The court did exonerate them. They were freed. Don't be such a nit.

This isn't dishonest at all, it's right there in the court ordered independent expert report. You have no credibility left as far as I'm concerned.

Eh, I never stopped you from discussing the court case. It was you who was lobbing a load of prepackaged baloney onto me and I was merely correcting your interpretation of my views which are obviously wrong. It's blatantly obvious that you've cherry picked and conflated every single line you've read on every discussion into a highly distorted view of your opposition and have tried to lump me in with that. Sorry for not playing along with this obvious delusion you have. I said I didn't care about the court result because a) I don't and b) you said I did and that I was emboldened by it. That's a direct response to you.

Please. Your entire participation is a massive strawman. You labeled me a racist and implied I was a nazi, ffs. Honest discourse is actually responding to what someone says, not responding to something they've never even intimated. Try harder.

Spare us. You came from the guilter sites to help shout down rational thought. Your thoughts originate there not here and everything you believe can be summarized on the guilter wiki. You're a bot more or less.

I disagree that's why you showed up here, but I don't disagree that using offensive language about a family is poor form.

Oski, is the king of infantile pot shots though. If you don't see he's off the rails, wow.

239, what exactly is stopping you from taking on this so called MEGAPOST by Henry ? Im just curious.

Also, +rep has a long history of not understanding what he's responding to so this is par for the course.

As far as moderation, I think people are trying to Jonestown the thread again because they're unable to shout people down or bury them in paperwork which is Oski's forte. Sorry, Yeti, that it's a moderation hassle :/

It's a speculative disaster and despite claims to the contrary, it's not well sourced. You're seeing firsthand that no one on the opposition cares that it has outright falsehoods in it, so what would be the point? Why would I give it any credibility by taking it seriously? I felt bad for Henry that he thought it was credible, tbh.

Also, I just remembered +rep or someone else recently said I've never laid out my theory of that night which is laughably false. I posted what I think happened and it's all supported by the evidence.

You're often saying exactly the same about the posters engaging you real time and yet you do take your time to answer them. This apparently is a piece of text that a lot of guilters are conforming to, I would say that if its that bad you could easily debunk it and shut out 75% of the people claiming guilt in here and have them shut up. There are good reasons to lock this thread up for a while and none have anything to do with stopping people from making arguments imo.

Yak, discussion of the mega-post just turns into a he-said/she-said shouting match with those on Henry's side failing to recognize, or admit, that it is a sloppy, one-sided mess of supposition, which the sheeple wind up worshipping with wide-eyed wonder and awe. It's pretty much the equivalent of the flat earth thread with the mega post being similar to those whack-job explanations and proof as to why the earth is flat. The experience of listening to the guilters is pretty much a similar experience as listening to the flat earthers — pretty unbelievable how they can cling to such an erroneous belief that was propped up with a bunch of misguided reasoning.

Better to just wait until the court issues their report on the lower courts equivalent of Henry's mega post — at least Oski is correct about that, albeit very late into the latest game as that was my contention way back when I wandered back in here after Amanda was exonerated to see what the response here would be.

NONSENSE! Curatolo also testified in front of Judge Hellmann, who found Curatola highly confused, and Hellmann determined that even if Curatolo had seen the defendants (unlikely), that Curatolo had seen them the night BEFORE the murder, on Halloween night:

This is an interesting dissection of Judge Nencini's fanciful motivation report done by a fellow Italian – if anyone is confused why the Cassation recently threw out the case against Amanda & Raffaele, they should read this article and then they'll understand Nencini's garbage that had landed in the laps of that Cassation Court's justices:

Good lord, what happened to Oski over the weekend? Now we're gonna have to lock the thread to save him any more embarrassment? Sad day for the guilters imo....


Tough to choose a favorite, but this was pretty special:


On a side note, enjoy the 'holiday' +rep, the one thing we might agree on I'll be celebrating myself after work. Kind of feel like Chipotle for some reason.

Oski to Highjak:
Versus, Oski using the correct work steps, but then failing the exam.

Oski's usual tactic at work again: "If you can't attack the message, then attack the messenger, and if you can't attack either, then hide behind the law, and if you can't do that, then attack the law."

That is not true.

I know that you, being a life-long sidekick and hanger-oner, have a hard on for Henry who you secretly admire for being able to actually put something out there for people to discuss and judge (whereas, you don't ever state anything approaching original material), but you are wrong about his position on the case.

If you feel so strongly about your comments towards Henry's work, why don't you back it up with something tangible?

Go ahead, its okay. If you can't muster the courage to actually say something about the case now that you know the result, you never will - now is the time!

lol ya, clearly

and lolken, sourcing lolhellman as usual

The message has been successfully attacked ad naseum.

As the pro-Knox people cannot seem to get any headway here, they have turned to attacking me, Henry, et al.

I am just returning the favor.

Anyhow, that you are defending HiJack leads me to believe you endorse his posts on the case. Please let me know if I am incorrect on that.

Tell you what, you go find what you believe to be Henry's best point in that pile of tripe, and I'll honestly look at it.

If I don't agree with it, then I'll tell you exactly why, and I'll even post citations which will (more than likely) prove Henry was pulling nonsense out of thin air.

That's good, because nobody else is gong to celebrate you.

By the way, I have thrown down the challenge and nobody (predictably) accepted.

That is what happens when someone calls the bluff and you are holding air.


Yes, because you are a lemming.

Go ahead and link me a post of yours that you think is good. Just one. I tried to find something of substance from you, but I saw nothing but "+1's, etc." - basically nothing but typical brown-nose posts from someone hopelessly looking for affirmation.

I know you are just a side-kick, but sometimes even the sidekick has to actually do something. So, let's see what you have.

And then he will invite you to his house so that he can take a picture of you two standing side-by-side.

It doesn't work like that.

You analyze a case by the facts and how they were applied. When it gets to the higher levels, as pointed out by your compadre, Simplicitus, nobody can accurately guess what will happen because there are a lot of factors in play and the Court has a lot of power to use them any way they want.

In your case, your "foundation" is a bunch of losing arguments on what the facts were and should be. The higher court may still rule in your favor, but it would not comport with your faulty analysis. I believe that will be borne out when the report is issued.

So, yes, you have the right answer, but you don't have any reasonable explanation as to how you arrived at it.

In the pro-guilt case, the foundation is facts as found in a court of law. Nobody on the AK side has ever identified any error in the process that would lead one to disregard those facts. All that has been offered is losing argument that was rejected at trial.

Of course, the court of law is not the only way to go, but as of yet, nobody has offered any alternative beyond "internet debate." If you believe "internet debate" is reliable, then fine - but then again, there is a reason why most people reject your position out-of-hand (it's not reliable).

So the pro-guilt people do not have the right answer, but they have built a foundation where they can legitimately claim surprise at the Cassation ruling. It may turn out that the lower courts improperly analyzed the evidence - it is unlikely the Court will be overturning the evidence. But, we shall see.

I mean, Oski was right when he assessed that I dont know a lot about the case (even though I never said I did).

I've looked over several source and made up for myself what way I feel about the case in general. I haven't even seen this megapost because for some strange reason it hasn't been quoted or linked in the last few pages iirc or in any other page I read when following along this thread earlier for that matter.

I wouldn't be surprised if its somewhat biased, thats exactly how the world works when you have a certain view. The only way to UNbias it is by applying your own (biased) POV from the innocenters camp onto it and then the neutrols will make sense of whatever comes out of that. Especially since most of the guilters arguments at this point are basically; it has been said, go look for it in the last 25k posts.

Sefanoni did eventually release SOME of the required paperwork, but not all of it:

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/lab-data-suppression/

Hellmann kept asking her to produce documentation, and she never did provide it all.

In addition to the missing paperwork, more importantly, Stefanoni never did provide the EDFs (Electronic Data Files).

The equipment used to analyze DNA outputs these EDFs, which are supposed to be placed onto CDs to give to the defense, as explained here:

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-con...efense-Bar.pdf

Stefanoni's DNA lab equipment produced those EDFs, which Stefanoni then uploaded to her computer to use a program to analyze the results, which can then be printed, and it those printed results that you have seen, but many were missing since they were out of sequential order.

Providing the defense with those EDFs allows their experts to verify that the results weren't overly tweaked, and they could also see why there were gaps in the sequential order produced by Stefanoni.

You are mistaken since the Cassation Ct was quoted as saying they were fully acquitting, or exonerating, Amanda. Since their statement was in Italian I'm not sure if "acquit" is more accurate than "exonerate" since that amounts to pretty much the same thing.

I could be wrong, but the Cassation Ct also never cited any relevant code sections in their statement, which had decreed that both Amanda & Raffaele to be innocent of the murder charges. Can you provide a citation supporting your claim that they did cite a code section?

I only called her a "Skank?" Since Stefanoni was caught blatantly LYING on the stand multiple times, I should have called her a Lying Skank.

In any event, with this last Cassation ruling it is now a proven fact that even Italy's top court has determined that Stefanoni's DNA results were clearly bogus.

Stefanoni should have been prosecuted for perjury.

I must not have much respect for the Kercher clan, eh?

As I had stated earlier, the Kercher clan is either very stupid, or evil. I'm sad about their daughter's tragic death, but the surviving Kerchers have behaved abysmally.

If the Kercher clan truly believed that other people had assisted Guede in killing their daughter, then why did the Kerchers (thru their attorney) move to block the defense's motion to have the apparent semen stain on the pillow tested for DNA?

The pillow was found under their dead daughter's hips, and since only men leave semen stains, you'd think the Kerchers would have wanted that stain tested.

If the stain's DNA matched Guede, then just more evidence against Guede, so nothing much lost nor gained.

HOWEVER, if the stain had Raffaele's DNA, then why would both the prosecution and the Kerchers move (successfully) to block Raffaele's motion to have that stain DNA tested?

The Kerchers obviously didn't think Raffaele had made the semen stain, but if the stain's DNA pointed at some other male, then that would help answer the questions the Kerchers publicly state they want answered.

So, why did the Kerchers block the defense's request to test that stain?

Are they evil or just stupid?

Raffaele's family seems to have some money, and it's a common belief (but an exaggeration) that Amanda came from money, too.

The Kercher clan has been an active 'civil' party in all of Amanda & Raffaele's trials and suing them both for $$MONEY$$ at the same time the state was prosecuting them criminally.

Guede didn't have a pot to piss in money-wise, so the Kercher clan have mostly ignored Guede and they only went after Amanda & Raffaele.

As their Pillow-Gate proves, the Kercher clan was seeking more than the truth!

Whereas, Amanda's family has behaved honorably throughout this ordeal.

Guilters have claimed Raffaele's family attempted to buy off witnesses, have had mafia connections (etc), and whether that is true (or exaggerations), I don't take a position on, but considering the sources, probably at least gross exaggerations.

It's not biased in the sense that it was drafted to reach a pre-determined conclusion.

It is a memorandum of how and why Henry reached his conclusion.

This was drafted and posted over three years ago when the information was not as abundant or as reliable as now. So, there may be some errors, but they were not due to unfaithful representations of cited material.

The "mega post" has been linked and reposed many, many times here. You are correct that the "guilters" are somewhat fed up with constant requests for restatement of the arguments, etc., when its been done many, many times and they are not really inclined to fish everything out - again.

Yeti touched on the heart of the matter - there was a proposition to end the debate between 239 and Henry many years ago where Yeti would moderate a debate based on Henry's "mega post."

239 declined as he did not want to agree to the condition that the arguments be cited.

- Instead, ignoring that such happened, 239 and others have simply argued the case as they see fit with no conditions or standards. I spent over a year just trying to pin 239 down on his position on the case, but he refused to state his position. That is a familiar pattern here - 239 simply refuses to state his position on certain matters so that he can slip away and redirect the argument.

The best one is when he had been challenging everyone to debate the DNA evidence and when P.R. (and others, but especially P.R.) took him up on the offer, he slinked away and refused to answer a number of direct questions, instead opting for ad homimen attacks. Yet, 239 persists in telling everyone he "destroyed" P.R. in the debate that he ran away from.

Anyhow, if anyone finds 239's tactics compelling, well, I think that speaks more towards that person's deficiencies of critical thought. Thankfully, most people on this site at least do not have such deficiencies and have, instead, opted to ignore 239 or ridicule his arguments.

I get that 239 values the position that the one who argues loudest and longest will prevail once everyone tires of opposing the argument. This is why he has re-set the arguments many times and attempts to re-set and re-argue again. Personally, I just go sick of it, so I have been giving him a hard time on it. I know he doesn't like it, but too bad.

Hi,

OK, fair enough comment. However, HighJak just posted a link to Henry's mega nonsense:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/34.../#post29700628

HighJak also correctly disputed one of Henry's bogus Mega-claims here:

You are (legally-speaking) WRONG!

Amanda & Raffaele certainly did have a solid alibi. They both stated they spent the evening together, and the prosecution NEVER proved otherwise!

The prosecution's claim that cell-tower records proved that Amanda was out and about earlier in the evening when she received the text message from Lumumba, that turned out to be provably false.

Even if it were true, that would have been earlier in the evening and irrelevant to their alibi for the time of the murder.

That's ridiculous and further evidence of how deficient your thinking is. I said I'd only participate in a debate if it were moderated so Henry was forced to argue the arguments head on. He then proposed some sort of citation clause which I never declined, just nothing came of the discussion. I'd have no problem sourcing everything I said because it was all from the primary sources for the most part.

Again, that's dumb. All you try to do is "pin down" a ******ed position you've fabricated on your own that you can argue against. My position is very clear on what happened that night and why I believe what I believe. It's all based on the evidence in the case and it's quite simple.

I've never run away from anything, Oski. PR did actually run away and got completely owned when she was not able to even understand what Stefanoni did much less explain or defend it. Anyone unbiased and rational would agree.

Who ya talkin bout?

No, quantity is your schtick Conductor. Choo Choo. I've never reset any arguments, you've just never won one or given the sane people here any reason to believe we've arrived at an erroneous conclusion other than to argue the court found them guilty so we should too. Of course that's no longer available to you.

Unlike you, HighJak seems to be well informed and I've reviewed many of his postings and found them to be accurate and well formed arguments.

If you have one of HighJak's postings in particular you disagree with, then repost it and let's all have a 2nd look at it.

However, even if you can find a posting or two of his that may contain factual errors or faulty reasoning, that wouldn't negate the bulk of his postings which have been on point and accurate.

Oski What is the difference between "improperly analyzed" and "overturning" evidence?

Well... Knox and Sollecito both have criminal defamation trials coming up in Italy in the next couple of months, for claims made in their books. Those charges may just be 'made to go away', like the charges against Francesco Sollecito for leaking pictures of Meredith's body to Telenorba (the Sollecitos got the case moved down to Bari, their hometown, where their friendly local prosecutor, already on notice for dismissal due to proven corruption, just said the charges didn't exist)... or you might see the politics of the Italian judiciary in play in another way: straight judges who don't like what happened in Marasca's court showing they're not in the same racket...

So there's that.