ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Was that the time that a woman beheaded you?
Amanda Knox Is Innocent
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
Was that the time that a woman beheaded you?
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Yeah....but I got better
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's less fatal than it used to be, thankfully. It's amazing what can be done with a tube of superglue, the straw from a pouch of Capri-Sun and half a dozen condoms.
Yossarian
⏭️
The Amanda Knox case turned a lot of people into amateur detectives - it's a shame the Troy Davis case didn't have the same appeal.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
It's sad that you are using the death of a young woman to score points on the internet. Who is the mug?
dylans
overlord of all acorns
If defending the innocence of people who are victims of a miscarriage of justice is "scoring points" then I I plead guilty
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
I think you'd find near unanimity on here as regards the Troy Davis case.
Treacle Toes
Time
Yet no sign of you on the Troy Davis thread I just looked at again. Oh and you also like to throw the term 'white trash' around
Something tells me you are likely to start a response to me with the words 'fuck you...' or some such profanity as you have others on the last few pages.
I'll cope!
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
ah, but the difference there is that I was referring to British reporting in general, not making the condescending assumption that British posters' opinions came directly from the British media without any critical thinking involved.
It also seems to me that yes, there is bias on both sides, but the American reporting has been more thorough, information-wise. I see a lot of things left out of the British news stories.
Treacle Toes
Time
TBh I read it as you were implying that British posters were/are reading uncritically. Hence me making the point above.
...and not in some US news stories? Come on...I don't agree with the point levelled at the US posters that they read uncritically, I don't think anyone has anyway of knowing that...equally I feel you are simialrly trying to make the same point you have taken offence to by implying it. You say more thorough but that could also be 'interpreted' as 'biased'. Why make the point about the British press if you aren't implying us Brits are not reading uncritically/widely enough?
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
that's just pathetic and mean.
I think both sides have valid ideological reasons for what they believe.
I won't speak for the other side, but mine is that I really don't like seeing people put away (not to mention put to death) for crimes there is a good chance they did not commit.
I personally find the thought that this could happen to me or anyone pretty terrifying.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
Well, I wasn't. and as I've already said several times, the US side of the reporting is definitely guilty of bias as well. I'm not going to go back and re-read the whole thread but I'm pretty sure the implication was made that the bias lay on the US reporting side before I ever said anything. And when I did it was about the actual reporting, not people's responses to it. You're barking up the wrong tree. I may have thought it, for a second, but then I realized how hypocritical it would be for me to think that.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Two things. First I would like an apology. Either that or show me a single post EVER when I have used the term "white trash". One post will do, just one.Yet no sign of you on the Troy Davis thread I just looked at again. Oh and you also like to throw the term 'white trash' around
Something tells me you are likely to start a response to me with the words 'fuck you...' or some such profanity as you have others on the last few pages.
I'll cope!
Second. Do you mean this Troy Davis thread. The one that I posted about 30 posts on and sat up half the night as his execution came closer and closer? Is that the one you mean?
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...s-we-are-no-were-not-troy-davis.281315/page-4
I wait for your apology or evidence to back up your bullshit accusations
Treacle Toes
Time
I am not above apologising...On the 'white trash' thing I have somehow mixed you up with treelover. http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/occupy-wall-street.278399/page-11#post-10522606
I APOLOGISE.
On the Troy Davis matter...I was re-reading this thread and didn't see you on there:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/troy-davis-fate-hangs-by-a-thread.281387/
Again, I APOLOGISE!
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Thank you. Apology accepted
I APOLOGISE.
On the Troy Davis matter...I was re-reading this thread and didn't see you on there:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/troy-davis-fate-hangs-by-a-thread.281387/
Again, I APOLOGISE!
Anudder Oik
heinous pointless bellend/fucking gobshite muppet
Did you see this in the american media? I don't think it was reported like this, was it?
it refers to her interegation..
Do you think people take sides in this case due to national loyalties or preconceived ideas or prejudices? I think it's more to do with how much information you have on the case. The american press has run with the PR campaign angle which is dumbed down and trimmed of detail. It ignores vast swathes of evidence and doesn't ask the right questions. The british press hasn't been much better.
I'm british and prefer to draw on the Massei report for info. The press is full of hack writers who'll write anything for money.
I have yet to find an article in the american press that doesn't avoid uncomfortable facts that point to guilt.
All the points I have brought up in the thread have been ignored and left unanswered by the pro Knox camp and that's the way they work. Like Ostriches burying their heads in the sand. This fact yes but that one no. The crime scene is only one room. No, it's the whole flat.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
that's totally not true. In fact, we keep answering your questions, then someone else comes along and asks the same questions all over again. It's been quite maddening really, and I have no idea why I'm still here tbh.
You also seem to keep not answering the one about why you're stuck on the court documents when they were so full of discredited evidence that the conviction was overturned. Plus I highly doubt any of you have actually read it yourselves.
You also seem to keep not answering the one about why you're stuck on the court documents when they were so full of discredited evidence that the conviction was overturned. Plus I highly doubt any of you have actually read it yourselves.
Anudder Oik
heinous pointless bellend/fucking gobshite muppet
As stated before there is a mass of evidence that has not been discussed. The reports are far more reliable material than the press. That should be obvious. Not everything was discussed in the appeal and that is why judge Hellman is feeling very uneasy. It was at best incomplete. The appeal dealt with 2 issues out of 10,000 pages of evidence and the double DNA is disputed by no less than 7 DNA experts. The 5 best in Italy supporting the case against Knox and Sollecito and 2 independent experts who have attacked the findings. These 2 have apparently fucked up in the past as well.
An example of something that may or may not have been overlooked.
Here is a transcript from a secret recording in the cells when Knox's family first visited her in custody before the first trial. This recording was apparently brushed over at the trial but was supposed to be brought up during the appeal. Apparently in the recording after she says the phrase (outlined in bold), her parents remain silent for time, then Curt starts up "Yeah yeah, so what you have to do"
An example of something that may or may not have been overlooked.
Here is a transcript from a secret recording in the cells when Knox's family first visited her in custody before the first trial. This recording was apparently brushed over at the trial but was supposed to be brought up during the appeal. Apparently in the recording after she says the phrase (outlined in bold), her parents remain silent for time, then Curt starts up "Yeah yeah, so what you have to do"
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
ooooooohhhhh 
!
not. she obviously did not mean 'there' as in the apartment where she lived with Meredith, or else that conversation makes no sense whatsoever as she had already been "lying" about it to everyone if that were the case.
I think the reason her dad is telling her not to talk to anyone is because she clearly has such an odd way of putting things that they don't even understand what she means half the time (as in example above and the long pause).
!not.
she obviously did not mean 'there' as in the apartment where she lived with Meredith, or else that conversation makes no sense whatsoever as she had already been "lying" about it to everyone if that were the case.I think the reason her dad is telling her not to talk to anyone is because she clearly has such an odd way of putting things that they don't even understand what she means half the time (as in example above and the long pause).
Anudder Oik
heinous pointless bellend/fucking gobshite muppet
There is nothing obvious about it. On the contrary, It is very ambiguous and because of that I can't see how anyone can judge either way unless their mind is already made up. I like the father's reaction though...
We need remember what Sollecito has said. She wasn't there, at his flat. He says she got back at 1 after going out earlier and leaving him on his own on his computer which it turned out he wasn't on.
Just a thought: Does anyone else find it odd that there are so many coincidential things in their Alibi's/versions with events in the case? For example. When she says she saw blood on his hands (from the fish they were preparing the night of the killing when they were at his flat). Then there's the constant showers at his place and then at her place, scrubbing each other etc..and the carting around of cleaning stuff. She took the mop from her flat on sunday morning to his when he already had a mop. She had clothes to wash. It's like events or necessities arising from a bloody crime have embedded themselves in their alibi's.
To put it another way. The coincidential words that appear in her alibi are; Blood, showering, scrubbing, showering, mopping, cleaning clothes. This is, in effect the way she describes her experience/activity from the evening before the murder to the discovery of the body. Oh and there was also sex if you can believe her.
We need remember what Sollecito has said. She wasn't there, at his flat. He says she got back at 1 after going out earlier and leaving him on his own on his computer which it turned out he wasn't on.
Just a thought: Does anyone else find it odd that there are so many coincidential things in their Alibi's/versions with events in the case? For example. When she says she saw blood on his hands (from the fish they were preparing the night of the killing when they were at his flat). Then there's the constant showers at his place and then at her place, scrubbing each other etc..and the carting around of cleaning stuff. She took the mop from her flat on sunday morning to his when he already had a mop. She had clothes to wash. It's like events or necessities arising from a bloody crime have embedded themselves in their alibi's.
To put it another way. The coincidential words that appear in her alibi are; Blood, showering, scrubbing, showering, mopping, cleaning clothes. This is, in effect the way she describes her experience/activity from the evening before the murder to the discovery of the body. Oh and there was also sex if you can believe her.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
The sites and pictures you have quoted from to hold up your arguments have all been pro knox release sites or the american media. You have never ever simply quoted from the actual evidence.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Er no, it's just the same unanswered stuff that has been floating around from day one.
So many fishy loose ends. Obviously not enough for a conviction but one has to wonder why they could not be answered.
It has been noted that knox lied which she served a sentence (that she already served) and paid a huge fine for.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Maybe, but the point I was making was that it was the only knife that was roughly the right sort, the others were butter knives etc.
It wasn't the cops just coming in and taking a random knife.
dilute micro
esse quam videri
As much as the same criticism gets dished out about Americans from time to time it's good business to point out that when the UK sees an 'us verses them' situation in the courts the British media can go to absurdities to protect their own. I remember a case involving a 19 year old au pair and how ridiculous it was for Americans to expect an au pair to have common sense while everyone in Europe knows only nannies have common sense.
That's the road that one took.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Yeah its strange what people will do when under interrogation without tapes or legal representation. The Birmingham 6 and Guildford 4 all lied under interrogation too, even signing confessions and naming other people. Are they guilty now too?
dylans
overlord of all acorns
That's exactly what they did. Of all the knives and sharp instruments they could have (should have ) taken and tested, they chose to take and test only one, because it "looked clean". How would they know that it was the only one that was "roughly the right sort" if they didn't bother to take and test any others?
Think about it a moment, you walk into a room and find a stabbing victim dead, do you (A) collect all the knives in the house and in the suspects houses and test them all or (B) ignore every single knife at the scene, walk 5 minutes down the road to the house of one of the suspects and take only one kitchen knife for testing? The fact that they took only one knife indicates either incompetence or intention. Either they fucked up or they were trying to make evidence fit a preconcieved idea of guilt.
That's clearly crap. Are you seriously telling me that the only knives in Knox's apartment were butter knives? Behave yourself. As for Sollecito's apartment, We can clearly see another kitchen knife in the drawer. Does this look like a butter knife? It was totally ignored by the investigators as was every other knife. What amazing good luck, out of all the other possible knives they could have taken they choose one at random "on intuition" and wow, it just happens to be the murder weapon. What a lucky break...... except for the small inconvenient problem that it wasn't
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Oh yes but I am wrong of course. Meredith Kercher's blood was found on the knife. AHA. The smoking gun.....erm. except it wasn't. There was no blood found on the blade. Knox's DNA was found on the handle which is hardly surprising since she used it for cooking at her boyfriends apartment. This is when things get really fucked up. FInding no blood on the knife blade the chief investigator Patrizia Stefanoni tested for DNA on the blade and ....it was negative.! So she tested again using a new, untested method of dna testing called low copy testing despite the fact that her lab was not set up for this kind of testing and in fact was not even set up for ordinary dna testing. Regardless she goes ahead anyway and does she find the smoking gun. No, her tests come back too low for a result, again and again and again and again and again and again
So then, unbelievably, does she conclude that the tests indicate no DNA? No, she overrides the tests own paramiters, far past the levels of reliability acceptable until she gets a positive result that is so infinitismally small, Less than 100 picograms (a picogram is a trillionth of a gram or 0.000000000001 of a gram The result was so small that conveniently it couldn't be repeated We could go on, we could talk about how the knife fitted neither the wounds or the knife imprint on the bed, we could talk about how no control tests were done on any other item found in that drawer, but I think you get the point. The knife means nothing, it is worthless at every level from the way it was found, to the forensics tested on it to the conclusions drawn. A spoon taken from the apartment would have given the same result
.
So then, unbelievably, does she conclude that the tests indicate no DNA? No, she overrides the tests own paramiters, far past the levels of reliability acceptable until she gets a positive result that is so infinitismally small, Less than 100 picograms (a picogram is a trillionth of a gram or 0.000000000001 of a gram The result was so small that conveniently it couldn't be repeated We could go on, we could talk about how the knife fitted neither the wounds or the knife imprint on the bed, we could talk about how no control tests were done on any other item found in that drawer, but I think you get the point. The knife means nothing, it is worthless at every level from the way it was found, to the forensics tested on it to the conclusions drawn. A spoon taken from the apartment would have given the same result
.
Miss Caphat
I want it that way
that's not true. Also I have not posted any pictures, and hardly anyone has quoted from "the actual evidence" which IMO is a piece of crap and should be burned anyway.
fwiw, you honestly seem one of the least informed people on here about this case. not really too worried about you think tbh.
Anudder Oik
heinous pointless bellend/fucking gobshite muppet
Oh yes but I am wrong of course. Meredith Kercher's blood was found on the knife. AHA. The smoking gun.....erm. except it wasn't. There was no blood found on the blade. Knox's DNA was found on the handle which is hardly surprising since she used it for cooking at her boyfriends apartment. This is when things get really fucked up. FInding no blood on the knife blade the chief investigator Patrizia Stefanoni tested for DNA on the blade and ....it was negative.! So she tested again using a new, untested method of dna testing called low copy testing despite the fact that her lab was not set up for this kind of testing and in fact was not even set up for ordinary dna testing. Regardless she goes ahead anyway and does she find the smoking gun. No, her tests come back too low for a result, again and again and again and again and again and again
.
That's obviously notes from a non italian who wasn't even there unless you want to argue that Stefanoni, who is italian, writes in english. Try addressing the actual reports.
You also say her laboratory wasn't prepared to test DNA?. She is an internationally known forensics expert. Of course her laboratory is equipped. Where do you get this rubbish? Her findings were confirmed by 4 of italy's top DNA experts before the 2 academics attacked it.
Why did Sollecito give the obvious lie of cutting the victim's hand with the knife they tested? Surely someone who had nothing to do with the case and who knew that the victim NEVER came to dinner would protest the findings not confirm them.
You also say that the coincidential activity in their alibi's is scraping the bottom of the barrel but the fact is the police are trained to spot this sort of thing and it could be key to causing the original suspicion to fall on them. It's like a longer version of a Freudian slip. Admit it, you don't have the answers and you don't care.
You just reject everything out of hand. Nothing matters. Only her innocence.
Similar threads
