Amanda Knox Is Innocent

[savoloysam]

Or one person much stronger than her.

I won´t claim to be able to prove her innocence. But the complete lack of motive, the absence of any previous indications of a violent disposition, and most of all the disgracefully misogynist media campaign, to which judges and jury members were fully exposed during the trial, all combine to make me certain of her innocence.

I'm glad you don't work in law, well I seriously hope not anyway.

 

[Idris2002]

the guy who originally put the case together has a history of framing innocent women as being involved in satanic rituals and had unsuccessfully attempted to prosecute 20 others with near identical stories and was eventually removed from the case... it's horrific....

and at the bottom of all of this some poor family have still not gotten any real answers to this matter...

#

That's another thing, he's so keen on Satanic conspiracies that it is not merely his competence that is suspect, but his very sanity itself. . .

 

[belboid]

ooh, get mister pot. Shame that still doesn't support what you said, but never mind. Dio what you said you would before and ignore me, your worthless trolling cunt.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

mister pot pmsl

 

[phildwyer]

Yes. So you admit there is evidence?

Yes, evidence of her innocence. I´ve seen no evidence of her guilt whatsoever, merely assertions based on misogynist assumptions about her character.

The fact that her case ever came to trial is a travesty.

 

[phildwyer]

Also is it true that (as I saw on another site), trace elements of DNA for Knox and Sollecito were found, but much larger DNA evidence for the Rudy Guede person - this seems to be important, because if she did try to clean the crimes scene, wouldn't there also be only trace elements of DNA for Guede also?

I believe it has been established that she did not attempt to clean the trial scene at all. That was a lie by the vicious prosecutor.

In the weeks leading up to the murder, Rudy Guede had ben engaged in a veritable one man crme wave, involving burglary, drug dealing, assault and harrassment. He was basically known as the local nutter at large.

In particular he had earned a reputation as a serial pursuer of female tourists who had made their lack of interest in him perfectly clear.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Have you got links to all those points ^^^^^ Phil?

 

[phildwyer]

There is a possibility that she did commit the crime, whether she gets let off or stays banged up for life is neither hear nor there.

Right. So even if she´s innocent it is a matter of indifferene to you whether or not she stays in jail for life, simply because there is a ´possibility´ that she committed the crime.

You really don´t like Amanda Knox do you? May we ask why?

 

[phildwyer]

I suggest, with this ^^^ statement alone you are doning exactly what you accuse others of doing in your statements below.

¿Huh? Saying that I am familiar with her type means that I think she´s a murderer?

How do you work that out? I like her type. And I like them precisely because I know there is no serious malice in them.

 

[phildwyer]

A defendant may lie tho, there's no perjury in that instance.

What are you on about? A defendent can lie in court without committing perjury? Time to put down the crack pipe muchacho.

 

[phildwyer]

Having to prove a case against a presumption of guilt happens everywhere, no matter what is actually written down in law.

Right. So you think that the courts simply disregard the law and do whatever they feel like?

You know nothing. Garfield has thoroughly exposed your ignorance.

 

[Yossarian]

Back on topic. Dwyer, looking at the evidence, do you really really believe there is no way at all that Amanda Knox could have committed the murder or been a part in it?

I reckon dwyer has started including printouts of this thread in his weekly letters to Knox.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Have you got links to all those points ^^^^^ Phil?

I'm confused here what's your subtextural point?

You seem to be supporting Gude in your eagerness to dismiss knox... and phil for that matter... so what's your beef...???

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Right. So you think that the courts simply disregard the law and do whatever they feel like?

You know nothing. Garfield has thoroughly exposed your ignorance.

you know when you and I agree I worry ...

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Right. So even if she´s innocent it is a matter of indifferene to you whether or not she stays in jail for life, simply because there is a ´possibility´ that she committed the crime.

You really don´t like Amanda Knox do you? May we ask why?

Stop being a idiot, how on earth did you read that into what I wrote? You can't be that stupid surely.
The only point I am arguing is that it is moronic to say that she is 100% innocent of any involvement at this time. You quite clearly knew nothing about the case when you started this thread with your bold statement.

In fact only a page ago you said you could not claim to prove her innocence. She was at the crime scene, she was implicated, you can't possibly prove her innocence yet you also state as if it is fact that Knox is 100% not in the slightest bit guilty of anything? 100%?

All I am arguing here is that only a complete fool would say such a thing. She may well be found not guilty, who knows?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

#

That's another thing, he's so keen on Satanic conspiracies that it is not merely his competence that is suspect, but his very sanity itself. . .

again yet more evidence of the broken Italian system that satanic ritual would be allowed as a hearsay argument against a defendant along with mysticism into a murder trial in the 21st century is insanity itself...

I know its a heavily catholic country but really bad juju made the murders happened is almost back to the salem times...

 

[phildwyer]

you know when you and I agree I worry ...

That thought had occured to me too.

But on this issue, you are absolutely, bang on, 100% correct. I suspect you have a great deal more knowledge of the female character than the anti--Knox crusaders.

 

[phildwyer]

She was at the crime scene

No she was not. This is just one of the many basic errors that have distorted your view of this case.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Stop being a idiot, how on earth did you read that into what I wrote? You can't be that stupid surely.
The only point I am arguing is that it is moronic to say that she is 100% innocent of any involvement at this time. You quite clearly knew nothing about the case when you started this thread with your bold statement.

In fact only a page ago you said you could not claim to prove her innocence. She was at the crime scene, she was implicated, you can't possibly prove her innocence yet you also state as if it is fact that Knox is 100% not in the slightest bit guilty of anything? 100%?

All I am arguing here is that only a complete fool would say such a thing. She may well be found not guilty, who knows?

dude by all accounts including her own 'confession' she wasn't at the crime scene, whilst you may not think highly of phil's points let's not muddy the waters with inaccurate incorrect statements.

in fact pretty much the current case has said there's nothing other than the tainted DNA, which the police have been found to have breeched 54 conventions on it's use as evidence, there is nothing to link her to the scene other than her own bedroom and shared common areas which in a shared house you'd expect. certainly there has never been or even been alledged any of her dna found at the scene... the first judge despite being explicitly told this information decided that the DNA wasn't tainted but that knox had instead trodden her own dna into the scene by deliberately walking through the blood which tied in the satanic theories...

seriously the more you read about this the more you realise that this isn't some Manson family thing where mansion clearly orchestrated it even if he didn't do it... but it's a huge miscarriage of justice and such a disservice to the kertcher family.

Certainly if she is re-found guilty it will be because they want to maintain the integrity of the justices system and not because she is...

again I reiterate I have no idea if she did it but if it happened in the UK she'd be free today with no charges, no bail conditions, she'd never have even been taken to court, other than as a witness at a inquest...

does that make her 100% innocent? maybe, maybe not but what it doesn't by default is make her guilty...

 

[Utopia]

Mmmmmm, foxy Knoxy...of course she's innocent, well I think so at least and thats nothing to do with my desire to 'splash her tonsils' with my lovepiss!

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Mmmmmm, foxy Knoxy...of course she's innocent, well I think so at least and thats nothing to do with my desire to 'splash her tonsils' with my lovepiss!

erm wtf seriously...

this is the same kind of attitude which meant she got seen as a potential murderer in the first place... depraved, sexually promiscuous (by mental satanic ritual supporting loonies standards, by anyone else's standards a student...) who was wanton with lust and driven to murder by her desire...

 

[Treacle Toes]

I'm confused here what's your subtextural point?

You seem to be supporting Gude in your eagerness to dismiss knox... and phil for that matter... so what's your beef...???

No Garf, I am challenging Phil on a few things...namely, how he is so sure certain evidence about Knox is untrue and that anything he posts about Guede is true.

He has made loads of statements but not backed them up with links. On the subject of links/reports, Phil has created a case for any link/report, by Phil's reckoning, in the case of Knox, are all lies anyway. So hey, let's make loads of claims and not back them up but suggest that any link we may find is bollocks?

I am also amused (unpleasantly so) by Phil using statements like, she's a crazy lady/girl' (chica loca), 'not someone you'd marry/take home' or 'I know her type' and then accusing others of misogyny. I mean FFS sake, thank god us girls have the likes of Phil on our side eh?

I don't know if she is guilty as I have previously posted, I am though unsure of why Phil thinks that from a distance he can be so sure.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

That thought had occured to me too.

But on this issue, you are absolutely, bang on, 100% correct. I suspect you have a great deal more knowledge of the female character than the anti--Knox crusaders.

meoww!!!

 

[oryx]

I like her type. And I like them precisely because I know there is no serious malice in them.

Holy fuck, if ever a relative of mine gets their throat slit I hope you're not on the jury.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

No Garf, I am challenging Phil on a few things...namely, how he is so sure certain evidence about Knox is untrue and that anything he posts about Guede is true.

He has made loads of statements but not backed them up with links. On the subject of links/reports, Phil has created a case for any link/report, by Phil's reckoning, in the case of Knox, are all lies anyway. So hey, let's make loads of claims and not back them up but suggest that any link we may find is bollocks?

I am also amused (unpleasantly so) by Phil using statements like, she's a crazy lady/girl' (chica loca), 'not someone you'd marry/take home' or 'I know her type' and then accusing others of misogyny. I mean FFS sake, thank god us girls have the likes of Phil on our side eh?

I don't know if she is guilty as I have previously posted, I am though unsure of why Phil thinks that from a distance he can be so sure.

Oh ok.

There's sufficient evidence to say he probably is guilty even by Uk law standards

The best case senario would be for a Uk based inquest trail which at least would establish the facts of what happened. I can't believe the family would be convinced by the satanic ritual explanation. I know I wouldn't be with what has been revealled by this case.

The thing which casts doubt for me on all the convictions is this ridiculous stantic explanation. It's not justice for Knox it's definately not justice for kertcher and it shames Italy they have allowed this travesty to continue.

The only thing which will give closure to the family will be to get the facts out and truth of what happened on that night.

 

[belboid]

What are you on about? A defendent can lie in court without committing perjury? Time to put down the crack pipe muchacho.

weird, but apparently true. At least according to wiki]:
"The defendant can be called to the stand, but he may refuse to bear testimony,[18] or he may refuse to answer some questions. He can also lie. Since he does not take an oath and since he is not technically a witness, if a defendant tells a lie, he is not committing perjury."

Right. So you think that the courts simply disregard the law and do whatever they feel like?

You know nothing. Garfield has thoroughly exposed your ignorance.

another dumbo who cant (or wont) read.

Now, fuck off dwyer, there's a good eejit

 

[phildwyer]

Dio what you said you would before and ignore me, your worthless trolling cunt.

Whose ´worthless trolling cunt´ are you, exactly?

Is this how you sign your letters? ´With best regards, your worthless trolling cunt, Belboid.´

It does have a certain ring to it, but it´s rather superfluous.

Why not try mething like ´your stupid fat bastard, Belboid?´

Or perhaps ´your sycophantic grovelling bootlicker, Belboid?´

But then again, is there really any need for any further appelations? Wouldn´t ´Twatboy Belboid´ just about cover it?

 

[phildwyer]

I am also amused (unpleasantly so) by Phil using statements like, she's a crazy lady/girl' (chica loca), 'not someone you'd marry/take home' or 'I know her type' and then accusing others of misogyny.

You misquote me three times here, but let´s leave that aside for now.

You have levelled a rather serious allegation against me here--misogyny. As a feminist I find that offensive in the extreme. I´d like you to substantiate it please.

 

[belboid]

fuck off, dwyer.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

as you've contributed zero to this thread board, bellies how about you fuck off for once...