Continuation Part Six: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Bill Williams]

Once again, the thread was getting quite lengthy, so this new continuation thread has been started. As always , please feel free to refer back to the previous thread here to make your points. The cut-off post was arbitrary and no offense is intended. Thank you for keeping the conversation polite.

Posted By: Loss Leader

You are now again deflecting on me, on posters. You should talk about your claims. Evidence of your claims.
I am not interested in Mignini. I am interested in you. In you, I mean you as a mob, in your mentality, in your beliefs and idolological system. I am interested in the media, in the opinion campaign, and I am interested in the machine which you belong to. It's a machine for political propaganda that builds false narratives and targets the functioning of powers, like justice, pursueing criminal purposes and methods, and relies also on criminal elements with ties to some government agencies (like Mario Spezi); this machine is what we call in Italian "macchina del fango".

I would like to see you put in discussion your claims. Speak about your beliefs. Look at your belifs with critical attitude, try to check what you can actually demonstrate. I am testing your mentality and your rational attitude. I want to see how you think, why you come to your conclusions.

It's actually stunning.

You're not interested in Mignini.... but then you build the very myth that includes Mario Spezi.... who is ONLY known internationally for his exposure of Mignini, vis a vis the Narducci case, as well as the wrongful prosecution of two unlikelies in Perugia.

The agenda you and Andrea Vogt have bought into could not be more clear. Even in denying you are interested in Mignini, you build the very conspiratorial case that Mignini himself believes.... "My troubles all started with the Narducci case."

 

[Dan O.]

Machiavelli is getting these short cryptic prompts: "Deflect", "Talk about your Claims", "Evidence your claims".

It must be frustrating being a handler.

 

[Dan O.]

Dup. (though I should probably leave it in twice so it will have twice the effect)

 

[Machiavelli]

It's actually stunning.

You're not interested in Mignini.... but then you build the very myth that includes Mario Spezi.... who is ONLY known internationally for his exposure of Mignini, vis a vis the Narducci case, as well as the wrongful prosecution of two unlikelies in Perugia.

The agenda you and Andrea Vogt have bought into could not be more clear. Even in denying you are interested in Mignini, you build the very conspiratorial case that Mignini himself believes.... "My troubles all started with the Narducci case."

Mario Spezi was not interested in Mignini until recently. He was actually "forced" to become an enemy of Mignini, because Mignini focused on him by insisting in helping Giuttari and thus entered and thretened his scope of activity. Spezi's interest was to defend himself from Giuttari, Giuttari was the enemy and the threat not Mignini. Then Mignini became a target merely as secondary effect, since a prosecutor in Florence at the time (Canessa) "called" for the help of the Perugia anti-mafia team (Mignini), asking him to merge the small Narducci cases together with them and with the florentine MoF invesitigation. At the beginning Spezi and Preston still blamed Giuttari alone, they called Mignini a "honest person" and "incorruptible judge", while some Florentine judges pressured Mignini for splitting his work from Giuttari. Mignini did not leave but insisted, and Spezi was forced to consider him an enemy.

Spezi is not "known as a consequence" of Mignini. He was involved in something dangerous unrelated to Mignini, much older, mostly located in another region and pre-existing to any "international" knowledge of Spezi or Mignini.

But all this doesn't matter.

Back to the only point:

Your claims.
(abuse, lies, violations etc... ?)

Your evidence.

You are not answering.
Now you again divert talk about me, about Vogt, etc. But you are forgetting to confront with your claims. You are making claims about people and topics on a case.
You are accusing, claiming facts, you have things to discuss about people and facts. Do you intend to look closely and analyze your actual knowledge about facts?

You need to discuss your evidence and your claims.

 

[RandyN]

No no, Knox released a spontaneous statement. This is what she and her defence always maintained, for five years.
While denied counsuel, rather tan being interrogated, she wrote further incriminating memoirs by which she told new lies and placed further false evidence. She did that on her own will and all alone.

Too bad Italian law has that bothersome lawyer thing requirement at all. And to top it off a suspect can not even waive that right. So plain, so easy to understand. And yet after 5 almost 6 years... clowns still try to make the claim about something spontaneous...which would the definition of voluntarily giveing up ones rights... which is forbidden by Italian law no matter how many chickens you line up and have cluck about that otherwise.

 

[RandyN]

They make beautiful, BEAUTIFUL automobiles and motorcycles, the Italians.

This is the price we pay for them.

Dont forget the Ray Bans. They make a couple of beautiful autos...but the vast majority are tiny ugly death traps. Motorcycles? Ehhh. This price is too high.
Would you want to open a business in Italy?

 

[Bill Williams]

Mario Spezi was not interested in Mignini until recently. He was actually "forced" to become an enemy of Mignini, because Mignini focused on him by insisting in helping Giuttari and thus entered and thretened his scope of activity. Spezi's interest was to defend himself from Giuttari, Giuttari was the enemy and the threat not Mignini. Then Mignini became a target merely as secondary effect, since a prosecutor in Florence at the time (Canessa) "called" for the help of the Perugia anti-mafia team (Mignini), asking him to merge the small Narducci cases together with them and with the florentine MoF invesitigation. At the beginning Spezi and Preston still blamed Giuttari alone, they called Mignini a "honest person" and "incorruptible judge", while some Florentine judges pressured Mignini for splitting his work from Giuttari. Mignini did not leave but insisted, and Spezi was forced to consider him an enemy.

Spezi is not "known as a consequence" of Mignini. He was involved in something dangerous unrelated to Mignini, much older, mostly located in another region and pre-existing to any "international" knowledge of Spezi or Mignini.

But all this doesn't matter.

Back to the only point:

<............ sinister deletia ............>

Apologies, Machiavelli, this is quite laughable. I apologize profusely for putting this that way....

You say that you're not interesting in Mignini.

I say, if you're not interested in Mignini, why do you spend so much typing-time typing about Spezi, who is part of what Mignini himself claims is the conspiracy against himself.....

And THEN after typing ALL that stuff about Mignini, the Narducci thing, and Spezi, you say that it doesn't matter..... do you ever read your posts?

Both you and Andrea Vogt do this. Spend inordinate amounts of time trying to defend Mignini, all the while saying you're not interested in him.

Ok..... ah, er, ok.

 

[RandyN]

Mario Spezi was not interested in Mignini until recently. He was actually "forced" to become an enemy of Mignini, because Mignini focused on him by insisting in helping Giuttari and thus entered and thretened his scope of activity. Spezi's interest was to defend himself from Giuttari, Giuttari was the enemy and the threat not Mignini. Then Mignini became a target merely as secondary effect, since a prosecutor in Florence at the time (Canessa) "called" for the help of the Perugia anti-mafia team (Mignini), asking him to merge the small Narducci cases together with them and with the florentine MoF invesitigation. At the beginning Spezi and Preston still blamed Giuttari alone, they called Mignini a "honest person" and "incorruptible judge", while some Florentine judges pressured Mignini for splitting his work from Giuttari. Mignini did not leave but insisted, and Spezi was forced to consider him an enemy.

Spezi is not "known as a consequence" of Mignini. He was involved in something dangerous unrelated to Mignini, much older, mostly located in another region and pre-existing to any "international" knowledge of Spezi or Mignini.

But all this doesn't matter.

Back to the only point:

Your claims.
(abuse, lies, violations etc... ?)

Your evidence.

You are not answering.
Now you again divert talk about me, about Vogt, etc. But you are forgetting to confront with your claims. You are making claims about people and topics on a case.
You are accusing, claiming facts, you have things to discuss about people and facts. Do you intend to look closely and analyze your actual knowledge about facts?

You need to discuss your evidence and your claims.

Lol...yes Mario became interested when Mignini tossed him in jail illegally. What was the result of that trial on the accusation made by Mignini against Mario? Remind us.

Remind us why Mignini kept Lumumbas bar closed long after he was released from prison. I say Mignini did this to stop Lumumba from talking to reporters and telling about his police abuse and illegal interrogation...seems he wasnt allowed an attorney either. Which seems to be confirmed when Mignini filed charges against AK parents for something they said in the USA and was by all circumstantial evidence true. (Missing interrogation tapes, no investigation of the police to gather evidence if perhaps Knox was actually struck...sure she was...Rita did it. Failing to investigate is another crime of Mignini who had a duty to do so.

Look the man has made several TV recorded interviews. Most have been translated and the transcripts prove Mignini is the BIGGEST liar in this whole case. For example...Mignini says poor Lumumba accused by this girl for this crime...but the smart people understand that Mignini was the guy who kept "poor Lumumbas" bar closed for months...starving him into submission. This makes him a liar and a corrupt man.

He lies about the recording...once he says "we forgot to push record" another time he says "we could not afford" ...stop dont bother with your pitiful excuse about two separate interrogations the witness and the suspect...he is simply caught lying. Making excuses for his poor corrupt work.

You are entitled to claim I have a prejudice...but I understand that I hear no disagreement from average Italians about this case which is not just absurd but is not even logically close, it is fact less, the CSI has been shown to be faulty and sloppy and corrupt, a large number of irregularities such as burned hard drives, missing or absent cctv evidence, the strangest "Super witnesses" the world has ever seen...the huge number of sub-related cases filed against lawyers, defendants , families of defendants, reporters, newspapers, bloggers, even Frank Sfarzo is attacked thru Google. These are things ...corruptions that have no place in a fair trial...in a shaky corrupt trial...yes we expect to see all this and the hundreds of other items I simply dont have the time to bother wasting by pointing them out to you...but there are hundreds...maybe thousands...wrong shoes...cant count rings, lies about calling lawyers, calling family.

How hard and brave to attack to young stupid college students...and you are proud of that? Good for you. How is your association with AL going? You know AL Kia DA?

 

[Mary_H]

You are now again deflecting on me, on posters. You should talk about your claims. Evidence of your claims.
I am not interested in Mignini. I am interested in you. In you, I mean you as a mob, in your mentality, in your beliefs and idolological system. I am interested in the media, in the opinion campaign, and I am interested in the machine which you belong to. It's a machine for political propaganda that builds false narratives and targets the functioning of powers, like justice, pursueing criminal purposes and methods, and relies also on criminal elements with ties to some government agencies (like Mario Spezi); this machine is what we call in Italian "macchina del fango".

I would like to see you put in discussion your claims. Speak about your beliefs. Look at your belifs with critical attitude, try to check what you can actually demonstrate. I am testing your mentality and your rational attitude. I want to see how you think, why you come to your conclusions.

This is a super-strange post. Where have you been for the past 5 1/2 years, Mach? As far as I know, you have been right in the mix, starting with Candace's blog. It's hard to believe you have missed PIP discussing their claims, speaking about their beliefs, looking at their beliefs with a critical attitude, and trying to check what they can actually demonstrate, because it happens every day.

You need to focus on the essential issue: The prosecution's role is to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense's role is to find the weaknesses in the case. That's what PIP people do. We are reacting, not proactively working to destroy lives.

Calling PIP a political propaganda machine is very similar to calling Amanda manipulative. It reveals a fear that someone is trying to exercise power over you. My personal belief is that PLE perceived Amanda as an exotic creature onto whom they projected many of their own darkest inclinations. I see PGP doing the same thing to PIP all the time.

 

[codyjuneau]

.
Some thoughts on the channel 5 show:

• - despite its shortcomings, the most powerful media statement yet, demonstrating biased, sloppy, and lazy detective work by the prosecuting team.
• - the defense lawyer spoke excellent English, I would hire that guy.
• - the lawyer playing Mignini's advocate did not seem to like the cards she was dealt. I suspect the Florence prosecutor won't either. You got to know when to fold them ..
• - the climb was as easy as most athletes knew it would be.
• - if the PGP are correct, the police department must have been overwhelmed with phone calls from passing motorists who spotted the guy scaling the wall to the window.
• - no longer will Rudy be able to secretly laugh at the fools who explain in great detail how it would be impossible for him to break in through Filomena's window.
• - there is now video evidence showing how easy the climb is
• - there is now a video demonstrating how easily DNA contamination can occur
• - there is now a video interview of a sound expert stating it would be 'impossible' for the lady to have heard footsteps on the steps
• - there is now a video of both lawyers agreeing that the prosecution team theorizing instead of performing simple scientific tests is unacceptable.

.

 

[RoseMontague]

In you, I mean you as a mob, in your mentality, in your beliefs and idolological system. I am interested in the media, in the opinion campaign, and I am interested in the machine which you belong to. It's a machine for political propaganda that builds false narratives and targets the functioning of powers, like justice, pursueing criminal purposes and methods, and relies also on criminal elements with ties to some government agencies (like Mario Spezi); this machine is what we call in Italian "macchina del fango".

Gee, another conspiracy.

 

[Diocletus]

I think you are writing on forums claiming that a number people (possibly a big number) committed crimes or abuses.
Now, here there are also posters (acbtesla, RandyN etc.) who extend their accusation to really big numbers of people, as they say like that all Italians are corrupt, or that Italy is rotten as a culture or as a state, etc. I don't think there is a rational ground where you can contend with racism and prejudice so there is nothing to discuss with these people.
You instead, Bill, are seemingly focused on a number single individuals. Mignini, Massei, Vogt, Stefanoni... At least apparently.
You use some expressions like "forced to sign", and you bring allegations of abuses. You are making claims.

So the point is only this: whether you can prove your claims. There is really no other point of discussion.
You should only tell what are your claims of illegality or abuses, and what is your evidence. You are calling some people criminals, you are alleging actions. You have some burden of proof on your claims.
Until now, you have been shown to be wrong, your claim proven unfounded or false. Your latter statement about the SC still rings like the attempt to repeat something despite you have just been shown that it was unfounded and false. You have already been explained that the SC ruling is no evidence of violation of the rules. You have an obvious acceptance by all judges about other things.
So you are just without any argument, though you accuse me of "defending" or "deflecting"?

They railroaded the girl because she is American. There's your "racism."

Vogt=dope. Just read her stories. There's a reason she ain't in NY.
Massei=dope. Example: his retarded motivation, which no one in the world agrees with
Stefanoni=liar. Example: selective disclosure of records
Mignini=deceitful liar. Example: deprivation of counsel, suppression of dna evidence, submission of false evidence

 

[Supernaut]

You are now again deflecting on me, on posters. You should talk about your claims. Evidence of your claims.
I am not interested in Mignini. I am interested in you. In you, I mean you as a mob, in your mentality, in your beliefs and idolological system. I am interested in the media, in the opinion campaign, and I am interested in the machine which you belong to. It's a machine for political propaganda that builds false narratives and targets the functioning of powers, like justice, pursueing criminal purposes and methods, and relies also on criminal elements with ties to some government agencies (like Mario Spezi); this machine is what we call in Italian "macchina del fango".

I would like to see you put in discussion your claims. Speak about your beliefs. Look at your belifs with critical attitude, try to check what you can actually demonstrate. I am testing your mentality and your rational attitude. I want to see how you think, why you come to your conclusions.

This is 'projection' taken to a new level of absurdity and surreality.

It's like watching someone kicking another in the shin while screaming in pain.

 

[Dan O.]

Maybe Polly would like another cracker.

 

[Machiavelli]

This is a super-strange post. Where have you been for the past 5 1/2 years, Mach? As far as I know, you have been right in the mix, starting with Candace's blog. It's hard to believe you have missed PIP discussing their claims, speaking about their beliefs, looking at their beliefs with a critical attitude, and trying to check what they can actually demonstrate, because it happens every day.

You need to focus on the essential issue: The prosecution's role is to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense's role is to find the weaknesses in the case. That's what PIP people do. We are reacting, not proactively working to destroy lives.

The defence role takes place exclusively within the legal arena. When in the public arena, it's no defensive role, it's called propaganda. However you are not defending Amanda Knox, certainly not with legitimate legal means. The means by which you operate are qualified as mafious and criminal; they are focused not on seeking alleged "weaknesses" of the case but they they target people and institution through dirty propaganda, they are focused on defaming people and attacking the legitimacy of powers.
Moreover, bear in mind that I also consider a restricted group in the FoA as responsible of taking part in organizing a judiciary corruption.

Calling PIP a political propaganda machine is very similar to calling Amanda manipulative. It reveals a fear that someone is trying to exercise power over you.

Indeed. And it's someone criminal. It is indeed an attack on what I consider legtitimay and sovreignity. And it is indead carried on by mafious means and with he help of criminal elements and networks.
By the way, it's not that original. I happens in Italy on regular basis. Civil war is not a mind obsession in Syria, it's reality; conspiracies and mafia networks are not a fantasy.

My personal belief is that PLE perceived Amanda as an exotic creature onto whom they projected many of their own darkest inclinations. I see PGP doing the same thing to PIP all the time.

Amanda Knox is a trivial creature; she has no role but a passive one in this. She has a manipulative attitude, but she was manipulated herself (just as always happend to manipulators; this is how it works).
Amanda's involvement was just obvious; her lies are obvious; the involvement of multiple perpetrators in the murder was obvious. Evidence is obvious. Also the honesty of investigators was obvious, as well as the absurdity of your conspiracy theories, and the falsehood of your claims (like the false claim that Stefanoni refused to disclose evidence, the absurdity about HIV test, the Satanic rite, the allegation of law vio lations, the false media reports and your reliance of criminals like Spezi and Sfarzo (or things told by idiots like Preston) and so on... ).
Your purpose is to "save" the life of a person - or anyway an interest - which you care about for some reason; but your operation to achieve that is like the dffusion an anti-semitic libel campaign or like the anti-Dreyfuss or anti-Mossadeq campaigns.
Because the truth about facts is evident and most obvious to me, it is a matter of perception about reality. Your claims about people are false because they are ansurd and false not because of who Knox or Sollecito are. Amanda Knox has nothing to do with that.

 

[Antony]

.
Some thoughts on the channel 5 show:

• ...
• - the lawyer playing Mignini's advocate did not seem to like the cards she was dealt. I suspect the Florence prosecutor won't either. You got to know when to fold them ...

That was very much my impression. Does anyone know who the prosecution team is in Florence?

• - there is now a video of both lawyers agreeing that the prosecution team theorizing instead of performing simple scientific tests is unacceptable.

.

The comments on the C5 website have the usual batch of ill-informed guilter comment - at least one saying how good she was, and others complaining that she sold out to the defence. To me it illustrated just how vacuous the prosecution case is, and how obvious it was to their own advocate long before the programme material was covered.

 

[Welshman]

As I have stated in a previous post, it is blatantly obvious Amanda and Raffaeale were being interrogated as suspects. Despite this they were denied access to lawyers and the interrogations were not recorded. This is only a small part of the misconduct which occurred in this case. The prosecution released lies to the media and lied in court. The prosecution destroyed and suppressed evidence. They used dubious forensic evidence eg a knife which did not match the wounds. Why did the prosecution have to resort to these measures if they had such a strong case against Amanda and Raffaele?

 

[acbytesla]

There was missing furniture but still plenty of room for four people.

This from the Daily Mail or this from Hendry.

Yeah, and 15 people can fit into a phone booth. I have no doubt that it would be possible for 4 people to to be in that room at one time. I also don't doubt that 3 people could murder one person in that room. What I do doubt is the ability of 4 people to commit this murder in that room without leaving more definitive evidence of 3 people killing someone.

 

[RoseMontague]

The defence role takes place exclusively within the legal arena. When in the public arena, it's no defensive role, it's called propaganda. However you are not defending Amanda Knox, certainly not with legitimate legal means. The means by which you operate are qualified as mafious and criminal; they are focused not on seeking alleged "weaknesses" of the case but they they target people and institution through dirty propaganda, they are focused on defaming people and attacking the legitimacy of powers.
Moreover, bear in mind that I also consider a restricted group in the FoA as responsible of taking part in organizing a judiciary corruption.

Gee, another conspiracy, this time accusing members here of criminal acts and a conspiracy in organizing judicial corruption. How many conspiracies are we up to now, Mach.

 

[Dan O.]

One could ask Machiavelli if he could look into a mirror and say that. I have a strong suspiscion that he was.

Does Machiavelli perceive the prosecution using "mafious means and with he help of criminal elements and networks"? Toto was after all a criminal element and the prosecutions numerous leaks to the media were using the networks to deliver their propaganda. Or is he truly blind to that side?!