked her to produce the PDF capture. Go back to the examiner page where you found the post and you will see my name, Mary H.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-32288-Spokane-Elections-2010-Examiner~y2010m1d26-Perugia-murder-a-laughing-matter-for-Seattle-comedy-fundraiser-for-Amanda-Knox-January-26thRenee-Pe?commented#comments

  • LOL @ Judge ‘My daughter went to Amanda’s prep school’ Heavy

    try and open the letter of protest sent by Judge Heavey to the his italian counter-parts – NOTHING, it has been conveniently removed. And then, try finding the letter of apology by the same Judge – not there.

    How arrogant and up yourself would you have to be to even contemplate directing another Judge, let alone in another country, to take up your suggestions?
    ________________________________________

    good point

    BTW, that letter by Judge Heavy not only embarrassed him, it was the reason the Italians decided to give Amanda the ‘Casey Anthony Treatment’ and keep her in jail pending trial.

    They realized that if Amanda returned to Seattle before her trial, Judge Heavy himself would be the very judge that would have to sign Amanda’s extradition order.

    The Italian court took note of the bias in Heavy’s ridiculous letter and (wisely) denied her bail.

    Heavy is now a disgrace to the bench.

  • All About Candy

    I hope Candy Dumpster’s book sells enough copies to cover a 2nd nose job.

    Those jowls & that massive neck wattle could use some work, too, especially since she’s taken to trying to pass herself off as being 40 (she’s about to turn 60).

    It’s probably too late to undo the psychological damage flowing from decades of being ‘the uggo chick with a lisp’, but you never know…

    It might make her a better person – the kind that wouldn’t lie and demean Meredith’s memory for money.

  • Magnum P.I.

    I think I know “PhanuelD” – he lives in the thriving cultural hub that is Grafton.

    Your massive one-man blogging campaign won’t help you, bud – Amanda won’t be coming your way if she ever gets out.

  • jim

    mary H either u are misinformed or that u are totally overlooking the existing facts. mainly u also make urselves believe what u want to believe. first of all, all the roomies had returened including people living downstairs . there was some lead or suspicion that both amanda and her boyfiriend casted that led them to talk to them again 4 days later. like the way they behaved even in the morning after murder.they were recalled for second interrogation by cops because of their inconsistencies in the first place. that morning police showed up at the cottage becuz neighbors found the cell phones in their backyard. her botfriend called cops after postal police arrived. then they were standing ourside with a mop and bucket. then when police went upstairs the whole place was smelling due to bleach cleanup. then when her roomate arrived before they broke the victim’s door, amanda kept on saying that merredith always keeps her door locked or closed. her roomate Roamanelli told cops that morning, infact she never keeps her door locked its very unusual. then her roomate told police the same morning that amanda told her that she took shower that morning, imean in a cold cottage without any heat and bloodstained batthroom! Romaneli also told cops that when she said how dreadful way victim died, then amanda said “shit happens”, “what do u think she fucking bled to death!. then her roomate and cops also were amazed that amanda didnt actualy see the body when the door was broken down only to discover the blooody body, but she did tell the roomate that body was near the closet.then there was this strange behavior of both of them kissing and cuddling the same morning when every roomate incl guys were crying. then u see them buying a thong a day after the murder and her boyfriend saying that we will have a wild sex. do u know anyone whose roomate she knew for 3 months being not only murdered but butcherded enjoying themselves, not even shedding a single tear ? she wasnt just a neighbor but a roomate. so when cops saw all these things i mentioned then they began suspecting them and that led to second interview. so there leads that led to the second interview. thats what cops and people in law are for to dtect any suspicion and then lead on that. in the second interview she changed her story and blamed it on someone else? u said she was vulnerable thats why she changed her story? why was she vulnerable when her concsience was clean? then she wrote on a piece of paper and put her boss’s name down? imean why wuld cops and the prosecuter are against her, why wuld they have a personal grudge against her and her boyfriend, who by the way is italian and comes from a rich family? why wuld cops be against her? . it doesnt make anysense . she didnt have any past personal feud or grudge relationship with the public prosecuter that he will come after her at the interrogation. any police anywhere in a murder case will be hard and strong in their interview. but if u are innocent u will continue saying that u didnt do it and that u were not there. no police or prosecuter esp i a civilzed european country can coerce a false confession from a murder suspect if they are innocent. the only way they can do it is to drug some one.even the terrorists interrogated in the united states in the harshest way didnt change their story or didnt tell the secrets of their oragnization. so the only way as logic will dictate is that she must be lyimg . becuz notice she said i was there but my boss murdered her. so she was pretty much with it to present a scenario that she didnt do it but knew who didit. u may not accept it but it doesnt make any logical sense that the prosecuter and cops mader her to make false confession. only liars make such confession, people whose conscience is clean will not be afraid of anything and will not breakdown in esp a murder case interrogation. how come that boss who was arrested and interrogated didn’t breakdown like amanda and admitted his guilt by saying that he may have murdered her, as amanda says that she may have been at the cottage.? well becuz since he didnt do it, his conscience was clean so he didnt breakdown and maintained only one story and esp didnt blame it on someone else. she is a compulsive liar a sociopath, socio paths lie as if they are telling truth. by the way i dont know if u know that there is no evidence to her claim that she was mistreated thats what recent investigation has concluded, she is being charged for this slander now.then u say that the store guy came after few months to testify in the courst, but what differnce does it make he did nt come after the trial he came during the trial and testified as a witness that he saw amanda in the store. the court admitted his testimony, rite? obviously his coming after months must be still in the legal frame work . i mean this is a modern , civil european court. not some military tribunal. whuy wuld anyone discredit a modern civil court esp in europe?then finally u said that murderers do admit yes they do but its very rare most murderers maintain their innocence, becuz most of them are sociopaths and lying is what they do. th cases i know most have maintanied their innocene.u call them kids , amanda and her botfriend and that prosecuter didnt mkake them admit! frist of all they have been convicted by a modern, civil european court, 20 some judges looked at this case for 2yrs, they esp that boy friend ha the top lawyers, that boyfriend’s lawyer is top notch, she has defended the prime minister of italy. and yet her boyfriend is convicted. so i dont understand why people like u are doubting this court.why they dont admit despite of this becuz both of them are decitful, cunning and soul less , psycopaths and they will lie their crime forever. because sociopaths dont even recognize that they are lying, they state their lie as if they are telling truth, boyfriend didnt testify that itself to the court is an admission of the guilt, even that evil beast amanda knox said in the jail after guilt that the trial was fair. so it is a subconscious admission.u will see they will never get thru the appeals there is lots evidence to prove their guilt, its called circumstantial evidence

  • Mary H.

    I-yi-yi, did I just get caught in a time machine that took me back to 2007?

    I am always blown away by the gall of people who get on these blogs knowing absolutely nothing but not letting that stop them from “correcting” people who follow the case.

    Best comment of the day, from billyryan:

    “…yet every selective leak from the interrogation is a cast iron fact,…”

    And I do believe that is irony.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    Mary, Mary,[or rather Candance], me critizise everybody?

    With Valentine’s Day on the horizon, a rose for you for every post i have made that supports your allegation.

    I have long given up any attempt at a meaningful exchange of ideas with FOA puppets like you and my favorite John ‘here’s Joohhnnyyy’ Winters, and merely amuse myself, in a cynical way mind you, at how you entangle seemingly intelligent people in your ridiculous commentary until they give up with despair.

    No, no! Australia does NOT have a perfect legal system at all. Like all democracies, like Italy,UK and the US she too has her problems pretty much along the same lines; judges, juries, slow systems, questionable police methods etc …….

    Dis-appointed, Mary, Candance or whoever?

    That’s why I dedicated the link to you and John ‘here’s Joohhnnyyy’ Winters about innocent people being convicted within the context that you two have been the prime movers on other blogs in discrediting the Italian judicial system as if all other nationals are faultless. That’s why Amanda is in jail, right? It’s the slack italian judiciary fueled by AmandaHaters.

    Have i forgotten to take my meds today? Please direct me where and I will; although I must confess I have resorted to reading your comments when in need of a strong laxative.

    dixi

  • Tony Del Blazo

    Jim,
    Not an original thought in your entire piece except for the concept of the Italians having a MODERN court system.

    I am sure that others will butcher you on this better than I but I do have to mention that the reason I originally got interested in this case was the notion that Italy puts people convicted of murder and possibly other crimes in solitary confinement for the first nine months of their term. Magnini asked for this in the Kircher case.

    So much for concept of a MODERN court system.

  • IVSTITIA

    I don’t think you guys can come to an agreement. Why don’t you all put it to rest and let the Italian courts take care of this case?

    You can blog all year, and get frustrated as much as you like, but in reality everybody here is powerless because the Italian judges in the end will be the one to decide.

    As a somebody who knows Italian law and procedure better than anybody here, I want you to know that the Italian judiciary enjoys and extraordinary level of independence and autonomy from the political pressure exerted by legislators and the executive. Italian judges are not elected or appointed. They become judges after a very rigorous selection process administered by the judiciary’s self governing body, the Superior Council of Magistrates. This is composed of Judges elected in part by the magistrates themselves (judges and prosecutors) in national elections, and in part it is composed of University Law professors appointed by Parliament.
    The same is true for prosecutors. Unlike in the US, where District Attorneys are appointed by Governors or elected in political elections, Italian prosecutors are selected through the same selection process used to select judges. It’s based on knowledge of the law, not on party affiliation.

    Also, not only judges and prosecutors aren’t appointed by the executive power or by the legislators, but they cannot be removed or disciplined or even transferred, except for through a motion by the same Superior Council of Magistrates adopted by majority vote.

    Interestingly Italy is the only country where the State District Attorneys (the Prosecutors by Mignini) are not members of the Executive. They also are selected, disciplined and removed by the same Superior Council.

    The Italian Constitutional framers established such powerful magistrates totally independent from political interference for a reason. Because a guy named Mussolini, used prosecutors and judges to promote his political agenda, namely to persecute political opponents. The Italian constitution, promulgated in 1948 intended to avoid such interference and abuse of power by the executive.

    Because of this, this campaign perpetrated by some elements near the Knox family will be totally useless. If their intention is to apply pressure on the Italian politicians to take action against the judges, Italian politicians simply can’t do anything about it. We’ve seen that with the investigation of the CIA and SISMI spies involved in the extraordinary rendition of Abu Omar, Italian and American spies were convicted in spite of the Italian Government criticism of the prosecutors’ investigation.

    This campaign is also having a negative effect on the Italian people. Most are not very happy with the disparaging and interference coming out of Seattle. And I heard from my relatives in Perugia, that people aren’t too happy about how their city has been portrayed. Some here might say: who cares about what people say in Perugia. Well, may I remind you that the 6 jurors will come from Perugia, not from Seattle.

    So. Keep it up. Keep putting down Perugia and Italy and their judges. But don’t forget that Amanda’s destiny is actually in the hands of the very people you’re continuously insulting in these blogs.

    “La legge e’ uguale per tutti”

  • Tony Del Balzo

    Simple solution:

    Lie detectors for EVERYONE involved including every policeman, or
    Sodium Pentothal (Truth Serum). (but not too much as its fatal.) Too many have died already.

    Instant gratification.

  • Mary H.

    Har de har har, Enzo. I am in stitches!

    “….discrediting the Italian judicial system as if all other nationals are faultless.”

    As I tried to explain to you on another blog, lo, these many moons ago, discrediting the Italian justice system is an isolated claim. It has as much to do with the faults of other national justice systems as it has to do with the fact that the sky is blue or the hypothesis that the moon is made of green cheese.

    In other words, I am not discrediting the Italian justice system “as if” anything else — I am simply discrediting the Italian justice system. Why do you presume to know what I have not written?

    Every time anyone makes any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s safe to assume they have at least as many shortcomings as the object or person they are criticizing. What the heck, we let them do it anyway. If everyone who called Amanda promiscuous had to be a virgin, well, there would be hardly anyone posting at all.

  • colonelhall

    Jim and Billy Ryan. Is there any reason why you are not attempting to use anything resembling normal punctuation?

    If you start each sentence with a capital letter and leave a gap after each full stop, your posts would be easier to read.

    I know that we all have different knowledge of grammar and nobody is perfect, but I get the impression that you are choosing not to use capitals.

    I only say this because I have given up reading what you have to say, because it is so difficult to read. Your posts are so longs so it would be a shame if you were wasting your time.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @IVSTITIA:

    “I don’t think you guys can come to an agreement. Why don’t you all put it to rest and let the Italian courts take care of this case?”

    Are you kidding?

    The Perugian police beat the shit out of Amanda; interrogated her for 40 hours straight; tricked her into a written confession [or was it 2]; made her do cartwheels; no lawyer present; no camera taping; manipulated evidence; removed evidence; introduced evidence; mis-handled evidence; invented evidence; Magini is a cuckooo; an idiot; a criminal; the jury was not sequestrated; the judge didn’t look Curt Knox in the eye; no DNA, too little DNA, wrong DNA, contaminated DNA, and ……..

    they don’t speak english!

    The fight must go on !!!

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    Ivstitia wrote: “….but in reality everybody here is powerless because the Italian judges in the end will be the one to decide…..Because of this, this campaign perpetrated by some elements near the Knox family will be totally useless.”

    These are good messages to get across to the truejustice proselytizers, who are constantly trying to frighten people into thinking the Marriott firm controls their minds and the minds of American media professionals.

    Ivsitia then wrote: “Well, may I remind you that the 6 jurors will come from Perugia, not from Seattle.

    So. Keep it up. Keep putting down Perugia and Italy and their judges. But don’t forget that Amanda’s destiny is actually in the hands of the very people you’re continuously insulting in these blogs.”

    Are you saying there is a danger the jury could be swayed by their feelings toward Seattle, or by what they read on the blogs?

  • Mary H.

    Ivstitia, did you see Bill Edelblute’s new article on the examiner — “Why does Mignini continue a “carousel” of defamation suits?”

    He writes: “Perhaps it is the cultural and legal differences between the U.S. and Italy, but it is difficult to imagine a legal system that can withstand several new, distinct cases against various parties springing from every conviction.”

  • John Winters

    colonelhall says:

    ”I only say this because I have given up reading what you have to say, because it is so difficult to read. Your posts are so longs so it would be a shame if you were wasting your time.”

    That doesn’t go for the rest of us Billy, we like the clear, punchy way you write. Not all of us need to be addressed by some ponsy git with pompous notions of linguistic superiority.

    Keep it up Billy!!

  • B. Woodward

    Mary H wrote:

    “…constantly trying to frighten people into thinking the Marriott firm controls their minds and the minds of American media professionals.”
    ————————————————-

    I don’t think the Marriott PR firm is frightening per se.

    What’s scares me is the death of investigative journalism.

    One-sided coverage is the norm now. There is no balance. You never hear the OTHER side of the story. There is no quest for truth. Just ratings & money.

    Nixon would have had 2 terms if the press corps back then was as flimsy as it is now.

  • John Winters

    Mignini is as mad as a March hare.

  • Gary

    The fact remains that we now have a prosecutor that has been found guilty of multiple counts of abuse of his job. This alone should mean all cases he prosecuted should be re-examined and the good majority of convictions overturned. If you are convicted of planting evidence as a prosecutor you should automatically be fired from your job and all cases he tried should be re-tried or just overturned. Funny how the freak was found guilty of planting evidence along with all kinds of other violations of abuse of his job yet he is still free and still able to work his job. WHAT ON EARTH KIND OF SYSTEM DO THEY HAVE OVER THERE IN ITALY???? How come Amanda has to stay in jail while on appeal? She should be allowed to go free and go back to school while her case is in appeals. Well I’ll say this much. I can guarantee that this Magini freak has planted evidence and has tailored the false confession to his made up version of events. This man needs a jail cell not an office at the attorney’s office making up more lies and planting more evidence.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    so here I am weighing whether I should or shouldn’t answer your usual dribble and in the end, for the benefit of the public interest, I said ‘you have to do it!’.

    Now, mind you, I’ve had to reduce this to basic stuff, you know, apples and oranges, so here we go.

    Mary, communication is like a ‘doughnut’; it’s made up of the solid part and the ‘hole’ in the middle. You cannot ‘NOT’ think of a doughnut without including the ‘hole’. Otherwise it would not be a doughnut.

    That’s how YOU communicate, in the main. Not just you, but, especially you.

    Let’s call what you write ‘content’. Now, what you write ‘actually’ PLUS what you DON’T write creates a ‘context’. ‘Context’ is THE doughnut; made up of the content you have written and that which you ‘HAVE NOT’.

    You use this technique to great effect; you create a ‘context’ to which we all react BUT at your convenience and calling you childishly deny the initial intended ‘message’ without taking responsibility.

    Here is an innocuous example which illustrates what I mean. Note, that the ‘unsaid’ is in brackets:

    ‘the jury was NOT sequestrated!’ [ therefore, italian juries are manipulated, unreliable, easily influenced, irresponsible etc, and as a CAUSE she is in jail. Your intended message? Amanda did not get a fair trial .....].

    The TRUTH: juries are NOT sequestrated in the US and other countries either, BUT of course the likes of Egan skilfully leaves this out; experience has taught him that gullibility is heavily entrenched in most of the public’s DNA, especially Seattle.

    But, whilst one reader ‘reacts’ to the obvious omission:’ juries are NOT sequestrated in the US either’; other pinheads and dipsticks who don’t know any better post comments agreeing with the ‘ unsaid ‘ ; italian juries, the judiciary is a failure, not ‘per se ‘ , but as a CAUSE for finding Knox guilty.

    Then, when someone like myself [an AmandaHater] calls you on your posts:

    You simply say:

    ‘Why do you presume to know what I have not written?’

    Mary H, could it be because you yelled out doughnut to us?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    here’s Jooohhhnnnyyyy ….

    unbelievable, like clockwork, you are !

    But, who are you kidding ? @Gary said: that’s really you, isn’t it ?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Shane:

    “I must be missing something.”

    yep, you got that part right!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @jim said:

    hey man !

    please, would you kindly leave this blog immediately ????

    you are making too much sense, you AmandaHater, you !!!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @brickhouse said:

    Man, spot on !!!

    dixi

  • PhanuelB

    DStudent:”That you can’t find this record is the direct result of a defense motion, rather than some covert wrongdoing on the part of the Italian government!!!”

    False. What the defense has a right to under discovery is not the same what is presented to a jury. I would by the way be curious to see the judge’s instructions to the jury, just to make sure the basics are there — no watching media; only what is presented in court, etc.

    You may well be correct that certain of her statements (a very small part of what actually was said and asked) were ruled by a higher court to be inadmissible — meaning the jury can’t consider them. That single out of context document is a very different thing from the full interrogation record. Whether that means they are stricken from the record or sealed is another question.

    Interrogations were not an important part of the US cases cited above (OJ, Jackson, etc) but in Amanda’s case they form the foundation of the argument for those who think she did it.

    Here is a link to a New York State Court showing how records — including deposition testimony — can be downloaded by anyone with an internet connection.

    http://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/iscroll/SQLData.jsp?IndexNo=601305-2007

    The defense has asked for all electronic records of her interrogation. If every one of them isn’t provided, the entire trial would have no validity in a civilized society. If they were never made it’s because a corrupt and incompetent prosecution team didn’t want the world to know the truth.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Billy:

    I agree with John ‘here’s Jooohhhnnnyyy’ Winters:

    Keep it up Billy!

    …. and while it’s up, do you happen, per chance, do be anywhere in the vicinity of ‘here’s Jooohhhnnnyyy’ Winters?

    ‘Coz, there’s a small favour I would like you to do for all of us …..

    dixi

  • colonelhall

    JOHN WINTERS: “Not all of us need to be addressed by some ponsy git with pompous notions of linguistic superiority.”

    Although there are many people here with whom I disagree. You are the one who comes across as a really are a nasty piece of work! I politely pointed out that these guys are posting but not getting their message across because their style of punctuation makes their posts difficult to read.

    I pointed out that we all have different levels of literary skills and tried to make my point politely. There was nothing approaching “inguistic superiority” in my post.

    Why do you feel it necessary to insult people. like this?

  • colonelhall

    Typo error in the last post, but I guess that you can see that I meant

    “You are the one who comes across as a really nasty piece of work!

  • Shane

    Enzo wrote: “yep, you got that part right!

    dixi”

    Goodness, such sparkling wit!

  • IVSTITIA

    Not much time for me to be on blogs. Too much work this week.

    To answer to Mary H. These blogs are not reaching the Italians. The only Italians who read them are probably Italian Americans like me who live in the US.

    Also very little chance that the potential jurors read blogs, including Italian ones. The requirements to serve as jurors, including age requirements, are such that the age groups who use blogs in Italy cannot serve in a jury. In the Knox/Sollecito trial only 2 jurors were under 40 yrs old , the youngest (incidentally a trial lawyer) was 36. Blogs participation in the age groups over 40 is rather low in Italy. Computer use is lower than in the US, especially for those older age groups, although mobile phone penetration is much higher than the US (but not too many access the net via the mobile phone to blog).

    However, I presume that your target audience is not the Italian public opinion in Italy, but rather the American one. The hope of those who defend Knox is probably to convince enough people in the US to rise up and start protesting with the local US politicians so that they, in turn, will complain to the Italian authorities.

    A complaint by US officials to the Italian authorities or even to the press (as it happened with Maria Cantwell) will definitely reach the Italian public opinion. Sen. Cantwell’s comments made front news in Italy, and the decision not to name the Seattle park after Perugia (which already has a park dedicated to Seattle) was front news in Perugia (and back page news in the rest of Italy). Italians at large were very p.o.’d about the first one, even in Berlusconi’s newspaper, which is notoriously very critical of the Italian judiciary due to the fact they are trying to convict their master (Berlusconi). The second news about the park was received very negatively in Perugia, hence the intervention by the Perugia mayor. Actually there are now in Facebook, some Perugia bloggers who are calling for the end of the sister city relationship with Seattle.

    First of all both the judiciary and the police are not under the control of City Government, unlike in the US. The Polizia di Stato and the Carabinieri are both national law enforcement agencies much like the FBI, and therefore totally outside of the purview of the Mayor and the City of Perugia.

    But also these types of interference and criticism always makes people become very nationalistic. It’s one thing to debate the evidence, it’s another to trash the entire Italian institutions. The same thing would happen if a foreign nation and their officials started criticizing the US institutions.

    That is why the lawyers defending Amanda were totally P.O.’d at Maria Cantwell’s remarks and her call to H. Clinton to intervene. It doesn’t help their cause when the judges, who are the ones who will ultimately decide on AK and RS’s fate, are portrayed as a bunch of incompetent and corrupt actors of a corrupt and unfair system. Good luck gaining their symphathy with that kind of talk.

  • billyryan

    mignini is suing more people his lust for the limelight will probally cause him to make mistakes.there are a lot of people in italy now who know exactly the thug amanda was up against.the last chapter in any book about a thug like mignini was always about the men who brought him down.it is hard to deny now that he is out to destroy as many innocent lives as he can

  • colonelhall

    Billy Ryan, I see that you still choose to do away with punctuation. Do you not want people to understand what you are saying? Just a capital to start a sentence and then a gap after each full stop and I guarantee, more people will take notice.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    HillyBillyRyan, I’m sure you went to a jesuit school to learn how to write. You’re just as bad as Amanda.

    Mignini is a good man. There should be more prosecutors like him. Unfortunately you liberals don’t appreciate people who are tough on crime. You just want murderers, drug addicts, pushers and sex offenders in the streets of America. There are already many of them on the loose, and now you even want to import some from overseas, like Amanda Knox, who’s all of the above.

  • John Winters

    colonelhall says:

    ”You are the one who comes across as a really nasty piece of work!”

    Which is kind of interesting for me to ponder coz I’ve endeavoured when writing on these blogs in Amanda’s defense, to be as reflecting as possible.

    You personally are not in my mind when I say this colonelhall. I am really thinking of the kind of people (and there are plenty of them when you venture abroad), who cast Amanda in the same light as Myra Hindley, and feel that she is a legitimate target for personal humiliation and insult of the most disgusting order.

    This is something up with which I will not put because Amanda is not like Myra Hindley who was guilty of the crimes she was charged with.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    John Sphyncters:

    Amanda is guilty of the crimes whe was charged which. A jury decided so, and the appeal will probably confirm it.

    Amanda will stay in prison for several more years, because that’s where she belongs. Get used to that idea.

  • @”PhanuelD Student”

    Amanda’s defense team ensured that the interrogation records were kept OUT of evidence at trial.

    They had to, for in that interrogation Amanda admitted to a role in the murder and accused an black innocent man.

    To wit, it is Amanda that wanted and NEEDED the record hidden, not the prosecution.

    The court granted HER request.

    Now you turn around and accuse the court of corruption.

    If court had allowed it in evidence, you would have cried foul again.

    With you, they’re damed if they do and damned if they don’t – a sure sign that you’re a dunce.

  • PhanuelB

    @IVSTITIA:”It doesn’t help their cause when the judges, who are the ones who will ultimately decide on AK and RS’s fate, are portrayed as a bunch of incompetent and corrupt actors of a corrupt and unfair system.”

    Too bad if they don’t like it. There are reasons that democracies have free speech. Does anyone really think that it’s OK for a judge to find somebody guilty because they’re angry about outside criticism? And what are we supposed to do when specific people if not the entire system take a wrong turn?

    The Italian justice system is corrupt in Amanda’s case because:
    1) The prosecutor has been convicted of corruption in an unrelated case.
    2) His jailing of Mario Spezi was motivated by self-interest. The idea that Spezi was interfering with a criminal investigation is a joke.
    3) Doug Preston’s firsthand account of his interrogation by Mignini. The idea that Preston was interfering with a murder investigation is a joke. The interrogation was motivated by the self-interest.
    4) Italian police have not provided electronic recordings of Amanda’s interrogation because they don’t want anyone to know what was actually said or asked.
    5) The public does not have full access to the trial record which impedes their right to determine the quality of justice.
    6) Patrizia Stefanoni only provided the infamous “Too Low” notes when compelled to do so toward the end of the trial.
    7) Mignini intimidated Francesca Bene into not talking about a local drug addict she had seen only hours before the discovery of Meredith’s body with enough blood on him to require an ambulance. See the Afterword of Preston’s book, The Monster of Florence.

    The Italian Police are incompetent because:
    1) They failed to recover the bra clasp until 47 days after the murder.
    2) Patrizia Stefanoni was not properly trained in Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA testing
    3) They destroyed at least two hard drives that contained important evidence
    4) They failed to arrest Rudy Guede four days before the murder even though they knew of his involvement in three separate breaking and entering incidents. Meredith Kercher would still be alive if the Italian police had done their job and taken him out of circulation prior to the murder.
    5) They failed to examine the drain pipes in Raffaele’s house. If their theories are true they would have found blood and bleach there.
    6) They failed to protect the crime scene from a break-in in Mar-08 while it was still secured and under their control.
    7) They have failed to take DNA samples from the individual identified by Francesca Bene to see if his DNA was at the crime scene.
    8) They have failed to properly investigate the individual identified by Francesca Bene.

  • Matthew McCarthy

    It’s ironic anyone who thinks Knox was falsely accused overlooks the fact that she falsely accused her employer – Patrick Lumumba – of the murder. He was jailed for 2 weeks, but I guess he’s not cute enough for anyone to care about.
    The court ordered Knox to pay him $60,000 – that’s where the funds raised should go.

  • PhanuelB

    @DStudent:”Amanda’s defense team ensured that the interrogation records were kept OUT of evidence at trial.”

    Utterly and absolutely false. The defense has repeatedly asked for the FULL interrogation record and it has not been provided to them. The documents they sought to keep out the the trial were edited portions of the larger record which the prosecution had choosen. You can’t look at what somebody says without knowing what they were asked and in what context.

    An impartial jury cannot pass judgment on any interrogation evidence unless the defense has access to EVERTHING that occurred during the interrogation.

  • Kim Bailey

    PhanuelB “An impartial jury cannot pass judgment on any interrogation evidence unless the defense has access to EVERTHING that occurred during the interrogation.”

    Nonsense. The courts in every country regularly disallow evidences. Many times it is because of some minor human error like forgetting to get a search warrant. Happens all the time in the US.

  • Kim Bailey

    PhanuelB said; “The Italian justice system is corrupt in Amanda’s case because:… Doug Preston’s firsthand account of his interrogation by Mignini. The idea that Preston was interfering with a murder investigation is a joke. The interrogation was motivated by the self-interest.”

    Admittedly I did not read your post to the end, but the above stupidity had to be responded to urgently. Preston’s account proves nothing about the Kercher case. What Preston’s story proves is that the Italian justice system works and very speedily. He was questioned one day and the next day he left Italy, because he was innocent. If Knox was innocent she to would be back in the US.

  • PhanuelB

    @KimBailey:”Nonsense. The courts in every country regularly disallow evidences.”

    Prosecution evidence, absolutely. Defense evidence, almost never.

    If some statement in an interrogation is important to the prosecution, the defense has a right to everything and anything that is known about the entire interrogation, particularly where there are issues of duress, coercion, or worse. That’s intuitively obvious..

  • Honesty – Please

    “PhanuelD Student” said

    The defense has repeatedly asked for the FULL interrogation record and it has not been provided to them.

    —————————————-

    You are dead wrong.

    Show us a source for your claim!

    Amanda confesses to a role in the murder and accuses an innocent black man in that interrogation.

    Amanda appealed to the Supreme Court to keep that interrogation OUT of her trial.

    They gave her what she wanted.

    And now you claim it’s a ‘cover-up’! Absurd!

    The only one seeking to hide the interrogation is Amanda.

  • Kim Bailey

    PhanuelB, explain to me what “almost never” means in legal terms and then I will reply to your post.

  • Honesty – Please

    When asked which female cop ‘cuffed’ her on the head twice, she:

    a) could not provide the officer’s name; &

    b) could not provide a basic physical description of the officer.

    Ever heard the adage that “lies have no details’?

    Amanda is Seattle’s answer Casey Anthony.

  • Kim Bailey

    PhanuelB, Give me the legal definition for “intuitively obvious” too. If you have time.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB: You are corrupt and incompetent. If you were Amanda’s lawyer there is no doubt she’d lose all appeals.

    Amanda’s and Raffaele’s lawyers, as well as lots of Italian legal experts, found no fault in the trial proceedings. Amanda’s lawyers may not have been happy with the verdict, but they didn’t question the fairness of the trial, and actually said it was conducted fairly.

    You can think whatever you want, but it won’d change anything. You are a worthless piece of merda.

    Next case please!

  • Honesty – Please

    All this talk about Doofus Preston is a joke.

    They let him go!

    His story is proof that Mignini does NOT push for wrongful convictions to ‘save face.’

  • PhanuelB

    @KimBailey:”He[Preston] was questioned one day and the next day he left Italy, because he was innocent. If Knox was innocent she to would be back in the US.”

    Yes Preston was innocent and he left Italy the next day because he took seriously the threats of a corrupt public official. Preston’s account of his encounter with Mignini has everything to do with understanding Amanda’s interrogation.

    Here is the first hand account of Doug Preston on his interrogation by Mignini. Preston is an accomplished author who was in Italy writing a book about a set of serial killings in Florence during the 80′s. The idea that he was interfering with a murder investigation is preposterous.

    “I was required to appear before Mignini, where he and several policemen interrogated me for almost three hours, in Italian, with no interpreter and no access to a lawyer. During the interrogation, Mignini accused me of several serious crimes, including planting a gun as false evidence to mislead police, obstruction of justice, and being an accessory to murder. He hinted that I might have had doings with a satanic cult. He demanded I confess to these crimes and said that if I did not, he would indict me for reticenza, reticence, a form of perjury. When I refused to confess to these ludicrous and patently false accusations…”

    “In my entire journalistic career I have not experienced the kind of abuse of prosecutorial power as I witnessed in Italy.”

  • jiminy

    PhallusB = just another Grafton fucktard.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB: Read what actually happened.
    He was notified by the prosecutor that he had rendered false statements to him and therefore he was in violation of the law. As a result Mignini told Preston that he could not proceed with the interrogation and that he was advised to seek legal representation.

    Rendering false statements while you’re being interrogated as a witness is an offence. Doug Preston was guilty of that. He did right to leave the country the next day though. He was probably telling lies to the prosecutor exactly like Amanda did, and you can actually go to jail for that.

    Amanda is guilty like sin! And so is Raffaele. They’re two coke heads drug addict killers. Nobody needs scum like that walking in the streets. Let them rot in jail.

  • billyryan

    mignini is now stepping on a lot of toes it is only a matter of time before these people unite and his come uppance can not be far away.al_fucking_useless mabey my grammer is not all it could be,but i dont have a dark side about wanting to torture young girls. i bet you know well amanda is innocent but this is what makes this case so appealing to you.having cried yourself to sleep for years over been too young to have joined the varteen ss this case is allowing you to live out your fantasies. I congratulate planuelB on your excellent posts you can always tell how al_shit is struggling when he posts under a few of his alaises. amanda will be home to a hero welcome in 2010 mignini will be in jail and al_suck_himself will have climed back down whatever shithole he climbed up out of

  • daisy

    You guys are a hoot! Keep it coming.

  • Kim Bailey

    PhanuelB, If I commit murder in Utah I should go free because the same prosecutor who questioned me wrongly accused a prisoner in Guantanamo Bay. I don’t care if they pulled out all 10 of Preston’s nails – his case has nothing to do with the Kercher case. Even if what DP says is true it still proves nothing for AK’s defense.

    Raffaele refused to testify for Knox or even corroborate her alibi. There is a recording on YouTube, in Knox’s own words, she says Raffaele is a liar – regarding the night of the murder. She is asking the courts to believe that she spent the entire night with Raffaele, then in the same statement she says he is lying about that night. She is where she belongs.

  • colonelhall

    Billy Ryan: ” mabey my grammer is not all it could be”
    Nobody’s perfect, but Just try using sentences. Take my advice. Start each one with a capital, end each one with a full stop and then leave a space.

    Try it – it will work wonders. People may be swayed by your arguments. They may all start to clamour for the release of young Amanda and it would all be down to you!

  • colonelhall

    John Winters – Your writing skills seem to be fine, yet still people seem to be avers to your powers of reasoning. Here’s my tip for you – Try to be pleasant for a change. Even Mary can do that!

  • Enzo Zoff

    @billyryan:

    What vast improvement on your previous posts!

    …..keep up the good work, you hear ?

  • PhanuelB

    First some requested sources:

    Doug Preston, CNN Anderson Cooper 360, 4-Dec-09: “Well, let me talk about this interrogation. The police first claim that they’d lost the videotape or the audiotape of the interrogation. And then they claim that they never made one to begin with, and then they claimed that they don’t even have a transcript of this interrogation.”

    Tim Egan, NY Times, 12-Jun-09: “The duress argument is crucial in this case. Knox, who is 21 and a study-abroad college student from the University of Washington in Seattle, was subject to an all-night grilling without a lawyer or a professional translator. The transcript, if one does exist, of that interrogation has never been made public. We have only the word of a prosecutor who is now on trial for his own misconduct in unrelated cases. And we now have Knox’s testimony.”

    CNN and the NY Times are reliable sources.

    The request by the defense for the interrogation record? See the record of the case. Preston says it’s there. Of course that is complicated by the fact that Italian law does not permit full public access to the trial record.

  • Answer This

    There are a lot of blogs attacking people who were involved on all sides in this case. Most, if not all, of the evidence presented was circumstantial, and based on this, it would only take ONE concrete piece of information to provide an alibi for AK and RS.
    One, thats all. If it was there then it would come out, everything else has.
    I’m tired of hearing, ‘mis-handling of evidence’, ‘corruption’, ‘cover-up’, ‘contamination’, ‘abusive interrogation’, and all the other things that are bandied about as if they have been shown to have any real substance to them.

    Lets see a witness, a phone call, a story by AK or RS that can be verified independently. Giving each other alibies !!!???? They cant even do that, drugs or no drugs, even though they had two years to think about it.
    I feel really sorry for Meredith and her family. I also feel sorry for Amanda and Rafaelle’s parents. They are fighting, like any parents would, for their kids. The publicity, the PR campaignes, the costs, the hangers on (FOAK), unfortunatly these probably forced Amanda down a path she might not necessarily have taken, and I cannot see any closure on this case for a very long time, if ever, for anyone.

  • Wattle Watcher

    I’ve finally found a photo that rivals the air-brushed/30 years out-of-date “glamour shot” that Anne Bremner uses.

    Candass Dumpsay has put up a photo on her webpage that is not only taken from 20 feet away with a soft focus, but squished in from the sides to create a thinning effect!

    I’ve seen the UK documentary, Candy – you can’t keep that up – the eye bags, jowls, big nose and even bigger wattle are plain as day.

    Fudging your graduation dates to suggest you’re under 40 doesn’t do anything to erase the 60 years on your face and neck!

    I wonder why she is so comfortable with misrepresentation…

    It’s an asset, though, when working for “The Friends of Amanda” PR machine.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @PhanuelB said:

    Reliable sources?

    Doug Preston, Tim egan, CNN, NYT – and don’t forget;

    Mr & MRs Knox, Amanda’s uncle and aunty, Janet Bremner, and Ciolino of 48hours !!!!

    well, that pretty well does it for me! I’ve just seen the light … Amanda is innocent !

    finally, I can get on with living !

    dixi

  • jiminy

    PallusB said

    CNN and the NY Times are reliable sources.
    ————————————–

    CNN didn’t say that, Doofus Doug did.

    The NYT bit was an OPINION piece by Egan (a Seattle-based member of Amanda’s PR team).

    Do you grasp the difference between fact-based reporting & op-ed pieces?

    Is everyone in Grafton as dumb as you are?

  • Keioni

    OK, guys, I’m 15 and a high school student in Oklahoma. My grandma talks about this case and got me interested. I have some questions but I’m not sure how to ask them because most of you can be a little, well more than a little, rude.

    Really, can I ask Ivsititia some questions and not get snapped at?

    Does the Superior Counsel have any control about Mignini? Do they have any control over any prosecutor?

    I wonder because from what you wrote I got the idea that no one in Italy has any control over these guys. I don’t mean exactly that, but do they have to answer to anybody or tell reasons for whatever they do? Can’t they become like the leader of the town, higher and stronger than anybody else? I guess I don’t get it.

  • Kim Bailey

    @PhanuelB, If you want to talk about Preston why don’t you go and start a new thread. This one is for the Kercher case, and that ignorant funding for Knox.

    Before you go one thing you forgot to mention that Preston said, “my phone rang it was the Italian police. They said ‘where are you? we are coming to get you now’” If you believe that any police would call someone and warn him that they are coming to get him for murder, then it is no wonder you believe Knox is innocent. Preston would say anything to get his face on camera and to sell another book.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mario Spezi is a worthless reporter at La Nazione of Florence during the early ’80s. Spezi became fascinated by the Monster because it gave him a chance to become famous.

    Florence has very little violent crime (even less in those years). The monsters, by killing a couple each summer, practically doubled the murder rate of Florence for the entire year and that was a chance for him to gain notoriety.

    Spezi came up with his theory of a lone killer, because that fits the imagination of most, since most serial killers are lone wolves. But there were 3 of them (at least), all convicted and now dead. One of them confessed, gave very specific details, and implicated the other two (who never cooperated with the authorities).

    Another one, Pacciani, the first one of the three arrested, had killed before, in 1951 at the age of 26. He had caught his 14 y.o. girlfriend (that would be illegal in Wash. state, but not in Italy where the age of consent is 14) having sex inside a car with another guy (the other guy was 41 y.o., this is also illegal in Wash. state, but not in Italy since the age of consent is 14). Pacciani got mad and got inside the car and killed the 41 y.o. guy. (This is illegal also in Italy) And since he wasn’t too happy with his girlfriend either, he decided to rape her next to the corpse of the other guy (This is also illegal in Italy, in spite of the age of consent being 14).

    Pacciani spent 13 years in prison for this crime committed in 1951.

    He was arrested in Mercatale, near Florence, after several witnesses saw him near the crime scenes. The police found in his garden a bullet from the same pistol (beretta22) used in all MOF crimes. During the trial in the 1990′s his wife and daughters testify that over the years he had raped both wife and his two daughters multiple times, often using zucchini and other vegetables.

    The above Mr. Pacciani, and his 2 friends, according to Spezi were not the monsters. Yet one of the 3 friends confessed and gave details that nobody else could know. He also confessed in court that there were people “very up high” who were commissioning those crimes and purchasing the body parts ablated from the female victims. He never had the courage to make names. The police also noticed large deposits of money in these three monsters’ bank accounts, although all of them had very modest means. One was a farmer (Pacciani), one was a mail carrier (he took the term going postal to the extreme) and one I don’t remember.

    Doug Preston believed Spezi’s theory of a lone wolf, and that those 3 were innocent. Then explain to me the detailed confession of one of the 3, the bullet in the garden of another, and the witnesses who saw Pacciani near one of the crime scenes holding a gun once and getting on his moped near the crime scene of another of the MOF murder. And one of the witnesses knew him since he was from the same little town.

    There were also anonymous letters sent to the police that there were satanic rituals being held, which required the use of a woman’s vagina ablated from women killed in the act of making love during a full moon night (yes the killings happened that way).

    So, were the investigators wrong and Spezi right? Well, obviously the courts and the supreme court agreed with the investigators and not with Spezi.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    hillybillyryan wrote this to me:

    “having cried yourself to sleep for years over been too young to have joined the varteen ss this case is allowing you to live out your fantasies.”

    Could any of you be so kind to translate the above for me in an understandable language? English, Italian, Spanish and French will do.

    Thank you.

  • Mary H.

    Enzo, when you responded to my post, why didn’t you use the example of discrediting the Italian justice system, instead of coming up with a new example that I didn’t use?

    I’m not sure whether you were trying to actually respond to my post or to change the subject. Your original complaint was that I was trying to discredit the Italian justice systems AS IF the American justice system is problem-free. I explained to you that the AS IF wasn’t relevant.

    When you changed the example to the subject of the jury not being sequestered, you chose an entirely different type of claim. You state that when someone claims the jury was not sequestered, they are saying that their message is “….the Italian juries are manipulated, unreliable, easily influenced, irresponsible etc, and as a CAUSE she is in jail.”?

    I’ll gladly give you that one — that is very similar to the implied/intended message behind the claim that the jury was not sequestered.

    But for you to say I am trying to discredit the Italian justice system AS IF the American justice system is problem-free, well, that’s quite a leap. My message is not hidden or implied; it is not related to anything other than that the Italian justice system has problems. You could have easily claimed that I am trying to discredit the Italian justice system AS IF I have a degree in international law.

    When you try to read meaning into a person’s claim and then argue that their claim is invalid because of the meaning you have read into it, it’s called a Straw Man argument. As if you didn’t know.

    Stay focused, man!

  • Mary H.

    Kim, have you found out about the mop and bucket, yet?

  • John Winters

    Al wants a tranny……..

    ”aving a cried yoself to slip forrr a manny years a and a been a too yung a forrr joinin thee waffen SS
    this a kise a cann a elp fulfil a yo fantasees about a
    young a girls uh uh? uh?”

    Hows that?

  • Mary H.

    Ivstitia, I also don’t have much time at the moment, but I wanted to quickly reposnd to your post about public opinion.

    You wrote: “But also these types of interference and criticism always makes people become very nationalistic. It’s one thing to debate the evidence, it’s another to trash the entire Italian institutions. The same thing would happen if a foreign nation and their officials started criticizing the US institutions.”

    An inherent aspect of this case is that we cannot debate the evidence without discussing the Italian legal system, because it was within its structure that Mignin was able to get away with everrything he has (almost) gotten away with.

    That said, I do agree with you, it would be better to stay focused on matters that are not about trashing other countries’ populations.

    On the other hand, it has been common in modern history for politicians to bow to the outside pressure of popular disapproval. I imagine the hope of, say, a boycott, is that if the Italians don’t want the Americans (and others) hating them for unjustly imprisoning Amanda and Raffaele, they will let their leaders know. Mignini may be immune to interference from many of his superiors, but he can’t be immune to interference from all of them.

  • The Amanda Knox Corporation.

    Matthew McCarthy says:

    ”It’s ironic anyone who thinks Knox was falsely accused overlooks the fact that she falsely accused her employer – Patrick Lumumba – of the murder. He was jailed for 2 weeks, but I guess he’s not cute enough for anyone to care about.
    The court ordered Knox to pay him $60,000 – that’s where the funds raised should go.”

    No these funds are going towards costs of expensive attorneys and so on. Then after Amanda’s appeal and release, the money from the book and the film, and the film of the book, and the film sequel that just about makes it, and the third sequel that bombs, together with sales of ‘Amanda dolls,’ ‘Amanda sex toys’ etc. will be kept in a slush fund for Amanda’s future while at the same time she will be declared bankrupt until the heats off.

  • Gary

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh
    I see you had nothing to say about my last comment and I’m assuming that’s because you know I’m correct. Do you believe that freaky Magini should be allowed to keep his job after planting evidence? How do you know that he did not plant evidence against Amanda? (Not that there is any that proves her guilty except his forced confession.) I can guarantee that freak planted evidence in her case and I also believe that he used the media to demonize her. Where are you from? Let me guess Italy. When are you going to face the fact that Magini planted evidence and that he made up almost all of what he presented in court. When are you going to realize that the freak is obsessed with satanic rituals? Why has he used this theory in more than one of his cases and why was his found guilty of planting evidence and many other wrong doings when it came to his job? Tell me would you want this freak prosecuting you in a murder trial? I bet not. Well I hope someday you fall victim to this freaks web of lies and that he puts you away for the rest of your life when you are innocent. What will be your opinion of him then? Let’s see!!! I suppose you will still find him to be one of the greatest and upstanding people in the world. I hope that doesn’t happen to you, but if it does and you are put away for life for a crime you didn’t commit then it will serve you right for all the great things you said about him. What you going to be saying when you go to trial and all this false evidence starts coming out that was fabricated and planted by the freak against you? You are in a fantasy world and it seems to me that you are related to Magini. As far as you saying that Gueda took good legal advice and that’s why his sentence was cut in half is total craziness because this man knows that he is guilty and Amanda and Solechito know that they are innocent. So what you are saying is they should have lied and said they were involved so that they would spend less time in prison for crimes they did not commit. Your reasoning is totally off the wall and you need to recheck you’re self. Well good luck in your fantasy world and I’ll be looking forward to the day that I can say Ha Ha to you when Amanda and Solchito are exonerated. I will bet my life that they will be exonerated in the end and you know they will too. See you when I can tell you I told you so.

  • John Winters

    colonel says:

    ”John Winters – people seem to be avers to your powers of reasoning. Here’s my tip for you – Try to be pleasant for a change. Even Mary can do that!……

    ….quite literally just 4 posts after his friend Al Fakh Youdoug has said:

    ”Amanda is guilty like sin! And so is Raffaele. They’re two coke heads drug addict killers. Nobody needs scum like that walking in the streets. Let them rot in jail.”

    Very pleasant!

  • John Winters

    Al Fakhyourdog says:

    ”There were also anonymous letters sent to the police that there were satanic rituals being held, which required the use of a woman’s vagina ablated from women killed in the act of making love during a full moon night (yes the killings happened that way).”

    ”Ablated?”

    What the hell do you mean by that!!?

  • Mary H.

    Could you guys please not talk about this? :) Thank you.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Sphyncters:

    You obviously are not too well versed with surgical terms. Only people who work in health care like me or serial killers like the MOF or Raffaele would know the meaning of ablation.

    Ablate (ablation) refers to the surgical removal of an organ, body part, appendix or whatever.

    The Monsters of Florence (or maybe a doctor who some people still suspect was with them, probably Narducci) used to kill the couples having sex in the car at night in the countryside around Florence, then, after they killed them they would ‘ablate’ (=surgically remove) the woman’s left breast and the entire vaginal area. According to the confession of one of the 3 convicted, and according to some anonymous letters received by investigators, these body parts were used by some group of sick puppies for some stupid satanic rituals. Maybe they ate that stuff thinking it was an aphrodisiac or something. Anyway, that is what Mignini and Giuttari wanted to further investigate when Dr. Narducci was found in the lake. But the big chief prosecutors in Florence put all kind of obstacles on their effort to further inquire into that lead. Florentines (including me) speculate that among those crazy puppies there might have been some politician or someone “really up high”, like the self confessed Monster (Giancarlo Lotti) said in court.

    Anyway Mignini and Giuttari (the chief of mobile squad in Florence who was also indicted with Mignini) weren’t too happy about those people telling them to keep hush and let go of that new lead and so that’s probably why they decided to wiretap the chief of police and some other people who tried to stop the investigation (including some journalists). Maybe they wanted to see who was behind the whole story who was trying to bury the investigation on the senders of the monsters (the sick puppies).

    Now, John, don’t spread rumors that Berlusconi might have been part of that sect. He’ll sue you for defamation if you do. Ok?

    Anyway. I’ll stop here otherwise Mary H. will be totally grossed out.

  • Paul K

    There’s something pretty tragic about reading the posts on this site, a lot of very strongly-held anti-Knox family views and tragically little compromise. The Knox family are, I suspect, behaving exactly how many of us would if placed in a similar situation. I don’t agree with their stance but I feel sorry for them. I’m from Britain and maybe have a slightly more detached view than those from Seattle or Perugia, but I think it’s crystal-clear that there was sufficient evidence to convict Amanda. The Italian legal system does, of course, have its flaws but also has a comforting amount of decomcratic process inbuilt, and the appeal process is comprehensive and thorough. Logic, precedent (and lobbying for early release) dictates that the truth will soon surface in a case involving three convicted prisoners. Sollecito is already displaying ‘mental health problems’ in relation to his incarnation and this is an interesting twist. The Italian legal system also has compassion inbuilt (unlike the American system, but we won’t go there!) and a full confession from him would open the prison gates sooner and release a floodgate of truth from all involved. Anyway, I got a bit sidetracked there. The real reason I’m posting was to voice my utter, utter amazement that anybody could be so socially inept, ignorant and insensitive as to host a ‘comedy night’ in such circumstances. Staggeringly bad taste, despite the fact there were ‘no jokes about the Kercher family or Italy’. Jesus wept.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H, Candance or whatever:

    You say:
    ‘Enzo, when you responded to my post, why didn’t you use the example of discrediting the Italian justice system, instead of coming up with a new example that I didn’t use?’

    because, MaryH, I was trying to keep it simple for you!

    I must apologise to you; my take on you was that you were a slippery, cunning, obnoxious sophist stalling every piece of worthwhile commentary and genarally causing havoc with every blog on Knox.But after careful review, I am know pretty much convinced that you’re simply a sandwich short of a picnic lunch.

    I thought that as a FOA puppet your sole objective was to distort, manipulate, distract and confuse posts.But, lo, you ACTUALLY believe your own crap! In your mind, and your mind only, you’re a legend! Like you ACTUALLY believe that your dribble will make a difference to K/S’s outcome. Does Amanda know this?

    Get this: arguably, 3 of the best criminal lawyers were representing K/S; S is italian; his father an influential doctor, S’s siter was a lieutanant in the italian police force; 2 US embassy officials present; dozens of international journalists; daily media scrutiny; expert legal opinions; 19 different judges; 104 pages of judgement – and in all of this, wait for it, everyone missed what Mignini got away with ?

    Except, Mary H who is now going to tell us within the context of the failings of the italian legal system, what Mignini did or didn’t do in ANOTHER case, years ago. WAS there a miniscule of allegation of an abuse of office in Knox’s case?

    NO!

    WAS there any complaint lodged or even voiced by the defence attorneys?

    NO!

    IS there any RELEVANCE to the Knox case?

    NO!

    But none of this will stop MAry H from spinning her weave of crap. It won’t matter how many times in clear simple language you point this out to her she will like a 3 year old soil her nappies and then cry when you try to clean her up.
    In summary, an ‘infantile’s will to power’ is our MAry H.

    Stay focused, with you?

    No thanks, I’ll opt for the 3 year old; there ‘hope’ lies.

    dixi

  • jim

    Enzoff or rather pissoff, i read judge michel report that subjected amanda to the trial. my facts are based on it, not some reporter or columnist. hey mr, enzoff ignorant dicks like u will never get it…. she is proven a murderer . i dont love or support murderer. i am not her hater but i believe in justice for that poor victim. you are just an ignorant asshole for telling me to leave becuz u cant take the truth. anyone whoever supports that amanda , the white trash has her blood on their hand. she is proven guilty by a a civilzed court with 20 judges who looked at the case over 2 yrs. u get it. u get the f out the blog asshole, killer supporeter!

  • jim

    del balzo, why shuld i discredit italian court, its part of european union. its not some third world court . do u believe in american court system AS ALL FAIR where judges are elected buy politicians . in italy judges are selected by the supreme judicial council, not by the government like in US.there is more corruption in american court system,why do u believe in their verdicts in cases like oj simpson, scott peterson and so forth?

  • jim

    mary H I READ THIS CASE FROM JUDGE MICHELI report, not some reporters. u are just ignoring the facts just to make urself believe what u want to believe.go read judge micheli report, this is the judge who subjected her to the trial. she is guilty for sure and will rot in that hole forever

  • Mary H.

    I have a couple of (sincere) questions for the Italian speakers about Judge Micheli’s report. First, I have looked through some parts of it, and it seems to me to be mostly directed at Rudy Guede. Am I looking at the wrong report? Where in there does it actually spell out the parts Amanda and Raffaele allegedly played in the murder?

    This is the one I have been looking at:

    http://www.penale.it/page.asp?mode=1&IDPag=750

    Second, there has been a widely publicized quote from the report to the effect that the judge said “someone opened the door to Rudy Guede and that person could only have been Amanda Knox.” But from the translation I was reading, it seemed more like the judge said “someone opened the door to Rudy Guede and that person could not have been Meredith Kercher.”

    How do you know when K. stands for Kercher and when it stands for Knox?

    Thank you for your assistance!

  • colonelhall

    Paul K – thank you for your contribution a welcome piece of sanity here!

  • Mary H.

    Enzo wrote: “Get this: arguably, 3 of the best criminal lawyers were representing K/S; S is italian; his father an influential doctor, S’s siter was a lieutanant in the italian police force; 2 US embassy officials present; dozens of international journalists; daily media scrutiny; expert legal opinions; 19 different judges; 104 pages of judgement – and in all of this, wait for it, everyone missed what Mignini got away with?”

    Current number of people Mignini is suing or investigating for acts of speech:

    Eleven

    http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/

  • Jeff L.

    Mary H. said:

    I have a couple of (sincere) questions for the Italian speakers about Judge Micheli’s report. First, I have looked through some parts of it, and it seems to me to be mostly directed at Rudy Guede. Am I looking at the wrong report?
    —————————————-

    The “report” you refer to is the ratio of Judge Micheli that sentenced Rudy Guede to 30 years.

    It flowed from Rudy’s “fast-track” trial by judge alone. Hence, its focus on Rudy, rather than Amanda & Raffaele.

    In contrast to their accomplice Rudy, Amanda & Raffaele elected trial by jury, a much more elaborate/ time-consuming process that ended in December.

    The ratio of the court will be published this spring.

    Now I’d like to ask you something, Mary H: Why did you pose this question when you are already so familiar with the answer?

    Do you ever wonder if there really is a God? One that sees what you are doing to undermine justice for Meredith?

    I do.

  • Jeff L.

    Mary H said:

    …Mignini is suing or investigating for acts of speech,,,

    _____________________________

    you mean ILLEGAL acts of speech

    a/k/a slander

    read the Italian criminal code

    another poster already gave you translations of the relevant provisions

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    as usual and so typical, and more of the same crap and dribble ….

    but this is embarrassing even for me ..

    Mary H, it’s Mignini who is suing others – he is the plaintiff not the defendant !

    Mary H: very s_l_o_w_l_y … if he was in the wrong as you claim, if indeed he is the criminal that you allege he is and if all the other accusations which have been propelled at him are true it would be other people suing him !

    Capisci ?

    And a person usually initiates a civil action in defamation when in his mind at least, the person feels he has been defamed in some form by someone ELSE !!!

    All you have done is PROVE my point !

    I have no opinion as to the veracity of his claims but it does indicate to me that he is NOT prepared to take the crap that’s been levelled at him, whatever that crap may be.

    Mary H: make that 2 sandwiches shy of a picnic lunch !

    Jesus, woman – give it a break for your own good!

    dixi

  • Beth Storvak

    Hey Renee, tell it to the Kercher family. Really. You can go on about ‘anonymous bloggers’ and such, who hide behind computers, but it seems that you should really take your arguments to the Kercher family. I’m sure that you can find a way to do that. If you can organize a fundraiser that benefits the woman that was convicted of killing their daughter, then I’m sure that you can arrange some kind of message or meeting directly to the family of Meredith Kercher. If you can’t, then really, you’re no better than any of these ‘anonymous bloggers’. Let us know how that goes once you’ve contacted Meredith’s family.

  • Mary H.

    Wow. That’s incredible.

    My point was that he investigates or sues people who speak out against him. Hence, it is unlikely that people will speak out against him, even if they disagree with him.

    I think you mean drivel, not dribble.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @jim:

    ok buddy, please, calm down.

    Please, would you read my post in reply to your post again. Please?

    You will find that I ABSOLUTELY AGREE with you 100%, and with your other posts too.

    I’m assuming that perhaps that english is not your ‘mother-tongue’ and my silly attempt at being ‘funny’ in phrasing it this way, obviously back-fired.

    Sorry, for this.

    take care,

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    that is really bad form even for you !

    I genuinely and sincerely mean that – but, in you way and by your own hand you demonstrate the lengths and breadths of lies, crap and distortions you are willing to go to win a point.

    Again, providing evidence to my recent posts.

    “My point was that he investigates or sues people who speak out against him. Hence, it is unlikely that people will speak out against him, even if they disagree with him.”

    Litigants don’t commence defamation suits because someone has dis-ageed with them; they commence litigation because what has been said about them is totally untrue and is likely to damage, inter-alia, their reputation , idiot!

    And no, I DON’T mean drivel, I mean DRIBBLE, like the saliva that leaks from a 3 year old, which you well know.

    dixi

  • billyryan

    if i though amanda knox was guilty i would say how sad for her and her family after they done their best for her and leave it at that.The reason i post here is because i know she has been wrongly accused and falsey convicted.Thank you paul k for your excellent posts.mignini is now suing or investigation eleven people in several office in italy today this monster is been discussed .I bet none of these people have any bother believing amanda is innocent.lets go back to the killer of young couples around florence.Mignini was known to have been in the area,there is grave doubt the killer was ever caught,the bodys of the young women were desecrated,the killer had some fixation with young girls who had made love and setanic rituals.Now in perugia a young girl that had made love and setanic rituals are again part of the story. Just mabey the monster of florence and the monster of perugia are the same man.Would al_dogshite and his pupets ever go get involved in some other cause other than keeping an innocent girl in jail

  • John Winters

    Mary H. on Micheli:

    ”Where in there does it actually spell out the parts Amanda and Raffaele allegedly played in the murder?”

    I had to smile when I saw this. I have this theory that Micheli is actually the one who is fixated with Amanda Knox. The ‘logic’ of his ‘rationale’ for chrissake, ‘rationale’ of all terms to choose to describe a written account of the confused and veritably anti-rational state of his mind.

    He suggests at one point for example, that Knox is the person who does the altering of the scene in order to change it so that there is an apparent sexual motive for the attack.

    There is an absurd contradiction here. The assumption that Knox did the altering is then necessarily precluded by the fact that she was present at the killing and therefore must have been witness to the purely sexual motive for its occurrence. Why would she then go to the trouble of altering a scene which she was already aware contained evidence of sexual activity, to look like a crimescene which contains evidence of sexual activity?

  • colonelhall

    “the confused and veritably anti-rational state of his mind.”

    There you go again Johnny, just lashing out at people. Do you know Micheli? Have you read the report? Can you provide any evidence that testifies to his state of mind?

    Even if you are the most ardent of Amanda Knox admirers, you must agree that her response to the murder has been questionable. The contrast between what she doesn’t remember and what she remembers clearly, for instance. The change of alibi and the incredible story about being at the scene of the crime ( which, if not true, is a weird story to make up ) would put her number one in any policeman’s suspect list. The antics at the police station, the apparent distrust of her flat mates, all earn her a lot of attention and suspicion.

    You expect people to believe in her innocence and believe that a judge is crazy, just because you say so. It doesn’t wash!

  • ifyourinterested

    http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/meredith-kerchers-bra-clasp.html

    also a link in one of the articles to a translation of the micheli report

  • ifyourinterested

    “Here is a link to the testimony of Professor Adriano Tagliabracci, director of the Forensic Institute of Ancona and president of the Italian Association of Forensic Genetics, who testified for the defense:

    http://abcnews.go.com/International/US/story?id=8118652

    “‘The clasp goes from one scientist to another, and we don’t see gloves being changed. We then see it being put on the floor and picked up again. These procedures are all wrong,’ Tagliabracci testified.
    ‘By not changing gloves and by touching other objects, cross-contamination of DNA is highly possible,” he said.”

    from the “viewfromwilmington.blogspot

  • Beware the spin from “PhanuelB”

    “PhanuelB” is just another dunce from Grafton.

    Amanda’s “celebrity” has attracted yet another lonely, unemployed nut-case that fantasizes about a relationship with her.

    He just regurgitates the talking points put out by the “Friends of Amanda” PR campaign.

    At the rate he’s posting, he’ll soon be surpassing the work product of the bloggers hired by the Marriott firm to spin for Amanda.

  • beware the spin?

    there is only so much info out there and only so many ways to write about it. by now almost all of you are in repeat mode. i see you on the various blog sites and you’re all pete/repetes, multiple do overs and let’s see if you get it this timers.

  • where oh where?

    I’ve looked all over the internet and have seen no scientists or forensics experts who have written anything in support of “the knife” or bra clasp DNA evidence. Well, let me clarify that, no scientists or forensics experts who aren’t involved in the prosecution or who are willing to present their names and credentials. I have seen several who dispute or question “the knife” or the clasp DNA evidence.

    Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support this DNA evidence outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?

  • Mary H.

    Thanks for the links, ifyourinterested. I will check them out.

  • Gary

    All I can say anymore about this case is that we now have a convicted prosecutor who has been sentenced to prison yet he is still allowed to prosecute cases during his appeal. In the United States this would not only have caused every case that he prosecuted to be re-examined he would have been let go from his job. He definitely would not have been allowed to prosecute a murder case of this magnitude. It’s not like Magini was found guilty of driving without a license or some other penny crime; he was found guilty of abusing his job (Illegal wire tapping, false confessions, planting evidence, etc.). Well this is the best thing that could have happened because now his credibility is ruined and his testimony will be unbelievable. Amanda and Raffaelle will be free by the end of the summer and that freak will then be sitting behind bars. Can’t wait to know he’s sitting in a jail cell (Let him know what it feels like.) I am not defending Amanda because she’s an American, but because I know in my heart that she is innocent. I also believe that she was railroaded by that freak Magini. This man has no right to be prosecuting a murder case let alone any other cases. The evidence was made up, planted and coerced by a deranged prosecutor who is getting old and needed a huge win to finish his carrier with a bang. Unfortunately for the freak he has now been found guilty and will be finishing his carrier in a prison cell. The best part of it all is that that Amanda and Rafaelle will go home as free people mainly due to Magini being found guilty of planting evidence etc. Even though there was no real evidence to convict them to begin with and the fact that we know how the Italian justice system works there should be no reason in the world why these convictions should not be overturned unless the Italian government has no regards for what’s wrong from wright or just because they want the American Girl to sit in jail for the rest of her natural life.

  • PhanuelB

    @somebody:”“PhanuelB” is just another dunce from Grafton.

    Amanda’s “celebrity” has attracted yet another lonely, unemployed nut-case that fantasizes about a relationship with her.”

    Every word of that is a lie. And how would you know anyway? It’s just a Mignini-like fabrication.

    I’m in it because I see hate and irrational hysteria and I think it’s the right time and place to confront it . I care about our schools and colleges and I will not stand by and watch as a broken justice system and a bunch of hate mongers interfere with two innocent young people’s lives.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    PhallusB: “I care about our schools and colleges and I will not stand by and watch as a broken justice system and a bunch of hate mongers interfere with two innocent young people’s lives.”

    Are you sure you aren’t a school children stalker?

    And by the way, Amanda and Raffaele ain’t innocent. They are two coke head murderers.

  • where oh where?

    Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support the DNA evidence for the knife and bra clasp outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?

    I’m still waiting.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Gary said
    am February 5 2010 @ 4:28 pm

    All I can say anymore about this case is that we now have a convicted prosecutor who has been sentenced to prison yet he is still allowed to prosecute cases during his appeal.

    DIDN’T YOU HEAR THAT ACCORDING TO THE ITALIAN CONSTITUTION YOU’RE INNOCENT UNTIL CONVICTED AFTER ALL APPEALS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED?

    MIGNINI IS INNOCENT.

  • Mary H.

    Al, I’m watching you.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    JOHNNY SAD: There is an absurd contradiction here. The assumption that Knox did the altering is then necessarily precluded by the fact that she was present at the killing and therefore must have been witness to the purely sexual motive for its occurrence. Why would she then go to the trouble of altering a scene which she was already aware contained evidence of sexual activity, to look like a crimescene which contains evidence of sexual activity?

    BECAUSE RUDY IS THE ONE TELLING THE TRUTH.

    HE WAS IN THE BATHROOM AND MEREDITH WAS IN HER BEDROOM.

    THEN RAF ARRIVED AND KILLED HER AND RUDY CAME OUT OF THE BATHROOM. SCUFFLED WITH RAF THEN TRIED TO HELP MEZ.
    HE ESCAPED OUT OF FEAR, POOR THING!

    THEN AMANDA AND RAF CAME BACK AND ALTERED THE SCENE TO MAKE IT SEEM RUDY HAD DONE IT DURING A RAPE.

    RUDY IS INNOCENT! FREE HIM

    AMANDA TELL THE TRUTH! YOUR BOYFRIEND KILLED MEZ AND YOU HELPED HIM.

    MURDERER!

  • Where oh where?

    To Al-fakh:
    Could you answer my question below? I’ve been searching but can’t find any. Thanks in advance.

    “Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support the DNA evidence for the knife and bra clasp outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    MARY HO.
    GO BACK TO THE EXAMINER. I’M BUSY HERE.

    I OFFERED YOU SOME NOOKIE SINCE YOU’RE PROBABLY KIND OF UGLY AND FAT AND NOBODY WANTS YOU. BUT YOU WEREN’T WILLING.

    GO WITH JOHN WINTERS.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support the DNA evidence for the knife and bra clasp outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?”

    ASK DOUG PRESTON! HE KNOWS EVERYTHING (NOT).

  • colonelhall

    Let’s stop all the insults kids. Just look at the evidence. Let’s stop defaming the prosecutor. He is facing a suspended sentence (subject to appeal) and is still allowed to do his job. he was not the only prosecutor. The post by Gary is ridiculous. You can go on calling the prosecutor names, you can go on saying that he is deranged, you can go saying that the evidence was manipulated, but saying it does not mean that it is true.
    This was a long trial, the defence did their best, but were unable to make a case that convinced the jury. There were no accusations of foul play on the side of the prosecution.

    The only foul play in this case came from the Sollecito family. The sister lost her job because of it and they will be facing their own trial, which has been delayed until April.

  • Where oh where?

    “Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support the DNA evidence for the knife and bra clasp outside, of course, anyone who has “nothing” to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?”

    Darn, left out the “nothing” earlier.

    But Al, I was asking nicely and saying thank you. I really would like to read a positive report by any expert on the knife and bra clasp DNA. I’ve read several who don’t support the findings and I would like a counter balance. Really.

  • PhanuelB

    Have the anti-Amanda trolls no shame?

    @FukU:”I OFFERED YOU SOME NOOKIE SINCE YOU’RE PROBABLY KIND OF UGLY AND FAT AND NOBODY WANTS YOU. BUT YOU WEREN’T WILLING.”

    @FukU:”Are you sure you aren’t a school children stalker?”

    @Candy’s Jowls Make Sick
    @Candy’s Nixon-Nose
    @Candy’s Eye Bags

    “You’ll see the lisping “Mary H” – just look for the old chick sporting the Nixon nose & jowls over a massive wattle.”

    @Jiminy:”One look at the food blogger and you will realize that, in addition to abnormal nose length, lying can also cause the following to develop:

    Nixon-like jowls;
    Massive neck whattle;
    Lisping; &
    Inability to Reason.”

    @wattle Watcher:”I’ve finally found a photo that rivals the air-brushed/30 years out-of-date “glamour shot” that Anne Bremner uses.

    Candass Dumpsay has put up a photo on her webpage that is not only taken from 20 feet away with a soft focus, but squished in from the sides to create a thinning effect!

    I’ve seen the UK documentary, Candy – you can’t keep that up – the eye bags, jowls, big nose and even bigger wattle are plain as day.

    Fudging your graduation dates to suggest you’re under 40 doesn’t do anything to erase the 60 years on your face and neck!”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Hey PhallusB:
    Since you are always asking for original trial info, I have something for you.
    It’s Nara Capezzali’s phone number. You know! The lady across the street who heard the noise and the people go up the metal stairs next to her apartment.

    She’s actually listed in the Perugia directory. Here you go:

    Capezzali Nara
    Via Del Melo, 26
    06122 Perugia (PG)
    tel: + 39 075 5720032

    Don’t forget to dial 011 (US International call no.) before the number. Ok?

    She doesn’t speak English though, but try Google translate when she tells you what she heard.

  • John Winters

    AlFhakncrackupsoon says:

    ”HE (RUDY) WAS IN THE BATHROOM AND MEREDITH WAS IN HER BEDROOM.
    THEN RAF ARRIVED AND KILLED HER AND RUDY CAME OUT OF THE BATHROOM. SCUFFLED WITH RAF THEN TRIED TO HELP MEZ.
    HE (RUDY) ESCAPED OUT OF FEAR, POOR THING!
    THEN AMANDA AND RAF CAME BACK AND ALTERED THE SCENE TO MAKE IT SEEM RUDY HAD DONE IT DURING A RAPE.”

    Right, I’ve got that statement recorded so that I can quote from it later when I have to prove to people that you have lost touch with reality and need help understanding simple concepts.

    P.S. My original argument was set in the context of the crimescene as Micheli saw and described it. This version precludes the possibility that Guede could be regarded as innocent of involvement in the actual murder.

  • billyryan

    al_fake_dogshite you are not a man you are a dog

  • John Winters

    I’d just like to correct colonelhall’s last post a tad if I may:

    Let’s stop all the insults kids. Just look at the evidence. Let’s stop defaming Amanda Knox. She is facing a 26 year sentence (subject to appeal) and is not allowed to do her job. And she was not the only one wrongly convicted. The post by AlFhakYou is ridiculous. You can go on calling Amanda names, you can go on saying that she is a deranged murderer, you can go saying that the evidence was not manipulated, but saying it does not mean that it is true.
    This was a long trial, the prosecution did their best, and to global astonishment, were able to make a case that convinced the jury. Subsequently, there have been accusations of foul play on the side of the prosecution coming out of everyone’s ears. Even the Florentines have joined in.

    The only foul play in this case came from the Mignini team. Despite global incredulity, he hasn’t lost his job though he will be facing another barrage of attacks when his case comes to appeal sometime in the future which can’t be soon enough for this writer.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Whiners:

    That’s Micheli’s interpretation of the events.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that Rudy may actually be the only one telling the truth, or at least something close to the truth.

    Raffaele and Amanda killed Meredith. I’m not sure of the exact sequence of events, if Amanda was staying outside in the kitchen or even outside in the porch or if she was with him, but I think that Raffaele was certainly involved.

    If Rudy was involved, then it was an attempt by Raffaele and Rudy to group rape her, maybe with the complicity of Amanda, who was probably outside the room giggling over her roommate being raped.

    I think the best way to find out would be to send the 3 of them to Guantanamo and waterboard them and interrogate them separately. Of course this wouldn’t be torture, just enhanced interrogation techniques, and everything would be done in accordance with Alterto Gonzales guidelines memo (we don’t torture in the US). In extreme cases, we might send them to Egypt for some outsourced interrogation.

    When the 3 of them come up, separately, with the exact same version of the facts, you’ll be assured that is the truth.

    These stupid Italians keep insisting on their broken justice system, with 3 levels of judgement and 2 appeals. For what? Just waterboard them! That’s how we deal with justice in America.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    HillBillyRyan: even the stupidest dog has way more brain than you do. That’s for sure.
    How can you not see that Rudy is telling the truth and that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty.
    Oh! I forgot! You’re all a bunch of racist upthere, just like Amanda (the Nazi).

  • John Winters

    AlFhakupaclas says:

    ”If Rudy was involved, then it was an attempt by Raffaele and Rudy to group rape her, maybe with the complicity of Amanda, who was probably outside the room giggling over her roommate being raped.”

    It is very worrying that anybody could actually believe this scenario is possible having known Amanda and Raffaele for over two years now.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    JointSmoking allWinters writes: It is very worrying that anybody could actually believe this scenario is possible having known Amanda and Raffaele for over two years now.”

    That’s the most likely scenario. They are two sick puppies.

    Two coke heads drug & sex addicts with mental issues.

    Let them rot in jail. Those two murderers.

  • Mary H.

    Al-FY wrote: “Raffaele and Amanda killed Meredith. I’m not sure of the exact sequence of events…”

    …but if I lie in bed thinking about it long enough, I’ll come up with something.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    You can be as sarcastic as you wish Mary Ho.

    In the meantime the murderer stays in jail, and likely, she’ll stay there even after the appeal.

    Maybe not 26 years, but much longer than just a couple more years.

    PS: Mary you seem a little lonely posting this junk all night. Do you have a man? You need one, you know!

  • Mary H.

    It’s not even dinnertime in Seattle. And how do you know I’m not a man? I would never reveal my identity on these blogs, what with all the vigilantes. Still interested in that date?

  • PhanuelB

    @FukU:”PS: Mary you seem a little lonely posting this junk all night. Do you have a man? You need one, you know!”

    Maybe comments like this and the one’s I cite above dishonor Meredith. And I’m sorry it’s all coming from the anti-Amanda crowd.

  • Hector Malloy

    “PS: Mary you seem a little lonely posting this junk all night. Do you have a man? You need one, you know!”

    Wow. Someone is lacking self awareness.

  • jim

    enzof, english is my native language, and ur comment that english is not my native language is a very racist one. thats why folks like u support amanda the beast, well i dont know if u know that she is a racist herself, becuz once she passed a racial comment on a jew customer in the cafe she used to work. accordingly she kept on saying and laughing that “my people killed ur people ha ha ha”. there’s also drunk video of amanda in you tube where some one says u dirty jew. so this evil beast is actually a cruel murderer and fundamentally a racist. all evidence points towards her guilt. in the very beginnig i was on her side but after i read the report from judge micheli from italy i changed my views on her. she really is not a murderer but a butcher the way she killed that poor woman. . u will see she will rot in that hole for 26 yrs. its about time that she put hash oil in her hole, f bitch

  • jim

    mary h, i dont know where u get ur source from. i read the judge micheli report the original one and it clearly says that the way meredith was murdered , the number of wounds, and position of her body it cant be only one person but many people at least 3. it talks about among other things eyewitness account of amanda and her boyfriend looking at the cottage from the court yard down below at nite after the murder. this report is an eye opener. i changed my mind about her after i read this report. wht about her jail diary it really is a a admission to her guilt, it says “i experienced no one else experienced so amazing” also ” i wonder how she would have felt when blood was flowing from her, just agony or terror” u are just distorting facts just to protect this sick, evil, charming psycopath, u will see she will be in that hole for 26 yrs and her f mom and that asshole daddy need to get her hash oil in that jail.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @jim;

    which part of:

    ‘I agree with you a 100%’ did you not understand ?

    Because, even allowing for the lowest form of wit, sarcasm, you seem to have missed the point.

    Now, ‘ I A_G_R_E_E with Y_O_U !!!!!!!

    man, take care,

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Jim, you’d believe anything you poor gullible fool. The reverence you have for Micheli’s laughable twaddle is pathetic, eliciting Pathos with a capital P from your reader. Go and get yourself half an education before you come back to these blogs to discuss Amanda Knox’s future you servile wimp.

  • Gary

    To;Al-Fakh Yugoudh said

    DIDN’T YOU HEAR THAT ACCORDING TO THE ITALIAN CONSTITUTION YOU’RE INNOCENT UNTIL CONVICTED AFTER ALL APPEALS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED?
    MIGNINI IS INNOCENT.

    Oh really. Well then if that’s the case Amanda and Rafaelle are innocent also seeing that all their appeals have not been exhausted yet. The only problem with that is the fact that they are still sitting in prison and freaky is not. In fact that no good freak is still prosecuting cases. I would still love to know if you would have no problem with Magini prosecuting you in a case. Let’s say for instance you were wrongfully accused of a murder and Magini was the prosecutor. Would you be very comfortable with that? Please answer the question even though I already assume you would say yes seeing that you love the man. In all reality you would be scared to death if you had a case pending with this jerk. I would love to know your analogy of how Gueda’s DNA and all the other evidence he left was so clearly visible and was directly tied to being left there when the murder was committed and all the evidence they say was found at the crime scene from Amanda and Rafaelle was not proven to had been left their during the commission of the crime. As far as the knife goes you can put that evidence in the garbage along with the bra clasp seeing that the knife was not the murder weapon and the bra clasp was contaminated beyond belief. If you want to get real technical about the bra clasp there is always the possibility that Meredith and Rafaelle had a little fling at some point and he removed her bra during sex. HUMMMMMMMM now that could never be a possibility seeing that college students do not have sex with their girlfriend’s roommates or friends. You need to get real and start to see the light through the trees.
    AMANDA AND RAFAEELE ARE INNOCENT.

  • IVSTITIA

    Gary: Mr. AFY is actually correct. Art. 27 of the Italian constitution indeed states that a defendant is innocent until found guilty with a definitive sentence, i.e. after the Supreme Court confirms the sentence of the lower courts.

    Mignini is therefore innocent, and so are Amanda, Raffaele and even Rudy, since in all those cases the last appeal to the Supreme Court, and therefore the definitive sentence has not occurred.

    The reason why AK, RS and RG are sitting in prison, although officially still not found guilty with a definitive sentence, are the same reasons why they were all in sitting in jail even before the trial. The reason is that they were considered a flight risk.

    In order to be kept in jail, before a definitive sentence, one or more of the three requirements below must be met:

    1. The defendant is a flight risk
    2. The defendant, if left free, is in the position to tamper with the evidence.
    3. The defendant is a dangerous individual and there is the possibility that s/he might commit another crime if left free.

    Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele were kept in prison because no. 1 above was applicable. Maybe they applied even no. 2 but I’m not sure, I don’t remember off hand.

    One piece of info you may not know. A few years back there was a major crime case captivating the Italian public opinion. It was known as the Cogne murder from the name of the small alpine town where it occurred. It was a case of a little boy found dead in his house. Apparently his mother was the murderer. During the course of the investigation and throughout the trial, she was left free, in spite of the fact she was found guilty both at the first trial and on appeal. The murder occurred in 2002, the first trial started in 2004 and the appeal ended in 2007. Her guilty sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court in May 2008, and that’s the time when she finally got arrested and put in prison.

    The reason why she wasn’t kept in jail during the trials is because the judge felt that she wasn’t a flight risk, she wasn’t in the position anymore the tamper with the evidence, and she wasn’t considered dangerous (she apparently killed her boy in a moment of anger and frustration with something he had done).

    Of course maybe the police wanted to continue investigating while she was free. One important element in the crime was that her entire extended family was wiretapped (that’s a very popular and maybe a little abused practice in Italy by the Italian prosecutors). While eavesdropping on some of the telephone calls, the police found out of a plan by the murderer family (incl. her husband) to plant evidence on a neighbour. They were planning to put a bloody hammer in his garden. Of course that discovery was used against her at the trial and certainly didn’t help the woman. As I said she was found guilty with a definitive sentence. She was convicted to 16 years in prison (she got 30 yrs at the first trial then reduced to 16 in appeal) exactly like Rudy. She also opted for the abbreviated trial, which guarantees 1/3 automatic discount in the number of years.

  • John Winters

    Gary says:

    ”If you want to get real technical about the bra clasp there is always the possibility that Meredith and Rafaelle had a little fling at some point and he removed her bra during sex.”

    Anything is possible, but when the location of a potential DNA-impressed item of evidence changes between the time it was originally identified at the crimescene and when it was bagged, it must be discounted, especially when its location over 47 days is UNKNOWN! The damned thing could have been to McDonalds and back on somebody’s heel in that time!!

    • crawler

      To Posterity: It is now June 2011 and Amanda Knox’s Appeal is in motion. Two independent forensics experts have been appointed by Appeal court Judge Hellman and their findings have just been published. Thus Professors Conti and Vecchiotti concluded that the methods used to record DNA trace samples on both the knife and the bra-clasp were severely negligent and both these items should have been disregarded as viable evidence in the prosecution of Amanda Knox. (Their report sort of includes the observation that if you had taken off the socks of one of the forensics people in the lab where the original recordings were made, you would probably have found the same amount and trace quality DNA profiles on them as were found on the knife and clasp). I’ll keep you up to date Post.   

  • John Winters

    Ivestia says:

    ”One important element in the crime was that her entire extended family was wiretapped (that’s a very popular and maybe a little abused practice in Italy by the Italian prosecutors).”

    Oh what! This is almost as good as colonehall’s plaintive pleading for clemency for the criminal Minini. So now wiretapping is ‘a little abused practice in Italy.’ Scuse me while I check my Italian legal statutes, but tapping and recording the private telephone conversations of high-ranking police officers is a criminal offense in Italy just as much as it was in the States when Hunt and Liddy brought down the government by committing the same crime.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John winters:

    here’s Jooohhhnnnyyyy wrote:

    “The damned thing could have been to McDonalds and back on somebody’s heel in that time!!”

    The issue is NOT where the bra-clasp has been, but how S’s DNA got on there, idiot!

    The obvious answer is that both he and Knox where at McDonalds.

    You make such an issue about the 47 days delay; if I’ve asked you once I’m going to ask you now for up-teenth time, so what?

    Bain in Florida was released after 35 YEARS after RECENT DNA technology proved him innocent ….

    So what is your point? apart, foam the laugh a post idiocy that you contribute?

    Again, I’m reminding you about Valentine’s Day; don’t forget the flowers for Amanda, ok?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “…but if I lie in bed thinking about it long enough, I’ll come up with something.”

    Mary H:, are you bragging again?

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Bain in Florida was released after 35 YEARS after RECENT DNA technology proved him innocent ….

    Eric Ferrero, spokesman for the Innocence Project, speaking specifically about the case you’ve mentioned here following Bain’s release, spoke about the peculiar circumstances surrounding retrieval of DNA unit traces. He said that a DNA profile can be extracted from decades-old evidence if it has been preserved properly. He went on to explain that this means evidence sealed in a bag and stored in a climate-controlled place, which is how most evidence according to him, is handled as a matter of routine.

    I think the police and polizia scientifica people in Perugia would disagree with him.

  • IVSTITIA

    Winters said: “So now wiretapping is ‘a little abused practice in Italy.’ Scuse me while I check my Italian legal statutes, but tapping and recording the private telephone conversations of high-ranking police officers is a criminal offense in Italy”

    It’s not illegal if you have the judge’s authorization to wiretap.

    When I say abused, I’m not saying it was done illegally, I’m saying that the Italian judges tend to give such authorizations with higher than average frequency. According to an article I read in an Italian newspaper judges give such authorizations much more often than judges in the rest of European countries of similar size. Obviously the statistics may not take into consideration that Italy has a big problem with organized crime which is not particularly acute in other European states.

    • crawler

      To Posterity: It is now June 2011 and in Britain, the 125 year old News of the World newspaper has just been closed down(!) because its journalists have been hacking into the mobile phones of ordinary innocent people in order to enhance their storylines and thus their careers. Bravo to the British government who rooted out this evil! 

      • crawler

        Forgot to mention that today, as a result of the News of the World phone-hacking scandal, and because some of his officers were involved in this deceit, the Chief of the Metropolitan police in London has just resigned. You see Posterity, the British still act with integrity and fall on their swords when their sins have found them out. That is because lurking in the depths of their souls is still a remnant of the old honour system which guided people to behave in altruistic ways in the service of their country.

  • John Winters

    Ivestia says:

    ”When I say abused, I’m not saying it was done illegally, I’m saying that the Italian judges tend to give such authorizations with higher than average frequency.”

    Yes of course Iv, we undestand.

    ”Obviously the statistics may not take into consideration that Italy has a big problem with organized crime.”

    Oh, obviously, of course.

    In fact, what you’re trying to sneakily imply here is that Minini’s telephone tapping was not illegal and that there is so much organised crime in Italy, Minini’s activities sort of got mixed up with it, so of course they weren’t illegal. Yeah, of course.

    Unfortunately, the judge at his trial disagreed. Minini’s telephone tapping and recording was not authorised by anyone because its motives had nothing to do with police work. Minini illegally tapped and recorded the private telephone conversations of senior police officers like a common hood mixed up in the organised crime you rightly pointed out Minini indulges in too.

  • Where oh where?

    I’ve looked all over the internet and have seen no scientists or forensics experts who have written anything in support of “the knife” or bra clasp DNA evidence. Well, let me clarify that, no scientists or forensics experts who aren’t involved in the prosecution or who are willing to present their names and credentials. I have seen several who dispute or question “the knife” or the clasp DNA evidence.

    Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support this DNA evidence outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?

    I asked this yesterday and no one came forward with any independent experts. It’s been over 2 months since the guilty verdict and I’ve read lots of independent experts who say the DNA knife and bra clasp evidence is highly flawed. Why are there no independent experts out there willing to come forward with a rebuttal argument?

  • John Winters

    Where oh where? says:

    ”Why are there no independent experts out there willing to come forward with a rebuttal argument?”

    It’s because they’re inadequate and dependent.

  • Gary

    IVSTITIA said

    1. The defendant, if left free, is in the position to tamper with the evidence.
    2. The defendant is a dangerous individual and there is the possibility that s/he might commit another crime if left free.

    Wow you just proved a great point when it comes to Magini. These are the reasons you posted for someone to be jailed while they are still going through the legal process. OK let’s see.
    1. The defendant (Magini) is in the position to tamper with the evidence.
    Well this is most definitely true seeing that he’s already been found guilty of planting evidence and tampering with evidence.
    2. The defendant is a dangerous individual and there is the possibility that s/he might commit another crime if left free. Again…
    Magini is a dangerous person seeing that it has been proven that he likes to take innocent people’s lives away from them by putting them in jail, and he is most certainly a risk of committing these crimes again considering he is still allowed to prosecute people.
    So now what are your reasons for allowing Magini to stay free? I love how you gave the exact reasons why Magini should be put behind bars. Thanks.

  • Where oh where?

    “The people that supported this evidence testified in court.
    That’s how it works.
    The people you’ve seen on TV, and in magazines, and on blogs. That’s the work of a PR firm that got hired almost before Amanda hired a lawyer.”

    Excuse me, but the scientists who have come forward with their names and credentials have put their reputations as scientists on the line. I don’t think any one of them would do this lightly or without some thought as to the consequences if what they were saying wasn’t true.

    I haven’t seen, heard or read one independent expert who is willing to stake their reputation on the prosecution’s interpretation of the DNA evidence for the knife or the bra clasp.

    I know the Italian justice system is in charge here, but if no scientist outside the ones involved in the prosecution side of the case come forward with support, what does that say about the quality of this evidence? Especially since several independent scientists with credentials have come forward to say that this evidence is highly flawed.

  • Mary H.

    As a general rule, where oh where, Mignini’s supporters cannot produce valid documentation for any of their claims about the case or the trial. They find most of their information on the truejustice website, where it has been edited to support that site’s agenda.

    If you produce legitimate sources for claims in favor of Amanda’s innocence, your citations will be ignored and the subject will be changed (see Kim Bailey and “the mop and the bucket,” above).

    You wrote: “Could any of you please direct me to where I can find experts who do support this DNA evidence outside, of course, anyone who has to do with the prosecution or the civil cases?”

    No, nobody can.

    Ivstitia will say he supports his claims with documentation of Italian legal code, but he refuses to acknowledge the law may not have been followed, or that it is irrelevant to revealing the actual facts of the case..

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    here’s Jooohhhnnnyyyy, again:

    you say:

    “”Why are there no independent experts out there willing to come forward with a rebuttal argument?”

    It’s because they’re inadequate and dependent.”

    I say:

    thank God we’re got you!

    …. and May H, of course …. phew …

    dixi

  • IVSTITIA

    The crime of which Mignini was tried does not qualify for cautionary (preventative) detention.

    Even if convicted all the way through the appeals, according to the Italian law, any conviction of less than 2 years is automatically suspended and is not served if the defendant has no prior criminal record.

    Obviously no judge would put in jail a defendant before the trial when he knows damn well, that, even if convicted with a definitive sentence, he or she will not need to go to prison.

    I suggest that you guys limit your discussion to the evidence and not to the legal procedures existing in Italy, because you obviously cannot debate matters of which you have zero, nada, zilch, nessun, knowledge.

    And leave Mignini alone, his trial case has nothing to do with the kercher case. Let’s not forget that Amanda’s interrogation when she made the name of Lumumba occurred before he was even present. Therefore your attempt to portray Mignini as a Gestapo officer who tortured Amanda will not fly outside of this blog, certainly not in an Italian court. Sorry to disappoint you, but Mignini’s trial will play no role whatsoever in the appeal (Mignini won’t even be part of it).

    Get ready to see Amanda’s conviction confirmed in appeal. Everything is possible but a conviction, maybe with a lower sentence, is the most likely scenario in appeal.

    And John! If that happens, I can guarantee you that your President will send no Marine Corps to invade Italy. Count on that one!

  • Mary H.

    Ivstitia wrote: “And leave Mignini alone, his trial case has nothing to do with the kercher case.”

    You may think it has nothing to do with the Kercher case, but most observers think it has everything to do with Mignini’s credibility and his proclivity to abuse his office. Naturally, that plays into how they think he handled the Kercher case.

    And Ivsitia wrote: “Let’s not forget that Amanda’s interrogation when she made the name of Lumumba occurred before he was even present.”

    But just last week, Ivsitia, you wrote this:

    “Add also that the police had evidence that Lumumba’s cell phone had pinged on the cell tower serving Piazza Grimana, and that Lumumba had changed phones one or two days after the murder (and therefore that fact raised suspicions). The phones was a problem for Lumumba even after his release. In fact although the Judge didn’t have enough elements for his detention he was still kept in the “registro degli indagati” (suspected register) for a little while longer after his release.”

    All that surveillance sounds like it has a lot more to do with the police and the prosecution than it has to do with Amanda’s accusation.

    In fact, with all the tapping and taping and dirt-collecting the police were doing on Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick in the days following the crime, it’s starting to become very clear that the three of them WERE suspects before they went in for their interrogations, and therefore should all have had lawyers, by Italian law.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    you say:

    “In fact, with all the tapping and taping and dirt-collecting the police were doing on Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick in the days following the crime, it’s starting to become very clear that the three of them WERE suspects before they went in for their interrogations, and therefore should all have had lawyers, by Italian law.”

    The only thing that’s become very clear is your idiocy.

    Let me see now, I want to this clear in my mind; I, the Police, find a person to be a SUSPECT – that is, I think that person might have done it, but I’m not sure yet and I’m in the process of collating evidence in whatever form. I have my suspicions about that person, so I have that person observed and surveilled in order to get and firm up my evidence. I don’t want to alert the suspect to what I’m doing, otherwise it would defeat the purpose of my surveillance.

    So what do I do, as investigators of a crime surveilling suspects?

    I know: advise them of what I’m doing and get them to get lawyers BEFORE I have established a case against them !!!

    Mary H: too many Pink Panther DVDs, honey!

    dixi

    I

  • John Winters

    ”So what do I do, as investigators of a crime surveilling suspects?
    I know: advise them of what I’m doing and get them to get lawyers BEFORE I have established a case against them !!!”

    The fact is you, as the Perugia police, did ILLEGALLY tap and record the private phone calls of senior police officers.
    A chief prosecutor found guilty of committing a serious offense like this was hardly going to advise anyone to get a lawyer. He doesn’t want law-abiding people like that around while he’s managing things like violent interrogations.

  • Gary

    Mary: Thank You. I couldn’t have said it better myself. (Especially about Magini’s conviction being 100% relevant to the Knock case.
    IVSTITIA: You must be from Italy! As far as the 2 year sentence being suspended that’s great, but do you think that Magini should be allowed to keep his job? Also I have been waiting patiently for your answer as to would you want Magini prosecuting you in a case if you were innocent? (Answer the question and stop ignoring it) I know why you’re not answering it because your answer would be no; and for good reason. In fact I don’t think you would want that guy prosecuting you even if you were guilty of a crime seeing that he would make up evidence to make his case better.
    Let’s take a poll here. Who would want Magini prosecuting them for a crime they did not commit? (I know that no one would want to be prosecuted by any one for a crime they did not commit, but the question is pertaining to Magini)
    This whole case and all the evidence presented in it was a total farce and we all know it. Sure you can say a jury convicted them and that should be respected. Yes I agree with that to a point. This is only if you have irrefutable evidence (Which they did not), you have a prosecutor that at the time of the trial was not under indictment for abuse of his job (Huge red flag that this man is up to no good), and you don’t have every single juror being plagued by the media and the rest of the country to convict over made up stories published in the tabloid.
    IVSTITIA: As far as the U.S. President sending the marine core to invade Italy that’s the most ignorant thing I have heard out of your mouth so far. Trust me if the president wanted to send troops over to invade Italy the place would be a pile of rubble when we got done. (Well that’s just plain stupid anyways seeing that no one would go to war over the wrongful incarceration of one person from America).
    Anyways I would love to see the irrefutable evidence they have. And for that matter I would love to know what the motive was (No way this was a satanic ritual). Why on earth would a bright college student who had everything going for her say to herself let’s mimic the Halloween satanic ritual and rape and murder my roommate and best friend. In fact let’s not only rape and murder her; let’s be real smart about it and clean up only our DNA from the crime scene and leave Gueda’s all over the place. Then we will take the knife that we murdered her with and put it back in the drawer at Solechitto’s house (They will never look there for it). The knife scenario is only feasible if it was the real murder weapon; which it was not. Opps!!!! After all the killing and raping and cleaning up they forgot the bra clasp.
    Face it the bra clasp evidence is garbage for many of reasons. (And not just because it was left there for 6 weeks, moved and contaminated by multiple people) The knife evidence (Well that speaks for itself). Amanda’s DNA being all over the house (Well that speaks for itself also seeing she lived there.) Where is the evidence of Amanda’s DNA left during the commission of the crime? Gueda’s is there and has been proven to have been left there during the crime, but where is Amanda’s? Where are all these experts that are so convinced of her guilt that you are saying they are not going to put their reputations on the line (WHAT??????????????????????) Put their reputations on the line for what? Why because they can’t back up their claims therefore it will make them look stupid and their testimony garbage.
    Give it up because no matter what you say or anyone else that is against Amanda and Rafaelle says you all know that these two are totally innocent and that the Italian justice system has been put to shame by all of this. If you want to make a bet as to the appeal let’s do it. Now that we have the freak out of the way and everything he did to put Amanda behind bars will be under question should make this a guarantee win. As far as I’m concerned it’s Magini who is the stupid one because he just blew his whole case against Amanda and Rafaellle. Thanks Magini. (Have fun in hell)

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    here’s Joooohhhnnnyyy!

    “The fact is you, as the Perugia police, did ILLEGALLY tap and record the private phone calls of senior police officers.”

    Bud, build a bridge and get over it !!!

    Firstly, what the blazes does Mignini’s prior allegations of abuse of office have to do with Knox?; it wold ONLY have relevance if he had been committed the same, but he didn’t !!!

    So how does the fact that he didn’t make K/S any more innocent or less guilty?

    And anyone and everyone with an atom of objectivity could see what the real objective was behind Mignini’s abuse; except you Preston and Mary H who hang on to this as a desperate attempt to link a prior case to another.

    They wire-tapped ALL protagonists, including S’s sister who at the time was a lieutenant in the police force. She was ‘ caught ‘ admitting that she was going to tamper with evidence. She was sacked and now faces trial.

    So much for your anti-american sentiment ……

    grow-up. Really, just grow up, you idiot.

    dixi

  • IVSTITIA

    Mary H.: The police did not tap Lumumba’s phone. They found out that his phone pinged on the cell tower serving Piazza Grimana from the Mobile Phone company. You may not know this, but whenever your cell phone is on it pings on a a cell tower near where you are. If you start driving away from where you are the phone will start pinging in other towers. That’s because cellphones work according to a technology called mushroom technology. The cellphone company can provide your location at any time, with pretty good accuracy, thanks to that technology. If you don’t want people to know where you’re or where you’re going you should turn your cell phone off. Incidentally that’s what Raffaele and Amanda did on Nov. 1 at approx. 20:42.

    Gary: “As far as the 2 year sentence being suspended that’s great, but do you think that Magini should be allowed to keep his job?”
    The law says he’s still innocent and the suspended sentence would anyway apply to the interdiction from holding public office. There is nothing in the law that could prevent him from continuing in his current position. Consider however that is work with Amanda is done, since his office is not competent for arguing appeals. Therefore what difference would it make if he quitted today?

    Gary: I wouldn’t have a problem being prosecuted by Mignini. It’s not the prosecuors who decides whether to convict or not, it’s the judges. And this is true also in America. If his case has no merit, he won’t win the case.

    Gary wrote: “As far as the U.S. President sending the marine core to invade Italy that’s the most ignorant thing I have heard out of your mouth so far”
    I agree with you, it is an ignorant thing to say. To think that Obama would send troops to invade Italy, a democratic nation member of the EU and NATO ally, in order to liberate Amanda is ridiculous, but that’s exactly what Mr. John Winters said in another blog, and that’s why I made that comment. If Amanda is convicted nothing would be done by the US Government. The US would not want to ruin relations with an ally, considering also that there have been other instances where Americans have escaped justice in Italy (26 CIA agents who kidnapped a person as part of a rendition program, one US pilot who was flying way below the permitted altitude and killed 20 European skiers in the Alps, a US soldier who killed an Italian official in Baghdad). There are also instances of Italians widely believed to be wrongly incarcerated in the US, the most famous right now is Carlo Parlanti. Did you see the Italian government complaining or even mentioning to the US or Californian authorities about that? Clearly not!
    Governments tend to stay out of judicial matters when they happen in other democratic nations. That’s because the judiciary both in Italy and the US is supposed to be independent from political intervention.

    Regarding the rest of what you wrote, I don’t care to debate the evidence anymore, it’s kind of pointless. It’s like having a Republican and a Democrat debate. They’ll still remain a Republican and a Democrat at the end of the conversation. I’d rather let the judges decide.

  • Where oh where?

    Thank you, Mary, for your explanation. I know what you’re saying is right.

    But I’m not really asking about valid documentation from the prosecution. I understand the lack thereof. I understand what all the “guilters” are doing but I still have to ask again.

    It’s been 2 months since the verdict and I’ve read several articles by or about DNA experts from around the world who have problems with the knife and clasp DNA. They seem to have no issues with putting their names and credentials on these articles. But I haven’t found a single article by a DNA expert from anywhere else in the world, including Italy, who has put their stamp of approval on this evidence. Why not?

    I also perfectly understand that the Italian courts have absolutely no obligation to pay any attention to what these experts in the field of DNA have to say.

    But I can guarantee that in the court of public opinion and in the scientific community, what these experts have to say does matter. And the longer this case goes on, well, suffice it to say, the more the time for these experts to come forward.

    I’m also very curious about you “guilters”. Doesn’t it phase you even a little bit that the knife and clasp DNA has no expert supporters outside the few involved in this case? Not even a single scientist in Italy has come out with an outraged, “how dare you” response to what is being written and said.

  • PhanuelB

    WhereOhWhere:

    You are correct that courts shouldn’t be looking over their shoulders or considering what is said outside of court.

    But they better understand that they have an obligation to make public anything and everything that occurred in that trial save for matters legitimately sealed.

    The problem is that the world is coming in to see for themselves if justice was done and we don’t have what we need in front of us. As I understand it, journalists can attend the trial and view court documents, but they can’t publish any of those documents. The result is that so much here is just second or third hand information.

    I’ve had it up to here with being asked to take Harry Rag’s word for it that she said this or that or that it was all voluntary. Italian law should be changed so that there is no prohibition on the publication of the trial record.

  • Mary H.

    Enzo wrote: “I know: advise them of what I’m doing and get them to get lawyers BEFORE I have established a case against them !!!”

    Italian law requires that once a witness becomes a suspect, he or she must be provided with an attorney. If the police had established cases against Amanda, Raffaele before they interrogated them, then they were required to provide them with attorneys at their interrogations.

    No doubt one reason this law was enacted was to prevent suspects from incriminating themselves during interrogations, which is exactly what happened to Amanda and Raffaele.

    Without the information they had collected on Amanda, Raffaele and Lumumba, the police wouldn’t even have known what questions to ask. Obviously they asked questions that led in the direction of what they wanted to establish. If Amanda and Raffaele were simply witnesses, as the police claim, then they should have been allowed to just give their testimony (which, incidentally they had already done over the course of the past four day), and leave.

    The interrogations were set up to get Amanda nad Raffaele to fulfill the police’s expectations and to arrest Amanda and Raffaele.

    And Ivsitia, I didn’t say the police tapped Lumumba’s phone.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @where oh where:

    you say:

    “But I haven’t found a single article by a DNA expert from anywhere else in the world, including Italy, who has put their stamp of approval on this evidence. Why not?”

    probably, because it’s not convenient for you.

    Unlike, the US, italian law dictates that the defence has every right to be present at the forensic analysis.

    OK, why wasn’t K/S represented? Why indeed, did they turn down the invitation?

    This is the critical question, isn’t it?

    Perhaps K/S’s lawyers can answer that for you.

    dixi

  • Where oh where?

    Enzo Zoff”you say:

    “But I haven’t found a single article by a DNA expert from anywhere else in the world, including Italy, who has put their stamp of approval on this evidence. Why not?”

    probably, because it’s not convenient for you.

    Unlike, the US, italian law dictates that the defence has every right to be present at the forensic analysis.

    OK, why wasn’t K/S represented? Why indeed, did they turn down the invitation?

    This is the critical question, isn’t it?

    Perhaps K/S’s lawyers can answer that for you.

    dixi”

    Enzo, dear, you answered my question with several questions.

    I’ll answer as best I can: I don’t know why K/S lawyers weren’t present.

    But you could make it convenient for me to find any DNA expert anywhere in the world, including Italy, who has come forward and put their stamp of approval on this evidence.

    There are several, as I’ve said, who dispute this evidence.

  • Mary H.

    “Presiding Judge Giancarlo Massei, rejecting the defense bid, ruled the trial should go on. He said that defense consultants were present when the DNA tests were carried out by forensic experts and that relevant documents had been made available a month and a half ago, suggesting that defense had enough time to review the findings.”

    The Associated Press ; By Marta Falconi; Monday, September 14, 2009

  • billyryan

    the problem “where oh where” in getting independant dna experts to support the prosecution dna analsis is similar to getting scientests to say the earth is flat or the sun is nearer to the earth than the moon,the amanda haters have no answer to this question.i am just hoping that the convicting judge has a bit of humanity in him and he realises his error,and we might be finally be on the road to justice.he has seen the destruction this miscarriage of justice brought to these two familys up close and personal.he has twenty four days now and the eyes of the world are upon him.

  • Gary

    IVITTA said
    I wouldn’t have a problem being prosecuted by Mignini. It’s not the prosecuors who decides whether to convict or not, it’s the judges. And this is true also in America.

    Your corect when saying that the prosecutors do not convict; it’s the jury and judges, but it’s the prosecutor who brings forth the evidence that these people decide on guilt or innocence. Now when you have a prosecutor who fabricates evidence and makes up outrageous theories that have no marrit what so ever to them and you have an open system in which the public is subjected to every lie they read in the tabloids of course your going to have a jury that will convict. It was not the judges or jury that brougt this evidence to court it was Magnini. So ultimetely it was him that convicted them. I still would like to know where the irrafutable evidence is and why the scientists are hidding behinde close doors. I would also like to know how they were allowed to use a knife that was not even the murder weapon in court as the weapon and how they were allowed to use a bra clasp that sat for 6 weeks, then moved and finnaly contaminated multiple times. As far as you having no problem with Magnini prosecuting you for a crime you did not commit is a bunch of garbage. What you going to do when all the fabricated and contaminated evidene comes your way? What you going to do when Magnini starts playing the satanic ritual against you? What you going to do when the juey says guilty when your completely innocent? I bet my life that you will start using the fact that he was convicted of all the things pertaining to his job. (Or maybe you will just sit there and do your time and say to yourself I should have listened to everyone about corrupt Magnini).

  • Mary H.

    billy ryan wrote: “he has twenty four days now and the eyes of the world are upon him”

    I get the feeling Mignini and the others are very surpised by the reaction of Amanda’s supporters. Mignini has probably never had so many people question his work before, and certainly not question it with scientific challenges.

    The Italians seem to be pretty casual about this whole justice/court business, and with good reason, since, if someone doesn’t like the first trial, they can always get another one, or two.

  • jim

    mr john winter , i dont want to reveal my education, i am sure i much more educated than u. i could be erratic becuz i tye fast. mr wise guys wheredo u get ur source or info about this case? every one has same source at this point, becuz verdict report iscoming in march. its just that everyone has their own ideas about this case. but the truth is that she & her boyfriend had almost 19 judges who looked at their case and reached at the verdict. they are guilty based upon the circumstantial evidences. by the way i am not a gullibe or fool. by the way y wrote this blog u are an arrogant and an asshole

  • Mary H.

    Since when does people agreeing with each other mean they are making the right decision? The Ku Klux Klan all agree with each other.

    The judges all agreed with each other because they are accustomed to rubber-stamping. The more times they rry a case, the more times they get paid. If an innocent person is convicted, so what? They’ll get out eventually.

    The judges all agreed with Mignini for the same reasons, and one more — they didn’t want to be sued for disagreeing with him.

  • John Winters

    Enzoff says:

    ”..what the blazes does Mignini’s prior allegations of abuse of office have to do with Knox?;”

    It’s like this to do with Knox:
    _____________________________________________________
    Mingin comes to trial of Knox. His job is to prosecute her which he does and she is put in prison for 26 years.

    Mingin’s prior: Guilty of tapping and recording the private telephone conversations of senior police officers.
    _______________________________________________________
    Amanda Knox comes to trial wrongly accused of murder. Thanks to someone with serious prior, she is put in prison for 26 years!!

    Amanda Knox’s prior: Citation for playing music too loud at a party.
    _______________________________________________________

    Nowdjagettit?

  • John Winters

    Enzoff says:

    ”They wire-tapped ALL protagonists, including S’s sister who at the time was a lieutenant in the police force.”

    But when they wire-tapped Sollecito’s sister, they had got authorisation from the judge and the court. This is because this wire tap was legal like someone going into a bank and drawing money from their account.

    When Mingin tapped and recorded the private telephone conversations of senior police officers in Florence, he did not seek authority to do this because his motives for doing the tap were criminal and for personal gain, rather like someone walking into a bank and withdrawing money from everyone’s accounts by pointing a gun at the cashier and demanding she hands over their money.

    Corruption is the legal system’s worst enemy. It eats into it and destroys it very quickly in a way that doesn’t have quite so virulent an effect when dealing with corruption in the church or military for example. That is why the law cannot tolerate even the mildest form of corruption. And that is why Mingin was put on trial.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @where oh where:

    you say:

    “There are several, as I’ve said, who dispute this evidence.”

    Sweetie, there’s your answer !

    Get them to the appeal bench, pronto
    !

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    here’s Joooohhhnnnyyy:

    you say:

    “This is because this wire tap was legal like someone going into a bank and drawing money from their account.”

    That’s right, that’s exactly right. As I have said on munerous times before, there isn’t a skelic of proof that Mignini ‘abused’ his powers in any way in the K/S/G murder case. In addition, he was ghosted by Comodi who is as pure as virgin snow!

    This is my POINT ! Now it’s become yours?

    You then say:

    “That is why the law cannot tolerate even the mildest form of corruption. And that is why Mingin was put on trial.”

    For the first time, I AGREE with you bud !!

    Mignini was put on trial like anyone else and treated as an equal. No quarter given, no quarter asked. When he was found guilty, he said virtually what the Knox’s said, that he was disappointed that he felt he was innocent and that he would appeal.

    All of this under the same legal system that you and Mary H continually denegrate.

    He will have his chance at his appeal in the exact way K/S will; no different! And, mind you the man is a Prosecutor. By the way, he is on the record for stating that there are flaws with the italian legal system as he has come to find out ‘first hand’.

    “Nowdjagettit?”

    No, bud I don’t.

    The only people that do are those that are desperate to argue that because mignini was charged and then convicted of ‘abuse of power’, then the case he argued against K/S/G is void. But why?

    Seriously, why didn’t K/S’s defence team object to his presence?

    Tell me, ‘What did he in the K/S case that was not proper, leaving aside his prior

    I’m pleased that he was found guilty for no other reason than to demonstrate, right or wrongly, that there appears to be no love lost even amongst the judicial college.

    Dear Jesus, imagine if they had found him innocent – the crap and dribble [not drivel] you would have gone on about.

    Lastly, and I know that I’m howling into the wind, the charges were NOT corruption. You seem him as you want, another view is that he had the balls to take on his peers and do what he thought was right.

    Was he inside the law?; was what he did legal?; was it an ‘abuse’ or a necessity to unearth the truth? could he have attained the writs from the very Prosecutor he was investigating?

    I don’t know; and what’s more, it doesn’t matter what I think. The Court has found him guilty and like all convictions that’s the current verdict.

    Although, I haven’t heard Magnini whingeing and whining about his lot.

    Capisci?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “As a general rule, where oh where, Mignini’s supporters cannot produce valid documentation for any of their claims about the case or the trial. They find most of their information on the truejustice website, where it has been edited to support that site’s agenda.”

    I pride myself in being as best informed as I can possible be, despite you breaking out in laughter at reading this.

    PRAY TELL: from whence do YOU source your impecabble material from?

    I am totally serious. Please direct me to your sources!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    you say:

    “The judges all agreed with Mignini for the same reasons, and one more — they didn’t want to be sued for disagreeing with him.”

    Yeah, right!

    That’s why there wasn’t a moment’s hesitation in his peers charging him with abuse of power and other meaningless charges!

    And as I explained to you before, you don’t sue other people for defamation for dis-agreeing with you. I’ve pointed this out to you before.

    Mary H, just as an aside, in the Land Down Under, the worst possibe of human traits that we despise, more anything else, is being a ‘bad-sport’. This is a person that has been clearly been run-out in between 3rd and home base and still complains and lies. Generally, a cheat!

    Mary H, even under the cover of anonimity, you’re a cheat and a despicable one at that …

    you lie, distort, manipulate and spin every conceavable fact put forward that convicts K/S.

    People don’t hate K/S, but frustrated at the dribble [not drivel] that you spurt out, they direct their anger at them.

    Give it a break! In the end the truth will emerge, if you let it.

    dixi

  • jim

    mary h, i dont wht u talikin about this judge michel report sure talks abot guede’s conviction but it clearly says that number of wounds andthe way body was found its clear thatmore than one killer was involved, also he subjected amanda andhe boyfriend to undergo trial. it also says hat some one came back later at nite to rearrange the crime scene. if u really see with an open mind that guede ‘s story is more in lie with the evidence than the other two liars. guede is not the only one thats implicated but also the other 2 killers in that report. stop making ur own conclusion, but read with an ope mind u will see she is guilty. she is a psycopath killer with a carming personality along with that sick boyfrined who is into violent japanese sex comics.also i read this from her prison diary where she says that “i was cowering in the kitchen with my hands on my hears, i could hear meredith’s scream in my head, it wasnt real just like a dream and i am not sure about the truth”. now doesnt mean anthing to u, that she is trying to play wit words only to baffle people and yet she is showing her guilt indirectly. i can email u the whole content of this if u want. itreally goes to show wnat a 2 faced, multiple personalities amanda is , a real serial killer material

  • Mary H.

    Enzo wrote: “I am totally serious. Please direct me to your sources!”

    Start with Google, enter key words, go from there.

    Enzo wrote: “That’s why there wasn’t a moment’s hesitation in his peers charging him with abuse of power and other meaningless charges!”

    I have a feeling there probably was a moment’s hesitation. I am not following that case, though, so can;t say for sure.

    Enzo wrote: “And as I explained to you before, you don’t sue other people for defamation for dis-agreeing with you.”

    A mentally healthy person doesn’t, but Mignini does, because he feels threatened by challenges to his authority more than a mentally healthy person would.

    P.S. Enzo, you would have more credibility if you didn’t use so many dopey exclamation points.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “A mentally healthy person doesn’t, but Mignini does, because he feels threatened by challenges to his authority more than a mentally healthy person would.”

    I rest my case !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @MAry H:

    “Start with Google, enter key words, go from there.”

    done that, been there, got the T-shirt.

    All point to one direction: K/S/G guilty …..

    That’s why i really need your guidance, as we all do, as to where these sites are …

    Surely, you would have folders and folders full of references ….

    Come on Mary H don’t be a pike, don’t be a bad-sport, share with us all your non-biased, independent K/S sites ….

    We’re all counting on you ….

    Cecked the FOA site … great pixs ….

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    Enzo, I don’t even know what you’re talking about. When did I say I ever say anything about impeccable, non-biased, independent sites?

    Your questions about providing documentation do not constitute an argument against my statement, “As a general rule, where oh where, Mignini’s supporters cannot produce valid documentation for any of their claims about the case or the trial. They find most of their information on the truejustice website, where it has been edited to support that site’s agenda.”

    Personally, I would find it helpful if the Amanda-haters ever provided any documentation at all. For example, yesterday, you wrote:

    “OK, why wasn’t K/S represented? Why indeed, did they turn down the invitation?”

    You offer no source for your claims. I provided a source for an argument against your claims (The Associated Press ; By Marta Falconi; Monday, September 14, 2009), et voila, the subject was dropped.

    Why are you so resistant to finding reports, citing the sources, analyzing the differences between claims and, especially, staying on task? Instead of ever seriously discussing this very serious case, you bounce and leap around the blogs like a maniacal court jester, shrieking and grinning and calling everyone else idiots.

    I am really curious — don’t you feel even the least bit embarrassed about coming across as an alcoholic, coke-sniffing combination of the Three Stooges and a hyperactive 12-year-old?

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    you cited:

    “Presiding Judge Giancarlo Massei, rejecting the defense bid, ruled the trial should go on. He said that defense consultants were present when the DNA tests were carried out by forensic experts and that relevant documents had been made available a month and a half ago, suggesting that defense had enough time to review the findings.”

    The Associated Press ; By Marta Falconi; Monday, September 14, 2009

    ==================================================

    Mary H, listen, honey and listen well: as many have posted, – me included, – ultimately and inevitably, the final decision, the final say and any chance of a release for K/S through the appeal process will rest with a handful of learned judges.

    That’s a fact!

    So you and I can debate all of this, and in the end, it will mean swat to K/S appeal process.

    But here’s the difference between you and I; I know this whereas you go on as if the Perugian court is reading your every word.

    Furthermore, i DO feel embarrassment; you are right, but it’s at your posts which are so ridiculously contradictory and at times plain stupid that I shudder that people like you exist.

    The above is a classic example. Take a good look at it, no, not with just one eye, with both.

    What you have PROVED is that the defence where PRESENT at the DNA testing and having the results for over 45 days had sufficient time to review them and challenge them! But, the DEFENCE didn’t.

    ISn’t that what is says?

    Yet, you and John ‘here’s Jooohhhnnnyyy’ Winters are first, second and last to challenge the DNA findings.

    My point is: why WASN’T it done at the time?

    Why are you blaming Mignini, forensic, and every body else that points this out to you.

    Did I agree with the findings? No. Did I disagree, no!

    Similarly, with Mignini, the way you proved that he was corrupt was to cite the fact the HE is suing 11 people for defamation!

    But you KNOW. You KNOW everything about this case to the extent and level of your choosing.

    You’re a bad sport, Mary H. You’re a cheat !

    I am really curious — don’t you feel even the least bit embarrassed – oh yes I do!

    “…about coming across as an alcoholic, coke-sniffing combination of the Three Stooges and a hyperactive 12-year-old?”

    Point me to the coke, PLEASE !

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Enzoff

    ”Was he inside the law?; was what he did legal?; was it an ‘abuse’ or a necessity to unearth the truth? could he have attained the writs from the very Prosecutor he was investigating?”

    The way your mind bends fallacy to attain the image of truth is close to what we here in the West diagnose as delusional schizophrenia. It is common among products of in-breeding.

  • John Winters

    Enzoff:

    ”Furthermore, i DO feel embarrassment; you are right, but it’s at your posts which are so ridiculously contradictory and at times plain stupid that I shudder that people like you exist.”

    This is a classic stage in your therapy. Here you are showing real signs of progress and grasping certain concepts which are pertinent to your case. However, you are continuing to disseminate the material of these concepts and project them onto other people:

    ”Yet, you and John ‘here’s Jooohhhnnnyyy’ Winters are first, second and last to challenge the DNA findings.”

    The next thing we have to do therefore, is encourage you to internalise these ideas about embarrassment and shuddering and realise that their genesis, activation, and consequences are best off retained within your good self and all that that entails. Rather like Tarzan realising for the first time that it is his own reflection he is watching in the mirror of the rockpool.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    ‘here’s Joooohhhnnnyyyy’

    buddy, buddy, buddy, … come on now …

    where is the love, man?

    In the words of my 13 year old: ‘whatever!’

    “Rather like Tarzan realising for the first time that it is his own reflection he is watching in the mirror of the rockpool.”

    you got this part right at least.

    …. and, I’m taking my meds, ok?

    just keep the therapy coming; I think it’s really helping me. Thanks.

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Enzo says:

    ”Where is the love man?”

    Enzo if you knew anything about that subject, we wouldn’t be having this discussion because the case wouldn’t exist.

  • colonelhall

    Johnny Winters -”his motives for doing the tap were criminal and for personal gain,”

    I have started to read The Moster Of Florence, by that well-known Amanda Knox supporter D.Preston. I’ve got to admit, it’s a cracking good read. What has come our of it so far is that it is one hell of a complicated case. As Preston points out, it is a case that will go on to be the ruin of many a person. Right from the start, there are all sorts of theories going about that are rooted in the dark history of Florence.

    I know you love this Johnny, so I’ll say it again “It looks as if Mignini overstepped the mark” as a result, he succumbed to the fate of others, who have tried to solve this great mystery. I fail to see how he was wire tapping for personal gain.

    In any case, the Monster Of Florence mystery ( going back to 1968 ) has absolutely nothing to do with the Knox case. People are just using it out of desperation.

  • Mary H.

    colnelhall, I believe the focus on Doug Preston was because of the intimidating interrogation he underwent with Mignini. He wanted people to know that Amanda was probably threatened during her interrogation. He said something about how, if his interrogation frightened him into immediately leaving the country, he couldn’t imagine Amanda being able to withstand the pressure of hers.

  • billyryan

    enzo zoff would you ever do the world a favour learn to speak english or else shut to fuck up.I am wondering which of ye is the biggest thug rude guede who stabbed a beautiful girl left her dying on the floor while he went dancing,done a deal with another thug mignini to destroy two more familys who are as innocent in this case as merridith.birds of a feather between them two.then “enzo zoff”and “jim said”who use a photograph of amanda and fantasise about her crying in a cell in italy to wank every night,i think the only way ye can manage this is yere vision of innocence tears and beauty,like i said i cant make up my mind which of the four of ye is the sickest thug.i think i will leave it up to mary H GARY OR JOHN WINTERS to solve my dilemma

  • PhanuelB

    ColonelHall:

    Does your copy of “the Monster of Florence” have the discussion in the Afterword on pages 325-327 of Spezi’s meeting with Francesca Bene?

    What is your opinion on that?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyryan said
    am February 8 2010 @ 4:33 pm

    “enzo zoff would you ever do the world a favour learn to speak english or else shut to fuck up.”

    Wow! This is amazing coming from somebody that has no knowledge whatsoever of the most elementary rules of punctuation, spelling and grammar.

    Colonelhall
    How about reading also the book by Giuttari, who actually led the investigation (he was the chief inspector in charge of the case in the 1990′s when the 3 monsters were arrested) and had more access to the evidence than Spezi?

    His book in Italian is called: Il mostro. Anatomia di un’indagine (The Monster. Anatomy of an investigation), and frankly I don’t know if there is an English version out there.

    I’ve seen on Italian blogs that it’s a very good book also, with lots of insights. Although Florentines are still divided on the Monster.

    Most people believe that the 3 of them were not alone. Most still believe it was a doctor who did the ablation of the female parts from the victims (in the 1980′s in Florence practically all MD’s were put under investigation).

    Spezi’s theory of the lone Sardinian makes no sense, especially considering that one of the 3 convicted monsters confessed to the crimes, implicated the other 2, and gave enough details to believe that the 3 of them were certainly guilty.

    But on the theory of the commissioning satanic sect, the jury is still out, although most Florentines think that Mignini was on the right path. Unfortunately his Florentine colleagues didn’t agree with him and there was certainly friction between the two prosecutors’ offices (Florence in charge of the MOF and Perugia in charge of the Narducci’s case). In the end he overstepped his authority when he tried to investigate the police officials in Florence and got in trouble for it.

    But that case has nothing to do with Amanda. He wasn’t even present when the police first heard her and she implicated Lumumba. So blaming Mignini for that false accusation is a weak excuse that nobody is going to buy (except for John Winters, Mary Ho, Phallus B and few others who don’t count for $hit)

  • Mary H.

    billy, I would definitely have to give Mignini the honor, due to his positions of privilege and responsibility in society, as well as the educational opportunities he took advantage of. The other three all have social or intellectual deficienceies that provide them with an explanation, if not an excuse, for their behavior. Mignini is an insecure, vindictive power-tripper. The other three are gnats.

  • John Winters

    colonelhall says;

    (Foreword by JW: In fact, I love this bit the best because it made me LOL (laugh out loud)):

    ”I fail to see how he (Mingin) was wire tapping for personal gain.”

    I have considered the other possibilities which might account for why Mingini tapped and recorded the private telephone conversations of senior police officers and confess have only managed to come up with one: that Mingini tapped these police officers because he thought at the time that he was Batman and that Florence was Gotham City. Which is even more reason why he should be detained in either a psychiatric or a penal institution.

  • Gary

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh
    Wow you have a very foul mouth. I hope that you don’t talk like that in front of children. As far as Magnini’s other case having nothing to do with the Knock case you are so wrong. First of all it highlights the same exact motive behind the two cases (Satanic Rituals.)
    In your own words:
    Unfortunately his Florentine colleagues didn’t agree with him and there was certainly friction between the two prosecutors’ offices (Florence in charge of the MOF and Perugia in charge of the Narducci’s case). In the end he overstepped his authority when he tried to investigate the police officials in Florence and got in trouble for it.
    Does this not say a little something about his character? It most certainly does considering that he overstepped his authority and broke the law to try and get information that was not authorized by the courts. He also was found guilty of tampering with evidence amongst other things. Why are you so persistent that Magnini is such an upstanding citizen? Why do you believe that he would not go out of his way to do the same criminal acts in Amanda’s case? Why do you find Magnini to be such a great person who is only out for the truth and not to further his carrier?
    I am still waiting along with the thousands of other people for you to come out with the irrefutable evidence you claim to be in the Knock case. We are all still waiting for your reasoning behind why the knife that was used in trial as the murder weapon not being a match to the wounds on the victim and the imprints left behind of the knife. We are also waiting for an explanation as to why you believe this was a satanic sex ritual killing in which no irrefutable evidence was found implicating Amanda and Rafaelle as being at the scene of the crime. What is your motive behind all of this? Are you an American hater?
    AMANDA AND RAFAELLE ARE INNOCENT……………
    This case is the biggest miscarriage of justice since the O.J. Simpson Case. The evidence in this case is total garbage and the people behind the convictions are scared of what the Italian public would have thought if they were acquitted because of all the crap put in the tabloids, the judges were afraid of losing their jobs, and this Magnini fellow was only worried about his reputation and his carrier.
    To be perfectly frank with you; this case was not for justice but for political gain and hatred toward the Americans. Think what you want, but you know just as well as I do and many others who support Amanda that this was a lynch mob. When this is all said and done Amanda and Rafaelle will be free. The real killer (Geuda) will spend his 16 short years in jail (Which will most likely turn into 8 to 10 years in the end) and he will then go free. As far as I’m concerned and the way the American justice system works he would be spending the rest of his miserable life behind bars. Amanda and Rafaelle would have never been charged in America….

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    My date “Mary H” said: “Mignini is a vindictive power-tripper.”

    There might be some truth to thatl, as you can see in the article below.

    http://blog.panorama.it/italia/2010/02/08/i-metodi-di-giuliano-mignini-sei-mio-nemico-vai-indagato/

    PS: DISCLOSURE: “Panorama” is one of Italy’s leading weekly magazines published by Mondadori SpA. Mondadori SpA is Italy’s largest publisher which is owned by the Berlusconi family. Since Berlusconi is being investigated and undergoing multiple trials for bribing, tax evasion, false accounting etc., he has often viciously attacked Italian prosecutors (whom he accuses of being politically motivated ‘liberals’). Therefore any attack to prosecutors in this magazine (and other media belonging to Berlusconi) should be taken with a grain of salt, since often these attacks to Italian magistrates by his media outlets are intended to be self serving arguments for his reasons of not wanting to subject himself to court judgement. As you all know Berlusconi is trying all possible ways (including ad hominem immunity laws) to avoid going to court. I just wanted to mention this for the purpose of disclosure.

  • John Winters

    I don’t know which was the more frightening, your last post, or the link to the article about good ol’ Mingin’s ”list of people he’s gonna get.”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Gary said:
    “murder weapon not being a match to the wounds on the victim”
    NOT TRUE. THERE WERE 3 WOUNDS IN MEZ’ NECK. THE LARGEST WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE KNIFE SEIZED AT SOLLECITO’S APARTMENT. READ THE COURT RECORDS. IT IS CLEARLY STATED THAT THE WOUNDS WERE THE PRODUCT OF TWO DIFFERENT KNIVES (ONE SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER THAN THE OTHER). YOU CAN THINK OTHERWISE, BUT THAT’S ON THE RECORD (READ MICHELI’S SENTENCE MOTIVATION REPORT).

    “why you believe this was a satanic sex ritual killing”
    I NEVER SAID SO. MY COMMENTS REFERRED TO THE MONSTER OF FLORENCE. NOBODY SAID THAT THE KERCHER’S MURDER WAS BECAUSE OF SATANIC RITUALS. IT’S NOWHERE IN THE COURT RECORDS. IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A HYPOTHESIS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION (I DON’T KNOW), BUT IT’S NOT PART OF THE COURT RECORDS ANYWHERE. THAT HYPOTHESIS NEVER MADE IT TO COURT (IF THERE WAS EVER SUCH A HYPOTHESIS).

    “this case was not for justice but for political gain and hatred toward the Americans.”
    THAT’S PURE HOGWASH. THERE IS NO ANTI-AMERICANISM IN ITALY (ON THE CONTRARY), AND ALSO DON’T FORGET THAT TWO CONVICTED CO-DEFENDANTS ARE NOT AMERICAN (ONE IS ITALIAN AND THE OTHER IS FROM IVORY COAST BUT RAISED IN PERUGIA). THE ANTI-AMERICANISM CLAIM IS A SILLY EXCUSE BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND FEW OTHERS WHO’VE NEVER VISITED OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN STATE OF WASHINGTON (OR WHICHEVER STATE YOU LIVE IN).

    ALSO, WHOSE POLITICAL GAIN ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ITALIAN PROSECUTORS ARE NOT ELECTED LIKE IN AMERICA OR NOT EVEN APPOINTED BY GOVERNORS AND PRESIDENTS. THE POLITICAL CLAIM ARGUMENT IS VALID FOR AMERICAN PROSECUTORS RATHER, SINCE THEY OFTEN WANT TO APPEAR TO BE TOUGH ON CRIME FOR ELECTORAL REASONS. NOT SO IN ITALY WHERE THEY ARE SELECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT BODY OF MAGISTRATES (SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRATES) BASED ON THEIR COMPETENCE IN LEGAL MATTERS.

    “the judges were afraid of losing their jobs”
    IMPOSSIBLE. THE ITALIAN CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS EXTRAORDINARY PROTECTIONS. ITALIAN MAGISTRATES ARE UNMOVABLE AND CAN BE DISCIPLINED ONLY BY THE SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRATES, WHICH CAN DO SO ONLY THROUGH A MOTION VOTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS.

    “When this is all said and done Amanda and Rafaelle will be free.”
    WE’LL SEE. IT’S NOT UP TO YOU OR ME TO DECIDE.

    “Amanda and Rafaelle would have never been charged in America”
    I’M NOT SURE. THERE ARE PLENTY OF CASES IN AMERICA OF INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED WITH MUCH LESS EVIDENCE. LET’S NOT FORGET THAT ACCORDING TO THE INNOCENCE PROJECT AS OF TODAY 250 INMATES HAVE BEEN EXONERATED FROM VIOLENT CRIMES IN THE PAST FEW YEARS. THEY HAD SPENT AN AVERAGE OF 13 YEARS IN JAIL BEFORE RELEASE. ONE HAD SPENT ALREADY 35 YEARS IN JAIL (JAMES BAIN IN FLORIDA) AND 17 WERE WAITING TO BE EXECUTED IN DEATH ROW. YOU HAVE A NERVE TO IMPLY THAT THE US JUSTICE SYSTEM IS BETTER THAN THE ITALIAN ONE.

    http://www.innocenceproject.org/about/Mission-Statement.php

  • John Winters

    Al-FhakYougud says:

    ”THERE WERE 3 WOUNDS……THE LARGEST WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE KNIFE SEIZED AT SOLLECITO’S APARTMENT”

    Do you realise how terrifying it is when you say things like that seeings as Amanda’s fate is in the hands of people like you?

    Some of us are genuinely losing weight over Amanda’s predicament. Please keep that in mind before blurting out exposures like this, of your brilliant exercises in deduction.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    ‘here’s Joooohhhnnnyyyyy’

    Deep … really deep!

    ===================================================
    @Al-Fakh Yugoudh:

    I have followed your posts and those of colonelhall with interests, and i hope you don’t mind me making an observation.

    I’m saying this based on my own experience of dealing with the likes of John ‘here’s Joooohhhnnnyy” Winters and of course our beloved Mary H, Candence or whoever she might be.

    Guys, it’s a waste of time !

    Al-Fakh Yugoudh, with the utmost respect, you fight on as if these idiots were reasonable people with a genuine desire to discuss an issue mixed with a bit of entertainment.

    They’re FOA puppets!

    Of course, it’s your choice, but there comes a time that all you do is provide fuel for their cause which is mainly to stall, stifle, distract and generally confuse all issues.

    Why do they do this?

    Because they can.

    PS. billyryan is John ‘here’s Joooohhhnnny’ Winters.

    take care,

    dixi

  • colonelhall

    “Mingini tapped these police officers because he thought at the time that he was Batman and that Florence was Gotham City. Which is even more reason why he should be detained in either a psychiatric or a penal institution.”

    Or could it be that he desperately wanted to uphold the law and not allow crooks to go free?

  • Mary H.

    I just stumbled upon this exemplary piece. It was written before the verdict, but the relatively short blog continues until more than a month afterward. There is a lot of interesting information and civil commentary in the blog as well as the essay.

    Issue of Demeanor Raised In Amanda Knox Case
    Posted November 30th 2009 at 3:52 pm by Steve Graham
    The perspective of a criminal defense attorney…

    http://www.grahamlawyerblog.com/2009/11/30/issue-of-demeanor-raised-in-amanda-knox-case/

  • Shane

    “Most people believe that the 3 of them were not alone. Most still believe it was a doctor who did the ablation of the female parts from the victims (in the 1980’s in Florence practically all MD’s were put under investigation).”

    This is such rubbish. Everyone except Mignini and Guattari thought it was a lone serial killer, yet those two came up with this crazy multiple killer theory in which female body parts were used in satanic rituals. Everyone thought Narducci’s suicide was just, well, a suicide, but Mignini and Guattari decided it had to be staged and furthermore, that his body had been switched with someone else’s before it was buried. When it was exhumed and found in fact to be Narducci’s, they simply claimed that it had been switched again! (Shades of their theory on the knife, there: ‘the knife doesn’t fit the wounds? No problem, there must’ve been two!’). It’s completely insane.

  • Shane

    “Or could it be that he desperately wanted to uphold the law and not allow crooks to go free?”

    No, that’s not it.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Shane:

    “No, that’s not it.”

    why not, shane?

    dixi

  • Gary

    Al Fakh said:
    3 WOUNDS IN MEZ’ NECK. THE LARGEST WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE KNIFE SEIZED AT SOLLECITO’S APARTMENT.

    Compatible! Compatible with what? Compatible with the millions of other knifes in the world like that one. Come now. Do you actually believe that they would be so careful not to leave any irrefutable evidence at the crime scene, yet so stupid to put the knife that you claim was used in the murder back in Solecito’s house? (Must be that knife was made of gold and they didn’t want to part with it.) Would you take the murder weapon back to your house and put it back in your kitchen drawer if you just killed your girlfriend’s roommate with it?

    Al Fakh said:
    NOT SO IN ITALY WHERE THEY ARE SELECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT BODY OF MAGISTRATES (SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRATES. BASED ON THEIR COMPETENCE IN LEGAL MATTERS.
    Do you really think Magnini is competent? He’s about as competent as George Bush was as President of the U.S.A.

  • John Winters

    colonelhall says:

    “Or could it be that he desperately wanted to uphold the law and not allow crooks to go free?”

    No that IS exactly it Shane. Batman didn’t want crooks like The Riddler, Joker, Penguin, or Chief of Police Giuseppe De Donno to go free.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Gary:

    “Do you really think Magnini is competent?”

    Have you asked Amanda?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Gary:

    you say:

    “….. yet so stupid to put the knife that you claim was used in the murder back in Solecito’s house? (Must be that knife was made of gold and they didn’t want to part with it.) Would you take the murder weapon back to your house and put it back in your kitchen drawer if you just killed your girlfriend’s roommate with it?”

    The answer is yes, of course. That’s how murderer’s get caught, dopey.

    You should check out Mathew Hardman a 17 year old Welsh kid who stabbed 22 times a 90 year old lady.

    The only lead the police had were footprints made by a rare brand of runners. A million to one chance tip-off got the police searching this kid’s bedroom.

    Guess what they found? Under the bed, were his runners. They searched the whole bedroom of course and found the knife in his wardrobe with the old lady’s blood/DNA.

    Wanna know what else is interesting about this case? The DNA trace found on the knife was LESS than that found on S’s knife! HE had ‘cleaned’ it too, or at least he thought he had. And, the sample was a lot older than 47 days.

    There’s an old adage amongst litigation lawyers; NEVER ask a question unless you KNOW the answer.

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Buzz off says:

    ”You should check out Mathew Hardman a 17 year old Welsh kid who stabbed 22 times a 90 year old lady.”

    Oh not that old chestnut. Hardman was psychotic and killed the old lady as part of a self-tailored ritual, cutting out her heart and drinking her blood!! Now if you’re going to start Mingin-like fantasising about Amanda and Raffaele again, there’s no point in continuing this discussion.

    Busy bee says:

    ”Guess what they found? Under the bed, were his runners. They searched the whole bedroom of course and found the knife in his wardrobe with the old lady’s blood/DNA.”

    The only runners with any relevance to the case in question are a pair of Nike Outbreak 2′s owned by ”Rudy.”

    There was NO BLOOD ON THE KNIFE.

    The DNA trace ”found” on Raffaelle’s knife by Steffanoni (for chrissake!) was so small as to be probably caused by cross contamination in the lab and would not have made it to court in the US or UK.

  • PhanuelB

    “The DNA trace found on the knife was LESS than that found on S’s knife!”

    Please provide a source for this claim.

  • Shane

    “Please provide a source for this claim.”

    I second this; I’ve seen no mention of the amount of DNA found on the knife, nor evidence of how it was handled and tested.

    Imagine what Mignini would’ve made of the Matthew Hardman case. He’d probably have argued someone staged the break-in through the window and that it was a ritualistic sacrifice by multiple attackers (well, he’d be a little closer to the truth than he is in the Kercher case at least).

  • Shane

    John Winters said: “No that IS exactly it Shane. Batman didn’t want crooks like The Riddler, Joker, Penguin, or Chief of Police Giuseppe De Donno to go free.”

    Ah yes! It all makes sense now. Silly me :p

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shame said: “This is such rubbish. Everyone except Mignini and Guattari thought it was a lone serial killer, yet those two came up with this crazy multiple killer theory in which female body parts were used in satanic rituals.”

    Were you living in Florence throughout the 1980′s? I was, and served my military service in the Carabinieri.

    You’re more informed than me? I think not.

    Don’t forget that one of the 3 monsters (Giancarlo Lotti) confessed to at least some of the crimes and implicated the other two with very detailed elements that somebody extraneous to the crimes would not know.
    Another of the 3 monsters (Piero Pacciani) was seen in two occasions near two separate murder sites. Also a bullet from the murder weapon used in all murders (a Beretta caliber 22) was found in his garden behind his house in Mercatale Val di Pesa, just south of Florence.
    Lotti also stated in court that there were “very up high people” whose name he couldn’t mention, who purchased the body parts from them.
    Investigators found that conspicuous sums of money were deposited at various occasions in the 3 monsters’ bank accounts. Sums which are not consistent with the modest means of a retired small farmer and a postal worker.

    The lone serial killer might have been the initial hypothesis, but once those 3 were caught and those confessions were made, it was clear that there were more than one killer.

    Don’t just read Spezi’s theory of the lone Sardinian sheperd and think it’s the Gospel.

  • Where oh where?

    Al said: “ALSO, WHOSE POLITICAL GAIN ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? ITALIAN PROSECUTORS ARE NOT ELECTED LIKE IN AMERICA OR NOT EVEN APPOINTED BY GOVERNORS AND PRESIDENTS. THE POLITICAL CLAIM ARGUMENT IS VALID FOR AMERICAN PROSECUTORS RATHER, SINCE THEY OFTEN WANT TO APPEAR TO BE TOUGH ON CRIME FOR ELECTORAL REASONS. NOT SO IN ITALY WHERE THEY ARE SELECTED BY AN INDEPENDENT BODY OF MAGISTRATES (SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRATES) BASED ON THEIR COMPETENCE IN LEGAL MATTERS.

    “the judges were afraid of losing their jobs”
    IMPOSSIBLE. THE ITALIAN CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS EXTRAORDINARY PROTECTIONS. ITALIAN MAGISTRATES ARE UNMOVABLE AND CAN BE DISCIPLINED ONLY BY THE SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRATES, WHICH CAN DO SO ONLY THROUGH A MOTION VOTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS.”

    Doesn’t this scare the hell out of you? Don’t you get it, there is no one who can stop a rogue prosecutor!!!! A majority of this council has to agree. OK. How often has this happened in Italian history? And, if it has, who was the prosecutor and why was he or she removed from office?

    Al, I am truly interested in this bit of Italian history. I would like some insight on what it takes to get a prosecutor removed from office and how many have been removed.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shane said: “Do you really think Magnini is competent? He’s about as competent as George Bush was as President of the U.S.A.”

    Magistrates in Italy are selected through a rigorous set of tests and interviews in law principles and practice. Not all might turn out to be great magistrates, but do you have a better way to select candidates for a job? It sure beats having the people elect judges and District Attorneys in State elections.

    You just mentioned Bush, whom you describe as incompetent. Bush was elected twice by a majority of Americans (the first time nearly a majority), and there is the possibility that the next time around Americans might elect an even less competent person, just because she’s got a pretty face and a cute behind.
    Well! That’s the type of people that sometime get selected through popular suffrage.

  • Where oh where?

    Al Said: “You just mentioned Bush, whom you describe as incompetent. Bush was elected twice by a majority of Americans (the first time nearly a majority), and there is the possibility that the next time around Americans might elect an even less competent person, just because she’s got a pretty face and a cute behind.
    Well! That’s the type of people that sometime get selected through popular suffrage.”

    At least the American public has a chance to get rid of someone they feel is incompetent. But what choice does the Italian public have if they feel a judge or prosecutor is incompetent? None. No wonder they buckle under to the pressures placed on them by a rogue prosecutor.

  • Where oh where?

    Al, dear, what you are really proving is that judges and prosecutors in Italy enjoy an almost unprecedented amount of power with an almost nonexistent lack of any checks or balances. It’s really frightening.

    No wonder mignini is getting away with it.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    WOW said: “what choice does the Italian public have if they feel a judge or prosecutor is incompetent?”

    The removal of an incompetent prosecutor (or even just disciplinary action) is the responsibility of the Superior Council of Magistrates. Such council is composed of 24 appointed members and 3 de jure members (The president of Italy, The Prime President of the Supreme Court, and the Prosecutor General before the Suprem court). The 24 elected members are elected as follows:
    16 are judges elected by the entire body of magistrates nationwide.
    8 are University professors of law elected by Parliament.
    The Chairman of the Council is the President of Italy.
    The Vice Chairman is elected by the council choosing among the 8 members elected by Parliament.

    This body is responsible for:
    -Hiring
    -Training
    -Transfering
    -Disciplining
    -Terminating
    the Italian magistrates.

    Magistrates do get disciplined and even fired by the CSM.

    But you wouldn’t know. Since you don’t read Italian newspapers.

    Also notes that even in America not all states elect District Attorneys. In several states they are appointed by the Governor, and therefore Americans can’t vote them out either.
    State Assistant DA’s are not elected either. They’re hired by each district.
    You should learn how things work in your own country before criticizing how things work in others’.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    WOW: Al, dear, what you are really proving is that judges and prosecutors in Italy enjoy an almost unprecedented amount of power with an almost nonexistent lack of any checks or balances. It’s really frightening.”

    Ignorance is sovereign in your brain.

    Although the Superior Council of Magistrates (Italian acronym CSM) is an independent self governing body, the constitution guarantees checks and balances by:

    1- requiring that 1/3 are representatives sent by Parliament (Check and Balance by the Legislative power).
    2- requiring that 2/3 are representatives by the judiciary (check and balance from the Judicial Power)
    3- requiring that the council is chaired by the President of Italy (Check and Balance from the Executive).

    Why don’t you study some constitutional law before talking.

  • Where oh where?

    Al Said: “But you wouldn’t know. Since you don’t read Italian newspapers.”

    I asked you to give me sources for the removal of any judge or prosecutor. I can get the Italian stories translated. I wanted to see what charges were brought against any of the judges or prosecutors that have been removed. I am curious about this part of Italian history. I would like to the so called “in and outs” of the dismissal process.
    Thanks in advance.

  • Where oh where?

    Al Said: “Why don’t you study some constitutional law before talking.”

    I have never pretended to being a lawyer or to having studied Italy’s constitutional law. I’m just an average person with a lot of curiosity. I’m not that adroit with words so I can only try to express my thoughts as best I can.

    OK, I get what your saying about the checks and balances, at least on paper. How do these checks and balances work in the real world? That’s why I was asking about giving me some help in finding cases of where judges or prosecutors have been removed from office and the reasons behind these removals.

  • Where oh where?

    Al said: “Although the Superior Council of Magistrates (Italian acronym CSM) is an independent self governing body, the constitution guarantees checks and balances by:

    1- requiring that 1/3 are representatives sent by Parliament (Check and Balance by the Legislative power).
    2- requiring that 2/3 are representatives by the judiciary (check and balance from the Judicial Power)
    3- requiring that the council is chaired by the President of Italy (Check and Balance from the Executive).”

    Sorry, Al, I just keep thinking of things to ask.

    Does the judge and/or prosecutor brought before this council also get 3 bites of the apple? Do they get to appeal? Do they get to appeal more than once? Do they get to stay in office while the council goes about trying to fire them?

    Or do they just get a letter in the mail that says they’re fired?

  • Where oh where?

    Al said: “Also notes that even in America not all states elect District Attorneys. In several states they are appointed by the Governor, and therefore Americans can’t vote them out either.
    State Assistant DA’s are not elected either. They’re hired by each district.
    You should learn how things work in your own country before criticizing how things work in others’.”

    I’ll tell you something, Al, I come from a city that had a rogue prosecutor who had a rogue forensic helper who put a lot of innocent folks in jail. It took over 20 years to bring the pair down, and in actuality, the prosecutor retired and the forensic helper was just fired from her job. No criminal charges are pending for all the harm these two people did, and it’s doubtful that any criminal charges will ever be brought. You see, some of the people they “brought to justice” were put to death in those 20 years and I guess no one wants to open that can of worms.

    So, I am acutely aware of what can happen in court cases. I am not claiming that this is what happened in the Amanda and Raffaele trial, but I see lots of things that are questionable. And I can’t help but ask for answers, even if I’m stupid or ignorant or whatever.

  • IVSTITIA

    Where on Where: in reference to your request to Al-Fakh.

    This is the most famous recent expulsion of a judge from the judiciary by the CSM:
    http://www.corriere.it/cronache/10_gennaio_22/csm-rimozione-giudice-tosti-crocefisso-aula_152fed4c-0753-11df-8946-00144f02aabe.shtml

    It was the case of a judge who refused to have the crucifix in his courtroom. Crucifixes are mandatory in the Italian court room, if you can believe that. Since I’m an atheist don’t ask me to justify such stupid law in clear violation, in my opinion, of the principle of separation of Church and State, also present in the Italian constitution at art. 7. It’s the cultural heritage from the Pope’s temporal power I guess. Forget the judges and prosecutors, those who hold the most power in Italy are the bishops.

    The article below is from a legal professional website. It cites some statistics on the increased disciplinary action by the CSM after the recent reform of the disciplinary procedures. Full removal of a magistrate is not really common, unless they do something really serious (like going against the will of the Catholic church, as we saw above). More common are other types of disciplinary actions, such as suspensions, demotions, transfers etc. http://www.studiocataldi.it/news_giuridiche_asp/news_giuridica_6984.asp

  • John Winters

    Al-FhakYoup says:

    ”Were you living in Florence throughout the 1980’s? I was, and served my military service in the Carabinieri. You’re more informed than me? I think not.”

    Well I think we all agree here that military service in the Carabineri or the police force in Italy has been proved not to equate with an in-depth knowledge of how any particular criminal case works or who is guilty and who is not, those kinds of boring details that get in the way of you being able to strut around in your fancy uniform, showing off to the girls!!

  • IVSTITIA

    JW: “Well I think we all agree here that military service in the Carabineri or the police force in Italy has been proved not to equate with an in-depth knowledge of how any particular criminal case works or who is guilty and who is not, those kinds of boring details that get in the way of you being able to strut around in your fancy uniform, showing off to the girls!!”

    True! However whoever lived in or around Florence in those years certainly had a lot of exposure to the case, since it was an obsessive presence in the press.

    I’m certain the Carabinieri, even the ones who chose to serve just for a year as auxiliaries in the then compulsory military service, had their “monster” prevention duties, such as patrolling every single secluded road in the countryside to make sure nobody would be so silly to have sex in their cars.

    No chance for Al-Fakh to show off his uniform with the girls nowadays. The service in the Carabinieri as auxiliary was eliminated with the implementation of an all volunteer military (like in the US) at the beginning of this millennium.

  • Shane

    AFG wrote: “Don’t forget that one of the 3 monsters (Giancarlo Lotti) confessed to at least some of the crimes and implicated the other two with very detailed elements that somebody extraneous to the crimes would not know.
    Another of the 3 monsters (Piero Pacciani) was seen in two occasions near two separate murder sites. Also a bullet from the murder weapon used in all murders (a Beretta caliber 22) was found in his garden behind his house in Mercatale Val di Pesa, just south of Florence.
    Lotti also stated in court that there were “very up high people” whose name he couldn’t mention, who purchased the body parts from them.”

    The trouble with the Monster of Florence theories Mignini and Guattari came up with is that there’s no evidence for these rituals involving a cult that needed female body parts; it’s fantasy, just like the orgy/murder scenario Mignini’s outlined for the Kercher case. Lotti, I believe, was a bit of a nutjob (if I’m thinking of the right person) and all the people accused were vulnerable in one way or another. Guattari is now a best-selling crime novelist, which is probably where Mignini should set his sights too.

    From the FBI profile of the killer (conveniently ignored by the crazy conspiracy theorists):

    “These eight assaults were, in the opinion of the analysts examining the submitted materials, perpetrated by the same offender, who acted alone. The attacks themselves are classified as “lust murders.” FBI research into crimes of violence indicates that lust murders typically involve the mutilation and/or displacement of the victim’s breasts , genitals or rectum.”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19313866/ns/dateline_nbc/

    An interesting read.

  • Shane

    AFY said: “Shane said: “Do you really think Magnini is competent? He’s about as competent as George Bush was as President of the U.S.A.””

    Erm, no I didn’t. I’d probably agree, though.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shane said: “The trouble with the Monster of Florence theories Mignini and Guattari came up with is that there’s no evidence for these rituals involving a cult that needed female body parts; it’s fantasy

    IT’S TRUE THAT IT WAS NEVER CONFIRMED. BUT THAT POSSIBILITY WAS BASED ON ANONYMOUS LETTERS RECEIVED BY THE INVESTIGATORS. IT WASN’T STRAIGHT OUT OF MIGNINI’S OR GIUTTARI’S IMAGINATION. REGARDING NARDUCCI’S CORPSE WHICH WAS SWITCHED, YOU SAID IT WAS A SIMPLE SUICIDE. EXPLAIN TO ME THE DRUGS AND THE FRACTURED NECK BONE (INDICATING POSSIBLE STRANGULATION) FOUND IN THE AUTOPSY PERFORMED AFTER EXHUMATION IN 2002. ALSO EXPLAIN IT TO NARDUCCI’S WIFE WHO SAID SHE CATEGORICALLY REFUTES THE POSSIBILITY THAT HER HUSBAND COMMITTED SUICIDE FOR ANY REASON.

    “Lotti, I believe, was a bit of a nutjob (if I’m thinking of the right person)”
    I WOULDN’T DEFINE PEOPLE WHO COMMITTED CRIMES SUCH AS THOSE VERY NORMAL PEOPLE. THAT DOESN’T MEAN HIS CONFESSION WAS FAKE. HOW DID HE LEARN THE DETAILS OF THE KILLING OF THE TWO GERMANS?

    “From the FBI profile of the killer (conveniently ignored by the crazy conspiracy theorists)”

    SO THE FBI PROFILES ARE THE GOSPEL? THEY’RE ALWAYS RIGHT 100% OF THE TIME?
    IN THAT CASE NO NEED TO HAVE AN APPEAL IN PERUGIA. RAFFAELE SOLLECITO IS DEFINITELY 100%GUILTY. ACCORDING TO THE FBI THE TYPICAL PROFILE OF A MURDERER COMMITTING A CRIME SIMILAR TO THE ONE IN PERUGIA IS A WHITE MALE. ET VOILA’. CASE SOLVED. SEND RUDY HOME TOMORROW!

  • Where oh where?

    “One of Spezi’s big scoops had been the discovery of a report prepared for Inspector Perugini by the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit in Quantico, Virginia. It had been commissioned in secret and then suppressed, because it didn’t describe Pacciani. The report cataloged the killer’s likely characteristics, explained his probable motive, and speculated as to how and why he killed, how he chose his targets, what he did with the body parts he collected, and much more. Its conclusion was that the Monster was of a type well known to the FBI: a lone, sexually impotent male with a pathological hatred of women, who satisfied his libidinous cravings through killing.”

  • Where oh where?

    ““From the FBI profile of the killer (conveniently ignored by the crazy conspiracy theorists)”

    SO THE FBI PROFILES ARE THE GOSPEL? THEY’RE ALWAYS RIGHT 100% OF THE TIME?
    IN THAT CASE NO NEED TO HAVE AN APPEAL IN PERUGIA. RAFFAELE SOLLECITO IS DEFINITELY 100%GUILTY. ACCORDING TO THE FBI THE TYPICAL PROFILE OF A MURDERER COMMITTING A CRIME SIMILAR TO THE ONE IN PERUGIA IS A WHITE MALE. ET VOILA’. CASE SOLVED. SEND RUDY HOME TOMORROW!”

    I wish the prosecution would commission a profile of the person who murdered Meredith, see who the profile actually fits. This profile is a tool only but it can be very informative and while I know the FBI isn’t 100% right, I would bet they are right far more often than they are wrong.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    WOW: “Its conclusion was that the Monster was of a type well known to the FBI: a lone, sexually impotent male with a pathological hatred of women, who satisfied his libidinous cravings through killing.”

    SHOULD WE ASSUME THAT CRIME PROFILES BY LAW ENFORCEMENT ARE ALWAYS 100% RIGHT?

    OK DEAL!! THEY CONVICTED THE WRONG MONSTER OF FLORENCE.

    THEN WE MUST CONCLUDE THAT, BY THE SAME TOKEN, RUDY IS INNOCENT, BECAUSE THAT CRIME FITS THE PROFILE OF A WHITE MALE, ACCORDING TO CRIMINOLOGISTS’ PROFILES.

    DO WE WANT TO GO WITH RAFFAELE AS THE ONLY CULPRIT?

  • Where oh where?

    Al,
    Did the FBI do a profile that I am unaware of?

    You say “THEN WE MUST CONCLUDE THAT, BY THE SAME TOKEN, RUDY IS INNOCENT, BECAUSE THAT CRIME FITS THE PROFILE OF A WHITE MALE, ACCORDING TO CRIMINOLOGISTS’ PROFILES.”

    I say, Huh?

    The FBI drew their conclusions on the monster of Florence killer based on evidence submitted to them, they didn’t just pull it out of the air. You equate this specific FBI profile with a general criminologists profile. They’re not the same.

    Give the FBI profilers the evidence on the Meredith Kercher case and see what conclusions they reach. I know this won’t happen, at least not in Italy, but I bet we see profilers popping out in some of the many books slated to come out about this trial.

  • colonelhall

    I am nearing the end of the Monster Of Florence and a ripping good yarn it is! Spezzi’s theory seems very convincing. However, after following the kercher case, I am inclined to take everything with a pinch of salt.
    I am nearing the end of the book and Spezzi is now in prison being denied his rights, it appears. However, the chances that he really was on the verge of solving the case, in the manner described, seems just too incredible for words. At this stage, I have the feeling that he and Preston could have been up to no good.
    I am sorry that i cannot read Italian, as I would like to have had the opportunity of viewing the case from Giuttari point of view.
    I still do not consider that it impacts on the kercher case. Knox and Sollecito appear to be as guilty as sin.

  • Where oh where?

    Reading the micheli report, I see there are 3 bloody towels reported, 1 on the bed and 2 on the floor. It is my understanding that these towels mildewed so no evidence could be gained from them. Is this true? I can find no mention of the towels in any of the trial reports I have read.

    Why or how would/could the forensic police let all 3 towels mildew?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Hey ColonelHall:

    here is how to buy the book by Giuttari:
    http://libri.rizzoli.rcslibri.it/sclibro.php?isbn=17009792

    And this is what it says in the website

    Michele Giuttari
    The Monster. Anatomy of an investigation.

    Read the first chapter online

    Euro: 18.00
    Pages: 364
    Buy online

    I wrote the incontrovertible investigative truth of a police investigation in many ways unique in the world: the crimes of the Monster of Florence.

    Between 1974 and 1985 a series of atrocious murders disrupts the outskirts of Florence, seven couples are massacred in isolated places where they had hidden themselves during their love encounters. Two German tourists (one of which is mistaken for a woman because he wore long hair) suffer the same fate. In some cases the corpses of the victims are horribly mutilated to remove gruesome trophies. The investigations follows different tracks, then focuses on a farmer, Pietro Pacciani, who is in the meanwhile in prison for sexually assaulting his daughters. The evidence collected get him sentenced to life imprisonment in 1994, but they do not satisfy the prosecutor Piero Luigi Vigna. How could a man “rude” and ignorant as Pacciani do everything himself, deceiving the police multiple times and even demonstrating skills of surgeon? The appeal process is set for January 1996; Vigna decides to reopen the investigation and entrusts the right man: Michele Giuttari, newly appointed Head of Mobile Squad of the Tuscan capital. Giuttari immersed himself in the case files, in the minutes of the interrogations, investigating, questioning and becomes convinced that the truth is very different from that established by the court ruling: omissions, ignored evidence, a climate of fear is still palpable as if people knew that the “monster” may return to strike at any moment, while silence and innuendo, rumors, rumors that one must have the patience to connect. And little by little Giuttari comes to the certainty that Pacciani CAN NOT HAVE ACTED ALONE. The investigations, masterfully reconstructed in this book by the one who was the protagonist, will cause the conviction of the so called “pic-nic friends” of the Mercatale peasant (Pacciani), friends with whom he executed his heinous crimes, but Giuttari also realizes that above them there must have been an unsuspected person who was pulling the strings, commissioned the killings, and collected those dismal trophies as fetishes. Pacciani died in obscure circumstances and at this point investigations are inexplicably hampered by Giuttari’s superiors, and Giuttari was receiving increasingly pressing calls to stop further investigations. But Giuttari does not give up, he completes his work, but here are his final bitter words: “My time has expired. I collected a dossier throughout the investigation, which contains the incontrovertible investigative truth. Time will tell if the investigative truth will coincide with the judicial one or, as it has unfortunately happened once in this affair, the two will eventually diverge. A book by a law man who does not resign himself to half-truths and dares to demand that light be shed on one of the bloodiest series of crimes that have rocked our country.

  • Shane

    “IT’S TRUE THAT IT WAS NEVER CONFIRMED. BUT THAT POSSIBILITY WAS BASED ON ANONYMOUS LETTERS RECEIVED BY THE INVESTIGATORS. IT WASN’T STRAIGHT OUT OF MIGNINI’S OR GIUTTARI’S IMAGINATION. REGARDING NARDUCCI’S CORPSE WHICH WAS SWITCHED, YOU SAID IT WAS A SIMPLE SUICIDE. EXPLAIN TO ME THE DRUGS AND THE FRACTURED NECK BONE (INDICATING POSSIBLE STRANGULATION) FOUND IN THE AUTOPSY PERFORMED AFTER EXHUMATION IN 2002. ALSO EXPLAIN IT TO NARDUCCI’S WIFE WHO SAID SHE CATEGORICALLY REFUTES THE POSSIBILITY THAT HER HUSBAND COMMITTED SUICIDE FOR ANY REASON.”

    I can’t remember any anonymous letters which spoke of Satanic rituals, the Order of the Rose and so forth. I think those theories were lifted mostly from the blog of an Italian psychic, Gabriela Carlizzi.

    As for the Narducci suicide, his body was exhumed years after his death, and he’d also been in the water for several days before his body was found. The bone in his neck could have broken at any point during that time. This is the problem with seeing medical evidence as absolutely conclusive. There was a witness who saw Narducci in his boat out on the lake at the time he disappeared; when he glanced over at him a few minutes later, he’d disappeared. It was a suicide that Mignini interpreted as ‘staged’ and a ‘cover-up’. Sounding familiar?

    “I WOULDN’T DEFINE PEOPLE WHO COMMITTED CRIMES SUCH AS THOSE VERY NORMAL PEOPLE. THAT DOESN’T MEAN HIS CONFESSION WAS FAKE. HOW DID HE LEARN THE DETAILS OF THE KILLING OF THE TWO GERMANS?”

    When I say he was a nutjob, I don’t mean he was a psychotic murderer, I mean he wasn’t all there: “Lotti was a sort of village idiot of the classic kind that have largely disappeared from the modern world, a man who subsisted on the charity of the village, who was fed, clothed, and housed by his fellow citizens, and who entertained all with his unwitting antics. Lotti hung about the town square, grinning and hailing people… He maintained himself in a felicitous state of inebriation, consuming two liters of wine a day, more on holidays”.

    He was completely wrong in the details of his initial statements about the crime, and his account only began to line up with the prosecution’s after he’d spent several months talking to them (with free lodgings, food, and plentiful wine available). Reminiscent of Kokomani and Curatola in the Kercher case.

    “SO THE FBI PROFILES ARE THE GOSPEL? THEY’RE ALWAYS RIGHT 100% OF THE TIME?
    IN THAT CASE NO NEED TO HAVE AN APPEAL IN PERUGIA. RAFFAELE SOLLECITO IS DEFINITELY 100%GUILTY. ACCORDING TO THE FBI THE TYPICAL PROFILE OF A MURDERER COMMITTING A CRIME SIMILAR TO THE ONE IN PERUGIA IS A WHITE MALE. ET VOILA’. CASE SOLVED. SEND RUDY HOME TOMORROW!”

    Say what? You can’t just equate the profile of the Monster of Florence killer with an entirely different crime. The profile for a rapist/murderer who acted in the way this attacker did would be completely different.

  • Shane

    I forgot to mention that the reason they initially became suspicious that Narducci’s suicide was really a murder is because they misinterpreted a tapped phone call from some drug dealers in which they talked about doing the same to another person as was done to the doctor at the lake. Turned out they were talking about a completely different doctor who’d been shot, but by that time it was too late, Mignini was away with the fairies.

    (Again, sounding familiar? ‘See you later?’, anyone?)

  • Mary H.

    A-FY wrote: “Were you living in Florence throughout the 1980’s? I was, and served my military service in the Carabinieri.”

    When did you have time to manage your Mideast oil wells, and your factory, and to work as a male model?

  • billyryan

    enzo zoff people up to the age of five talk gibberish or people with the mental age of five, since i think it was a long time since you were five i think you should be removed from this blog on the grounds of limited mental ability.al_fake_dogshite just when i thought the standered of this blog was about to improve with your absence you make your reapearence i suppose at least it got rid of your proxys.any chance you would inform us which part of the framing of amanda enables you to get it up.surley there must be a high rise building somewhere close to you with concrete underneath to enable you to do the world a favour

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Now, I’m not saying that Giuttari was necessarily right. But who do you think had all the elements to make a better guess? Spezi (a journalist) or Giuttari (the investigator in charge of the case)?

    And regarding Narducci. According to his wife and police investigation the doctor used to drive often from Perugia to Mercatale where he was friend with the pharmacist. One of the 3 convicted monsters, Mario Vanni, recognized his photo and said: “oh yeah! that’s the doctor from Perugia. He used to come to Mercatale and used to go out to prostitutes and various “parties” with his friend (the pharmacist) in Mercatale. Uhmmmmmmm! Coincidence? The doctor from Perugia whom investigators think was killed rather than suicidal used to go very often to the same town where the 3 monsters were from. What a coincidence?

    And guess what? After he was found dead (killed? drowned?) in 1985 the monster’s crimes suddenly stopped. The monster used to kill once or twice every summer in the 1980′s, but suddenly, he stopped after his last murder in the summer of 1985. Coincidentally Narducci was found dead in October of that year.

    What a F…ing coincidence!!! A doctor from Perugia goes all the time to the small town of Mercatale to visit his friends, the same town where the 3 convicted monsters were from, died, maybe strangulated, in misterious circumstances and suddenly all monster murders stop in that same year.

    But noooooo! I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.
    I’m sure the real monster, as Spezi suspects, was some lone Sardinian sheperd who couldn’t get it up with women (or sheep).

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H.: When did you have time to manage your Mideast oil wells, and your factory, and to work as a male model?

    I was Carabiniere only for a year (actually 15 months).

    Hey Mary H.: would you like to date a former male model? and ex carabiniere as well? I still look good in a uniform. Send me your picture, I want to see if you’re really a woman first.

  • Mary H.

    Well, let’s hear more about those oil wells first.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    hillbillyryan: for sure when you’re in this blog the standards of English spelling really drop very low. Why don’t you try and get a GED, and then come back?

  • Mary H.

    I would hate to see the rules of grammar get in the way of billyryan’s originality, creativity and brilliance.

  • Mary H.

    Has anyone been over to truejustice lately and seen these titles?

    “Meredith’s Perugia #21: We Return To The Amalfi Coast As Meredith Might Very Well Have Done”

    “Meredith’s Perugia #23: A Moving Video Of The Venice That Meredith Might Really Have Loved”

    YIKES.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    You don’t like those places Mary H?

    Have you ever been to either? You would enjoy them. They are much more beautiful than rainy Seattle.

  • Mary H.

    Al, it’s not like you to miss the point and change the subject so completely. Who do you think you are? Enzo Zoff?

  • Gary

    Wow I sure missed alot while at work today. Well alot of you that posted right after me summed up what I said very nicely. Thank You. As far as me be dopey; the only dopey one in this case is Magnini. I’m exahausted so all I have to say for the evening is that Amanda and Rafaelle are INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT INNOCENT……………………………..

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Amanda and Raffaele are actually both very guilty and there is a real good chance their conviction will be upheld in appeal, and then confirmed by the supreme court. Based on the timing of similar trials in Italy the appeal should be over by the end of 2012 or early 2013. The Supreme court’s sentence usually comes within a year or so after the appeal, so we can finally put this case to rest maybe in 2013. After which we can move on to something else while Amanda spends the next few years in jail. Based on the average length of stay in Italian prisons, probably she’ll be out by 2017 or 2018. She still got time to kill some other girl in Seattle when she goes back to UofW to finish her studies. Maybe this time she’ll be able to blame it on a black guy successfully.

  • Mary H.

    Al, don’t you mean a suntanned guy?

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Maty H:

    “Al, it’s not like you to miss the point and change the subject so completely. Who do you think you are? Enzo Zoff?”

    oh, Mary, Mary – you’re so sweet. Here I was thinking that you had forgotten me.

    You know, we should agree for me to stop telling the truth about you and you stop telling little furbies about me. But then, you would lose your identity.

    Tell me, Mary, Mary dear, why are you so obssesed with the TJMK site if it replulses you so much? Let it be although; i was hoping to be directed by you to your recommended sites but to no avail.

    Listen, my time is somewhat limited today, so i thought I’d binge on your posts. Loved this one to:

    “I would hate to see the rules of grammar get in the way of billyryan’s originality, creativity and brilliance.”

    But, isn’t “billyryan” really John ‘here’s Jooohhnnyy’ Winters?

    Cheeky,

    you take care now,

    dixi

  • colonelhall

    Finished “The Monster Of Florence” It had me going for a while. A really good read, which I would recommend to anyone. However, when I got to the afterword regarding the Kercher case, I realised to what extent a writer can be successful at manipulation. Having read reams about this case, I could see that Preston was ( to be kind ) economical with the truth.

  • Mary H.

    Enzo, like so many, you do not know the meaning of a true obsession (which is not surprising, given your limitations).

    As to the question of periodically visiting tjmk, well, one is not really qualified to discuss this case if one is not as fully informed as possible, eh? I’m sure you would agree that it wouldn’t hurt the anti-Amanda faction to study up on some of the Amanda support sites once in awhile, so they would actually know what they’re talking about for a change.

    As the saying goes, keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer.

    “But, isn’t “billyryan” really John ‘here’s Jooohhnnyy’ Winters?”

    If you can’t tell the difference between those two, you are an absolutely terrible judge of character.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “I’m sure you would agree that it wouldn’t hurt the anti-Amanda faction to study up on some of the Amanda support sites once in awhile, so they would actually know what they’re talking about for a change.”

    Sweetie,darling gorgeous – I agree with you.

    What a curious little darling is our MAry H [or Candence or whatever]!

    I look to you for ALL the facts on the Knox case. And, when I asked you to nominate what sites you recommend you left me to my own devices !

    And you know how limited I am!!!

    Mary H: what is the true meaning of obsession?

    ” ….. you can’t tell the difference between those two”

    No, I can’t – and so does everyone else ….

    Cheeky,

    MAry, please, take care,

    dixi

    Come on, help me out.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    oh, just realised …

    sorry about the excessive !!! …

    I’m no way as good as billyryan ….

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @colonelhall:

    “Having read reams about this case, I could see that Preston was ( to be kind ) economical with the truth.”

    I must say that I find that very difficult to believe, knowing the integrity of Preston!

    Mary, please, can you deal with this ? I’m too upset!!!!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John winters AND Mary H: [Candence, or whoever]

    Here’s Jooohhnnyyyyy:

    Bud, I just visited the TJMK site [phew, I finally found it] and they now got ANOTHER murder case on some italian chick called Sonia Marra?

    Who’s she?

    Anyway, I’m reading this article and it seems to me that it’s more italian police corruption. Very similar to Knox.

    No evidence, no DNA, no eye witnesses; nothing …. and they pin it on this poor sap [another Amanda] Umberto Bindelli!!!!

    Guys, can you help him out?

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    Oh, THAT’S what you wanted me to recommend – the pro-Amanda sites. I thought you wanted me to recommend all the places I usually get my information. Naturally, I thought you were teasing me, as usual, since I get my information from too many sites to be able to list them all, and they are always changing. If you really want to know the names of the pro-Amanda sites (ha ha, as if), here they are:

    Perugia Shock by Frank Sfarzo:
    http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/
    Italian women at the table by Candace Dempsey:
    http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/index.asp
    Friends of Amanda:
    http://www.friendsofamanda.org/
    Anne Bremner:
    http://annebremner.com/Amanda%20Knox.htm
    Free Amanda:
    http://freeamanda.livejournal.com/
    Alternate Theories – Perugia Murder:
    http://alternatetheories-perugiamurder.blogspot.com/
    Mark Waterbury:
    http://www.sciencespheres.com/
    Ray Turner:
    http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/

    This list is from a non-partisan site that provides descriptions of the cast of characters involved in the case — it’s very informative:
    http://maxlamontagne.blogspot.com/

    As for true obsession, well, let’s just say that if I were obsessed with the truejustice website, I would have mentioned its name on this page at least a hundred times or so, instead of just a few.

    I wouldn’t even say that your use of exclamation points constitutes an obsession, although there certainly are lots and lots of them!!!

    Sorry, I can’t respond to the issue of Doug Preston’s book, since I haven’t read it. What I can say is that his latest book debuted at the #4 spot on the NY Times Bestsellers List last month. SOMEBODY must think he has integrity.

  • billyryan

    enzo zoff there are classes for those who left school with only limited ability to read and write,mabey you would considder going into adult education for a few years and spare the rest of us your childish jibering.al_fake_dogshite i see how you have it all worked out how the appeal will drag out until 2113 with amanda still a hostage,and in the worst case scenario for you your saddism will have been satisfied,you were in the carabiniere for 15 months recuited mabey by mignini as the kind of man he needed working with him.i would say dogshite you are cursing your luck over having left the carabiniere,or were you dismissed,just mabey you could have been part of this case,which part of this case do you fantasise about the most”the terrosising of a young girl during her questioning”or”mignini making the case that amanda and raffaela could interfere with the evidence if giving bail”the judge that accepted that is probally finding it hard to sleep,or is it really the thought that you could have been the policeman that seperated a crying and terrified girl from her crying and frightened three sisters and mother,and put her into a prison van for a trip to hell,for a crime you know well she had nothing to do with.the only problem with your pridiction for how this case will pan out in the future,is your belief that amanda wont meet a judge who is not a saddist or terrified of your pal mignini or a piontus piolet and leave it to the next judge to decide,mabey it has already being decided that amanda and raffaela will be given bail in 2010 in the hope that the shame the rape of amanda knox has brought on italy will ease.in any case please give an undertaking to the world that you wont breed

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    hillbillyryan: Given the large amount of spelling, punctuation and grammar mistakes you can pack in a single sentence, have you thought that maybe (or should I say ‘mabey’) you’re the one who needs to go back to school? I bet you attended the same school Amanda went to.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Yep, Mr. hillbilly: Amanda is not going to get done with the trials before 2013. Unless she gets acquitted at the very next trial, which could end by 2012.

    But I kind of doubt it. Unless there are some major developments, she’s likely to be found guilty in appeal as well, although there is a good chance the appeal court will shave some years off from her sentence at the first trial. Since in Italy, generally inmates who aren’t dangerous criminals or terrorists are released within 12-13 years max, sometime even as early as after 7 years (although she didn’t opt for the abbreviated trial), she could be out as early as 2015 and no later than 2020. Not bad for a psycho murderer like her and Raffaele.

  • billyryan

    your guess piece _of _dogshite about amanda and i attending the one school is about as accurate as the length of time amanda and raffaela will spend in jail. The world is just giving italy a bit of slack to sort out this misscarrage of justice,the judge who convicted probally knows by now how grave an error he has made,but he still has a chance to regain his credibility,amanda and raffaela will get bail yet in march,and you will be reduced to the nobody you were before this case so excited you

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    b.illiterate.ry.anus:
    1-I believe Amanda and Raffaele are guilty, I also believe most people in Italy (including the judges) agree with me, and therefore I believe that there is a good chance they’ll be convicted in appeal as well. However nobody can be sure, and if they are acquitted more power to them. Unlike you, I won’t care one way or the other. You, on the other hand, will be either enthusiastically happy if they’re acquitted or suicidally depressed if not. As a result, you’re in a real bad shape if they are found guilty again.

    2 – Although I cannot be sure about whether they’ll be found guilty or not, I am however very familiar with the average time it takes for trials to take place in Italy and therefore my prediction on the end of the trials are pretty accurate. But you’re right that I’m wrong about you and Amanda going to the same school. You never went to any school. You are just an illiterate peasant from a 3rd world nation.

    3 – Not only are you an illiterate anus, but you’re also totally ignorant about the Italian legal system. Italy does not have a bail system, therefore your assertion that Amanda will be released on bail in March is as stupid as it gets. No Mr. BilliterateRy.anus, there is not such a thing as being released on bail in Italy while the appeals go on. You are either a flight risk, and they keep you in jail, or you are not, and they keep you out of jail. The judges decided Amanda is a flight risk, so she stays in.

    4 – You say that the judge has a chance to regain his credibility. How so? The judge (G. Massei) will not be the judge on the appeal. Once his opinion report is out in March, his work is over with this trial. Your contribution to this topic in this blog is of zero value, because you simply don’t know $HIT about anything. Why don’t you just shut up and go back to work the land with your hoe. It’s almost time to plant your crop, you illiterate peasant!

  • Enzo Zoff

    @billyryan:

    :enzo zoff there are classes for those who left school with only limited ability to read and write,mabey you would considder going into adult education for a few years and spare the rest of us your childish jibering.”

    billyryan, I want to go to the same school; you went to; I want to wear an all white uniform too, ok?

    which one was that?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “Sorry, I can’t respond to the issue of Doug Preston’s book, since I haven’t read it. What I can say is that his latest book debuted at the #4 spot on the NY Times Bestsellers List last month.”

    SOMEBODY must think he has integrity.”

    Yeah, it was ME!

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    thanks for the sites. My God there are so many!

    I didn’t know you had your own site! WOW ….

    “You can’t convict somebody of murder if you can’t place them in the murder room.”

    That’s what I thought …. have you got time to help Bindelli out?

    He wasn’t in the room either. They can’t even find the dead body, it’s missing !!!

    Who would steal a dead body? Only in Italy!

    I’m on to it; reading the sites that is ….

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    Mary H:

    some of the articles on your blog are in ITALIAN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    what’s the go ????

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @MAry H:

    You have this on your blog.

    “They point out Raffaele never met Rudy–except in court, never the best place to socialise.”

    Babe, are you sure? … coz there’s a You Tube clip of Amanda giving testimony in Court, stating that she and S had indeed met in the Piazza before.

    I just don’t capisci …

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    still on your blog, you talking about Rudy:

    “All of this by his own admission.”

    Did we ever find out if Rudy was beaten by he Police?

    dixi

  • Harry Rag

    The evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.

    Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:

    1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

    2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.

    3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.

    4. Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.

    5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.

    6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.

    7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci and Dr. Stefanoni.

    Amanda Knox’s footprints were found set in Meredith’s blood in two places in the hallway of the new wing of the cottage. One print was exiting her own room, and one print was outside Meredith’s room, facing into the room. These bloody footprints were only revealed under luminol.

    A woman’s bloody shoeprint, which matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith’s body. The bloody shoeprint was incompatible with Meredith’s shoe size.

    Two independent imprint experts categorically excluded the possibility that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat could belong to Rudy Guede. Lorenzo Rinaldi stated: ““You can see clearly that this bloody footprint on the rug does not belong to Mr. Guede, but you can see that it is compatible with Sollecito.”

    The other imprint expert print expert testified that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot.

    An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. Meredith’s bra was removed some time after she had been killed and Rudy Guede had fled the scene.

    The murder dynamic implicates Knox and Sollecito.

    Barbie Nadeau wrote the following:

    “Countless forensic experts, including those who performed the autopsies on Kercher’s body, have testified that more than one person killed her based on the size and location of her injuries and the fact that she didn’t fight back—no hair or skin was found under her fingernails.”

    Judge Paolo Micheli claimed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith’s murder that they could have only known if they were present when she was killed.

    Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. She stated on at least four separate occasions that she was the cottage when Meredith was killed.

    Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito both gave multiple conflicting alibis and lied repeatedly. Their lies were exposed by telephone and computer records, and by CCTV footage. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis for the night of the murder despite three attempt each.

    Legal expert Stefano Maffei stated the following:

    “There were 19 judges who looked at the evidence over the course of two years, faced with decisions on pre-trial detention, review of such detention, committal to trial, judgment on criminal responsibility. They all agreed, at all times, that the evidence was overwhelming.”

  • billyryan

    al_fake_dogshite i am not from a third world country.i wonder do most of italy think amanda is guilty.the judge has to explain the guilty verdict and this he can not reasnobly do,one thing i must say for mignini by the skillfull use of his power and the defamation laws he is slowing up the release of truth in this case.fair enough so lets say after march amanda is no longer a flight risk and is released for the duration of the apeals.i wonder would that ruin your wank fantasy every night

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billiterateryanus said:
    “..after march Amanda is released for the duration of the apeals.i wonder would that ruin your wank fantasy every night”

    First of all I don’t know how she could be considered not a flight risk after March, since she was considered so by all pre-trial judges, including at the Supreme court. At most they might concede her some form of house arrests, maybe in a local rehab community for drug addicts or recovering prostitutes.

    Her release while awaiting the appeals wouldn’t ruin my fantasy at all. As I said I don’t even care if she’s released and let go back to Seattle tomorrow.

    Besides Amanda is not even my type. My type is Mary H. I’ve never seen Mary H. in person but her posts in this blog make me want to bang her at night. I hope she’s not Candass Dumpsee, that would definitely be a disappointment.

  • billyryan

    gudge g massei has to explain how he rejected the defence dna experts and accepted fully the prosecution dna experts theory that merridiths dna was on the knife blade,that the collecting of the bra clasp after 47 days and the selective identifing of dna on it.he has to explain to the world how a fair judge took the word of a homeless man an in jail drugpusher who only came forward a year later that amanda was near the house,international experts have rubbished the prosecution dna evidence,the silence is deffening from dna experts in italy and abroad in support of the prosecution dna evidence,this case is now the greatest show on earth books have been written.Films will soon be made the italian defamanation laws wont save mignini when film makers in the us get to work,he is already an international hate figure,he will be portrayed in films as the lowest most reviled human being possible,the man who faces the next most criticall analsis is judge g massei,but he has one thing mignini hasent he has twenty two days to save himself from international ridicule.dogshite and harry rag will retreat up their own arse in 2010 and disapear and ye will leave mignini to stand alone.If massei is smart he will use the next twenty two days to save himself from the faith that surely awaits mignini

  • Mary H.

    You guys are making me laugh so hard I can hardly write. I’m happy to see the genius of Billy Ryan is inspiring you to become ever more creative. You know I love you, Billy, but you have to admit some of the zingers they came up with are pretty funny, including the new name given to you by Al-fake dog_shite. The ones about going out to work the land and wearing the all-white uniform made me laugh in spite of myself.

    Nevertheless, it is always Billy who can boil the subject down to its pith, i.e., “your wank fantasy every night.” That indeed is why most fellows follow the case.

    “dogshite and harry rag will retreat up their own arse in 2010 and disapear and ye will leave mignini to stand alone.” ROFL!

    Billy wrote: “Films will soon be made the italian defamanation laws wont save mignini when film makers in the us get to work,he is already an international hate figure,he will be portrayed in films as the lowest most reviled human being possible”

    Truer words were never spoken. We Americans love our human villains even more than we love monsters and aliens.

  • Gary

    Ok that shit was funny as hell about you wanting to bang Mary H. We need some humor once and awhile to break no monotony. On the other hand Amanda is definitely my type; although the herpes on her lip sort of turned me off. I think Mary H. is also a hotty even though I have never seen her, but I would still like to take a dip in her swimming pool. ROTFLMFAO. Only joking Mary.

  • Mary H.

    Al-Fakh Yuinmidreems wrote: “I’ve never seen Mary H. in person but her posts in this blog make me want to bang her at night.”

    Only at night?

  • Mary H.

    Harry Rag wrote: “Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah:

    1. Blah
    2. Blah
    3. BLah
    4. Blah
    5. Blah
    6. Blah
    7. Blah

    Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.”

  • Mary H.

    Gary wrote: “that shit was funny as hell about you wanting to bang Mary”

    What the — !?!

  • Gary

    Mary; What it’s ok sweety.

  • Gary

    Mary as long as you dont look like Magnini your alright in my book

  • Mary H.

    God help me if I look like Mignini. :D

  • Gary

    God help us all if you look like Magnini.

  • John Winters

    Mary H wrote:

    ”Harry Rag wrote: “Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah”

    Surely you lot have realised that this particular post that begins with the ”overwhelming evidence” introduction is a paste job that la grande bore Harry Rag has pasted numerous times before to numerous blogs.

    Problem is, new readers who are interested in the case will believe that some or any of it is still relevant and the rest of us (interestingly in terms of the ongoing discussions on these boards, including people like Al-Fhak and Enzo Zoff!), will be effectively retarded.

  • Mary H.

    I think Harry’s getting tired, John. I don’t see him around nearly as much as before, although, admittedly, I don’t go to very many blogs.

    He might be devoting his time to the youtube videos they’re bragging about on truejustice these days. Perhaps he realized that many of his constituents were more likely to be brainwashed by TV than by the written word. Also, he has so much time on his hands, he probably decided to vary his projects.

  • Mary H.

    I don’t intend to neglect you, Enzo! If you are actually going to look at those websites, you are gonna get quite a bit smarted up. I can’t wait to be impressed.

    You wrote: “They point out Raffaele never met Rudy….Babe, are you sure? … coz there’s a You Tube clip of Amanda giving testimony in Court, stating that she and S had indeed met in the Piazza before.”

    Your second paragraph doesn’t match your first. Amanda and Raffaele met in the Piazza; Rudy and Raffaele didn’t.

    You also wrote: “All of this by his own admission…. Did we ever find out if Rudy was beaten by he Police?”

    No, I don’t think we did. They really had no reason to beat him; they already had ironclad evidence against him. They tend only to beat girls who can’t remember their place in Mignini’s fantasy.

    I don’t have a blog; I am not Candace Dempsey. I have no doubt she has better things to do than be here, preparing her book for publication next month. Deadlines, you know! Also, if she didn’t want to read any “antis” on her own site, she certainly is not going to deliberately seek them out in the blogs.

    I am not interested in that other case.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary H. said
    am February 10 2010 @ 7:22 pm
    Al-Fakh Yuinmidreems wrote: “I’ve never seen Mary H. in person but her posts in this blog make me want to bang her at night.”

    Only at night?”

    IN CASE YOU LOOK LIKE CANDASS DUMPSAY I DON’T HAVE TO SEE YOUR FACE IN THE DARK.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Since most of you will be boycotting Italy in the near future when Amanda gets convicted in appeal, and also since most of you are so f.ing poor and stupid that couldn’t afford to travel outside of Seattle anyway, I’ll give you a tour of something in Rome. I’m sure Amanda will have a chance to visit some of these in a few years when they release her on probation.
    PS: I don’t know if you know but the Italian politicians are thinking of letting inmates spend their last two years of prison at home in a sort of house arrests with some bonus permits. Just to relieve the crowded prisons.

    Ok here is the tour that you guys would be boycotting if only you could afford to go to Italy in the first place.

    INSTRUCTIONS: After you link on the site below and select an image and it appears, then
    HOLD DOWN THE LEFT MOUSE BUTTON AND SLOWLY MOVE THE CURSOR AROUND THE ROOM. THEN CLOSE THE WINDOW AND START OVER. CLOSE BY CLICKING ON THE UPPER LEFT CORNER ARROW. BE SURE TO USE THE MOUSE WHEEL TO ZOOM IN.

    http://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_giovanni/vr_tour/index-en.html

    INSTRUCTIONS: After you link on the site below and select an image and it appears, then
    HOLD DOWN THE LEFT MOUSE BUTTON AND SLOWLY MOVE THE CURSOR AROUND THE ROOM. THEN CLOSE THE WINDOW AND START OVER. CLOSE BY CLICKING ON THE UPPER LEFT CORNER ARROW. BE SURE TO USE THE MOUSE WHEEL TO ZOOM IN.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    VERY
    INTERESTING STUFF

    In the
    1400′s a law was set forth in England that a man was allowed
    to beat his wife with a stick no thicker than his thumb.
    Hence we have ‘the rule
    of thumb’

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    Many years ago in
    Scotland , a new game was invented. It was ruled ‘Gentlemen
    Only…Ladies Forbidden’.. .and thus, the word GOLF entered
    into the English language.

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    The first couple to
    be shown in bed together on prime time TV was Fred and Wilma
    Flintstone.

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    Every day more money
    is printed for Monopoly than the U.S.
    Treasury.

    – ———— ——— ——–

    Men can read smaller
    print than women can; women can hear better.

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    Coca-Cola was
    originally green.

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    It is impossible to lick
    your elbow.

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    The State with the
    highest percentage of people who walk to work:

    Alaska

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    The percentage of
    Africa that is wilderness: 28% (now get
    this…)

    ——— ——— ——— —-

    The percentage of
    North America that is wilderness: 38%

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    The cost of raising
    a medium-size dog to the age of eleven:

    $ 16,400

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    The average number
    of people airborne over the U.S. in any given
    hour:

    61,000

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Intelligent people
    have more zinc and copper in their hair..

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    The first novel ever
    written on a typewriter, Tom Sawyer.

    – ———— ——— ——— ——— ———

    The San Francisco
    Cable cars are the only mobile National
    Monuments.

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Each king in a deck
    of playing cards represents a great king from history:

    Spades – King David

    Hearts – Charlemagne

    Clubs -Alexander,
    the Great

    Diamonds – Julius
    Caesar

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    111,111,111 x
    111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987, 654,321

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    If a statue in the
    park of a person on a horse has both front legs in the air,
    the person died in battle. If the horse has one front leg in
    the air, the person died because of wounds received in battle.
    If the horse has all four legs on the ground, the person died
    of natural causes

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Only two people
    signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4, John Hancock
    and Charles Thomson. Most of the rest signed on August 2, but
    the last signature wasn’t added until 5 years later.

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q. Half of all
    Americans live within 50 miles of what?

    A. Their birthplace

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q. Most boat owners
    name their boats. What is the most popular boat name
    requested?

    A.
    Obsession

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q.. If you were to
    spell out numbers, how far would you have to go until you
    would find the letter ‘A’?

    A. One
    thousand

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q. What do
    bulletproof vests, fire escapes, windshield wipers and laser
    printers have in common?

    A. All were invented
    by women.

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q. What is the only
    food that doesn’t spoil?

    A.
    Honey

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Q. Which day are
    there more collect calls than any other day of the
    year?

    A. Father’s
    Day

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    In Shakespeare’s
    time, mattresses were secured on bed frames by ropes.
    When you pulled on the ropes, the mattress tightened,
    making the bed firmer to sleep on. Hence the
    phrase…’Goodnight , sleep tight’

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    It was the accepted
    practice in Babylon 4,000 years ago that for a month after the
    wedding, the bride’s father would supply his son-in-law with
    all the mead he could drink… Mead is a honey beer and because
    their calendar was lunar based, this period was called the
    honey month, which we know today as the honeymoon.

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    In English pubs, ale
    is ordered by pints and quarts… So in old England , when
    customers got unruly, the bartender would yell at them ‘Mind
    your pints and quarts, and settle down.’

    It’s where we get
    the phrase ‘mind your P’s and Q’s’

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Many years ago in
    England , pub frequenters had a whistle baked into the rim, or
    handle, of their ceramic cups. When they needed a refill ,
    they used the whistle to get some service. ‘Wet your whistle’
    is the phrase inspired by this practice.

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    At least 75% of
    people who read this will try to lick their
    elbow!

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    Don’t delete this
    just because it looks weird. Believe it or not, you can read
    it.

    I cdnuolt blveiee
    taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The
    phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at
    Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the
    ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the
    first and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a
    taotl mses and you can still raed it wouthit a porbelm. This
    is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by
    istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?

    ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ———

    YOU
    KNOW YOU ARE LIVING IN 2009 when…

    1. You accidentally
    enter your PIN on the microwave..

    2. You haven’t
    played solitaire with real cards in years.

    3. You have a list
    of 15 phone numbers to reach your family of
    three.

    4. You e-mail the
    person who works at the desk next to you.

    5. Your reason for
    not staying in touch with friends and family is that they
    don’t have e-mail addresses.

    6. You pull up in
    your own driveway and use your cell phone to see if anyone is
    home to help you carry in the groceries.

    7. Every commercial
    on television has a web -site at the bottom of the screen.

    8.. Leaving the house
    without your cell phone, which you didn’t even have the first
    20 or 30 (or 60) years of your life, is now a cause for panic
    and you turn around to go and get it.

    10. You get up in
    the morning and go on-line before getting your
    coffee

    11. You start
    tilting your head sideways to smile. : )

    12 You’re reading
    this and nodding and laughing.

    13. Even worse, you
    know exactly to whom you are going to forward this
    message.

    14. You are too busy
    to notice there was no #9 on this list.

    15. You actually
    scrolled back up to check that there wasn’t a #9 on this
    list

    ~~~~~~~~~~~AND
    FINALLY~~~~~ ~~~~~~~

    NOW U R LAUGHING at
    yourself.

    Go on, forward this
    to your friends. You know you want to! Go lick your
    elbow.

  • jim

    mary h u are a typical american thats is ignorant and ofcourse supporter of a butcher woman. dont be so excited she the all american charming sociopath ain’t comin back till she hits the middle age.

  • colonelhall

    Mary “Problem is, new readers who are interested in the case will believe that some or any of it is still relevant and the rest of us (interestingly in terms of the ongoing discussions on these boards, including people like Al-Fhak and Enzo Zoff!), will be effectively retarded.”

    You’ve got that bit right!

    I don’t know, if there is anyone reading this stuff anymore, but if there is, I think that Harry is doing a great job. Better to read something relevant to the case than a whole lot of insults going back and forth endlessly.

  • Mary H.

    Hi colonehall. I am still reading. Actually, it was John Winters who made the comment you quoted. And I think we were just having some fun earlier today; I for one, did not feel insulted.

    Well, Harry has been persistent, I’ll give him that. It’s just that most of what he writes is so outdated that his opponents don’t even bother to refute it anymore; it just takes up too much room on the page.

    For example, he wrote: “1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.”

    Well, yeah, those were all people who worked for the prosecution, which immediately throws their statement into doubt. There are MORE people, with higher qualifications, who “categorically” say otherwise. I have provided citations and their names on several occasions and several blogs, but Harry and his ilk just keep on truckin’. They choose to ignore the truth, it’s as simple as that.

    I find it alarming that people read what he writes and don’t question it. Is Barbie Nadeau’s phrase, “Countless forensic experts…have testified” good enough for you? Of course they’re not countless. If they testified, then we know their names, ergo, they can be counted.

    Countless is just a word intended to make it sound like more people think she is guilty than actually do. Two young people’s lives are on the line here — why is it okay to be so casual and so careless?

    The rest of what Harry writes is either blatantly false (“Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted”), (“despite three attempts each”), or can be invalidated with logic and reason (19 judges agreed? So what? As I wrote before, the Ku Klux Klan all agree).

    As the number of people who know Amanda is innocent increases, Harry and his pals will get more desperate, I guess, but Amanda’s supporters don’t have to work as hard as we once did.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    ” ….. or can be invalidated with logic and reason (19 judges agreed? So what? As I wrote before, the Ku Klux Klan all agree).”

    This is truly powerful stuff …..

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “I don’t intend to neglect you, Enzo!”

    Hey, sweetie, thanks. Unfortunately, the time difference between our countries get’s in the way and so it seems I tend to miss the traffic.

    ” If you are actually going to look at those websites, you are gonna get quite a bit smarted up. I can’t wait to be impressed.”

    you’re not kidding! I started with yours, Italian Woman at the Table and I was immediately intimidated. A good portion of your links were in italian! So you can imagine my panic.

    “I am not interested in that other case.”

    I’m very disappointed; I thick you should really reconsider my proposal. Really.
    Given your stance on dedication an commitment to ruth, justice and the american way it will seem very parochial to just limit your fight just on amanda.

    You have also stated on record that the italian judiciary needs to be discussed within the context of the Knox case and i feel that perhaps your failure to incorporate Bindelli might be interpreted as insular. What do you think ?

    dixi

  • John Winters

    Al-fhak says:

    ”Q. Most boat owners
    name their boats. What is the most popular boat name
    requested?

    A.
    Obsession”

    I think this one more than any of the others proves that the veracity of these snippets should be doubted.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    ” I’m happy to see the genius of Billy Ryan is inspiring you to become ever more creative.”

    yes, indeed.

    billyryan, is a riot.

    Makes, my day along with John ‘here’s Joooohhhnnnnyyyy” Winters; it just doesn’t get any better than this, does it?

    dixi

  • John Winters

    colonelhall

    ”I don’t know, if there is anyone reading this stuff anymore, but if there is, I think that Harry is doing a great job. Better to read something relevant to the case than a whole lot of insults going back and forth endlessly.”

    I don’t know if I have read you correctly but if I have, what is so great about being retarded by someone?
    Maybe you think we really should go and lick our elbows in which case you must think discussing this case is very boring. We are the only people who are going to discuss it I’m afraid. So why do you keep coming back here?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    hey Enzo Zoff and Colonelhall! I think’m leaving you alone guys to fight the battle for truth and justice against the FOAkers in this blog. I’m kind of tired of this Amanda Knox stuff. Everybody is writing the same BS every day now. I think I’ll move on to troll on some other topic. IVSTITIA, who got me interested into this Amanda b.s. (we are actually friends, both Tuscans in California) is on a business trip right now. So maybe when he comes back he’ll give you some advice on the legal ramifications. He studied law in Italy, so he knows more than me. What I know is from my short Carabinieri training during my military service. Actually I think he’s going to write some more articles on law on truejustice maybe when the judge report comes out. Keep an eye on his writings, they are more informative than the FOAkers’ (I think his pseudonym on that site is Commissario or something like that).
    Anyway. Once in a while if I’m bored and feel like coming to insult billy and Johnny, “mabey” I’ll make a quick stop.
    Ciao ciao guys. Hope Amanda rots in jail for much longer, that murderer!

  • John Winters

    One down, three to go!

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Al-Fakh Yugoudh:

    “Hope Amanda rots in jail for much longer, that murderer!”

    Capisco !

    But, I don’t believe that you want Amanda to rot in jail, really?

    When you post comments like that you serve their cause and diminish yours; that’s where they get ‘AmandaHaters and lately it’s been diluted to ‘Anti-Amanda”.

    Remember, it could have been your sister, cousin, daughter or friend … you and I would probably have done the same whatever the cost and effort.

    Mate, you want o now what the irony is? I actually have a very close friend in jail for murder serving 13 years convicted for pushing his girlfriend of a cliff.

    13 years later, they arrested him!

    No DNA, no witnesses, motive was quashed by the judge, found guilty on NOTHING !

    In 1994, when they found her body it was at point A on the rocks of the ocean. 12 years LATER the point of impact was MOVED about 4.5 metres further out to sea rendering the initial suicide theory impossible, said the police.

    Who moved the point of impact?
    The police !

    On what basis?
    They realised, 12 years later, they had made a mistake !

    What prompted the correction?
    Don’t know, just did?

    The Prosecutor, has been involved in some of most controversial murder cases in Sydney. He was cautioned by the High Court over his conduct.

    Mate, this guy makes Mignini look like a lamb.

    His appeal has just been lodged with the courts to be heard later this year.

    And yet, like the FOA, we too lobbied for justice. Except, that his appeal will be heard by 3 judges and to be acquitted it has to be 3-0 his way.

    So what f***king use is there is slandering the Prosecutor? Zilch !!!
    Actually, we go out of our way to point out that he was just doing his job!

    So what f***king use is there is slandering the judicial system? Zilch !!!
    Why woud you antagonise the very people who have the power to release you? And besides, it wasn’t the Prosecutor or the Judge that handed down the verdict, it was the jury!

    So what f***king use is there is slandering the jury? Zilch !
    They’re long gone and again it just antagonises the public, the very people you want on side!

    So what f***king use is there is slandering the media, who had 12 years of hype, untruths, fabricated stories, sex, and murder wrapped up in a tele-movie? Zilch -’coz the media cuts both ways – if it’s on your side, it’s great!

    We actually use these blogs as an educational tool as to what NOT to do; on radio and TV interviews our mantra is NOT to engage in debate; merely present the facts as we see them, then quickly walk away.

    Don’t ever try and sell a point of view, instead, enrol the listener. Ultimately, we could have 99.99% of the public opinion, but if 3 guys in funny robes and with stupid wigs on, don’t agree, it don’t mean a cracker!

    You are left with the distinct impression by their posts, that it’s an act on American Idol; you know, everyone will phone in with their vote as to whether Amanda is innocent to not.

    Although, I wish we had the numerous ghost writers under the user name Mary H and JW [ my personal favorite] …

    Anyway, Marcch 4,5, 6 – the judgement will be handed down and I guess we’ll see them in action again …

    dixi

    Prosecutor? Zilch !!!

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    here’s Jooohhhnnnyyy:

    “One down, three to go!”

    ?????? …. what?

    after all this time you’re only on first base?

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    Enzoff wrote: “Given your stance on dedication an commitment to ruth, justice and the american way it will seem very parochial to just limit your fight just on amanda.

    You have also stated on record that the italian judiciary needs to be discussed within the context of the Knox case and i feel that perhaps your failure to incorporate Bindelli might be interpreted as insular. What do you think ?”

    I think getting involved in the Bindelli case makes as much sense as the Amanda-haters getting involved in the Kercher case. I have absolutely no relationship whatsoever to him or to Sonia Marra or to anyone connected with them. If someone I know were to ask me to look into it for his or her legitimate personal reasons, I would consider it.

  • Mary H.

    Al-F. Y., I’m glad to know this has all been a lark for you. I’m sure Amanda and Raffaele find it one big joke, too.

    “(I think [Ivstitia's] pseudonym on that site is Commissario or something like that).”

    That makes sense. He must be baleno, as well? Or is that you, too?

    When you guys leave, the anti-Amanda side will be down to Enzo, Harry Rag (who also has at least three pseudonyms) and colonelhall.

    Who was it last night who wrote, “As the number of people who know Amanda is innocent increases…”? Oh, that was me!

  • Mary H.

    Enzoff wrote: “So what f***king use is there is slandering the Prosecutor?… So what f***king use is there is slandering the justice system?… So what f***king use is there is slandering the jury?… So what f***king use is there is slandering the media?… Why would you antagonise the very people who have the power to release you?”

    This argument always slays me. First of all, let us note that no one has been “slandered” except Amanda and Raffaele.

    Second, the essence of this argument is exactly the same as an abuser saying to his victim, “I wouldn’t have to beat you if you would behave.” Is this what you advise, Enzo — that everyone sit down and shut up? Somehow I doubt that will change the judges’ minds.

    Ironically, Mignini got exactly what he wanted by slandering and misbehaving. Basically by making a lot of noise.

    “Ultimately, we could have 99.99% of the public opinion, but if 3 guys in funny robes and with stupid wigs on, don’t agree, it don’t mean a cracker!”

    Don’t tell the media that. They got Amanda into prison and they will get her out.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    you cite:

    “This argument always slays me. First of all, let us note that no one has been “slandered” except Amanda and Raffaele.”

    I could post a comment about the mating rituals of the west congon pygmies and you would find a way to connect it to Amanda.

    I made NO reference to the K/S case. I was merely pointing out to Al the irony that I personally have my ‘own’ K/S and on some level I can understand your stance, your point of view, your position.

    “Second, the essence of this argument is exactly the same as an abuser saying to his victim, “I wouldn’t have to beat you if you would behave.” Is this what you advise, Enzo — that everyone sit down and shut up? Somehow I doubt that will change the judges’ minds.”

    Is this what I said? The essence of my message is that it’s pointless changing the tyres if you have a flat battery. Changing the tyres will not get the car going; the problem is the battery. You need a new battery.

    In my own personal sitiuation with my friend, we’re not going to get him released by crtizing the Prosecutor; or critizing the Australian legal framework with its own problems; or jumping up and down critizing the media.

    And, the media had 12 uninterrupted years of portraying my friend as gigolo, with no morals, selfish, promiscuous, lazy. They followed him to the UK, France, Swiss, Italy and the US.

    When that wasn’t enough, they made a tele-movie attacked his sexuality by alluding he was bisexual and scripted him as they wanted.

    At least your Amanda has been spared bisexuality.

    “Enzo — that everyone sit down and shut up? Somehow I doubt that will change the judges’ minds.”

    No-one, but no-one has ever been released from prison due to the loudeness of their vocal chords. They have been released when the evidince, new or old, is so overwhelming that the Court amends the conviction.

    You take the view, that if you shout long and loud enough, if you make enough ‘noise’ that if you can sway public opinion that the the Italian Appeal judges will wake up one sunny morning as let K/S out.

    You wanna believe this honey, than, do.

    I tell you what will get them out; legal arguement and evidence. It’s no more different for my friend than it is for K/S or Italy, Aussie, US or UK.

    But your biggest problem is that you have allowed this to become ‘personal’. In Italy it was just another murder case; in fact, public opinion leaned to K. You have managed to piss the italians [not only] off big time.

    Imagine, can you, the opposite. Can you imagine had an italian judge written to his counter-part in the US demanding this and that?

    Lastly, my situation is light compared to yours in some respects; there was NO physical/DNA to contest, there were No eyewitnesses that place him at the crime scene, there was a motive proposed, but the sentencing Judge overturned it at the sentencing hearing.

    There was EVIDENCE that his girlfriend has attempted suicide before; that they were happy; that she had gone to the doctor for depression; that she had missed an appointment with the psychiatrist that day.

    And yet, he was found guilty. And, unlike the italian system no 104 pages of explanation as to why.

    against that back drop, I admit I don’t envy your position.

    But, hey, good luck, God speed and let’s see what the judgement says. You won’t know what to do when you get it …

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    And against that backdrop, Enzo, with your friend’s experience, I can’t imagine why you would ever have taken the anti-Amanda side. And don’t even TRY to tell me you didn’t.

    You wrote: “No-one, but no-one has ever been released from prison due to the loudeness of their vocal chords. They have been released when the evidince, new or old, is so overwhelming that the Court amends the conviction.”

    I must disagree. Many times, the only thing that gets the judges to reconsider old evidence is public pressure. Amanda will be acquitted on the exact same “evidence” that got her convicted. Only this time, more people will be paying attention.

    Maybe one of the difficulties you and your friends have had has to do with the fact that the whole country of Australia has fewer people than the state of Texas. We simply have a lot more people making noise.

    You also wrote: “But your biggest problem is that you have allowed this to become ‘personal’.”

    Not a problem; an asset.

    “In Italy it was just another murder case…”

    Absolutely false.

    “You have managed to piss the italians [not only] off big time.”

    So what?

    And of course, this dilly:

    “I made NO reference to the K/S case.”

    Closely followed by:

    “And yet, like the FOA, we too lobbied for justice.”

    Ultimately, I am really sorry about your friend. I know what it’s like to fight an uphill battle, believe me. In all seriousness (is that a word?), have you thought about hiring a PR firm?

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “I can’t imagine why you would ever have taken the anti-Amanda side. And don’t even TRY to tell me you didn’t.”

    Well, I don’t want to disappoint you so I WILL try; I A_M N_O_T A_N_T_I_Amanda!

    I have openly, sincerely and genuinely disclosed my position, thoughts and feelings, but, it’s NOT anti_Amanda. I have shared with you that I have 2 daughters of my own. The eldest was in Italy in 2008 on a exchange scholarship and I have stated that for the grace of God – there go I.

    As a parent, I FEEL for the Knoxs/Sollecitos and even the Guedes. Even more for the Kerchners.

    You will have to choose to believe me on this – or not.

    But, when I sit at my desk, around a dinner table, a BBQ on even in a queue at a bank and I hear people discussing my friend and his plight I listen with detachment. They speak crap, because they don’t know any better.

    Sometimes I interject, sometimes I don’t. Some actually care about the true facts; others made their minds a long time ago, not to . None of them, so far, will be the presiding on the Bench of Criminal Appeal . Thank God for that !

    It is for this reason that I am NOT bothered as to their posture. It means swat as to getting an acquittal. Our objective is to sow the seeds of truth, the facts as were presented in Court and not the edited 1 minute clip that ALWAYS portrayed my friend in a bad light.

    ALL members of the jury had been subjected to and engulfed with negative portrayals for 12 YEARS ! The jury was NOT sequestrated here either; and on ALL evening news bulletins there he was virtually ridiculed one paragraph this side of defamation.

    And, get this, the initial jury was DISQUALIFIED after 4 days because 3 of the jurors had ALREADY decided that he was guilty and were LITERALLY terrorising the other 9 into submission. On day 4, one of the jurors rang a radio talk-back and confessed what was happening.

    Mary H: ” …. tutto il mondo e paese” [ e = is]

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “Many times, the only thing that gets the judges to reconsider old evidence is public pressure.”

    The appeal process is automatic in Italy: ALL evidence is reconsidered as a matter of course, subject to the efficacy of the defence; what additional public pressure did you need?

    “Amanda will be acquitted on the exact same “evidence” that got her convicted. Only this time, more people will be paying attention.”

    Perhaps. But if you look at Guede’s appeal there was very, very little that was allowed to be re-opened. Good luck.

    “We simply have a lot more people making noise.”

    Yes, very true. But, remember, you heard it first from me!

    Let me tell you this about public dynamics that my friend learned from his experience. Let’s call him, GTI.

    To GTI, what the public felt about him was so important to him. During the 70 day odd trial, random people would wave to him, cheer him, greet him at every public opportunity. He would say to me how great it felt to have the public on side. And I would reply: 40,50,100 people a public does not make!

    The day after he was convicted, to EVERY BODIES surprise, talk-back radio, TV and newspaper opinion polls showed a staggering 90/10% ratio for right/wrong verdict.

    3 learned Judges; that’s what it comes down to for an acquittal. AND, it MUST be 3-0; 2-1 will not do.

    So, if you know of a PR firm that can guarantee a 3-0 return, let me know.

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    It sounds extremely challenging, to say the least. It also sounds different from Amanda’s predicament in a lot of ways, so I can see why you don’t think the same approach the pro-Amanda-ites are taking would work for your friend.

    Does your friend have a chance? Are his lawyers any good? Does Australia have a branch of the Innocence Project?

  • Where oh where?

    Enzo, I know you don’t think public opinion could sway the judges but what if the innocent/guilt ratio was the other way? What if 90% of the public thought your friend was innocent?

  • IVSTITIA

    Still going at it, uh? Well, for the benefit of clarification in order to get acquitted Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito don’t need 100% of the 8 panel judges and jurors. I guess it doesn’t work like down-under. They need 4 of them (if there is a tie 4-4, the verdict which prevails is the one that is more favorable to the defendant, therefore they’d be acquitted). The votes are cast, one by one, by the jurors first in order of age (starting from the youngest). The President of the court votes last, after the other professional judge (the Giudice a Latere, or side judge). Nevertheless the two professional judges tend to lead the panel in their direction, therefore it’s rare that the jurors go against the 2 professional judges. Some do, especially in Appeal, when the panel of jurors have people with higher education degrees, especially the younger jurors (who must be at least 30 y.o.). Of course in the first trial that didn’t help. The youngest juror was a 35 year old lawyer, but he also went along with the judges’ theory (lawyers serving in juries in Italy are the only ones who very often challenge the judges). The reality is that the evidence against AK/RS is not as weak as you’d like to portray in these blogs. Hearing from experts that there is DNA of the victim in RS’ knife, watching a Powerpoint presentation from an expert who shows how a bloody footprint matches’ RS’ foot, hearing a computer expert who says RS was not at the computer when he said he was, or being presented phone records that show that RS called 112 after the police already arrived, and of course hearing that Amanda implicated an innocent man, and didn’t retract that false accusation for 2 weeks after his arrest, are all very powerful elements in the eye of a jury.

    Regarding the attempts, made in these blogs to sway public opinion, my question is: whose public opinion? Most people in Perugia believe they are guilty (3 out of 4 according to an admittedly non scientific newspaper poll at the time of the verdict) and were pleased with the verdict (although many thought the sentence was too short). But now nobody talks about this case in Italy anymore. You can’d find an article in the newspaper about it, not even in the “Corriere dell’Umbria” or in the local Umbria pages of “La Nazione”, the Florence daily which serves primarily Tuscany and Umbria. So, if the intent is to sway public opinion in Italy in order for them to apply pressure on the judges, it’s obviously not working. In the end, if AK and RS are acquitted it won’t be because of the public sentiment of the people, but rather because the appeal judges themselves (the two professional ones especially) believe they’re innocent based on the evidence. The PR effort, in my opinion, is more to move American public sentiment so that pressure is applied to US politicians to intercede with Italian authorities. But would it work in a country where magistrates are so independent and autonomous from political interference. I don’t know, but I doubt it. In the end it will be the power of the evidence presented in court (or the lack thereof) that will determine the outcome, not the public outcry from people across the ocean.

    PS: Enzo Zoff, are you related to Dino Zoff? The famous former goalkeeper of the Italian National soccer team? For sure with a last name like Zoff, your relatives must have been from the region of Friuli. probably from the province of Gorizia. Enjoy Sydney mate! I was there a couple of months ago and I loved it, Darling Harbour, Circular Quay and all.

  • Where oh where?

    Actually, Ivs, I wasn’t speaking of the Knox trial, nor was I being sarcastic. I understand what you are saying, but Al seems so down. I don’t have the same way with words that some of you have, but I’ll just say what I have to say and then you can all call me stupid.

    What I was trying to say, if the guilty/innocent percentage was reversed would the judges be looking at the evidence in a little different way. I do realize judges shouldn’t take into account public opinion when making a decision, but if a majority of the public polled felt like the friend was innocent, would the judges take a closer look to see if this opinion had any merit? Al seems to have given up on proving his friend is innocent.

  • John Winters

    Inavest says:

    ”In the end it will be the power of the evidence presented in court (or the lack thereof) that will determine the outcome, not the public outcry from people across the ocean.”

    You keep insisting on this point to do with the amount of evidence. Colonelhall too, regularly posts with expressions like ”mountains of evidence.”

    What does this mean? Does it mean that in Italy, if I can produce 1000′s of pages of writing which say that someone I know saw you at Pier 39 last night, and that an ice cream cone with your DNA on it was found in the vicinity; and that when asked about where you were yesterday evening, you were unable to come up with an adequate answer because the hard drives on your computer had been destroyed. And if I took 1000′s of pages to write these few things down dilatorily, the fact that I could produce 1000′s of pages of writing about what you were doing last night would be enough to see you convicted of any crime I fancied pinning on you.

    Because that’s what it sounds like. You people seem to be more impressed by the seeming majesty of the all-powerful judges and the impressive-sounding titles of their offices, together with the large files of waffle they produce about what two people did one evening, than anything which sounds like it really has body or material or intellectual worth.

    If I undid you at one end, would you deflate with a rude noise?

  • billyryan

    ivstitia i read your comments with interest. Ihave no doubt about what you say about the procedure of the appeal.But then you go on to repeat now completely discredited evidence as proof of amanda and raffaela guilt. first the presence of merridith dna on the knife. Ten international experts have condemed and rubbished the prosecution dna analsis,the silence from any independant experts in support of the prosecution experts is defening.anyone from italy the british company that pioneered lcn testing none of these have uttered a word publicly
    raffaela was not at the computer when he said he was
    are you joking me the police fried amandas raffaela and philomenia hard drives.IN a fair court i think the police would be trying to keep computer evidence out of this case
    raffaela called 112 after the police arrived
    a postal police officer stated in evidence he arrived at 12.35 he knew because he looked at his watch.he also said in evidence he broke down the door to amandas room but did not enter.one of amandas and merridiths roomates standing behind him said he broke down the door entered the room lifted the cover of the body and looked at it.his superviser stated that the car was not sent out until 12.46 phone records prove that raffaela called the police at 12.51.to a reasnoble court telling lies comes very easy to this postal police officer
    amanda implicated an innocent man,and did not retract this for two weeks
    up to this point the police had taped everything and suddenly all tapes were turned off.ask anyone who understands torture and they will tell you that the tortured person will always tell you what you want them to tell you,a police officer from rome testified to hearing amanda screaming during this time,it probally did not take much just the two slaps at the back of the head done,amanda was a long way from home and probally was pretty easily frightened amanda did not know mumumba was innocent she was not in the cottage that night she had no way of knowing the police had not got this part of the investigation right
    the bloddy footprint
    I dont think the prosecution are even claiming that now
    having repeated all that now discredited evidence although you left out the bit about the prosecuter now being a convicted planter of evidence and master phone tapper he is probally not to bad at getting rid of evidence that does not suit his interests.the papers are no longer running this story,i wonder have they anything to fear if amanda was aquitted having so savagely slandered her and contributed to this misscarriage of justice.
    I was watching sky news this morning italy has slipped back into recession and is in a group of countries in most financial difficulty after greece in the eec.goverments fall in this kind of situation they will be hoping for a good tourist season and for exports to grow again.i just wonder what support amanda knox has got in the us.maybe not enough to start a campaign to ask us citizens not to visit italy while they are holding her hostage also maybe not enough to see italyian imports left unloaded in us docks.i think films will shortly be made about the italian rape of amanda knox,and you never just know how inflamed oppinion might become

  • Where oh where?

    Ivs, I have a a couple of questions. What happens if the defense proves that the prosecution or police lied about one or two pieces evidence? How would that effect the judges at the appeals trial? If it can be proven, do you think it would call the whole case against Amanda and Raffaele into question? Notice, please, that I’m saying IF.

    Also, what happens if/when the prosecution releases the rest of the files on the knife DNA evidence to the defense and it turns out those test weren’t preformed correctly? Or, what happens to the case if the prosecution never releases that report? Again, notice I’m asking IF.

  • Mary H.

    Where oh where, John W. and billyryan, you guys are sizzling today!

    Two questions for Ivstitia: 1. Did the prosecution present this about Amanda during the trail as an accusation?

    “…and of course hearing that Amanda implicated an innocent man, and didn’t retract that false accusation for 2 weeks after his arrest, are all very powerful elements in the eye of a jury.”

    2. as billy wrote: “a postal police officer stated in evidence he arrived at 12.35 he knew because he looked at his watch….his superviser stated that the car was not sent out until 12.46 phone records prove that raffaela called the police at 12.51.”

    Ivsitita, you said in another post that the postal police called in at 1:00 to report about the phones. They found the body at 1:15. I want to know what they did from the time they supposedly arrived (12:35) until 1:00. Why did they not break down the door to the missing girl’s door until they had been at the cottage for 40 minutes?

    In their efforts to make a liar out of Raffaele, they make themselves look completely incompetent, having wasted 25 minutes standing around jawing before reporting in. What really happened was they arrived around 12:55, called in to say they had arrived, then started looking around the house and finally breaking down the door. More a 15-minute job than a 40-minute one.

    To insist they arrived before Raffaele called 112 proves how deliberate the framing of Raffaele and Amanda was.

  • IVSTITIA

    billyryan, I’m not going to debate the evidence with any of you on this blog anymore because it would be a futile exercise on my part. You can certainly continue to call that evidence “discredited” evidence as much as you like, but obviously it wasn’t considered so by the court, since the judges & jurors unanimously thought it sufficient to incriminate the two defendants. I can assure you that neither Frank Sfarzo nor Paul Ciolino get any air time on Italian TV, and there are no media outlets in Italy that have described that evidence in the disparaging terms you have. So good luck turning the tide around!

  • IVSTITIA

    Q: “What happens if the defense proves that the prosecution or police lied about one or two pieces evidence? How would that effect the judges at the appeals trial? If it can be proven, do you think it would call the whole case against Amanda and Raffaele into question?”

    A: Possibly. I’m not in the mind of the judges so I don’t know.

    Q: what happens if/when the prosecution releases the rest of the files on the knife DNA evidence to the defense and it turns out those test weren’t preformed correctly?

    A: That piece of evidence would be excluded.

    Q: Did the prosecution present this about Amanda during the trail as an accusation?

    A: Yes. It relates to the art. 368 C.P. charge. It was also used as part of the art. 575 C.P. charge to demonstrate her knowledge of facts that only a party present at the murder scene would have known.

    Q: Regarding the 112 call and police arrival.

    A: I’m not going to debate this point. We’ve done at length to no avail. Whatever your theory is, the fact is that the judges believed the theory espoused by Judge Micheli in the Guede trial: i.e. the 112 call was made after the Postal police arrival.
    What I know is the sequence of events:

    - 12:36:46 (CCTV clock time) The Fiat Punto of the Postal Police is filmed by the CCTV camera arriving and stopping in front of the parking garage. The CCTV stops filming at 12:36:54 since it’s activated only when people are walking (or cars are driving) through the activation range.

    - Police officers testify to have arrived at around 12:35.

    - 12:54:39 – RS calls 112 and the call lasts 57 seconds (i.e. until 12:55:36).

    - Unverified time after police arrival and before arrival of Filomena’s friends (Luca Altieri and Marco Zaroli): Police and RS & AK about phones and break-in, survey Filomena’s bedroom, bloody bathroom, locked door.

    - Unverified time after police arrival but before 13:00: Luca Altieri and Marco Zaroli arrive. Luca sees the post-it on the kitchen table, alongside two phones that he mistakenly thinks are the missing phones. (Meanwhile, Amanda and Raffaele disappear into Amanda’s bedroom, from which they will later reappear)

    - Unverified time few minutes after Luca’s and Marco’s arrival but before 13:00 – Filomena Romanelli and Paola Grande arrive. Paola Grande testifies that after she arrived AK and RS open the bedroom and came out. Filomena talks to Inspector Battistelli, and explains how she lent Meredith an Italian phone, and the other one is from the UK

    13:00 – Battistelli contacts HQ and reports what’s happened in the last minutes (Filomena for sure is with him). Police Commissioner at Hqtrs logs this report.

    This is the sequence of events as transpired in the court documents. I have the entire tabulation of the phone records and the CCTV film, all saved in my hard drive, so I’m sure about these records. Obviously I can’t guarantee that the CCTV clock was right or that the police told the truth about their estimated arrival, but I think we can safely assume that the telephone records are accurate as to the time.

    The court bought the hypothesis that when RS and AK disappeared into Amanda’s bedroom they placed the calls to 112, while the police officers were talking to the Italian friends.

    I gave you the evidence presented in court. You debate it among yourselves. I’m not going to have any part in this debate.

  • Mary H.

    “You debate it among yourselves.”

    Thanks, Dad. Can we keep our light on a little longer if we don’t make too much noise?

    Q: Did the prosecution present this about Amanda during the trail as an accusation?

    “A: Yes. It relates to the art. 368 C.P. charge. It was also used as part of the art. 575 C.P. charge to demonstrate her knowledge of facts that only a party present at the murder scene would have known.”

    I don’t suppose you would be willing to provide a quote or citation?

  • John Winters

    Inavest says:

    ”I can assure you that neither Frank Sfarzo nor Paul Ciolino get any air time on Italian TV, and there are no media outlets in Italy that have described that evidence in the disparaging terms you have.”

    You have been very helpful with vital information concerning the (sometimes unsettling) vagaries of the Italian judicial system over the weeks since Dec 4 and thanks for that.

    What would you advise us to do then given the above. How do we bring home to the Italian people that we are an interest group who believe Amanda Knox’s case is unlike others, and that we believe a miscarriage of justice of some kind at least, has possibly taken place.

    Which as you point out, is the only way in reality to even attempt turning this thing round.

  • Mary H.

    As Ivstitia has pointed out REPEATEDLY, it will not be the people of Italy who decide the case, it will be the judges and the jury. While I don’t believe for one minute what Ivstitia says about there being no interest in this case in Italy anymore, I also could not care less what the people of Italy think about the case, and I never have.

    The judges and prosecutors now know they are in the worldwide public eye and they will act accordingly. This time the evidence will be presented in a way that is intended to get Amanda out of prison, not ensure another appeal.

    I just wish it oculd be right away instead of another year from now.

  • PhanuelB

    In the end the judges, police, and prosecutors answer to the people — at least in a democracy.

    Sometimes the people see a need to come in and see if some branch of government is doing their job. If they don’t like it that’s too bad.

    In Italy’s trial of the century, their justice system failed utterly and absolutely. This was as show trial and a kangaroo court that has shamed Italy in the eyes of the world. The sooner they do something about it the better.

  • PhanuelB

    IZVESTIA:”I gave you the evidence presented in court. You debate it among yourselves. I’m not going to have any part in this debate.”

    No you haven’t. I have yet to see even one document in it’s full unaltered form on the Internet. Italian law does not permit full public acess to the trial record. Court documents cannot be digitized and published to the internet. What would be the reason for a law like that except for a corrupt judicial system to make sure that the public could not see the truth for themselves?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    John Winters said
    am February 12 2010 @ 6:32 pm
    Inavest says:

    “What would you advise us to do then given the above. How do we bring home to the Italian people that we are an interest group who believe Amanda Knox’s case is unlike others, and that we believe a miscarriage of justice of some kind at least, has possibly taken place.”

    I’LL GIVE YOU THE ANSWER JOINT SPHYNCTERS:

    HAVE YOU TRIED CALLING BRUNO VESPA? MAYBE HE’LL CALL YOU AS A GUEST AT HIS “PORTA A PORTA”. HE’S THE MASTER OF MEDIA TRIALS. HE’S THE ITALIAN NANCY GRACE.

    THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT NO MATTER WHAT ITALIANS THINK, GUILTY-NOT GUILTY, THE ITALIAN JUDGES ALWAYS DO WHAT THE F*** THEY WANT BECAUSE NOBODY CAN DO NOTHING TO THEM, THEY’RE SUPER PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION. NOT EVEN BERLUSCONI CAN TOUCH THEM, THAT’S WHY HE HATES THEIR GUTS.

    PS: MARY HO! I MISSED YOU, THAT’S WHY ONCE IN A WHILE I HAVE TO CHECK YOU OUT. YOU TURN ME ON WITH THOSE SEXY POSTS.

  • Mary H.

    Glad to be of service, Yul-Fakh. “Hootchie-cootchie.” Does that turn you on?

    “THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT NO MATTER WHAT ITALIANS THINK, GUILTY-NOT GUILTY, THE ITALIAN JUDGES ALWAYS DO WHAT THE F*** THEY WANT BECAUSE NOBODY CAN DO NOTHING TO THEM…”

    And since the judges are in bed with the prosecutors, that explains why Mignini felt the right to do as he pleased in manufacturing the case against Amanda and Raffaele. God, he’s a buffoon.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @where or where?

    “Enzo, I know you don’t think public opinion could sway the judges but what if the innocent/guilt ratio was the other way? What if 90% of the public thought your friend was innocent?”

    Mate, we have had cases like that; google Lindy Chamberlain, for example.

    You know, public opinion and support is great in putting the spotlight on someone/something that requires some form of scrutiny and/or exposure to such an extent that it needs to pushed in the public domain, a form of ‘we’re watching you”.

    This works beautifully and is at it’s most potent for issues of gross human injustices, e.g., Guentanamo Bay.

    But this does not ‘guarantee’ the desired result for an individual WITHOUT the supporting legal arguments and evidence that proves his/her innocence, substantial doubt, or some form of negligence/corruption.

    There is very little relief for NOT LIKING a verdict, as opposed to, PROVING verdict wrong; and I’m backed by numerous tragic historical examples.

    By the way, the opposite is also true; perceived ‘guilty’ defendants who have managed to ‘slip’ through the system e.g. OJ do not end up in jail because of opinion polls.

    That’s why I think that ultimately all efforts will have to be directed at the evidence and legal argument; the game will belayed out and won or lost in that arena; public opinion/support will be limited as to what it can do, otherwise it would be crowds that win football games and not the players.

    good luck,

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @where oh where:

    n.d.r:

    “the game will belayed out” should be ‘ the game will be played out’

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John winters:

    “What would you advise us to do then given the above. How do we bring home to the Italian people that we are an interest group who believe Amanda Knox’s case is unlike others, and that we believe a miscarriage of justice of some kind at least, has possibly taken place.”

    Undoubtedly, they would say: “Appeal; and then Appeal again.”

    And, then they would probably add, that’s 2 extra appeals most countries, including yours, don’t extend to defendants.

    “and that we believe a miscarriage of justice of some kind at least, has possibly taken place.”

    But ONLY for amanda? not raffaele? Are you aware, how all your efforts are ONLY about Amanda’s innocence. What about Raffaele?

    Tell me, how much would you be concerned if amanda was released and not raffaele?

    Would your fire still burn in your stomachs or would you walk away from the injustice?

    You see, I want to declare my own hypocrisy and selfishness. With my friend GTI, I came to realise the legal injustices not only in Australia but also throughout the world.

    But truthfully, once he’s out, I’ll probably call it a day.

    And you?

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “Does your friend have a chance?”

    Of course. But quantifying it is difficult.

    If ever you wanted a murder case based on 101% circumstantial evidence, this would be it.

    For 12 years it was considered a suicide. The father of the girlfriend acknowledged as much when she was found on the cliff’s rocky floor that morning.

    Hence, NO photographs were taken by police of the point of impact.
    There where 2 coronial enquiries and the point of impact was never questioned.
    A video re-construction was made by the police, with one officer pointing at the point of impact.

    Some 12-15 police, ambulance, rescue-squad confirmed the spot.

    12 years later, a detective, newly assigned to the case, declares that the point of impact was incorrect, it was 4.5 metres out to sea.

    Hence, he says, she could not have jumped that far; therefore it was NOT a suicide it must have been murder.

    But, if she could not jump that far, how did she get there?

    She was thrown, like a spear, by my friend, GTI.

    His g/f was 178cm and about 59 kgs.

    But why would he throw her, risking his life in pitch black darkness, when all he had to do was just ‘push’ her?
    Because, he was in a rage.
    Over what?
    She knew too much information about his affairs and GTI’s boss.
    What information?
    Dunno !

    … and so on!

    “Are his lawyers any good?”

    he has, arguably the best criminal defence lawyer in Oz.
    Dozens of criminal appeal lawyers have volunteered/pro-bono their services.
    there is a swell of support within the legal community, albeit, underground.

    ” Does Australia have a branch of the Innocence Project?”"

    Sure, And many more. There’s a guy in South Australia who has devoted his life to legal injustices.

    Unfortunately, due to defamation and other legal restrictions not much can be said UNTIL the appeal is lodged with the Court.

    Once lodged, public debate can commence but needs to be referenced and limited to the documents lodged.

    For example, had K/S been in Oz, you would NEVER be able to conduct a blog like this – pray for small mercies.

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @IVSTITIA”

    “Enjoy Sydney mate! I was there a couple of months ago and I loved it, Darling Harbour, Circular Quay and all.”

    So why didn’t you call me?

    When are you here next?

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    It does sound like your friend has a lot of people behind him and a very good chance of being acquitted. We hope.

    Regarding your comments on public debate — do you mean there isn’t enough documentation available for people to look at and discuss? Or do you mean that people are forbidden from discussing? If the latter, how can Australian legal restrictions prevent people from other countries from blogging about it?

  • Mary H.

    Oh, I meant to add that this accusation, “She was thrown, like a spear, by my friend, GTI,” is ridiculous.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    “If the latter, how can Australian legal restrictions prevent people from other countries from blogging about it?”

    with great difficulty, but you would do it at your own peril.

    If the blog was hosted by an organisation, they would be in risk of a hit of defamation or as a minimum some form of censorship.

    In our case, we’ve had a web-site prepared 4 days after he was sentenced!

    But we could never discuss, debate, challenge refute, critizise any aspect of the so-called Nutty Professor’s report that ‘proved’ the GTI was ‘capable’ of throwing his g/f; I’m capable of hitting a ‘hole-in-one’ in the US Masters; but what are the chances?

    In Oz, it is generally considered inappropriate to comment publicly on cases sub judice, which can be an offence in itself, leading to contempt of court proceedings. This is particularly true in criminal cases, where publicly discussing cases sub judice may constitute interference with due process.

    Again, – pray for small mercies.

    dixi

  • Enzo Zoff

    @Mary H:

    I forgot to state, that once the Appeal is lodged and stamped by the Court, the documents then became ‘public’ property, ipso facto, providing to a limited extent the capacity to commence discussion in public.

    But again, at your peril.

    dixi

  • John Winters

    But truthfully, once he’s out, I’ll probably call it a day.

    And you?

    Yep…when Amanda’s released, that’s that.

  • Shane

    IVSTITIA wrote: “- 12:36:46 (CCTV clock time) The Fiat Punto of the Postal Police is filmed by the CCTV camera arriving and stopping in front of the parking garage. The CCTV stops filming at 12:36:54 since it’s activated only when people are walking (or cars are driving) through the activation range.”

    You forgot to mention that the actual time at which the postal police were filmed on CCTV was 12:48. You also forgot to mention that Raffaele’s attorney proved (with the aid of CCTV footage of the Carabinieri) that the CCTV time was 8-12 minutes fast…

  • Shane

    Erm, I meant 8-12 minutes slow, not fast…

  • John Winters

    Shane says:

    ”Erm, I meant 8-12 minutes slow, not fast…”

    Thanks Shane. I wanted to reply to that post with the information you supplied here but I wasn’t sure how Raffaele’s attorney did it. I knew it was something to do with the CCTV clock actually running 12 minutes behind time.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Blood from the victim was found in the bathroom, in the sink, in the bidet, on the Qtip container, etc. mixed with Amanda’s DNA.

    If it wasn’t Amanda who brought that blood in the bathroom, how did it end up there? Obviously not Meredith.

    If it was Rudy who brought that blood in the bathroom (maybe because he washed up before fleeing the scene) his DNA would have been in the bathroom, mixed with the blood. But Rudy’s DNA wasn’t there. Therefore he was never in that bathroom.

    So who brought the blood to the bathroom?

    Mistere!!!!

  • Shane

    John Winters said: “Thanks Shane. I wanted to reply to that post with the information you supplied here but I wasn’t sure how Raffaele’s attorney did it. I knew it was something to do with the CCTV clock actually running 12 minutes behind time.”

    No worries, yeah her argument was very convincing. She simply pointed out that the CCTV footage showed the carabinieri at 13:22, yet cell phone records showed they called Amanda to ask for directions at 13:29 (the call went on till 13:33). This means the CCTV must have been at least 8 minutes slow, and probably a bit more. Since the postal police are seen approaching the cottage at 12:48 CCTV time, the earliest they can have arrived is 12:56 – a minute after Raffaele finished his call to the carabinieri.

    The idea they called 112 after the police arrived gets repeated so often, yet it’s as much of a myth as the bleach receipts!

  • Shane

    Al-Fakh said: “If it was Rudy who brought that blood in the bathroom (maybe because he washed up before fleeing the scene) his DNA would have been in the bathroom, mixed with the blood. But Rudy’s DNA wasn’t there. Therefore he was never in that bathroom.”

    If Amanda had been involved in a bloody murder, her DNA would have been in the bedroom, mixed with the blood. But Amanda’s DNA wasn’t there. Therefore she was never in that bedroom.

    Case closed?

  • billyryan

    i think the judges summing up now might just be of far greater importance than anything that has happened up to now.sky news in a report on the eurozone during the week showed how greece is bankrupt and will have to be bailed out. Italy has slipped back into recession and has huge budget defecit problems.who knows what might have gone on behind the scenes what if the whitehouse was to state that they do not think that italy is a safe destination for us tourists in 2010.maybe exports to the us have already suffered enough for italy to have gone back into recession.the italian government might just pull enough strings to get amanda released during the appeal process

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    To Shane:

    PREMISS:
    -Amanda’s DNA or fingerprints were not in Meredith’s room
    -Rudy’s DNA or fingerprints were not in Meredith’s bathroom where her blood was found
    -Rudy’s DNA or fingerprints were not in Filomena’s bedroom or broken window where the break in and burglary occurred (or staged).

    CONCLUSION:
    1-Amanda was not in Meredith’s bedroom when she was murdered.
    2- Rudy was not the one to carry the blood in the bathroom since he was never in that bathroom.
    3- The bloody footprint on the bathmat in the bathroom does not belong to Rudy.
    4- Rudy was not the one to break in through Filomena’s window.
    5- Rudy was not the one to burglarize and search for valuables in Filomena’s bedroom.

    How could the murder have happened then?

    Think of the possibilities.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billiterateryanus said:
    “if the whitehouse was to state that they do not think that italy is a safe destination for us tourists in 2010″

    HAHAHAHA! GOOD LUCK WITH THAT ONE!

    THE NATION WITH 8 TIMES THE MURDER RATE OF ITALY, THE NATION WITH 12 TIMES THE INCARCERATION RATE OF ITALY, THE NATION WHERE 250 INMATES HAVE BEEN RECENTLY EXONERATED FROM THEIR CRIME AFTER DECADES IN PRISON BECAUSE INNOCENT, THE NATION THAT IS TRYING TO CONVINCE EUROPEANS TO INCREASE THEIR EFFORT IN AFGHANISTAN (ITALY HAS THE 3RD LARGEST PRESENCE IN THAT COUNTRY) DECLARES THAT ITALY IS NOT SAFE.

    THAT’S REALLY FUNNY! I ALMOST BURST MY BELLY AGAIN.

    PLEASE COME UP WITH MORE OF THOSE, BILLITERATERYANUS! LAUGHING IS REALLY GOOD FOR HEALTH.

    the italian government might just pull enough strings to get amanda released during the appeal process.

    HAHAHAHA! THIS ONE IS EVEN BETTER BILLITERATE RYANUS! THE GOVERNMENT WHOSE CHIEF CANNOT GET JUDGES OFF HIS OWN NECK GIVEN THEIR POWER AND INDEPENDENCE FROM POLITICAL PRESSURE, HAS THE ABILITY TO “PULL THE STRINGS” WITH THEM, AND PUT THEM INTO THEIR PLACE FOR AMANDA.

    BILLITERATE RYANUS. I HAVE A NEW NAME FOR YOU: billiterathilarious ryanus.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billiterate ryanus:

    -It won’t be the Italian public opinion to convince the judges to acquit Amanda.
    -It won’t be the American public opinion to convince the judges to acquit Amanda.
    -It won’t be the threat of boycott by US travelers to convince the judges to acquit Amanda
    -It won’t be the political pressure by American politicians to convince the judges to acquit Amanda
    -It won’t be the political pressure by Berlusconi’s government to convince the judges to acquit Amanda.

    There is only one way to get the judges to acquit Amanda:

    - by demonstrating in court that all the evidence stacked up against her is the simultenous result of:

    -Incompetent CSI work in collecting and analysing evidence
    -Accidental Lab contamination
    -witnesses’ mass delusion
    -police brutality
    - falsified police reports
    - inaccurate CCTV clock
    -inaccurate internet/computer records
    -inaccurate phone records

    If all of the above are true, she’ll a free woman in two or three years from now when the appeal is over. Unfortunately guys, on average the appeal ends 2 to 3 years after the first trial. Italian justice is meticulous and full of guarantees for the defendants but very very slow.

  • Enzo Zoff

    @billy ryan:

    “the italian government might just pull enough strings to get amanda released during the appeal process.”

    Mate, the italian government can’t pull enough strings to get it’s own agenda through; AND, on what basis would/could it pull the strings? We need to let K free otherwise Dona;d Trump won’t visit us?

    Italy ranks about 7-8 as a world power. She’s ITALIA not Italia-stan.

    What happens next? the italian government asks for the 2 italian prisoners in your jails?

    Mate, K/S aren’t hostages held by the mafia; they have been tried by italian courts and found guilty. Please remember, S is ITALIAN !!!!

    Your next headache is going to be the trial of S’s sister for attempted corruption of police evidence. She was a lieutenant and was dismissed. God only knows what is going to flow from there – but it won’t be pretty.

    Do you know what is great about the italian judicial system?

    It has the obligation of laboriously having to detail and reconcile the reasons behind the judgement reached. This makes it very EASIER for a defendant on what areas to concentrate in breaking down for an appeal. In your country it would have been: “Guilty, your honour”.

    If you were Amanda, which system would you prefer?

    If my friend GTI had been tried in Italy, the judgement would have been blank !

    guys, pray for small mercies,

    dixi

  • Mary H.

    Hello all. Regarding the blood and DNA in the bathroom, I suspect that investigators didn’t even test for Rudy’s DNA in the bathroom.

    The police cleaned up bloody footprints in the hall that day. It is entirely possible they took pictures of the bloody footprint in the bathroom, then cleaned it up. That would explain why they used the photo as evidence at the trial, rather than DNA results — I mean, could the footprint really have had NO ONE’s DNA in it?

    In the first couple of days after the discovery of the body, the police believed Meredith had had only one attacker. They may have assumed that since there was plenty of evidence at the crime scene itself, the preservation of evidence from other areas of the house could be placed lower on their list of priorities.

    It was two weeks before Rudy became a suspect. Before that, and after Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick were arrested, the focus of the investigation was on finding evidence to support the allegations of their guilt. For example, the judge believed Raffaele’s knife was the murder weapon, so that knife was tested for blood. When none was found, the police went looking for another knife.

    When the police collected fingerprints, they did not canvas the whole house; they selected areas they considered suspicious or potentially involved in the crime. For example, they did not collect fingerprints from Amanda’s bedroom (hence the widespread myths about the thorough cleaning that never happened).

    Along the same lines, it is possible the tests done on the blood samples from the bathroom were aimed selectively at finding specific evidence of Amanda, Raffaele and Patrick, while ignoring any other DNA that might have been present. Then later, by the time they had collected so much of Rudy’s DNA from the crime scene, they may not have been too worried about retesting the the bathroom samples, or they may have used them up, the way they used up the sample from the kitchen knife.

    When you read some of the comments police made about their decisions (including suspecting Amanda) being based on their experience and their intuition, it becomes clear that the process of collecting evidence in the case was anything but rigidly scientific.

  • Shane

    I think you’re right, Mary. After all, Guede himself admitted he had gone into the bathroom several times. In Guede’s case the evidence led to him; they weren’t looking for evidence to incriminate him in the way they were with Knox and Sollecito. Did they even have any samples left from the bathroom at the time he was caught to check for his DNA?

    I suspect the only testing they did in the bathroom was to check the visible blood stains for Amanda’s and Raffaele’s DNA, because they needed evidence against them. They wouldn’t have checked it for Laura’s and Filomena’s, even though theirs was almost certainly there too, since they lived in the cottage.

    Have to say I’m a little surprised to hear Al-Fakh or any pro-guilter saying lack of DNA means someone can’t have been there, though. It’s rather a strong argument in favor of Amanda’s total non-involvement!

  • billyryan

    al_fakeillerate_dogshite you claimed you were leaving this blog,or was it just a tatic to get more money out of whoever is paying you,i assume thirty pices of silver would buy your loyalty for any cause.i think this case is a war and they shoot traiters during a war.
    enzo zoff you tell us about your friend in australia i accept your word and i have great sympathy for him i cannot understand why you post here trying to get support for the amanda is guilty brigade
    its amasing al_fake_illerate_dogshite when you dissapear your aliases appear when you return they dissapear. I was sort of hoping you would dissapear and be just happy wanking yourself looking at the photographs mignini gave you of when these brave men had amanda crying,you know the ones he gave you for sucking his cock.i think you mentioned california surely there is a highrise building with water or concrete at the base for someone as intelectually limited as you are to do the world a favour

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billiterathilarious ryanus if there is somebody with limited intellectual ability here that is you. If I want to come back and post here when I have time I do and I don’t need to ask for your permission you illiterate piece of merda. The reason I don’t post during the week much is because I’m too busy at work these days to come to this site and waste time with idiots like you. Wherever you are I’m sure there are plenty of high rises or cliffs where you can jump from.

    And Mary Ho. Your posts are really stupid, I bet you’re a blond. Which makes you even sexier. Somehow you’re saying that the absence of Amanda’s DNA evidence in Mez’s room means that she wasn’t there and therefore she wasn’t part of the murder. However the absence of Rudy’s DNA in Mez’s bathroom doesn’t mean that he wasn’t there. You basically apply a double standard, and you try to find lots of excuses why it is so, excuses of which you have no basis. “The police could have…”, “maybe they forgot to check….”. The fact that they found Amanda’s DNA in that bathroom means that they did tested that bathroom.

    And Shame: the bathroom with the blood traces is not the same bathroom where Rudy took a crap. Rudy took his crap in Filomena’s and Laura’s bathroom, the victim’s blood was in Mez’s and Amanda’s bathroom. They did test both bathrooms, they found Rudy’s DNA in Filomena’s bathroom (where he took a crap) but not in Mez’s (where the blood was). In the latter bathroom they found Amanda’s DNA mixed with the blood.

    Mary Ho. All your hypotheses why they didn’t find Rudy’s DNA in Mez’s bathroom are based on conjectures out of your own ass. No basis whatsoever.

    You just want to apply the double standard because that’s the rule you apply:

    When the evidence incriminates Amanda or Raffa, it’s not valid evidence, because it’s contaminated.
    When the same evidence incriminates Rudy, then it’s good evidence.

    When evidence incrimiinating Amanda is lacking, it means she wasn’t there.
    When there is no evidence incriminating Rudy, it doesn’t mean anything. He was still there. They didn’t find anything because the police didn’t look hard enough.

    Yeah Right! Good luck thinking that the judges are not going to see the double standard applied here.

    No Mary Ho. That’s not how it works. This is how the judges will look at it:

    1-Rudy’s DNA is in the victim and Raffa’s DNA on the bra. Then they were both there when the murder occurred.
    2-Amanda’s DNA was in the bathroom mixed with Mez’s blood (but Rudy’s is not there at all). Then Amanda is the one who brought the blood in that bathroom.

    Maybe they’ll decide that Amanda wasn’t the one who killed, and she was out of the room, but they’ll definitely accuse her of having participated in the later staging and clean up. Either way she’s still an accessory to murder.

    If you think that the judges will apply your double standards and free her because they’re scared of Donald Trump’s boycott, I’m afraid that you’re all going to have a very rude awakening.

  • billyryan

    just when i though the smell of dogshite was about to leave this blog.the jew who changed to be a muslim because the beating of women was more acceptable to that religion returns.the word anus is becoming a regular part of your posts,fuelled no doubt by your desire to have mignini prick up yours al_fake_illerate_dogshite its not so long ago since you told us amanda would have to deal with mignini for the rest of her ordeal,that is not true,seemily you think you are an expert on italian law and how perfect it is.in the eec it is seen as the least efficient or fair system in europe something that the italians are trying to address.you became very adgitated when i said amanda might get support off the american government it is fairly ovious to me that is the reason traiters like you have been payed to post on bloggs like this,i suppose you and your smell is here to stay

  • Mary H.

    billy, every time I read your descriptions of Hil-Fakh and Mignini’s relationship, I laugh right out loud. :D

    Al-Fake-dogshite wrote: “Mary Ho. All your hypotheses why they didn’t find Rudy’s DNA in Mez’s bathroom are based on conjectures out of your own ass. No basis whatsoever.”

    I wish I had the strong basis Mignini had for his hypotheses. I don’t live in Perugia, though, so I didn’t have the opportunity to stand in the corner and take notes when Amanda said to Meredith, “Ah, you were pretending to be such a little saint. … Now we are going to show you.”

    And there certainly was no conjecture whatsoever in Judge Matteini’s report, in which she wrote:

    “It is possible to reconstruct what happened on the evening of November 1…..

    ….A little after, Meredith returned or she might have been already there. She went into her room with Patrick, after which something went badly….

    ….She was then menaced with a knife, a knife which Sollecito usually had with him, and with which Meredith was struck in the throat.”

    None of which turned out to be true.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”- by demonstrating in court that all the evidence stacked up against her is the simultenous result of:”

    OKAY SO FAR……

    -Incompetent CSI work in collecting and analysing evidence

    YES…..

    -Accidental Lab contamination

    YES………

    -witnesses’ mass delusion

    LOL……ARE YOU SERIOUSLY REFERRING TO THAT CIRCUS TROUPE THE PROSECUTION WHEELED OUT?

    -police brutality
    - falsified police reports
    - inaccurate CCTV clock
    -inaccurate internet/computer records
    -inaccurate phone records

    NO PROBLEMS THERE – SO IT’S JUST THE COMEDY ROUTINE WITH THE ”WITNESSES” THAT’S GONNA GIVE US A FEW PROBLEMS.

    ”If all of the above are true, she’ll a free woman in two or three years from now when the appeal is over. Unfortunately guys, on average the appeal ends 2 to 3 years after the first trial. Italian justice is meticulous

    STOP THAT, MY RIBS ACHE. ARE YOU REFERRING HERE TO THAT SHODDY AND EMBARRASSING DISPLAY OF CACK-HANDED INCOMPETENCE WHERE THE WHOLE WORLD WAS PARTY TO A SHOW OF INCOMPETENCE ON A GRAND SCALE INVOLVING THE BLATANT ABUSE OF EVIDENCE IN A VARIETY OF WAYS WHICH WAS UNCONTESTED BY ALL – INCLUDING ”THE DEFENSE TEAM?
    BECAUSE IF YOU ARE NOT, CAN YOU GUARANTEE THAT THIS ”METICULOUSNESS” THAT YOU SPEAK OF WILL BE A FEATURE OF THE ITALIAN APPEALS PROCESS.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billiterate ryanus, as long as you’re here I’ll keep coming whenever I happen to be at the computer. Maybe not as often as before, but I will come and denounce your stupidity. I never said that I was an expert in Italian law, Illiterate idiot! That was my friend Iustitia, not me. I’ve never studied Italian law, I just was in the Carabinieri and that was a long time ago. In any case, although my knowledge of Italian law cannot compare with Iustitia’s, I still know much more than you, because you don’t know f***ing sh*t about anything, you stinking illiterate. And I’m not paid either to write these posts, otherwise you couldn’t keep up reading all of them, because I’d be posting thousands a week. You think that Italian law is inefficient? I agree with you fully, because it’s very slow, and it is so because of all the procedural guarantees it provides in a world of limited resources (i.e. not enough judges to take care of it all). Do you think it’s unfair? It certainly is, because if you are really innocent it takes a long time before your ordeal is finally over. But is it really that bad for murderers like Amanda? Not it is not!! In most countries vicious murderers like her would be locked up for much longer and wouldn’t have so many guaranteed appeal chances. Amanda was much better of having committed murder in Italy than in any other country. So don’t complain! A murderer like her has a much better chance of getting away with it in Italy than in any other country. And Americans should be the last one to talk, God knows how many innocent people have been executed in the US in the last 3 or 4 decades since the capital punishment has been reinstituted. Of those 250 people found innocent by the Innocence Project, almost 10% were in death row. So try to extrapolate to the thousands of potentially innocent people who couldn’t be tested for DNA for one reason or another. Go back to your stinking hole, you hillbilly!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joint Sphyncters and Mary Ho:

    Whatever you say!

    Unfortunately for you, you will not have a saying on the appeal and nobody in that appeal court will be listening to you either. So good luck with your theories!

    Personally, I will be ok with either appeal decision. You, on the other hand, could become really agitated if things don’t go your way. In that case, I hope you have your high blood pressure medicines ready. You might need them.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”In the….bathroom they found Amanda’s DNA mixed with the blood.”

    This phrase has become etched in my brain because I have to read it used by TJFMK in blogs severally, on a daily basis. To a newcomer curious about this case and interested in learning more about it, this repeated phrase would convince them quite quickly that its content has some vital truth about it which surely damns Amanda to the chains of gaol for many a year. It has that tautological ring of a perfectly-formed declarative statement about it, and when repeated frequently like this, it takes on the characteristics of a commonly-held belief.

    Yet actually, it is not worth a light. Imagine Al-Fhak had a visitor to his house this evening, and that visitor cut their finger in the kitchen and went to the bathroom to treat the cut, depositing some blood there in the process. And for no particular reason, if a CSI team made a DNA sweep of that bathroom the next day, they would find the visitor’s blood mixed with Al-Fhak’s DNA. And what would they, and everybody else in the known world (excluding the discerning members of the TJFMK crowd), conclude from this?

    Rest of the world: Al-Fhak’s DNA is involved in the findings because he lives in the house where the bathroom is.

    TJFMK: Al-Fhak is somehow wholly or in part responsible for the visitor cutting themselves.

    Again I appeal to the Logic and Linguistics communities to damn this reasoning and assign it to the same trash can that Perugian translations of ”See you later” were assigned to on a previous occasion.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Whatever you say, Joint Sphyncters.

    What you say makes a lot of sense. Amanda’s DNA was already in the sink and in the bidet, and got mixed with Meredith’s blood.

    But who brought that blood there? There were no DNA or fingerprints belonging to Rudy, so how did the blood get there?

    If lack of DNA or fingerprints in the bedroom is sufficient to exonerate Amanda from being in the murder scene, then the same lack of DNA should be sufficient to exonerate Rudy from being in the bloody bathroom.

    Oh I forgot Mary Ho’s theory! Maybe the police didn’t look hard enough.

    Give me a break, will you?!

  • Mary H.

    You forget my theory at your peril, Al-Flak.

    Incidentally, we are talking about very small drops of blood, and technicians using the same swab to collect samples from different areas.

    We are also talking about Rudy grabbing towels to apply to Meredith’s neck. If he put the blood there, it was probably while holding the towels.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Sure Mary Ho.

    No matter what the evidence is, everything must point to Rudy. If somehow it doesn’t, and actually points to someone else, we find an excuse, any unlikely scenario we can think of, to make it point to him anyway.

    I’m sure the judges will believe that theory of yours as well. It was blood dripped from the towel…

    Sure. Makes sense to me! Anything to blame the negro, man!!

  • Shane

    John Winters wrote: “Rest of the world: Al-Fhak’s DNA is involved in the findings because he lives in the house where the bathroom is.

    TJFMK: Al-Fhak is somehow wholly or in part responsible for the visitor cutting themselves.”

    Haha, so true!

  • Shane

    Al Fakh wrote: “But who brought that blood there? There were no DNA or fingerprints belonging to Rudy, so how did the blood get there?

    If lack of DNA or fingerprints in the bedroom is sufficient to exonerate Amanda from being in the murder scene, then the same lack of DNA should be sufficient to exonerate Rudy from being in the bloody bathroom”.

    But you do know Rudy himself admitted to going into the bloody bathroom several times to fetch towels, right? Why would he lie?

  • Mary H.

    Why are you being such a complete d*ckwad today, Al-Foolish? Is it because it’s Valentine’s Day and you don’t have a date? Even you aren’t usually this bad.

    “Sure. Makes sense to me! Anything to blame the negro, man!!”

    If Americans aren’t allowed to criticize the Italian justice system because our system is flawed, then you shouldn’t be allowed to pretend you’re not a racist when everything you write indicates you’re a complete bigot in every other way.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shame: “But you do know Rudy himself admitted to going into the bloody bathroom several times to fetch towels, right?”

    No, I didn’t know. Where did he say that he fetched towels from THAT bathroom? or from any bathroom at all? How do you know that he didn’t fetch that towel from Meredith’s bedroom? Can you show me the source that he fetched the towel from THAT bathroom?

    And even if he fetched the towels from THAT bathroom, as you claim (without knowing where you got that information from), how is the act of fetching the towels from a towel rack, which was probably reachable from the door threshold, justify the presence of blood in the bidet or in the sink?

    If that blood were the result of Rudy washing his hands, which were probably bloody, wouldn’t his DNA be mixed with the blood instead of Amanda’s? And wouldn’t his bloody fingerprints be on the faucet knobs or the light switch?

    Well, they didn’t find his fingerprints or DNA mixed with the blood in that bathroom. But instead they found AMANDA’S DNA mixed with the bathroom. How do you think the judges will interpret that? THINK ABOUT IT! FORGET ABOUT HOW AL-FAKH YUGOUDH INTERPRETS THAT! BUT HOW DO YOU THINK REASONABLE JUDGES WILL INTERPRET THAT??

    MARY HO.: ” Is it because it’s Valentine’s Day and you don’t have a date? ”

    I’M MARRIED MARY HO. HAVE BEEN MARRIED FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
    THEREFORE YES. I GUESS YOU’RE RIGHT. I DON’T HAVE A DATE. I HAVE A WIFE.

    “you shouldn’t be allowed to pretend you’re not a racist ”
    MARY HO., I’M WHITE AND MY WIFE IS BLACK AND A BIT DARKER THAN BOTH RUDY GUEDE AND LUMUMBA.
    THE DAY YOU ARE IN A BIRACIAL RELATIONSHIP LIKE ME, YOU’RE ALLOWED TO CALL ME A RACIST. TILL THEN, SHUT THE F*U*C*K UP!

  • Mary H.

    “BUT HOW DO YOU THINK REASONABLE JUDGES WILL INTERPRET THAT??”

    Since when are we talking about reasonable judges? I thought we were talking about the judges in Perugia.

    “I HAVE A WIFE.”

    I doubt it, quite frankly. Ask her to come to the computer so we can see if she knows about all your obscene pseudonyms, which got you kicked off the Seattle Times blogs. Ask her what she thinks about your active fantasy life involving Amanda and Meredith, and how she likes it when you write, “I bet you’re a blond. Which makes you even sexier.”

    You sound like a mean drunk today.

  • Harry Rag

    e evidence against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito is overwhelming.

    Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:

    1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

    2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.

    3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.

    4. Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.

    5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.

    6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.

    7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci and Dr. Stefanoni.

    Amanda Knox’s footprints were found set in Meredith’s blood in two places in the hallway of the new wing of the cottage. One print was exiting her own room, and one print was outside Meredith’s room, facing into the room. These bloody footprints were only revealed under luminol.

    A woman’s bloody shoeprint, which matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith’s body. The bloody shoeprint was incompatible with Meredith’s shoe size.

    Two independent imprint experts categorically excluded the possibility that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat could belong to Rudy Guede. Lorenzo Rinaldi stated: ““You can see clearly that this bloody footprint on the rug does not belong to Mr. Guede, but you can see that it is compatible with Sollecito.”

    The other imprint expert print expert testified that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot.

    An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. Meredith’s bra was removed some time after she had been killed and Rudy Guede had fled the scene.

    The murder dynamic implicates Knox and Sollecito.

    Barbie Nadeau wrote the following:

    “Countless forensic experts, including those who performed the autopsies on Kercher’s body, have testified that more than one person killed her based on the size and location of her injuries and the fact that she didn’t fight back—no hair or skin was found under her fingernails.”

    Judge Paolo Micheli claimed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith’s murder that they could have only known if they were present when she was killed.

    Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. She stated on at least four separate occasions that she was the cottage when Meredith was killed.

    Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito both gave multiple conflicting alibis and lied repeatedly. Their lies were exposed by telephone and computer records, and by CCTV footage. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis for the night of the murder despite three attempt each.

    Legal expert Stefano Maffei stated the following:

    “There were 19 judges who looked at the evidence over the course of two years, faced with decisions on pre-trial detention, review of such detention, committal to trial, judgment on criminal responsibility. They all agreed, at all times, that the evidence was overwhelming.”

  • Al-Beefaqhd Goudh

    Hi Mary:
    Yes I’m Af-Fakh Yugoudh’s wife. He’s really married to me. I know he jokes a lot, so I don’t worry about what he writes on these blogs.

    But after reading your stupid posts above, I too think that you’re a blond.

    If Amanda is guilty I do really think that she really deserves to go to prison, you know!

    And if she’s not guilty at all but she still gets convicted, then…
    ..oh well! If that happens, then, to paraphrase Amanda Knox: “Shit happens!”

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”HOW DO YOU THINK REASONABLE JUDGES WILL INTERPRET THAT??”

    To which Mary H. replies:

    ”Since when are we talking about reasonable judges? I thought we were talking about the judges in Perugia.”

    I must say I agree with Mary H. here. Whatever the Italian contingent on these blogs say about the classical roots of their grand judiciary, this case seems to be proving something of a rude awakening for their judicial system in Perugia, which more than once was caught napping (quite literally), mid-session!!

    Is it reasonable to allow jurors to fall asleep when they have accepted an invitation to take part in a court session which ultimately, will have to make a decision about the next 26 years of a young girl’s life?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Is it reasonable to allow jurors to fall asleep when they have accepted an invitation to take part in a court session which ultimately, will have to make a decision about the next 26 years of a young girl’s life?”

    As Amanda Knox would say:

    SHIT HAPPENS!

  • Mary H.

    Oh, I think I know what’s eating Al-Flooey P’tooey today. He thought Ivstitia was jivin’ when he said he was gone for good, but now, after spending the weekend trying to get Itchy to rejoin him in his Tuscan treachery, Al finds himself all alone amongst a bunch of Amanda supporters. Aw, boo hoo, po’ widdo expatriate bigot! Well, what’s a fellow to do but go on the offensive? And I do mean offensive!

    Back to truejustice with you and Ivstitia/Baleno/Commissario Montalbano/Pinocchio, where everybody bows down before the gods of Peter Quennell and ronulus/Harry Rag/La Machine and their bags of money.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    I said: “I HAVE A WIFE.”
    To which Mary Ho responds: “I doubt it, quite frankly.”

    Are you getting jealous Mary? You’re still sexy blondie, don’t worry! Sorry to disappoint you, but yes, I’m taken. And she also knows about my Arab-Italian origins so briliantly displayed in my nickname, which is so famous throughout the blogosphere:

    http://blog.ilgiornale.it/foa/2009/12/02/un-lettore-musulmano-ci-scrive-siamo-davvero-paranoici/

    No I’m not drunk today. I don’t really drink much, never have. Just the standard glass of wine while eating, like good old italians do.

  • Mary H.

    Ah, yes, and your oil wells and factory; she must know about those, too.

    Hey, Al, I just got back from checking out the examiner, where you got your idea from Antonio about the “sh*t happens” comment. Way to be original, man!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Hey Mary Ho:
    Baleno is actually my other nickname, which I have to use when anti-muslim newspapers ban my beautiful Arab name. It’s not Iustitia’s.

    Let’s not mix up names here, ok? Iustitia is the Commissario Montalbano friend of that Peter guy in New Jersey. I’ve got nothing to do with True Justice.

    And nobody is gone for good except for the dead. Iustitia is still in the Bay Area spending the long weekend with his family, as I’m with mine, and actually maybe tomorrow we might even get together and device some strategies to fakh with you, John and the rest of the FOAkers a little more.

    PS: Iustitia told me that none of those True Justice people, including himself, get any money from the guy in New Jersey. Do you actually think that rich people like that Peter would separate themselves with money so easily? Haven’t you learned yet that the richest people are the stingiest they get?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Haven’t gone to the Examiner since this morning. Nobody is writing there anymore I stopped checking it.

  • Shane

    Al-Fakh wrote: “No, I didn’t know. Where did he say that he fetched towels from THAT bathroom? or from any bathroom at all? How do you know that he didn’t fetch that towel from Meredith’s bedroom? Can you show me the source that he fetched the towel from THAT bathroom?

    And even if he fetched the towels from THAT bathroom, as you claim (without knowing where you got that information from), how is the act of fetching the towels from a towel rack, which was probably reachable from the door threshold, justify the presence of blood in the bidet or in the sink?”

    Guede has said repeatedly he went to Meredith’s bathroom to get towels to try and stop the bleeding. From his prison diary:”I took a towel from her bathroom, but in less than a minute it was all soaked. I took another, but it was no use.” There were in fact three blood-soaked towels found in the bedroom (one may have already been in her bedroom).

    If Guede was traipsing from the blood-spattered bedroom into the bathroom to mop up blood, as he says, don’t you think it’s likely he would have carried traces of blood in there with him? Since no blood was found in the big bathroom (which was further away from Meredith’s room; the small bathroom was ‘her bathroom’, the one she used) it seems unlikely he went to the other side of the house to fetch towels. Why would he?

    Guede would have left traces of blood in the sink when he washed his hands (do you think he would have left the house with hands covered in blood? Could be tricky if he was seen…) and in the bidet when he washed his bloody foot (after he accidentally left the print on the bathmat).

  • Roberto Dylan

    With the pending judgement looming on the horizon, a little prophecy from me:

    “Shadows are falling and I’ve been here all day
    It’s too hot to sleep time is running away
    Feel like my soul has turned into steel
    I’ve still got the scars that the sun didn’t heal
    There’s not even room enough to be anywhere

    It’s not dark yet, but it’s getting there”

  • Where oh where?

    Shane said: “Guede has said repeatedly he went to Meredith’s bathroom to get towels to try and stop the bleeding. From his prison diary:”I took a towel from her bathroom, but in less than a minute it was all soaked. I took another, but it was no use.” There were in fact three blood-soaked towels found in the bedroom (one may have already been in her bedroom).”

    Where oh where have those little towels gone? I guess they went to the same place the 3 fried hard drives went. Wonder what kind of evidence was on the towels the prosecution didn’t want anyone else to see?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Guede has said repeatedly he went to Meredith’s bathroom to get towels to try and stop the bleeding.”

    DIDN’T WE ESTABLISH THAT GUEDE’S STATEMENTS ARE NOT CREDIBLE? WHY DO WE PICK AND CHOOSE HIS STATEMENTS ONLY WHEN IT’S CONVENIENT?

    HE ALSO SAID THAT HE WAS IN THE BATHROOM WHEN A GUY CAME IN AND KILLED MEREDITH. WHY DON’T WE BELIEVE HIM WHEN HE SAYS THAT, BUT WE BELIEVE HIM WHEN HE SAYS THAT HE PICKED UP THE TOWELS TO HELP MEREDITH?

    IF RUDY IS THE ONE WHO VICIOUSLY KILLED MEREDITH BY CUTTING HER THROAT MULTIPLE TIMES, WHY WOULD HE BE SO CONCERNED TO STOP HER BLEEDING WITH THE TOWELS? I’VE NEVER HEARD OF A VICIOUS KILLER WHO COMMITS A HEINOUS CRIME LIKE THAT AND THEN TRIES TO HELP THE VICTIM BY STOPPING THE BLEEDING.

    BUT OH WELL! ANYTHING TO BLAME THE NEGRO ONLY! WHATEVER WORKS!

    “Guede would have left traces of blood in the sink when he washed his hands”

    WHY DIDN’T THEY FIND HIS DNA MIXED WITH THE BLOOD THEN? WHY WAS THE BLOOD MIXED WITH AMANDA’S DNA IF THE BLOOD CAME OFF HIS HANDS?

    RUDY WAS WEARING SHOES (THEY FOUND HIS FOOTPRINT FROM HIS TENNIS SHOE), AND THEY DIDN’T FIND ANY BARE FOOTPRINTS BELONGING TO HIM IN THE HALL OR THE BEDROOM. THE BLOODY BARE FOOTPRINT IN THE BATHMAT MAY NOT BE HIS. AS A MATTER OF FACT POLICE EXPERTS SAID IT WASN’T HIS. WHY DIDN’T THEY FIND HIS BARE FOOTPRINTS ANYWHERE ELSE? WAS HE FLYING?

    AND WHY WOULD HE WASH HIS FEET IN THE BIDET IF HE WAS WEARING SHOES? HE COULD HAVE SIMPLY WIPED THE BLOOD OFF HIS SHOE.

    ______________________

    SO YOU THINK THAT THE JUDGES ARE GOING TO BELIEVE YOUR THEORIES IN SPITE OF THE ABOVE INCONSISTENCIES?

    WELL! GOOD LUCK TO YOU AND AMANDA MY FRIEND! BUT I’M TELLING YOU HOW THE JUDGES MOST LIKELY WILL INTERPRET THAT EVIDENCE:

    1 – BLOOD+AMANDA’S DNA IN THE BATHROOM= AMANDA IS THE ONE WHO CARRIED THE BLOOD TO THE BATHROOM

    2 – BLOODY BARE FEET REVEALED BY LUMINOL MATCHING AMANDA’S AND RAFFAELE’S (AND NOT TO GUEDE)= AMANDA AND RAFFAELE WERE PART OF EITHER THE MURDER OR THE CLEAN UP STAGE WHILE BAREFOOT.

    3 – NO TRACES OF RUDY IN FILOMENA’S ROOM OR WINDOW AND NO MISSING VALUABLES EVEN THOUGH IN PLAIN SIGHT = BREAK IN WAS STAGED AND WAS STAGED BY SOMEONE OTHER THAN RUDY.

    4 – BLOOD + AMANDA’S DNA IN FILOMENA’S BEDROOM = AMANDA PARTICIPATED IN STAGED BREAK IN AFTER THE MURDER.

    5 – RAFFAELE’S DNA ON BRA CLASP = RAFFAELE PARTICIPATED IN MURDER OR IN TAMPERING OF CRIME SCENE (EXPERTS DETERMINED THAT BRA WAS REMOVED AFTER KILLING)

    THAT IS HOW THE JUDGES WILL LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE. DON’T BELIEVE ME? JUST SIT AND WATCH A COUPLE OF YEARS FROM NOW.

  • Where oh where?

    Since most of the judges/jury are of Als ilk, it’s no wonder Amanda and Raffaele were convicted. Dude, you have absolutely no insight or common sense. How often in life have you been fleeced? If I was a con man I’d be wanting your address because I have this bridge…..

  • John Winters

    Geez that last post of Al’s really proves he only gets hyper-upset when someone points out something truly gobsmacking like:

    ”From his (Guede’s), prison diary:”I took a towel from her bathroom, but in less than a minute it was all soaked. I took another, but it was no use.”

    LOL (as in the ‘laugh out loud’ interpretation).

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    WOW and JW:

    Whatever you say and believe is fine with me.

    But …………IF:

    - Amanda’s DNA is mixed with victim’s blood in bathroom
    and there is no trace of Rudy’s DNA in sink.

    - Amanda’s DNA is mixed with victim’s blood in Filomena’s burglarized bedroom and there is no trace of Rudy’s presence (DNA or fingerprints) in same bedroom or window.

    - Luminol enhanced footprints match Amanda’s and Raffaele’s.

    - Bra clasp contains Raffaele’s DNA

    - Kitchen’s knife at Raffaele’s contains victim’s DNA and Raffaele blames an accidental pricking during a dinner that never happened.

    - Witnesses saw Raffaele and Amanda in places where they said they weren’t.

    - Witnesses heard scream and multiple people running up the metal stairs at parking garage.

    - Computer/internet records disprove that Raffaele was on line or at the computer when he said he was.

    - Telephone records disprove that he received call from father when he said he did.

    - Telephone records show he turned on phones when he said he was asleep.

    - Amanda blamed an innocent person and did not retract for weeks and police had to find out on their own that person accused was falsely accused.

    - Raffaele said Amanda wasn’t at his home between 9 and 1am, when she said she was.

    - Raffaele doesn’t remember if she even slept with him that night.

    - Raffaele still refuses to testify.

    HOW DO YOU THINK ARE THE JUDGES GOING TO INTERPRET ALL THESE CIRCUMSTANCES?

    THAT RUDY COMMITTED THE CRIME ALL BY HIMSELF AFTER A BURGLARY GONE WRONG, WHILE AMANDA AND RAFFAELE WERE INNOCENTLY WATCHING A DVD AT HIS APARTMENT AND NEVER MOVED FROM THERE?

    SORRY PEOPLE. BUT UNLESS YOU GET A BUNCH OF JUDGES STONED BY THE SAME DRUGS THAT AMANDA AND RAFFAELE ARE USED TO SMOKING, IT IS VERY UNLIKELY THAT THEY’LL BELIEVE THE LONE WOLF THEORY WHILE THE TWO LOVERS ARE AT HOME.

    I GIVE IT A GOOD CHANCE THAT THEY’LL BE FOUND GUILTY IN APPEAL. OF COURSE YOU’RE FREE TO GET MAD AND BOYCOTT ITALY AS MUCH AS YOU LIKE. BUT YOUR BOYCOTTS DON’T SCARE ANYBODY. BESIDES MOST OF THOSE WHO WOULD BOYCOTT ARE PEOPLE WHO WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO AFFORD TRAVELING TO ITALY ANYWAY.

    I BET NONE OF YOU HAS VISITED THERE IN THE PAST 5 YEARS. ACTUALLY I’M PRETTY SURE MANY OF YOU NEVER VISITED ITALY IN YOUR LIFE. AND YOUR IGNORANT COMMENTS OFTEN SHOW IT.

  • Where oh where?

    I was in Italy in Oct. 2008. I loved being there, thought it was wonderful. I had a chance to go back this coming Oct. 2010 and opted for another location. My sister lives in Paris and Corsica and has lived in Italy before. She used to vacation in Italy once or twice a year. But no more.

  • Where oh where?

    “There were in fact three blood-soaked towels found in the bedroom (one may have already been in her bedroom).”

    Where oh where have those little towels gone? I guess they went to the same place the 3 fried hard drives went. Wonder what kind of evidence was on the towels the prosecution didn’t want anyone else to see?”

    Still wondering.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “I had a chance to go back this coming Oct. 2010 and opted for another location.”
    “She used to vacation in Italy once or twice a year. But no more.”

    YOU’RE BOTH DOING THE RIGHT THING! YOU’RE MUCH SAFER AT HOME. AMERICA IS A MUCH SAFER PLACE FOR TRAVELERS:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/us/14visa.html

  • John Winters

    What is the point of continually listing the prosecution ”evidence” like this? I’m beginning to suspect Al-Fhak and Harry Rag work in the same warehouse together.

    Rather, it can be summed up like this and does just the same job without using all that blogspace:

    ALL of the (non-footprint) DNA evidence is flawed in the extreme.

    Amanda Knox was never in Meredith Kercher’s room on Nov 1st, 2007 so could not have killed her.

    I must say, continually pointing out that the appeal court is going to find the same way as the high court because the way the Italian judiciary understand things is very different to the way everybody else in the known world understands things, is also severely draining. What’s the idea? Nauseate us into submission?
    And if it is, surely the underlying motive for this must be that you are aware you are condemning an innocent party for some ulterior motive which has nothing in fact to do with the events of Nov. 1st, 2007 at 7 Via della Pergola, Perugia.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “Where oh where have those little towels gone?”

    RITHT! I WONDER WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TOWELS THAT RUDY SAID WERE THERE?

    IF RUDY SAID THERE WERE 3 TOWELS, IT MUST BE TRUE!
    RUDY IS ALWAYS SO TRUTHFUL AND TRUSTWORTHY!

    WHO KNOWS! MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE WENT BACK LATER ON AND THREW THEM AWAY! I WONDER WHO COULD HAVE DONE THAT!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “..you are condemning an innocent party….”

    As Amanda Knox would say:

    “SHIT HAPPENS”

  • billyryan

    mary H, john winters, where oh where.the judges summing up is due,what are ye hoping for amanda and raffaela being put under house arrest for the duration of the appeal process.surely the judge cannot disreguard migninis conviction for abuse of power and planting of evidence. It is so ovious that in this case the only evidence that the prosecution has got is the evidence that it planted and all the evidence that would have cleared amanda and raffaela that the prosecution has managed to disapear

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”…you are condemning an innocent person…”
    As Amanda Knox would say:
    ”S### happens”

    And that comment alone should be enough to stop people writing on blogs like these and get out there and start canvassing on Amanda’s behalf in the streets to bring home to people everywhere that she is indeed a victim of a miscarriage of justice. Comedy show? We should organise a demonstration and direct lobby of the senate.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyterate-Ignoryant:

    Your ignorance of the most basic punctuation and orthographic rules speaks for itself.

    Without having any proof, you accuse the prosecution of having fabricated and planted incriminating evidence or even concealed or tampered with exonerating evidence.

    You’ll see the type of house arrest they’ll be put in: the Big House arrest!

    If you want to see Amanda in the next 25 years, I suggest none of you boycott Italy, because you’ll need to travel there to see her. And once you get there make sure you schedule a visit at the “Casa Circondariale” of Perugia Capanne. Visiting times are limited, you know!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “..get out there and start canvassing on Amanda’s behalf in the streets ..We should organise a demonstration..”.

    IN THE STREETS???

    A CUL DE SAC WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE HANDFUL OF PEOPLE WHO WILL SHOW UP.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    As Harry Rag said:

    Amanda Knox’s DNA was found on:

    1. On the double DNA knife and a number of independent forensic experts – Dr. Patrizia Stenoni, Dr. Renato Biondo and Professor Francesca Torricelli – categorically stated that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

    2. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.

    3. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.

    4. Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.

    5. Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.

    6. Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.

    7. On Meredith’s bra according to Raffaele Sollecito’s forensic expert, Professor Vinci and Dr. Stefanoni.

    Amanda Knox’s footprints were found set in Meredith’s blood in two places in the hallway of the new wing of the cottage. One print was exiting her own room, and one print was outside Meredith’s room, facing into the room. These bloody footprints were only revealed under luminol.

    A woman’s bloody shoeprint, which matched Amanda Knox’s foot size, was found on a pillow under Meredith’s body. The bloody shoeprint was incompatible with Meredith’s shoe size.

    Two independent imprint experts categorically excluded the possibility that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat could belong to Rudy Guede. Lorenzo Rinaldi stated: ““You can see clearly that this bloody footprint on the rug does not belong to Mr. Guede, but you can see that it is compatible with Sollecito.”

    The other imprint expert print expert testified that the bloody footprint on the blue bathmat matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot.

    An abundant amount of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp. Meredith’s bra was removed some time after she had been killed and Rudy Guede had fled the scene.

    The murder dynamic implicates Knox and Sollecito.

    Barbie Nadeau wrote the following:

    “Countless forensic experts, including those who performed the autopsies on Kercher’s body, have testified that more than one person killed her based on the size and location of her injuries and the fact that she didn’t fight back—no hair or skin was found under her fingernails.”

    Judge Paolo Micheli claimed that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito knew precise details about Meredith’s murder that they could have only known if they were present when she was killed.

    Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. She stated on at least four separate occasions that she was the cottage when Meredith was killed.

    Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito both gave multiple conflicting alibis and lied repeatedly. Their lies were exposed by telephone and computer records, and by CCTV footage. Neither Knox nor Sollecito have credible alibis for the night of the murder despite three attempt each.

    Legal expert Stefano Maffei stated the following:

    “There were 19 judges who looked at the evidence over the course of two years, faced with decisions on pre-trial detention, review of such detention, committal to trial, judgment on criminal responsibility. They all agreed, at all times, that the evidence was overwhelming.”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    With all that evidence do you think that those judges will believe it’s a conspiracy by the prosecution, or a massive incompetent blunder by the police, or a mass witnesses’ delusion?

    They might dismiss SOME of the DNA evidence.
    They might dismiss SOME of the other CSI evidence.
    They might dismiss SOME of the testimony.
    They might dismiss SOME of the circumstantial evidence.
    They might dismiss SOME of the inconsistent statements.

    But they WILL NOT dismiss ALL OF the evidence.

    The judges will reach the only possible conclusion:

    AMANDA AND RAFFAELE ARE GUILTY OF MURDER!

  • Where oh where?

    Al, the three towels are in the (in)famous Micheli report.

    “Pulled to the left wall with the headboard against the wall earlier, and single bed with mattress covered only with the sheet below, on which rest means a woman’s bag in imitation leather beige, two terry socks, a book ( ..) stained, the upper-right corner of the cover of substance blood (..); ivory terry towel, plenty of substance smeared blood (..). On the sheet, between the towel and said the bag, are two blood spots of irregular shape (..) measuring cm respectively. Length and 9.5 cm. Wide and 2 cm. Length and 14 cm. 3 wide.”

    “n the course of the corpse, following the rotation of the body, we observe on the second floor tennis shoes in white cotton, partially smeared blood substance, a green terry towel, terry towel ivory completely soaked substance of blood, the sheet above the bed, cotton white, stained in several places of blood-borne substance, a shirt with zipper,”

    So, where are the towels now? I’ve read that the (in)famous forensic department let the towels mildew. Is this on purpose, or another example of their incompetence?

  • Where oh where?

    Al, Rudy said he used the towels to try and stop Meredith from bleeding. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t, but Rudy knew the police would find the towels and he knew he’d handled the towels so he gave them an excuse for the towels to be there with his finger prints or DNA or whatever. He didn’t know that the police would screw up the towel’s so they couldn’t be used as evidence. Also, by saying he used the towels to try and help Meredith it wouldn’t make him look so much like the garbage he really is.

  • John Winters

    John Winters wrote:

    “..get out there and start canvassing on Amanda’s behalf in the streets ..We should organise a demonstration..”

    Al-Fhak responded:

    IN THE STREETS???
    A CUL DE SAC WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE HANDFUL OF PEOPLE WHO WILL SHOW UP.

    John Winters responded (and this is for Roberto Dylan too):

    ”…..So through the night rode John Winters;
    And so through the night went his cry of alarm
    To every Middlesex village and farm,—
    A cry of defiance, and not of fear,
    A voice in the darkness, a knock at the door,
    And a word that shall echo for evermore!
    For, borne on the night-wind of the Past,
    Through all our history, to the last,
    In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
    The people will waken and listen to hear
    The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
    And the midnight message of John Winters”

    Henryo Wadsworth Longfellow.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the ledge of the basin.
    Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the bidet.
    Mixed with Meredith blood on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.
    Mixed with Meredith’s blood in the hallway.
    Mixed with Meredith’s blood on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.”

    Sorry to pull rank on your English again Al, I know it’s not critique of the highest quality, but how would this read (in English), if it were written this way round:

    ”Meredith’s blood was:

    Mixed with Amanda’s DNA on the ledge of the basin.

    Mixed with Amanda’s DNA on the bidet.

    Mixed with Amanda’s DNA on a box of Q Tip cotton swabs.

    Mixed with Amanda’s DNA in the hallway.

    Mixed with Amanda’s DNA on the floor of Filomena’s room, where the break-in was staged.”

    You see, having read your use of English for quite some time now, I suspect that you don’t (no actually I mean ‘can’t'), really appreciate the subtle change in the nuance of the language and its inference, which an alteration of this kind brings about to a series of expressions like those you quoted. For that reason, you create enormous frustration in your readership on these blogs because you are constantly trying to explain your ‘rationale’ using a language whose own inherent rationale is incompatible with it.

  • billyryan

    amanda will be free yet in 2010 and the men that framed her will have wrecked there own lives

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joined Winotours.
    You can keep on going with your linguistic masturbations as much as you like but the linguistic nuances of your English language will be appreciated even less by the judges in Perugia when they render the guilty verdict to Amanda.

    When that guilty verdict is read, you are free to point out all the subtle nuances in the English language to those judges. But make sure you learn Italian first though, because you might have to explain those nuances to them in that language.
    There is in fact a very high chance those judges don’t understand even a word of English, let alone your useless nuances.

    I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but that trial takes place in a country where they speak a language other than English. Therefore I can tell you in the language of THAT country where you can put your linguistic nuances:

    IN CULO!!!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyryan said
    am February 15 2010 @ 5:15 pm

    amanda will be free yet in 2010 and the men that framed her will have wrecked there own lives

    BILLYTERATE IGNORYANT:
    I think you’re off a few years. By 2010 you’ll be lucky if the appeal trial will have started. And appeal trials in Italy last, on average, a couple of years if not more.

    Although it doesn’t really matter in this case. They can take as much time as they like, since Amanda is going to spend many many more years in prison.

  • Mary H.

    John Winters wrote: “What is the point of continually listing the prosecution ”evidence” like this? I’m beginning to suspect Al-Fhak and Harry Rag work in the same warehouse together.”

    I completely agree. And just last night Al-Dork was claiming he had nothing to do with truejustice.

    billy wrote: “what are ye hoping for amanda and raffaela being put under house arrest for the duration of the appeal process.surely the judge cannot disreguard migninis conviction for abuse of power and planting of evidence.”

    My hope is they will be put on house arrest (well, my real hope is that they would be freed). One thing I have learned, though, is never to count on the Perrugian judges to do the right thing or the sensible thing.

    where oh where, good discussion of the towels. Can you believe Al-Ijjit didn’t know about them? He must be really well read.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary Ho:

    I’m very well read. As a matter of fact I can read Micheli’s report without using Google.

    Ask Joined Winotours if he can do that with his nuances.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”When that guilty verdict is read, you are free to point out all the subtle nuances in the English language to those judges.”

    I am not asking the judges to explain their seeming total lack of comprehension about what is revealed when the relative veracity of a platitude, which is in severe danger of evolving into some kind of profound truth due to overuse on these blogs, can be undermined to such an extent that the original statement (e.g. ”Meredith’s blood was: mixed with Amanda’s DNA on the bidet”), proves to demonstrate no tenacious semantic relationships between its elements and the phenomena of the reality which it proposes to describe, simply by the application of a syntactical transforming inversion of its elements.

    I am asking YOU to do it.

    The only problem is, I don’t think you have the faintest idea what I’m talking about, and that is why the mechanicalism of the language used on these blogs is so painfully reminiscent of the heartbreaking experience Amanda and her supporters underwent during the course of that damnable ‘trial.’

    Recently, Edda Mellas has been castigated on these blogs for commenting that she didn’t mention her daughter’s remarks about Patrik’s innocence to police ‘because she didn’t speak Italian.’

    Which is pretty small potatoes when you consider that her daughter is now doing 26 years for the same crime.

  • Roberto Dylan

    John winters -

    “Advertising signs that con you
    Into thinking you’re the one
    That can do what’s never been done
    That can win what’s never been won
    Meantime life outside goes on
    All around you.”

  • Roberto Dylan

    john winters:

    ” … shit happens!”

    Amanda Knox

  • Roberto Dylan

    to john winters -

    “In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
    The people will waken and listen to hear
    The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
    And the midnight message of John Winters”

    ” …. breakfast will be at 8.00 sharp”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Joined Winotours:

    It would really help you a lot if you left the wine in the cellar for a few minutes so that you stop your semantic hair splitting.

    The fact that there was a mixture of Meredith’s blood with Amanda’s DNA in the sink and in the bidet and on the Qtip container is a rather obvious clue that it was probably Amanda who cleaned her own bloody hands in that bathroom, and not Rudy.

    But if you want to continue to split hairs with your semantics go ahead. You can even show me your poetic ability if you want, but it’s not going to get you or Amanda anywhere. And by the way, no knowledge of English is even required to find Amanda guilty in that court.

    See you later William Shitspear.

  • jim

    mary the H listen egghead , ivista already saud that both amanda the butcher and the sick boyfriend disappeared in the their room witnessed by her roomate Filomenali when cops wrer actually in the cottage. they nade phone call to the police in that room as the court has established. u and rest of her supporters are just trying to cover the whtie american girl who is plainly a killer and a very cunning one. she will rot in that hole!go get a life

  • Roberto Dylan

    to john winters -

    “In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
    The people will waken and listen to hear
    The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
    And the midnight message of John Winters,

    Friends, breakfast will be at 8.00 sharp,he whispered”

  • Mary H.

    jim wrote: “ivista already saud…”

    Well, then.

  • billyryan

    surely now this case is at a very critical stage.mignini and camodi now have to hand over all details of this case to another prosecuter.in private he will ask them the hard questions.what really is the story of the hard drives,what was the forenzic results on the towels that rudy guede used,probally to clean up merridith so he could rape and sodomise a dead corpse.what state had ye really brought amanda too in her interrogation,that you decided the outside world could not be allowed to see,he will look for the results of the forenzic tests done for traces of bleech on the drain pipes at the cottage,the accusation that was so sucessfully used to keep this young couple in pretrial detension,he will interview the coroner who done the authopsy on merridith body,this man would not be bullied by mignini and might in private have a very interesting story to tell.with migninis use of investigations and defamanation cases against all who are opposed to him,he is now having to run very hard just to stand still.i have no doubt forenzic people in italy and the british company who pioneered lcn testing have been approached to support the prosecution dna evidence,but like the first coroner who did an authopsy on merridith body and mignini sacked when he would not toe the line,these people would not be bullied into stating black is white.the new prosecuter who may be studying this case as i write is soon to see the full brutality of what rudy guede done stabbed merridith in the neck three times carefull not to cut the main artuary so she would die slowly from blood loss,he probally raped her as she was dying.he was friends with the boys downstairs he knew the chances of merridith being home alone.after going dancing he returned to the cottage it was at this stage he probally used the towels to clean merridith so he could rape and sodomise her corpse,there is undeniably evidence merridith was moved after she was dead and the blood had dried,i think the dna on these towels was very telling and had to be got rid of in order for mignini to frame amanda.films will soon be made about this case and mignini is soon to become the most demonised and depised person on the planet.for not only framing a beautiful young couple but in his desire to do this his willingness to help rudy guede who committed the most brutal and depraved and sadistic slaying of a beautifull girl who brough joy into a lot of people lives,to almost get away with it.
    now that some of the emotion has left this case,and the press interest has waned,a new prosecuter is now looking at this case,he will be interviewing the drug addicts and homeless men who came forward a year later to help a flagging prosecution case.he will be horrified at what he sees.i understand mary H and john winters why ye have no faith in the perugia judges and prosecuters,but we have no choice but to give this new man a chance
    i see al_faik_y you are willing to consede that amanda may be innocent of late but you still want her to stay in jail,that is very telling of the kind of person you are

  • Roberto Dylan

    to john winters -

    “In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
    The people will waken and listen to hear
    The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
    And the midnight message of John Winters:

    Which was, breakfast will be at 8.00 am sharp, he whispered.”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyterate.ignoryant:
    your theory that Guede is a necrophile who raped Meredith’s corpse is so far fetched that it doesn’t even deserve consideration.
    And when did he have the time to rape her corpse if after the scream everybody ran out of there as quickly as possible? Are you trying to tell us that after going dancing at the Domus, he went back to the house in the early hours of the morning and raped the corpse then? You are obviously out of mind and you should get yourself checked by a doctor, preferably a psychiatrist.
    The only scenario that makes sense is the one postulated by the prosecutor. The only doubt I have is whether Amanda actively participated to the group rape or if she just watched from the door threshold while her sick boyfriend and Rudy tried to rape the girl (while she was still alive).
    Your conjectures are so idiotic that will never be considered in court. Those 3 drug addicts are all guilty and if miraculously they get acquitted, then that would be the true travesty of justice.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    And by the way billyterate.ignoryant, there is no chance that Amanda will be left free or even at house arrests while the appeals go on. The house arrest could have been a possibility before the trial, but after being convicted in the first trial, there is no way the judges are going to track back on their previous decision.

  • billyryan

    al_fakh_illiterate_dogshite you lost all credibility with you post that even if she is innocent she should be kept in jail.since there is undeniable proof that the body was moved after the blood dried,rudy knew the house was likely to be empty for the rest of the night only for merridits corpse.killers reguraly return to the scene of the crime.he had a plan to flee italy the cottage where he had raped and murdered was as good a place as any.the three towels that he had used, and mignini got rid of like the computer hardrives the tapes of the interrogation,it was probally when he came back he used them.
    the next man to prosecute is about to step on the world stage.mignini and camodi should be very worried about him,he might just have a heart and a belief that the innocent should go free and the guilty should be punished

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyterate.ignoryan said: “…since there is undeniable proof that the body was moved after the blood dried,rudy knew the house was likely to be empty for the rest of the night only for merridits corpse…”

    Hey Sherlock!

    Why don’t you contact Amanda’s and Raffaele’s lawyers and illustrate to them your defense strategy? Tell them that you believe that the murder scene was tampered with, and the body moved, not by AK and RS, as the prosecution believes, but by Rudy, who, after going dancing for a couple of hours, got the sexual urge to go back to the house and f*ck the corpse.

    I want to see if AK and RS’ lawyers go for that strategy, or if they call an ambulance to take you to the nearest mental institution.

  • John Winters

    Al-FhakYoughud says:

    ”The fact that there was a mixture of Meredith’s blood with Amanda’s DNA in the sink and in the bidet and on the Qtip container is a rather obvious clue that it was probably Amanda who cleaned her own bloody hands in that bathroom, and not Rudy.”

  • John Winters

    If you’re wondering whether I forgot to add a comment to what Al-FhakYoughud is quoted as saying in the previous post, don’t.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Yep Joint Winotours. No need for you to comment.

    That’s exactly what happened.

    Amanda got some blood on her hands during the murder scene staging (or maybe during the murder, if she took active part in it), so she went to the bathroom and washed herself. DNA from her sweat got mixed with the blood that stained the sink.

    Pretty simple, uh?!

  • John Winters

    Simple….yeeeah.

  • John Winters

    Now we’re back to square one:

    ”Amanda’s DNA was mixed with: Meredith’s blood on the bidet.”

    Simple!

  • John Winters

    If Al-Fhakupyourlanguagebyusingitlikeaprehensile
    can play Harry Rag and continually paste reems of outdated crap on this board, I can reply to Roberto Dylan in similar kind, who said (displaying an indiscreet lack of wit in the process):

    ”Which was, breakfast will be at 8.00 am sharp, he whispered.”

    Written by another American emigre:

    What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
    Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,
    You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
    A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
    And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
    And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
    There is shadow under this red rock,
    (Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
    And I will show you something different from either
    Your shadow at morning striding behind you
    Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
    I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
    Frisch weht der Wind
    Der Heimat zu.
    Mein Irisch Kind,
    Wo weilest du?
    ‘You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
    ‘They called me the hyacinth girl.’
    —Yet when we came back, late, from the Hyacinth garden,
    Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
    Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither
    Living nor dead, and I knew nothing,
    Looking into the heart of light, the silence.
    Od’ und leer das Meer.

    One day the whole world will know the truth of what took place at 7 Via della Pergola, Perugia, Italy on the evening of Nov. 1st, 2007. And they had better weep for Amanda Knox in that moment.

  • Roberto Dylan

    to John Winters -

    “One day the whole world will know the truth of what took place at 7 Via della Pergola, Perugia, Italy on the evening of Nov. 1st, 2007.”

    ” …. shit happened”

    Amanda Knox

  • Shane

    Al Fakh Myselfifnooneelsewill said: “- Amanda’s DNA is mixed with victim’s blood in Filomena’s burglarized bedroom and there is no trace of Rudy’s presence (DNA or fingerprints) in same bedroom or window.”

    I think you may be wrong here too, Al. Micheli mentions a Nike shoe print in Filomena’s room, with a piece of glass next to it; it was presented as evidence in Rudy’s trial. See here for more information: http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/archives/179047.asp

    What was Rudy doing in Filomena’s room, I wonder? We now have evidence that he was in Meredith’s bedroom (DNA, hand print, shoe prints), the bathroom (by his own admission), and Filomena’s room (shoe print). Plus his footprints leading to the front door. In other words, he was in every location connected to the murder.

  • Shane

    Where Oh Where said: “So, where are the towels now? I’ve read that the (in)famous forensic department let the towels mildew. Is this on purpose, or another example of their incompetence?”

    I was thinking about the footprint in the bathroom, and given the lack of any similar footprint in the blood in Meredith’s room, I bet it was made by someone (i.e. Rudy) stepping on one of the blood-soaked towels and then hopping into the bathroom to wash his foot. Maybe there was evidence to that effect on the towels, something which would of course make it highly likely Rudy was the one who made it, since he admits fetching the towels from the bathroom and using them to mop up the blood.

    Perhaps the ‘mildewing’ of the towels is another rather convenient destruction of evidence that might have discredited the prosecution’s case against Knox and Sollecito, like the frying of the hard drives.

  • Where oh where?

    Shane said: “I was thinking about the footprint in the bathroom, and given the lack of any similar footprint in the blood in Meredith’s room, I bet it was made by someone (i.e. Rudy) stepping on one of the blood-soaked towels and then hopping into the bathroom to wash his foot. Maybe there was evidence to that effect on the towels, something which would of course make it highly likely Rudy was the one who made it, since he admits fetching the towels from the bathroom and using them to mop up the blood.

    Perhaps the ‘mildewing’ of the towels is another rather convenient destruction of evidence that might have discredited the prosecution’s case against Knox and Sollecito, like the frying of the hard drives.”

    I agree. There was the towel sitting on the bed, a convenient place for rudy to sit and wipe dry his foot. But there is also the fact that rudy cut his hand during the struggle with Meredith, what you want to bet that rudy’s blood is also on these towels?

  • Where oh where?

    Here is another thought on those towels. They came from the bathroom that Amanda used and it wouldn’t have been unusual for Amanda’s DNA to have been on one or more of them. Don’t you think that the forensic department wouldn’t have jumped immediately to have a look, searching for her DNA? When none was found what use did the towels have? They already had plenty of evidence against rudy so might as well let them mildew.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shame: “Micheli mentions a Nike shoe print in Filomena’s room, with a piece of glass next to it;”

    WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT:
    “La stanza prende luce da una finestra, ubicata nel terzo medio della parete anteriore prospiciente il viale d’accesso alla casa. La stessa è protetta esternamente da una persiana fiorentina in legno di colore verde, in atto rinvenuta semiaperta e priva di effrazioni. L’anta di destra della persiana, è munita di un congegno di chiusura denominato ‘a spagnoletta’. La finestra è costituita da due imposte in legno bianco, con pA.lli in vetro, apribili verso l’interno, ciascuna munita all’interno di scuro di legno di colore bianco. Lo scuro dell’imposta di destra, è munito di un piccolo chiavistello di chiusura, in atto agganciato alla rispettiva asola a sua volta fissata all’imposta sottostante, e di un secondo congegno di chiusura, denominato ‘a spagnoletta’ munito di un chiavistello più G. del precedente, in atto aperto regolarmente (..). L’imposta di sinistra presenta il vetro infranto nella metà inferiore ed un foro passante di forma irregolare, che misura cm. 53 di lunghezza e cm. 27 di larghezza. Il davanzale interno ed esterno della finestra è cosparso di frammenti di vetro di varie dimensioni, presenti anche all’interno della stanza. Il lato interno dello scuro dell’imposta di sinistra, in corrispondenza del foro praticato nel vetro, presenta un’evidente scalfittura nel legno di forma irregolare, di cm. 2 circa, con sfilacciamento delle fibre legnose ed alcune piccole schegge di vetro ivi conficcate (..). Il davanzale esterno della finestra dista dal terreno sottostante mt. 3,78 (..).
    Sul quadrante anteriore del pavimento, sottostante la finestra, a mt. 0,93 dalla parete destra e mt. 0,66 dalla parete anteriore e mt. 2,31 dalla parete posteriore, è una busta di carta di media G.zza (..), contenente capi di abbigliamento ed un sasso della misura di cm. 20 x cm. 15 x cm. 15 circa; un secondo frammento di pietra, di piccola dimensione, poggia sul pavimento, fuori della busta, accanto al sasso (..)”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Your conjectures are full of “maybe”, “perhaps”, “I bet”, “probably”, and based on nothing except for your obvious intent to put the entire blame on Rudy.

    As usual any evidence against AK and RS is discounted or dismissed.

    Tell me why someone would claim in tears who was in the house and saw Lumumba doing it, and wouldn’t retract this wrong statement for 2 weeks, even though she had a chance to do so to the judges, lawyers, penitentiary police, chaplain etc.

    Could it be that “maybe” she was trying to put the blame on someone else in the hope she would be let go?

    But anyway, Shane. Don’t put links to Candace Dumbass or Frank Sfarzo. Show me actual unbiased documents. Show me where Micheli’s report says what you say.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak

    Ironically, you are using the language which Amanda used in her statements:

    ”Could it be that “maybe” she was trying to put the blame on someone else in the hope she would be let go?”

    These are conjectures, not statements of fact. Amanda was reporting what she imagined COULD have happened, not what she knew actually happened. This is because she didn’t in fact know what actually happened because she wasn’t there!

    Asked about that interview afterwards, she responded:

    ”They wanted a name and I couldn’t give them one.”

    Post-interrogation, Amanda actually was of the opinion that she had not given the police any factual information at all. And I must repeat, anybody with even an elementary understanding of mood in English will understand what she said in this way too.

    The way you discuss these statements doesn’t say much for the competence of the Perugian judicial system you seem so keen to defend. Surely they can come up with a member of staff who understands English at a deep enough level to appreciate the difference between language which is used to express conjecture and possibility, and language which is used to express fact.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Whatever you say guys! If somebody in this blog can even reach the conclusion that it was Rudy who tampered with the crime scene much later during the night, and he did so because he wanted to have sex with the corpse, then there isn’t much more I’m willing to debate. It’s like trying to convince a Christian that Jesus couldn’t have been born from a virgin or trying to convince a muslim that there are new 72 virgins in heaven waiting for suicide bombers. Totally futile.

    I think I’ll leave it to the judges to decide, they certainly have more access to the evidence than anybody else. And, when they decide, I’ll be perfectly happy with whichever decision they make. You on the other hand, will accept only one verdict, and I’m sure in case things don’t go your way, you’ll criticize every word of the sentence motivation. In that respect I much prefer the American system. Guilty or not guilty, and that’s it. No explanation for it in hundreds of pages of judges’ rulings. I wish it would be the same in Italy. Guilty or not guilty, and live with it.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Replace “new” with “no” above (when I talk about the 72 virgins). It was a typo.

  • Mary H.

    Hi’l-Fakh Hizzilf wrote: “…then there isn’t much more I’m willing to debate.”

    That’ll be the day.

    “It’s like trying to convince a Christian that Jesus couldn’t have been born from a virgin or trying to convince a muslim that there are new 72 virgins in heaven waiting for suicide bombers. Totally futile.”

    No, it isn’t. Those are articles of faith, while the evidence is supposed to be based on fact. Trying to envision the scenario, as Mignini and the judges did, is speculative, but the evidence can be tested scientifically.

    “Tell me why someone would claim in tears who was in the house and saw Lumumba doing it, and wouldn’t retract this wrong statement for 2 weeks, even though she had a chance to do so to the judges, lawyers, penitentiary police, chaplain etc.”

    Do you know for a fact that she didn’t? No, you don’t.

    The point is immaterial, anyway. Retracting her statement would not have gotten Lumumba out of jail, just as making her statement didn’t get him into jail.

  • Shane

    Al Fakh wrote: “WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT”

    I think it’s this bit, although I’m going on Google translate:

    “Quanto alla scelta di quell’ingresso un po’ scomodo, ma comunque agevole per una persona atletica, il ladro non pensò di entrare da dietro perché non sapeva come fosse fatto l’edificio sull’altro lato, o comunque ritenne che quella possibilità già facesse al caso suo; a dimostrazione dell’ingresso clandestino, inoltre, si rinvengono due frammenti di vetro all’interno della casa che non sarebbero stati mai repertati, uno dei quali avrebbe anche una foggia simile a un segno caratteristico di molte delle impronte lasciate dalle scarpe “Nike” riferibili al G.”

    It appears to have been mentioned during Guede’s trial, anyway. Did you read the link?

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Shane I don’t care about links to bloggers, whether it’s Harry Rag or Candace Dempsey. Neither one speaks Italian and they interpret whatever they want to interpret.

    I have the entire report which I exported on Word, so that I can search for specific words. I’ve searched for every possible combination and I’ve read that last sentence you have. That is in fact the only sentence closest to what you said earlier, but it doesn’t say it was in the bedroom.

    However, this is not what Micheli says. He’s telling what Sollecito’s defense (and his recount has a critical tone) is trying to explain (basically their theory of the burglary gone wrong).

    Don’t just read a piece here and there. Read it in the context of the whole logical argument that Micheli is trying to express:

    “Secondo la difesa del S., il vetro di quella finestra fu rotto da un sasso scagliato dal terrapieno antistante, sito a circa 3 metri di distanza; all’interno la finestra aveva l’oscurante, ma non era fissato all’anta, e dunque fu scheggiato per effetto del colpo ricevuto dal sasso (infatti ci sono frammenti anche all’esterno, sul davanzale, che confermano il rimbalzo dei vetri sull’oscurante).
    Quanto alla scelta di quell’ingresso un po’ scomodo, ma comunque agevole per una persona atletica, il ladro non pensò di entrare da dietro perché non sapeva come fosse fatto l’edificio sull’altro lato, o comunque ritenne che quella possibilità già facesse al caso suo; a dimostrazione dell’ingresso clandestino, inoltre, si rinvengono due frammenti di vetro all’interno della casa che non sarebbero stati mai repertati, uno dei quali avrebbe anche una foggia simile a un segno caratteristico di molte delle impronte lasciate dalle scarpe “Nike” riferibili al G.. Avrebbe anche senso, in tal modo, la condotta di quest’ultimo nel non tirare lo sciacquone: egli sarebbe entrato dalla finestra, avrebbe cominciato a rovistare per poi andare in bagno, quindi sarebbe rientrata la ragazza e l’uomo in bagno non avrebbe scaricato il water per non rivelare la propria presenza.
    In vero, questo Giudice ritiene che per entrare da quella finestra non ci volesse davvero Spiderman, come sostenuto dal Tribunale per il Riesame volendo liquidare l’ipotesi: ci voleva un uomo fisicamente agile, come certamente il G. era e come senz’altro sono i ladri che visitano gli appartamenti delle persone nottetempo.
    Né bisognava fare la scalata con il sasso in mano, potendolo effettivamente lanciare da quella sorta di parapetto (e non da sotto, come ha voluto obiettare il P.M., con il rischio che ricadesse in testa al lanciatore). Tuttavia, la scelta della finestra in parola palesava un certo azzardo, cui un ladro difficilmente ricorre: stando alle dichiarazioni della R., ella aveva lasciato le imposte praticamente socchiuse, una addirittura vincolata al davanzale per effetto della dilatazione del legno nel corso del tempo; e nulla, non essendoci certamente luce all’interno, avrebbe potuto rivelare all’uomo con il sasso in mano che lo scuro retrostante non fosse agganciato all’anta, con il rischio di scagliare la pietra e vedersela rimbalzare di sotto. Senza dimenticare che l’azzardo più G. consisteva nell’avere scelto proprio la finestra esposta verso la strada e verso i fari delle macchine in transito.
    Ammettendo poi che a quell’ignoto ladro dovesse darsi il nome di R. G., egli risultava – con quella dinamica – un ladro ancor meno probabile: dal suo punto di vista, perché non tentare di rubare innanzi tutto al piano di sotto, dove era più probabile che sapesse di non trovare nessuno perché aveva più confidenza con quei ragazzi ed era a conoscenza del loro provenire da altra regione, quindi forse gli avevano detto (od avrebbe comunque potuto saperlo da loro, chiedendoglielo apposta) che per le feste sarebbero tornati a casa? Come faceva a dare per scontato che al piano di sopra non avrebbe trovato nessuno o nessuno sarebbe tornato durante la sua azione, visto che in quell’appartamento abitavano un’americana e un’inglese, non certo rincasate per il week-end?Andando a vedere in prima battuta di sotto, egli avrebbe anche potuto scovare il più facile accesso al piano di sopra, ammesso che non se ne fosse già reso conto durante le almeno due occasioni (la sera degli apprezzamenti su A. e della dormita in bagno, quindi il giorno dell’ultimo gran premio) in cui era passato a trovare i ragazzi marchigiani.
    Del tutto inconsistente è altresì la tesi secondo cui il G. (ma il rilievo riguarderebbe qualunque ladro più o meno smaliziato) avrebbe dovuto restare in attesa per oltre mezz’ora, facendosi ritrarre a pezzi e bocconi dalle telecamere del parcheggio con il rischio – crescente, con il passare del tempo – che taluno rientrasse; ed ancora, se R. entrò dalla finestra volendo solo rubare, tanto che si mise a rovistare fra le borse della R., per poi andare in bagno e rendersi conto del rientro di M. (lucidamente, non tirando lo sciacquone per non rivelare la sua presenza), perché non scappò via piuttosto che decidere di andarla ad aggredire dalla parte opposta della casa?
    L’osservazione, che peraltro deve confrontarsi con la palese contraddizione dell’assunto difensivo (da un lato si ipotizza il ladro che entra clandestinamente, dall’altro si contesta che vi siano prove di violenza sessuale) comporta che il G. – escluso che incontrò la vittima e la aggredì in un altro ambiente, perché non ci sono segni di colluttazione – sarebbe stato preso da un chissà quale raptus da ammettere fin da subito l’evenienza di uccidere una ragazza alla quale aveva paventato sino a un attimo prima di rubare qualche soldo in un cassetto: egli, infatti, non era uno sconosciuto per M., eppure avrebbe deciso di attraversare tutto l’appartamento proprio per metterle le mani addosso (con l’idea di un atto sessuale consentito che, a quel punto, andrebbe a farsi benedire a passo di galoppo). E se può ammettersi – e la casistica ne conosce parecchi episodi – l’idea di un ladro che coglie l’occasione per violentare la padrona di casa, ciò accade quando il malvivente sappia di non poter essere indicato dall’aggredita alle forze dell’ordine.
    Il G., si ribadisce, dal bagno dove si trovava era vicinissimo alla porta di casa e alla stessa stanza da cui era entrato, quindi poteva andarsene senza essere notato: anche ammettendo che provò a uscire dalla porta ma la trovò chiusa dall’interno (perché bisognava sempre dare la mandata, secondo quanto riferiscono i testimoni) che problema avrebbe avuto un atleta come lui a scappare dalla stessa finestra da cui era entrato ? Considerando la sua statura, lasciandosi dondolare dal davanzale si sarebbe trattato di un facile salto di un paio di metri sull’erba.
    Quanto ai frammenti di vetro, che le successive precisazioni del P.M. (ma già l’orario delle riprese video fermato nel fotogramma, vale a dire le 01:03:12 del 3 novembre) collocano nella cucina e non nella stanza della K., essi appaiono assai meno significativi delle tracce esaltate con il luminol nella stanza della R., da cui si è ricavato DNA della vittima. Un ladro qualunque o una persona che voleva entrare furtivamente in casa, una volta riuscita a farlo da lì – con qualche difficoltà – avrebbe cercato o meno di rubare qualcosa e poi sarebbe andato nelle altre stanze, avrebbe commesso l’omicidio ma poi sarebbe andato via dalla porta, guarda caso trovata aperta la mattina dopo dalla K. (a voler prestar fede alla versione dell’imputata); chi glielo faceva fare di ributtarsi dalla finestra, o di ripassare da quella stanza lasciandovi tutti i beni di valore? Ergo, quel DNA – con tutte le necessarie e future verifiche sulla natura precisa della traccia, data la molteplicità delle sostanze c.d. luminol-positive, oltre al sangue – sta oggi ad attestare con verosimile ragionevolezza che chi entrò in quella stanza lo fece quando M. era già stata colpita, e dunque (da dentro, non da fuori) ruppe il vetro.
    Il tema appena trattato si ricollega, a questo punto, a quello della alterazione della scena del delitto, e soprattutto a quello – ammessa l’eventuale alterazione – dei soggetti che potevano avere interesse a darvi corso.”

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Mary Ho. You’re the last person I’d debate anything with. You just made up your mind and have a religious belief that Amanda is innocent and there is nothing that could convince you otherwise.

    I don’t debate religious matters with believers. And for you this is a religious matter and you are a believer.

    It’s simply unreasonable to think that Amanda would have made Lumumba’s name and held on to that for two full weeks, if not because she had an ulterior motive (i.e. deflect the attention from the real culprits, Rudy, Raffa and herself).

  • Mary H.

    “It’s simply unreasonable to think that Amanda would have made Lumumba’s name and held on to that for two full weeks…”

    Yes, it is. And she didn’t.

    You think you haven’t been debating? What have you been doing all these weeks?

    And stop wasting space with pages that can be clicked on with a link.

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    You can’t click on a specific portion of the document.

  • The chicken or the hen?

    There’s the chicken and then there’s the hen …

    Now, the rosster is doing it with the chicken, right?

    So who’s doing it with the hen ?

    Is it still the same rooster who’s doing it with the chicken also into the hen ?

    ‘coz if he is, then that is just too greedy man ..

  • Shane

    “Shane I don’t care about links to bloggers, whether it’s Harry Rag or Candace Dempsey. Neither one speaks Italian and they interpret whatever they want to interpret.”

    I was more convinced by Yummi in the comments, actually, who is an Italian speaker and who said: “The picture with the 5 prints has never been produced in court. But the picture with Rudy’s alleged print with a glass on it in Filomena’s room was already know and produced by the prosecution (i think is codified as track146)…The print was in the prosecution’s file in Rudy’s trial, it was mentioned on the media, and the picture comes from that file..” In a later comment he corrects the (track/trace?) number: “The most important print seem to be the “trace176″ which is in Filomena’s room, and it is a bloody shoeprint which is covered (probably) by many small broken glasses. (the exact item has not been disclosed, and cannot be seen, but is quoted)”

    I have to admit though, this is new information to me also. Anyone know how accurate Yummi is here? He seems to know about it in some detail.

  • Mary H.

    Shane — I don’t know how accurate Yummi is/was. He was much respected at first by Candace Dempsey, simply for being Italian and apparently knowing something about the laws. As time wore on, though, and everyone began to realize the evidence was contrived and amounted to nothing, the focus naturally turned to examining how Mignini and the Perugian police had managed to facilitate such a travesty of justice.

    Yummi became more and more resistant to the idea that Mignini and his compadres could have done anything unethical, and he was in complete denial about there even being any potential for Mignini needing to save face or protect his reputation. Yummi went so far as to claim the concept of saving face didn’t even exist in Italian culture, or at least in its judicial system. I didn’t follow the blog that closely toward the end, but it seemed to me Yummi eventually was making a more enemies than friends.

    At some point, he seems to have switched allegiance to truejustice.

  • Shane

    Thanks for that, Mary. Yes, I’ve seen his posts quite a lot on TrueJustice; he does seem to have done something of a switch half-way through the case!

  • the chicken and the hen

    we know there’s the chicken and there’s the hen.

    and of course, there’s the rooster.

    if the rooster is doing it with the chicken, who’s doing it with the hen?

    is it still the same rooster?

    if so, he’s really greedy, man.

  • IVSTITIA

    Aren’t you all tired of discussing this case? At least wait for the sentence motivation. I see from the comments about Yummi that in your opinion people are credible only as long as they are on your side and agree with your views. Once that is not the case, then, you’re done with them. No dissent admitted. That of course tells a lot about you and what your real objective is: SPIN!
    Regarding the saving face argument, that is the most ridiculous claim ever made on these blogs. If Mignini was so interested in saving face he wouldn’t have asked for the dismissal of the Spezi case. He was the one who first charged the Florentine journalist, but he was also the one who asked the judge to dismiss the case due to insufficient evidence. Mignini I guess wasn’t so interested in his face in that case! Of course I don’t intend to change your minds. Once somebody has made his/her mind up, there are very little chances for redemption. Who was who said a few comments above about religious beliefs?

  • Where oh where?

    Ivs, I’ll quit when you quit.

  • John Winters

    Ivstitia says:

    ”If Mignini was so interested in saving face he wouldn’t have asked for the dismissal of the Spezi case.”

    ‘Face’ is a nationalist issue where Amanda’s case is concerned. It cannot be compared to the issue of ‘face’ as it might have affected Mignini’s decision to ask for dismissal in the Spezi case (I think!).
    I mean correct me if I’m wrong.

  • Shane

    IVSTITIA wropte: “Aren’t you all tired of discussing this case? At least wait for the sentence motivation. I see from the comments about Yummi that in your opinion people are credible only as long as they are on your side and agree with your views. Once that is not the case, then, you’re done with them. No dissent admitted. That of course tells a lot about you and what your real objective is: SPIN!”

    This is a FAR more typical attitude in the TrueJustice camp. “Such and such is FOA, enough said” is the usual response when anyone mentions a source which isn’t as rabidly anti-Knox as TJMK. In contrast, I’ve found people querying the verdict have usually read all the available sources, even the ones that don’t support their position.

  • the chicken and the hen

    the dog is ‘forever’ in the push-up position …

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Yummi [..] was much respected at first by Candace Dempsey, simply for being Italian and apparently knowing something about the laws”

    Candace knows neither Italian nor law therefore she is not qualified for anything.

    “As time wore on, though, and everyone began to realize…”

    as everyone in Dumpshit blog began to realize that Yummi wasn’t buying their $hit, they decided to dismiss Yummi. Who needs to know the language used in court after all? and above all who needs to know the laws of the country where the trial takes place? Especially if that knowledge could come to the detriment of the “cause”. So let’s rely on ignorance and falsehood to spread the word.

    Fortunately nobody who will serve in the Court of Appeal will ever read the bullshit written by the FOAkers in this blog.

    Sorry folks, but none of you can do anything to change the course of justice in Italy. You are totally POWERLESS INSIGNIFICANT NOTHINGS to the Italian judges.

    Hope Amanda packed enough pajamas. She’s going to sleep over for a few thousand nights longer in Perugia.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”Especially if that knowledge could come to the detriment of the “cause”.”

    You’ve chosen your words carefully here as denoted by your use of quotes to frame the significantly selected term ’cause.’ I detect irony here however, suggesting that you expect your readership, of both pro and anti-Amanda hues, to understand that pro-Amanda opinion should in some way be regarded as low-order, rebellious, bolshi.
    In a way you’re right. It has been established by the community who have shared these blogs (in recent weeks especially), that Amanda is not guilty of the murder of Meredith Kercher. Even you have shown signs of coming round to that realisation dear Al-Fhak. For which reason, her case can no longer be regarded as a conventional criminal case as she is obviously continuing to be held for reasons other than guilt for this crime. She should therefore be treated as a political prisoner, and her supporters therefore should regard their work on her behalf as yes, work for a ’cause!’

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    Amanda Knox is not a political prisoner. She’s an “enemy combatant” who killed a EU citizen for futile reasons.

    She will be treated in accordance to Guantanamo standards. The Procura della Repubblica in Perugia (Prosecutor’s office) is retaining Alberto Gonzales for legal advice.

    After a couple of waterboardings we’ll all know the truth, don’t worry! We are winning this war on terror and on terrorist organizations of which Amanda Knox is a principal exponent.

    After we know the exact truth, we’ll be ready to negotiate her release to a third country, provided that Mario Lozano, Carlo Parlanti and Richard Ashby are part of the exchange.

  • billyryan

    I am starting to get worried about judge massei he done the easy part for his friend mignini convicted amanda and raffaela of the murder of merridith,sexual violence,transportation of the knife,staging of a breakin,and also for amanda slander of patrick.but not of premediated murder,hence the sentence of 25 and 26 years,the premediated part had to go when the prosecution decided there was no motive.a tricky thing to explain that guilty of transporting the knife but not premediation.i mean they just brought it with them to have something in there hand,maybe you could get away with that in most cases but with the way the world is watching this case the bringing and taking of that knife is bloody awkward.A witness puts amanda at raffaela at 8.40 merridith rings her mum at 8.56 according to him and the prosecution amanda and raffaela were at the cottage before merridith which they could have done by running,amanda was living and shopping in the area for six weeks and working in a local bar the local people by then knew her face,and some of them were undoubtably on the street at nine o clock at night yet none of them i mean the ordinary citizens saw them running to the cottage that night.After the murder according to his infabable judgement they left through the carpark back to raffaela place after stabbing merridith leaving her to bleed to death taking her cellphones to remove any chance of she calling for help but them god damb cameras in the carpark failed to pick them up.another hard thing to explain and not look an idiot.the same judge who convicted gesua rinaldi of having helped the rapist and murderer of her daughter who left her free until all the stages of her appeal went through,as does happen in italy,but this young couple are so dangerous that at no stage can they be allowed out on the street.to convict amanda of murder and transportation of the knife he accepted fully the “lcn” test on the knife.protocal for this test states that by the very minimun it must be done in a lab specially designed for “lcn” testing and that the sample must be big enough for a test by prosecution and defence.the only evidence the court has got for merridith dna on the knife blade is patrizia stefanoni word a close friend of mignini a convicted criminal an evidence fixer.this “lcn”would never or never has been used to convict an italian.mignini has given him another serious problem of getting convicted of abuse of power now the frying of computer hard drives the dissapearence of interview tapes the mildewing of the towels rudy used to clean up merridith are a lot harder for him to ignore.he has to explain how amanda sexually assaulted stabbed merridith yet left no dna in the murder room.all he has got is an “lcn” test which is not allowed in a lot of countries recently banned by the california supreme court,and it is only a matter of time before the european court of human rights get it outlawed within the EEC.the dna evidence he accepted as undeniable proof has been condemed by international experts,he has being buying all the italian daily papers expecting to read dna experts supporting the prosecution dna evidence but the bastards have all sung dumb.time is running out and he has to do something he though at this stage he would be being congratulated on having aprehended murders not being accused of facilitating a miscarriage of justice.the least the prosecution could have done for him is to have provided proof of the purchase and the presence of bleech at the cottage in the drains from the sink,what he would not give for a few bleech receets right now.maybe he is wondering how he got caught up in the hatred of amanda that blinded his judgement,and he is loking at himself in a mirror right now and asking himself what have i done to this beautiful young couple.and just maybe he will shoot himself rather than defend the undefendable,stranger things have happened

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    billyterate.ignoryant: go back to school and learn how to write at least.

    And don’t worry about the Italian judges. They don’t need the help from illiterates like you.

    If professional jurists had to listen to crazy people like you, John Winotours, noShame, Mary Ho. and Whore ho Whore? justice would be doomed.

    Thank God you all don’t count for $hit.

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”Amanda Knox is not a political prisoner. She’s an “enemy combatant” who killed a EU citizen for futile reasons.”

    You can laugh, but cases where miscarriages of justice have been corrected by public pressure and interest groups is not unknown. In the UK, George Davis, who had been convicted and imprisoned for armed robbery in 1974, was released because of a campaign of action and pressure continued by his friends and family on his behalf who insisted he was innocent. They refused to let the case die after his sentencing and brought to the public’s attention that blood test results proving that Davis could not have been present at the crimescene had been suppressed by the prosecution at trial. (Remind you of anything). He was released in 1976 when the case was reviewed by the Home Secretary (the British secretary of state). So come on Hillary, let’s review Amanda’s case!!

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    “So come on Hillary, let’s review Amanda’s case!!”

    Italian judges decide cases in Italian courts not Hillary. If they decide to convict, tough luck buddy! Your Hillary and the US Government can’t do S*H*I*T!

    Hillary has ZERO power in Italy. ZERO!

    Mr. Frattini (Italian foreign minister) can do nothing for Carlo Parlanti and Hillary Clinton can do nothing for Amanda Knox.

    Amanda Knox is in the hands of the Italian judges, nobody else’s.

    Capisci, testa di cazzo????

  • John Winters

    Al-Fhak says:

    ”Capisci, testa di cazzo????”

    Forgive my Italian but did you just say ”do you understand, angry pussy cat?”

    Anyway, you’re quite right, I meant to cite the Italian counterpart of the British Secretary of State here, not Mrs. Clinton. Unfortunately I don’t know who that is or what he’s called.

    Perhaps if I asked you nicely, you could help out dear Al.

  • billyryan

    al_sack_of_shit i am trying my best to like you but i am failing,in your next post tell us all why you hate amanda,forget the evidence what pleasure does her suffering give you

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh

    You’re mixing up government positions. That shows your Americo-centered chauvinism.

    The equivalent of the US Secretary of State (H.Clinton) is called:

    in UK: Secretary of State of Foreign and Commonweath Affairs (or more commonly Foreign Secretary).

    in Italy: Ministro per gli Affari Esteri (or Minister for Foreign Affairs). His name is Franco Frattini.

    Earlier you mentioned the British Home Secretary. That is a totally different cabinet position.
    The British Secretary of State for the Home Department, commonly known as the Home Secretary, is the minister in charge of the Home Office of the UK. The Home Secretary is responsible for internal affairs.

    The Italian equivalent is the Ministro degli Interni (or Minister of the Interior). His name is Roberto Maroni. This Minister is responsible for the Law Enforcement agency such as the Italian State Police (Polizia di Stato). The Italian police is not a department of the city, like in most of the US. It’s a national agency under the control of this minister. In fact the City of Perugia and its Mayor have nothing to do with the police. He has no control over it.

    The Italian Ministro di Grazia e Giustizia (Minister of Justice) controls, but only administratively, the judiciary. His name is Angelo Alfano. But he has only control over budgets, clerical staff etc. (administrative stuff), not over the judges and prosecutors. They are under an self governing independent body called Superior Council of Magistrates. This council is responsible for hiring, firing, disciplining, training, transferring, of judges and prosecutors. The Justice Minister does nothing of that. He can do nothing to them, he has no power over them.

    It’s a strange arrangement compared to other countries, but the Italian constitution wanted to guarantee total independence of judges and prosecutors from the political power (legislative and executive). Thank Mussolini and his abuses of the judiciary for such an arrangement.

    That is why nobody in the Italian government has the power to pressure the judges and prosecutor to do anything. If judges or prosecutors violate some rules only the Superior Council can discipline them or even dismiss them, but not a Minister of Berlusconi’s government (or any Government).

    And there is no way the Superior Council will discipline the judges for doing their job simply because the defendant is a rich snotty spoiled girl or boy. There is a process in place, which provides for 2 appeals, one of which is a full retrial. No other country gives you so many chances in appeal, so don’t complain. But, if after the process is over (i.e. all appeals have been exhausted) you’re found guilty, that’s it. There is no Minister that can change that verdict. You go to jail and serve your sentence.

    Capisci ora?

  • Enzo Zoff

    @John Winters:

    “Forgive my Italian but did you just say ”do you understand, angry pussy cat?””

    Yep, that’s it; you got in in one!

    dixi

  • Al-Fakh Yugoudh
    <