Really? Any evidence of this? How exactly has he tried to manipulate the case? Which witnesses did he corrupt? What happened as a result?
Innocent people can and do lie.
;-)
Volturno also ran wiretaps on the Sollecito family. The outcome of those was recordings of a plan to cover up and mislead the investigation into Meredith's murder. There were efforts made to pressure politicians to intervene.[1] The recordings also revealed a plan by the Sollecito family to interfere with the investigation by enlisting the broadcaster Telenorba and the newspaper Panorama to leak evidence including images of Meredith's naked body. The Sollecito family would eventually be charged related to these acts but after successfully arguing for a change of venue to Bari the Bari prosecutor refused to proceed. The Sollecito's would later be implicated in another allegation of interference when Prison Informants stated that they were paid by Sollecito's family to lie at trial and cause confusion.
the question was, was that believable? I wondered if the poster thought no shower had taken place and Knox lied about taking one,
There are those on the prosecution side of course, who consider that she never took a shower but that she only said that as a reason for why she had to go back to the house, for the early morning clean-up. AK and RS were due to go early morning that day but for some reason didn't (I wonder why?).
Show me one site that you have looked at that believe them to be guilty that you cannot level the exact same or at least very similar criticism at.
The accusation of bias/ lack of objectivity here is a misleading one- because effectively you dismiss anyone (even a multitude of independent forensic experts, criminal investigative experts, legal experts, PR press experts etc) if they have come to the conclusion that they are innocent.
The main thing to note is that these independent experts have only come to their conclusions AFTER looking at the case in detail.
They are actively trying to point out the multitude of errors from the guilters that perpetuate the quite preposterous number of mis-truths that are out there. They deal in facts. How you interpret them is up to you.
It would be more bizarre surely if a load of independent experts, looked at all the facts, come to the conclusion there is zero evidence that points to AK and RS. and then people expect them to say otherwise or to pretend they do not have an opinion one way or another based on their years of experience?
That would be the far more ridiculous thing to expect. They have their opinion sure, but they still deal in facts (and not conjecture/ speculation) so then you can then form your own opinion.
This is the major difference compared to the 'pro guilt' site that has been linked so many times on here. I still read that one in great detail too though I hasten to add.
Unless and/or until all these independant experts stand up in Court and have their theories tested by both defense and prosecution, then it just boils down to them just being opinions really.
If any or all of these experts can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the conviction is unsafe and their evidence is the one piece of the jigsaw that can prove it - why haven't they?
Sorry but this is total nonsense. You stated it as a fact, which is quite frankly laughable.
I too have seen experts state their belief that it was a lone assailant. Medical and forensic experts have found evidence of just one person's DNA, not 3, both on and indeed inside Meredith. Guess who that person was? Oh yeah, Rudy Guede
the question was, was that believable? I wondered if the poster thought no shower had taken place and Knox lied about taking one, or if he believed there was a shower and that Knox lied about seeing the blood or that she knew full well there was blood because she had just been involved in the first of its kind group murder committed by three people, two of whom had never met before, and decided to use the mat anyway and then not bother to clean or destroy the mat but instead tell everyone she had used the mat? Or if Knox, having just taken a shower, then saw the mat and the blood thereon and decided to use it anyway, probably taking care not to stand on the bloody bit?
I think the last of these scenarios the most believable. How about you?
I don't know.
I only know what I would do - and that is if I got out of a shower and saw a mat with blood stains on that I rightly or wrongly assumed to be menstrual - I wouldn't be standing on it. Anywhere.
There are those on the prosecution side of course, who consider that she never took a shower but that she only said that as a reason for why she had to go back to the house, for the early morning clean-up. AK and RS were due to go early morning that day but for some reason didn't (I wonder why?).
Who are these people on the prosecution side of which you speak?
Prosecutors?
Police?
Erstwhile members of the true justice sites?
I don't think the actual court proceedings ever ran the no shower case and the clean up argument was pretty much abandoned wasn't it?
Unless and/or until all these independant experts stand up in Court and have their theories tested by both defense and prosecution, then it just boils down to them just being opinions really.
I totally agree. Informed, expert opinion I hasten to add.
If any or all of these experts can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the conviction is unsafe and their evidence is the one piece of the jigsaw that can prove it - why haven't they?
A very good question and one I fully suspect AK and RS's legal teams will be looking into.
It's my opinion that the evidence (or rather lack of) is SO flimsy that there is no way on earth that the US will let her be extradited. No way.
IF this goes to the next stage I fully expect a hell of a lot more to be made of the absolute shambles of a prosecution/ lack of motive/ lack of any tangible evidence/ media manipulation/ lies and mis-truths that the general public still to this day clearly lap up for some reason etc etc...
To answer your question- You only have to look at the case of the West Memphis 3 (or others), to see that even when the facts don't add up, and even when it looks like a totally unsafe conviction, where more and more people and indeed independent experts start to question the validity of a conviction/ guilty verdict lack of evidence/ proper police procedure etc, it can take an awfully long time in fact years and years for this to be accurately and properly represented in a court of law.
I don't know.
I only know what I would do - and that is if I got out of a shower and saw a mat with blood stains on that I rightly or wrongly assumed to be menstrual - I wouldn't be standing on it. Anywhere.
you don't know which scenario you find the most believable? Or you can't judge it because you are so sure that you wouldn't act in such a way that you cannot step outside your own standards of behaviour?
There are those on the prosecution side of course, who consider that she never took a shower but that she only said that as a reason for why she had to go back to the house, for the early morning clean-up. AK and RS were due to go early morning that day but for some reason didn't (I wonder why?).
They were planning to go somewhere 25 miles away. Why would that require them to leave early morning?
Volturno also ran wiretaps on the Sollecito family. The outcome of those was recordings of a plan to cover up and mislead the investigation into Meredith's murder. There were efforts made to pressure politicians to intervene.[1] The recordings also revealed a plan by the Sollecito family to interfere with the investigation by enlisting the broadcaster Telenorba and the newspaper Panorama to leak evidence including images of Meredith's naked body. The Sollecito family would eventually be charged related to these acts but after successfully arguing for a change of venue to Bari the Bari prosecutor refused to proceed. The Sollecito's would later be implicated in another allegation of interference when Prison Informants stated that they were paid by Sollecito's family to lie at trial and cause confusion.
gosh, well done Bari then I say.
Sounds like Sollecito was trying to do a bit of trial by media. A bit like the tactics of the police and Mignini prior to the trial, the difference being that Mignini released misinformation and lies to bolster his case. Also 6 months of this time his son was kept in solitary confinement lets remember.
So much of this is totally wrong, yet still you continue with it. I think it's apparent now that no matter what evidence or indeed lack of is placed before you, your mind is set.
The misinformation and inaccuracies above though are dangerous because other people less familiar with the case may actually start to believe you know what you're talking about.
I would be interested to know which of my points you take exception to? I was clear in saying the evidence on those points was enough to make me call guilty.
I appreciate there are other views on those points and I said that.
I know what I'm talking about, I've read it all. You might not agree and that's fine, but don't rubbish what I have to say.
And there's no point in constantly saying that AK and RS didn't constantly lie because we know from their statements that they did.
The most recent lie, from RS was on the Radio 4 programme last night where he was interviewed by the presenter and said categorically that the DNA found on the clasp was not his and Meredith's DNA on the knife in his kitchen was not hers.
Volturno also ran wiretaps on the Sollecito family. The outcome of those was recordings of a plan to cover up and mislead the investigation into Meredith's murder. There were efforts made to pressure politicians to intervene.[1] The recordings also revealed a plan by the Sollecito family to interfere with the investigation by enlisting the broadcaster Telenorba and the newspaper Panorama to leak evidence including images of Meredith's naked body. The Sollecito family would eventually be charged related to these acts but after successfully arguing for a change of venue to Bari the Bari prosecutor refused to proceed. The Sollecito's would later be implicated in another allegation of interference when Prison Informants stated that they were paid by Sollecito's family to lie at trial and cause confusion.
I think it was a full on video, except Meredith's eyes had tape over them to preserve her dignity.
When you've got a killer for a son, I suppose anything's justified, but you start to understand where the motivation for the attack on the poor girl originated, rather than the "we were just sitting around smoking pot" crap which is Sollecito's umpteenth attempt to explain away his crimes.
I don't know.
I only know what I would do - and that is if I got out of a shower and saw a mat with blood stains on that I rightly or wrongly assumed to be menstrual - I wouldn't be standing on it. Anywhere.
I'm with you there. I think it was also Knox who discovered the toilet full of stools? Now call me picky, but if I lived in a shared house and came across this I'd think 'eww dirty pig' and flush it!
I'm with you there. I think it was also Knox who discovered the toilet full of stools? Now call me picky, but if I lived in a shared house and came across this I'd think 'eww dirty pig' and flush it!
I'd have thought being picky was why she left them there to be found by the cops. Her own, she would have flushed.
The most recent lie, from RS was on the Radio 4 programme last night where he was interviewed by the presenter and said categorically that the DNA found on the clasp was not his and Meredith's DNA on the knife in his kitchen was not hers.
did the police ever investigate that RS's plumbing failure was genuine and there was a leak?
I think I recall that RS's father stated that, in his early evening telephone call to RS it was mentioned that they'd had dinner and now had a kitchen leak.
Then RS contradicted even his own father's account by asserting that they had dinner very late.
I would be interested to know which of my points you take exception to? I was clear in saying the evidence on those points was enough to make me call guilty.
I appreciate there are other views on those points and I said that.
I know what I'm talking about, I've read it all. You might not agree and that's fine, but don't rubbish what I have to say.
i would be interested to know if you will respond to my previous post and give us a timeline of events which you say or agree with as having happened, using the evidence? I completely understand if you can't, and as I explained I have never seen it clearly set out so I don't expect you to but I believe we were having a discussion which you instigated yet you have chosen to reply to others instead of me.
Re-examination of the DNA found RS profile on the bra clasp and the Nencini Appeal had the knife DNA re-examined and is now convinced that Meredith's DNA was found on the blade.
The appeal transcript has been published for some time. It's possible that RS hasn't bothered to read it though. He insisted in the radio interview that the DNA results were flawed. He lied.
Yes, but they can tell if it's blood. And this wasn't. Forgetting all the arguments about the testing being done by way of LCN and no control samples being kept and being done in a lab which carried out other types of DNA testing which apparently is a no no in the forensics world because of the problems with LCN and all those types of arguments, everyone was agreed that it wasn't blood. As this was supposed to be the murder weapon, shouldn't we have seen DNA from blood?
If the knife had been cleaned then it's probable that it was a skin sample rather than blood. Blood would be easier to wash away but a tiny amount of skin could very easily stick into the grooves of the knife. This is a more likely example of what they detected.
We have to remember that the knife was bagged and sent off at a later date from the rest of the samples. The knife was sent off as a single item to be tested and would have been tested at a later date from the rest of the samples.
Comments
Apart from medical experts of course.
And there's no point in constantly saying that AK and RS didn't constantly lie because we know from their statements that they did.
;-)
Volturno also ran wiretaps on the Sollecito family. The outcome of those was recordings of a plan to cover up and mislead the investigation into Meredith's murder. There were efforts made to pressure politicians to intervene.[1] The recordings also revealed a plan by the Sollecito family to interfere with the investigation by enlisting the broadcaster Telenorba and the newspaper Panorama to leak evidence including images of Meredith's naked body. The Sollecito family would eventually be charged related to these acts but after successfully arguing for a change of venue to Bari the Bari prosecutor refused to proceed. The Sollecito's would later be implicated in another allegation of interference when Prison Informants stated that they were paid by Sollecito's family to lie at trial and cause confusion.
There are those on the prosecution side of course, who consider that she never took a shower but that she only said that as a reason for why she had to go back to the house, for the early morning clean-up. AK and RS were due to go early morning that day but for some reason didn't (I wonder why?).
Unless and/or until all these independant experts stand up in Court and have their theories tested by both defense and prosecution, then it just boils down to them just being opinions really.
If any or all of these experts can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the conviction is unsafe and their evidence is the one piece of the jigsaw that can prove it - why haven't they?
I too have seen experts state their belief that it was a lone assailant. Medical and forensic experts have found evidence of just one person's DNA, not 3, both on and indeed inside Meredith. Guess who that person was? Oh yeah, Rudy Guede
I think your definition of 'constantly' needs some serious looking at. ;-)
I don't know.
I only know what I would do - and that is if I got out of a shower and saw a mat with blood stains on that I rightly or wrongly assumed to be menstrual - I wouldn't be standing on it. Anywhere.
Prosecutors?
Police?
Erstwhile members of the true justice sites?
I don't think the actual court proceedings ever ran the no shower case and the clean up argument was pretty much abandoned wasn't it?
Anyway, what do you think? Shower or no shower?
I totally agree. Informed, expert opinion I hasten to add.
A very good question and one I fully suspect AK and RS's legal teams will be looking into.
It's my opinion that the evidence (or rather lack of) is SO flimsy that there is no way on earth that the US will let her be extradited. No way.
IF this goes to the next stage I fully expect a hell of a lot more to be made of the absolute shambles of a prosecution/ lack of motive/ lack of any tangible evidence/ media manipulation/ lies and mis-truths that the general public still to this day clearly lap up for some reason etc etc...
To answer your question- You only have to look at the case of the West Memphis 3 (or others), to see that even when the facts don't add up, and even when it looks like a totally unsafe conviction, where more and more people and indeed independent experts start to question the validity of a conviction/ guilty verdict lack of evidence/ proper police procedure etc, it can take an awfully long time in fact years and years for this to be accurately and properly represented in a court of law.
They were planning to go somewhere 25 miles away. Why would that require them to leave early morning?
Sounds like Sollecito was trying to do a bit of trial by media. A bit like the tactics of the police and Mignini prior to the trial, the difference being that Mignini released misinformation and lies to bolster his case. Also 6 months of this time his son was kept in solitary confinement lets remember.
don't blame the bari prosecutor for suddenly dropping the case either. Especially in the crisis a good bribe is too good to turn down.
They say that is how Mignini managed to get his prison sentence for his misdeeds during the Monster of Florence case suspended.
I would be interested to know which of my points you take exception to? I was clear in saying the evidence on those points was enough to make me call guilty.
I appreciate there are other views on those points and I said that.
I know what I'm talking about, I've read it all. You might not agree and that's fine, but don't rubbish what I have to say.
The most recent lie, from RS was on the Radio 4 programme last night where he was interviewed by the presenter and said categorically that the DNA found on the clasp was not his and Meredith's DNA on the knife in his kitchen was not hers.
I think it was a full on video, except Meredith's eyes had tape over them to preserve her dignity.
When you've got a killer for a son, I suppose anything's justified, but you start to understand where the motivation for the attack on the poor girl originated, rather than the "we were just sitting around smoking pot" crap which is Sollecito's umpteenth attempt to explain away his crimes.
I'm with you there. I think it was also Knox who discovered the toilet full of stools? Now call me picky, but if I lived in a shared house and came across this I'd think 'eww dirty pig' and flush it!
I'd have thought being picky was why she left them there to be found by the cops. Her own, she would have flushed.
How is this a lie?
I think I recall that RS's father stated that, in his early evening telephone call to RS it was mentioned that they'd had dinner and now had a kitchen leak.
Then RS contradicted even his own father's account by asserting that they had dinner very late.
How about the transcript of the Nencini Appeal?
Re-examination of the DNA found RS profile on the bra clasp and the Nencini Appeal had the knife DNA re-examined and is now convinced that Meredith's DNA was found on the blade.
The appeal transcript has been published for some time. It's possible that RS hasn't bothered to read it though. He insisted in the radio interview that the DNA results were flawed. He lied.
If the knife had been cleaned then it's probable that it was a skin sample rather than blood. Blood would be easier to wash away but a tiny amount of skin could very easily stick into the grooves of the knife. This is a more likely example of what they detected.
We have to remember that the knife was bagged and sent off at a later date from the rest of the samples. The knife was sent off as a single item to be tested and would have been tested at a later date from the rest of the samples.