Lol.

Those posters that got banned were totally hapless. They added nothing but noise.

239, you werent banned because you are basically the clearing house for the shill point of view - and you had seniority.

Don't fool yourself 239, you are not effective or persuasive, its just that with you already here, the rest of the shills are redundant.

You're just butthurt that after studying both sides of this argument, I decided Henry won this thread in a landslide and that you are a joke, as did most of 2p2.

It appears that Henry has decided not to waste any more time on you, and it's a good decision, imo. So just keep doing what you do.

I have read a lot but not all of this thread. I would say that I am 90% in the "she did it or was involved" category but its tough to get 100% on board. The reasons are the following:

1. So much time has gone by it is hard to believe that she has not slipped up or done something else to indicate she is a sociopath in the intermediate time. That moron George Zimmerman was in trouble with the law within a week of getting off. OJ wrote a book about how he did it. Why has there not been more circumstantial evidence about her? Possibly good handling.

2. With Gude getting convicted and the three of them not having stayed close or really in contact, why hasn't someone rolled on the others yet?

3. The sadistic sex games story just doesn't make sense or seem probable to me. Without a clear motive I find it hard to settle my mind on her involvement.

All evidence points to the fact that she is a liar and covering something up, but whether or not that means she stabbed this girl or was involved in holding her etc or whether on the other hand she was simply just scared and acting irrationally is hard to separate conclusively.

PS. Please don't flame me.

I believe you will find that the court settled on a theory involving an escalation involving money or personal differences between Amanda and Meredith. Of course, we shall see for sure once the report is released.

There's no motivation to turn on each other since Italy doesn't allow things like plea bargains where your sentence gets reduced. Amanda and Raf can't roll on each other or on guide because that's as much as admitting they're guilty or at the very best were complicit.

Guede has no motivation to roll on AK or RS since there's no benefit to himself and he'd be making a bunch more enemies. Maybe once he's out a tabloid will pay a bunch of money for his story, but even then it'll be hard to believe.

You mean they couldn't sell the totally believable "sex game gone awry" or "thrill killers in love" theories?

I think the only ones selling that was the Knox propaganda team. I dont recall those being mentioned in the Massei report. I dont recall the prosecutors arguing such theories in court.

In any event; I dont believe you will find that any such theory has been shown to play a material part of the convictions - we will also know for sure when the latest report is issued.

I did not use this word today. Please go quote me where I have ever said this word.

I'll wait for your apology, along with the one where you said I was full of it regarding italian law regarding suspects and investigations in which you never seemed to respond to after proven wrong.

Jesus the conspiracy lunacy is strong here in this thread.

None of this has anything to do with the evidence.

A PR campaign is not designed to plant evidence, switch evidence, bribe judges, etc. It has no bearing on this case other then crazy obsessed pro guilt people who love to harp on the fact she hired a PR firm. Who gives a ****?

I asked a simple question. How are you positive people were coming to this website as paid shills from the knox PR campaign. That was it. Your answer is someone else posted it at some point and its here somewhere. I just thought since you were positive of it you knew what that information was that made you believe it was true, that's all. Let's just drop this conversation, as it has nothing to do with the trial or evidence and is simply conspiracy theories.

Ok. It was another shill. My point still stands. You are the guy with the bs backstory which all the shills seem compelled to provide.

As for your other "point" I think you are smoking crack.

Okay. Trial and evidence.

1. Identify any predudicial error at trial which would require a reversal.

2. Identify any item evidence which was improperly admitted at trial.

3. Identify any item of evidence which was improperly excluded at trial.

4. Identify any procedural error which resulted in material prejudice to Amanda.

There is plenty of splashings of sex, violence, and sex game gone wrong in Massei and Mignini says a bunch of ******ed things throughout trial and even in closing arguments.

Massei's theory (if you ever actually read it) is that literally after Amanda and Raff suddenly had no obligations they decided to leave Raff's apartment.

At some point they were in the square because that is where the star witness heroin addict homeless Curatolo witnesses them for the first time, because of course he looks up from a magazine he is reading and sees them and takes notice. He of course sees them again later in the evening and recognizes them yet again.

Next, they somehow meet up with Rudy and go to Amanda's house all 3 of them together, having no contact by phone or anything, or having ever previously really interacted or hung out together at all (Raff absolutely had never met him and Amanda might have met him or knew he existed simply in passing). But they just run into each other I guess which is not impossible.

Once at the house, Amanda and Raff go into her bedroom to have sex and Rudy goes to take a crap. Suddenly Rudy comes out and is sexually charged because of the environment and goes into Meredith's room who is likely reading in bed.

Then, he makes a move on her and people even testified to Rudys sexual aggressiveness toward women, especially when drunk or high.

Massei Pg. 366
Abukar Barrow [who was] interrogated on 11 December 2007 (and whose testimony was acquired with the consensus of the parties) testified that Rudy, above all when he was drunk or under the effects of drugs, ‚bothered people, especially young women. He blocked them off physically and tried to kiss them‛.

Meredith then rejects Rudy and upon hearing the skirmish Amanda and Raff come out and join in with Rudy and take his side, because after all, they brought Rudy to the house and having hung out with him for the last few hours they really feel close to him and of course they think he should be able to bang Meredith, despite what she wants.

Oh, and apparently they brought a steak knife with them from Raff's house for whatever reason....and they held her while Rudy sexually assaulted her and used two different knives to stab and kill her as well.

This was all fueled by drugs (marijuana and hashish) and rage and pure evil of course. Cue reefer madness clip.

Massei Pg. 367/368
Therefore it may be deduced that, accustomed to the consumption of drugs and the effects of the latter, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito participated actively in Rudy’s criminal acts aimed at overcoming Meredith’s resistance, subjugating her will and thus allowing Rudy to act out his lustful impulses; and this is considered to have happened because, for those [i.e. for people] who did not disdain the use of drugs (Amanda has stated that on that evening, before ‚making love‛, they had consumed drugs), watching films and reading comic books in which sexuality is accompanied by violence and by situations of fear, disregarding the concept of sexuality as an encounter of [two]persons moved by reciprocal and free emotion (see the comic books seized from Raffaele Sollecito and the statements on the 368 viewing of films which had drawn the attention of the tutors of the ONAOSI College attended by Raffaele Sollecito), the prospect of helping Rudy in [his] goal of subduing Meredith in order to sexually abuse her may have seemed to be an exciting stimulant which, although unexpected, had to be tried.

A motive, therefore, of an erotic, sexually violent nature which, arising from the choice of evil made by Rudy, found active collaboration from Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.

Go Identify your butthole.

Done talking to someone who calls everyone who disagrees with their opinion on this case a "shill".

******ed.

2. is the most obvious one. Meredith's bra was moved after the crime scene was sealed and was admitted as evidence. Tampered evidence is clearly not admissible and this was the basis of AK's acquittal.

AK speaks mostly English with a bit of broken Italian. A young, good looking, American woman, speaking English in the Square of a small Italian city (about 165,000 residence). Would likely stand out about as much as a young, good looking, Italian woman, speaking italian would stand out in a small american city.

I would like to think I would not miss the Italian woman. I might even stare at her and wonder what she looks like without clothes on. MAybe you wouldn't do that though....

That's a really weak reply.

I find it hilarious that the only thing in my post you point out to choose to defend is the homeless heroin addicts testimony who is nothing more then a professional witness ultimately. He testified for the prosecution in at least two other cases, one of which was a murder case. A junkie will do just about everything for a fix, everyone knows this.

Also, there were plenty of English speaking people living there. It was a popular college abroad for most students. Not sure why it would be so strange nor would there be a reason this would stand out to someone who lived there (literally) on a daily basis. Also who knows if they were speaking English or Italian? Raff's Italian still is horrible and it's been mentioned they would speak English, Italian, and even German to communicate.

Got anything else I can decimate for you?

I think it is widely accepted now that the "sex games" theory was a bit of a leap too far. The truth is there is uncertainty about what happened because nobody who was there is telling the truth. Wait for the judge's report from the latest appeal I would say. But note there was a bit of a crazy witness driving a car who saw Raff, Amanda and Rudy crossing the road together in front of him heading for the cottage.

My butthole was not at issue in the case; you are getting some bad source material

So the court found that this item of evidence was tampered with? If the court found that a particular item was tampered with, then it should have been excluded.

So, I guess if you show me where the Court made such a finding, I will then believe her conviction will be overturned on appeal.

This post is a great example of why you will never be taken seriously.

I don't think that was the basis of AK's aquittal.

It's clear that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line and basic logic is lost on you and a lot of others. I get it.

The fact of the matter is that "how" or "why" it happened is not really important. It is likely that what actually happened will never be known short of one of the defendants providing a narrative.

What is important is that the evidence shows participation of all three defendants at the scene and that there was more than one participant in the killing.

When such is true, it is important for a defendant to provide an exculpatory narrative to either establish 1) they were not at the scene; or 2) present but not involved in the primary act (thus allowing for a lesser charge).

Here, Raf and AK have failed to do this; the absence of a coherent narrative really hurts the defendants, as opposed to preventing the prosecution from making its case; a point proven true thus far in two trials (3 if you include Guede's).

Oski, what is 2 of the most prominent pieces of evidence for you indicating guilt 100%?