Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry17
I have read most of Amanda's diary and there is no mention of CCTV. Can you please tell me what date she wrote this?
|
Getting tired are we? What I quoted wasn't from her diary, it was from the letter she wrote to police shortly after the interrogation was over and the statements were signed. The point I was making is that it's not clear if the cops actually believed they had this proof or not. If they did believe they had it, it's possible it was the CCTV footage, but we don't know. They could have just told her they had hard proof as a scare tactic.
Quote:
|
I'm not sure what you think her retarded ramblings prove. Raffaele has already stated that she was not at his apartment and that she asked him to lie. Did you really expect her to write that ****er is throwing me under the bus?
|
I think it's really pretty clear what happened based on what both of them said happened and the record we have of what Amanda said while it was very fresh in her mind. It doesn't read as a she devil guiltress at all actually.
Quote:
|
Why would she write I don't think Raffaele killed Meredith? It seems like a strange thing to even consider the possibility that he could have if it was true that she was with him. It seems to me that she is considering trying to throw him under the bus.
|
Again you just ignore the context and the possibility she may be innocent. They've just told her they have hard proof she was there. They've convinced her she's repressing the memories and that Raf is saying she wasn't there. It's pretty clear to me she remembers certain thing as fact so at that point she knows he's lied and is trying to understand why. She goes on to say what's most real to her is that they were together all night. You just don't want to read it or ignore the parts that don't help your case.
Stop pwning yourself asking for sources dude.
Quote:
Mignini's CNN Internview12’51’’ CNN: Why wasn’t there any video or transcript of those hours?
13’00’’ Mignini: Look, that’s, I was at the police station, and all the…let’s say…when I made investigations in my own office, I taped them. I taped them, we have an apparatus for that, and I transcribed them. For example, there’s the interrogation of the English girls, Meredith’s friends, it was all taped. The interrogations of Amanda in prison were taped, and then transcribed, and we have the transcripts of… But in a police station, at the very moment of the investigation it isn’t done, not in the confrontations with Amanda or with anyone else. Also because, I can tell you, today, even then, but today in particular, we have budget problems, budget problems that are not insignificant, which do not allow us to transcribe. Video is very important…I completely agree with you that videotaping is extremely important, we should be able to have a video recording of every statement [verbale di assunzione di informazioni] made Because what is said is very important, but it’s maybe even more important how it is said, the non-verbal language. Because from the non-verbal language you can [missing words].
15’14’’ Mignini: It isn’t only Amanda, it’s always like that. But I wanted to say that I agree with him that it’s fundamental, only there’s a problem, especially when the witnesses are so numerous, and in fact just recording, I mean recording the sound, isn’t enough according to me.
15’38’’ CNN: It doesn’t cost much, he says.
15’40’’ Mignini: Well we have significant budget problems, that’s what it is.
|
Also notice above that Mignini pwns your (unsourced obv) earlier assertion that only suspects have their questioning taped. Well done Henry.
Quote:
|
A link would be great here.
|
Amanda and Raf's appeals are available in their entirety in Italian and summarized in English at injusticeinperugia.com Be careful though the site may plant a tracking cookie that will alert the shill team to your net locations so they can send arguers to combat you all over the web.
Quote:
|
I actually don't put much value on documents hosted on any of the propaganda sites but I'd still like to see it. Since you just quoted from it I assume you have it handy.
|
LOL
Quote:
|
Neither Nara nor Curatolo changed their testimony. What they said on the stand is a perfect match to what they said when first interviewed by the police.
|
You'll have no problem posting transcripts of their interviews and trial testimony then I'm sure. You're really lobbing them out there tonight, well done. Read what the kids appeal says about Nara's testimony and get back to me on that one.
Quote:
|
It doesn't. Sorry. I'm not having this debate again. Only retards on the internet think time of death was 9:30. First time of death is never a specific time it is always a range and second the experts all agree it was much later.
|
I know you don't want to go back through this because you got served the first time around and never really had another go. You didn't even really understand the argument at the point, flailed around, and then started with the all doctor's agree until I Massei'd that in half and then you just went on fully head bury. The evidence in this case does allow us to create a fairly small window for time of death and that is nearly closed at 9:30. That you can't refute this argument is par for the course.
Quote:
She would know it came from the cottage because the cottage is an isolated property. Unlike the rest of the properties in that area it has no immediate neighbours. It is all by itself so any noise from that direction would be limited to coming from the cottage.
Are you really asking why a widowed senior citizen who heard a scream did not go out at night to investigate?
|
Isn't there are a car park right across the street with I dunno a CCTV camera in it?
Didn't she claim it was bloodcurdling? She didn't even go to the window did she? There are problems with her testimony as you'll see in the appeal but I really could care less about this witness because Meredith was dead. it's for all intents and purposes impossible she was alive at this point and I think the prosecution probably agrees with me. You certainly did on page 18 remember!
Quote:
There is absolutely no contradictions. She testified that footsteps went in two directions on specific streets. In both cases witnesses testified that they saw Amanda and Raffaele in one case and Rudy in the other on the streets Nara claims the footsteps ran down. The phones are found on the road Nara claims the individual ran down. What exactly is the inconsistency you speak of?
You said that if Nara heard it then the car people would have also heard it. I want to know what you base that on. As usual it is on absolutely nothing.
Based on the positions of the individuals involved Nara was much better positioned to hear the scream than the people from the car.
I also like how you threw in that the lights were off. So if this was a burglary the burglars after committing a murder would have taken the time to turn off the lights for conservation purposes I assume?
|
The whole point here is that no one sees anything going on at the cottage and they would have. You have essentially Amanda and Raf running in all kinds of directions all over the place and these people would have seen them. None of it makes sense and it doesnt' really matter because Meredith was already dead and I've proven it with the TOD stuff and the cell phone stuff. No one reasonable would conclude she was alive at this point. You clearly see why on page 18 remember!
Quote:
|
Not during the murder. During the clean up she was barefoot.
|
And they were able to clean up every bloody footprint they left coming and going from the kill at least once or was it multiple times, while leaving Guede's prints intact? Wow!
Quote:
|
They cleared the house. They were and called 911. These were not real police officers they did not enter the room until the real police arrived.
|
They didn't check to see if she was alive? That seems like shirking their duty doesn't it?
Quote:
Funny I don't see that and either does anyone else who isn't just a shill
|
You do know her head is right by the closet there though right? Clearly they checked to see if she was alive.
Quote:
|
Her head can't be seen and the bit of her hair that can be seen is by the night stand not the white closet.
|
The closet extends well past the white you see in the picture that much is obvious. Seriously this is a terrible argument and her head was right by the closet and there was blood over there. They clearly would have checked to see if she was alive do you deny they did?
Quote:
|
She says people told her but never identifies who. If she said Filomena told me that would be one thing but there are only four people who could have maybe known and she doesn't name any of them. Further, all four of the people who got a glimpse of the room said they saw nothing. So how can Amanda have more information than any of the four possible sources?
|
Do you think it's possible the police were talking about it? I don't think this matters one bit sorry. You just have Amanda the conniving deft murderer just doing the most silly things don't you.
Quote:
|
Who? Someone is not a person. There were only four people in the hallway when the door was broken down that Amanda could have talked to and they all stated that they saw nothing.
|
What did the cops see? Again this is just a lame line of argument based on speculation.
Quote:
|
She is not being sued. This is a criminal charge.
|
So for the second time you can't source that she said this. OK.
Quote:
|
Plan A would be that the police assume it was a burglary and it goes unsolved.
|
Ah so premeditated coverup but oops damn I just mentioned everything that happened at the crime because Im so stupid! Convincing argument.
Quote:
|
Why did she know Patrick had an alibi? Patrick was near Piazza Grimana at about the same time Amanda and Raffaele were there. We know Patrick went back to his bar after but Patrick was in the same small area as Amanda and she could have seen him.
|
Because she knew he was at work?
Quote:
|
I don't really think she is thinking at all at this point. The police are asking about Patrick and Raffaele has stop corroborating her alibi. She has to point the finger at someone and what other option does she have than Patrick?
|
She doesn't have to point the finger at anyone all she has to do is ask for a lawyer. I think they totally freaked her out and ended up getting a bunch of bs out of her. It's clear as day in her testimony and especially in the letter she writes the next day. She has no idea what's real and what's not. When the dust settles she realizes what's going on obv.
Quote:
|
I don't claim this. I linked to the recording of the phone call in my mega post and included a transcript.
|
y
No one is disputing that but thanks for the reassurance. The point is it's illogical to think he'd mention it then intentionally and then moments later when the cops actually arrive decide to intentionally not mention it, and then use that as the basis for an argument towards guilt.
Quote:
|
No. When Raffaele makes that call the postal police has already been there for 20 minutes. It is a fake call to the police after the postal police have already arrived.
|
I feel bad for you on this one Henry, you've gone full foil on me again! Maybe time for a break I think
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
