MovieChat Forums > Amanda Knox (2011) Discussion > She is SO guilty

She is SO guilty

posted 10 years ago by Gabby-4
225 replies | jump to latest

Now they have new footage (timestamped) of someone who looks exactly like the guilty Knoxy-not-Foxy near her Residence when she said she was at The boyfriends house all night! Wearing clothes that look just like what she was wearing. That would blow her alibi and make her a liar for whatever reason.
But, the reason is that she is a murderer - like they said THE one who did the actual killing.....with the help of her then boyfriend. I hope they come get her and drag her back to Italy and then Meredith can rest in peace.

[–] katycharlotte-1 10 years ago

I hope so too - she's absolutely despicable and Italy should insist on her extradition.

[–] Sweetzbelle 10 years ago

How do people still actually believe she is guilty? Do you know any of the facts on this case?
The guilty person is already in jail. His DNA was all over the crime scene- including inside Meredith herself, all over the room she was found in, and his bloody handprint on the wall.
There was no DNA from Amanda Knox in Meredith's room where she was found. How could she have possibly cleaned up all her DNA so perfectly from the crime scene and yet left Guede's DNA still everywhere? Simple- SHE COULDN'T HAVE.
Why do people still honestly believe she's guilty, I am truly confused.

[–] cafea_acidulata2009 10 years ago

I'm with you.

[–] gcarras 9 years ago

I agree.

Amanda Bynes is hot and Lindsay Lohan is not.
Profile pic: Courtney Thorne-Smith.

[–] Corpus_Vile 10 years ago

How do people still actually believe she is guilty?

10,000 pages of evidence
5 samples of Knox's dna mixed with Meredith's blood in three separate areas of the house
Knox's lies
Knox's changing alibis.
Knox's attempting to frame an innocent man who was nice enough to give her a job
Knox placing herself at the scene of the murder.
Lots of things, really.

Do you know any of the facts on this case?

Yes. hence the reason I agree with her convictions.

The guilty person is already in jail. His DNA was all over the crime scene- including inside Meredith herself, all over the room she was found in, and his bloody handprint on the wall.

Crime scene was the whole hosue and no trace of him is found in Romanelli's bedroom where he was supposed to have done the burglary. Knox supporters can't have it both ways.

There was no DNA from Amanda Knox in Meredith's room where she was found. How could she have possibly cleaned up all her DNA so perfectly from the crime scene and yet left Guede's DNA still everywhere?

None of her dna found in her bedroom either. Doesn't mean she didn't sleep the

Simple- SHE COULDN'T HAVE.

Two separate courts of law disagree.

Why do people still honestly believe she's guilty,

See above.

I am truly confused.

I would recommend you read the Massei report, the Hellman report which provisionally overturned Knox's conviction, the Galati appeal which successfully got Hellman's ruling anulled and the Nencini motivational report, and you'll see just how strong the case against Ms Knox is.

"Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!"

[–] Blackjack254 10 years ago

Amanda Knox was ruled Guilty in Rudy Guede's seperate trial in which she was NOT ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN OR BE LEGALLY REPRESENTED. THAT is why she was convicted a second time because the Italian supreme court pretty much ordered it. The Hellman acquittal was throw out because it didn't take Guede's trial into consideration where it became "undisputed truth" that Guede was an accomplice to Amanda and Rafael, even though their lawyers weren't allowed to cross examine him.

Whether she did it or not, that is a MAJOR violation of her rights under both U.S. AND ITALIAN law. If her U.S. Lawyers are aware of that and they show it to the US State department, Italy will get a nice big fat middle finger and a big expose of their corruption to the whole world if they dared to make an extradition request.

How you can make the world a better place:
Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

[–] Corpus_Vile 10 years ago

So? It was a separate fast track trial availed by Guede which Knox herself could have opted for and had she had have done, Guede wouldn't have been represented at her trial either and in fact wasn't represented at her & Raffa's trial anyway. Knox wasn't on trial at Guede's trial, the court merely found out that Guede didn't act alone. She hasn't a hope of selling that one at her appeal as she was already represented fairly at her own trial. Raffa's lawyer Bongiorno recently (and was denied) applied to have Raffa tried separately & had her application had have been successful, Knox wouldn't have been represented there either.

No Hellman's ruling was annulled for it having no basis in logic, reason, scientific fact and being full of "preposterous straw man sophistry" according to the successful Galati appeal.
Nice to see her followers are this time attempting to argue on points of law rather than falsely howling that there's no evidence against her as we're way too late in the game for that now and that phase has been passed already.

No, Knox herself said her trial was fair and her rights were respected and that "American reaction isn't helping me".
And it wasn't a violation of her rights as again it was a separate trial, just as if you were up for robbing a bank with others and had a separate trial, your accomplices would still be named if thbey had have been caught also. No violation here.
The Us Sate Dept's silence on this has been quite telling. I very much doubt if her extradition will be an issue, but we'll just have to wait and see if her conviction is upheld come her final appeal. I predict it will be. I also predict that Italy will request extradition and it won't be an issue for America to grant it either.

And corrupt? Are you saying that the prosecution was corrupt and that there's a conspiracy to railroad both?

"Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!"

[–] sc_taylor 9 years ago

Oh no she's not! She's just been acquitted. Italy's Court of Cassation has comprehensively cancelled the conviction and not even permitted a re-trial.

I always believed her to be innocent. The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor was utterly preposterous. Pure fabrication and conjecture. I am astonished anyone ever believed it.

It's a classic case of trial by media. Character assassination and presumption. What people seem to be forgetting is the standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" - there is so much doubt in this case how can anyone possibly convict? The whole thing is truly appalling. Almost four years in jail for an innocent person.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Prosecution never mooted a sex game gone wrong theory, please provide the verbatim quote where they did.
There was no room for reasonable doubt in this case and you don't know what BARD means. The court which acquitted her broke the law and its procedure to do so, which says it all about the strength of her claims for innocence.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

no murder weapon. not present at the scene of the crime, no motive. equals innocent.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Cassation says unequivocally that Knox was at the crime scene when Mez was murdered which I already posted to you before, causing you to run away.
Still droning the same long refuted bs you cultists droned years ago, I see. Surprise surprise. She wasn't exonerated either regardless of your false babbling otherwise.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

the crime scene is Meredith's room. Amanda was never in that room. actually there is no real proof they were evn in the house but that doesn't matter. Meredith's room is the crime scene. Italy's top criminal court has scathingly faulted prosecutors for presenting a flawed and hastily constructed case against Amanda Knox and her former Italian boyfriend, saying it threw out their convictions for the 2007 murder of her British roommate in part because there was no proof they were in the bedroom where the woman was fatally stabbed. you have Amanada killing Meredith with Meredith in her room and Amanda in some other room. face the truth. she didn't do it. and your usual hysterical raving will not change that.

if anything you are the only person running. running from the truth.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Crime scene was the house, hence the reason the house was sealed off, instead of only Meredith's room. Nobody reasonable is interested in your personal interpretation of a crime scene due to your wishful thinking, or your endless repetition of already long debunked and refuted arguments.

Yet the same investigation done by the same cops and tech team against the black guy was perfectly correct, eh? Or was his investigation flawed too?
Cassation's accusation is yet another example still how their report is a corrupt farce and your racism and double standards for black people is duly noted with a complete lack of surprise, as racism, anti Semitism and homophobia seem par for the course among Knox's fan club.

Yeah she did it, along with her addled ex and Guede. Both courts which convicted used sound logic which you couldn't even dent, never mind debunk in eight years and followed the law. The court which acquitted broke the law, violated their own procedure and engaged in rampant illogicality. That says it all about the strength of your sex killers claims for innocence.
Neither you nor Knox are fooling anyone familiar with this case pete.
I take it you'll be shilling for Heather Mack next? Or is she the wrong colour for you?
And yes, Cassation unequivocally asserts Knox was there when Meredith was murdered, end of story. Regardless of your lies or wishful thinking and again, I've already linked the relevant segment of the report earlier, which you ran away from. Deal with it.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Blackjack254 8 years ago

It's in God's hands now, get on with your life.

How you can make the world a better place:
Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Oh I am, but I'll comment on any board I feel like thanks. Stick me on ignore if you have a problem with that. Amazing how you and pete always respond to my posts and always turn up to comment on this board, while telling others to get on with their life innit?
Oh and I'm not religious btw so your God's hands comment is pretty meaningless to me. That said if there really is a God then I wouldn't like to be either Knox or Sollecito when their time is up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZusf9_Bjx0
Call it a hunch.
Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

if she did it, explain to me how Amanda killed Meredith in Meredith's room when it is a fact Amanada was never in that room.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

It isn't a fact. Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede killed Meredith Kercher. Knox and Sollecito simply got away with it thanks to Knife Boy's dodgy dad. And you're a murderer groupie.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

the court you love so much said she was not in the room. stop ignoring facts and answer the question.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it didn't. Provide the verbatim quote where the court says she wasn't in the room. It merely says she left no biological traces of herself in the actual room. I've already answered as to how Amanda Knox killed Meredith Kercher. You actually said you don't need to bother with the report as you have secondary media reports. There are no words to adequately describe how stupid your statement is. You do a far better job in highlighting the weakness of your argument, simply by posting, than I ever could. You're simply and obtuse immoral murderer groupie.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

answer the question. how did she do if she was never in the room.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

She was in the room.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

bull. your own court says she wasn't. so answer the question.

Because no biological evidence from Knox or Sollecito was found at the house in Perugia where Kercher was murdered, the 52-page opinion said, their "participation" in the killing should have been "excluded
The judges denounced the prosecutors’ argument that there was not more physical evidence linking Knox and Sollecito to the crime because they had selectively cleaned the crime scene as illogical. Such an act would have been impossible, they said.
The high court also wrote that the inability of the investigators to definitively put Knox and Sollecito in the murder room made it impossible to uphold the convictions, even with circumstantial evidence that pointed to their presence in the house where the murder took place.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

A) I'm not Italian so it isn't my court.
B) The court does not state that Knox definitely wasn't in the room, it says she left no biological traces in the room as I've repeatedly told you. Please provide the verbatim quote from the Cassation report where it says that she definitely wasn't in the room, thanks.

Because no biological evidence from Knox or Sollecito was found at the house in Perugia

Stop lying, plenty of biological evidence from both sex killers was indeed found at the house in Perugia, such as Knox's blood mixed with Meredith's in five separate samples in three separate areas of the house, luminol footprints, Sollecito's DNA on the victim's bra clasp in a 17 loci match and him leaving his bloodied footprint on the bathmat.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence#DNA_Evidence

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Luminol_Traces

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Bathmat_Footprint

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Other_DNA_Evidence
You truly are completely and utterly shameless when it comes to flat out lying, I gotta say.

The judges denounced the prosecutors’ argument that there was not more physical evidence linking Knox and Sollecito to the crime because they had selectively cleaned the crime scene as illogical. Such an act would have been impossible, they said.

The prosecution never mentioned a "selective clean up", please provide the verbatim quote from the trial or appellate transcripts where they said that, thanks.

The high court also wrote that the inability of the investigators to definitively put Knox and Sollecito in the murder room made it impossible to uphold the convictions, even with circumstantial evidence that pointed to their presence in the house where the murder took place.

Erm, you're conceding that the court engaged in manifest illogicality and violated Italian law (as being at the crime scene during a murder and not alerting the authorities makes one just as culpable of murder under Italian law) as well as conceding that evidence shows that Knox and Sollecito were there when Meredith was murdered. Honesty at long, long last from you.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Blackjack254 8 years ago

Judge not, lest ye be judged, especially when you don't know the whole story. I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to be Amanda or Raphael when they are welcomed into Heaven.

of course, you don't have to be them. you can get there yourself, easily.

How you can make the world a better place:
Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Sorry your religious ravings mean nothing to me. You're slightly less dishonest than Pete. Do you deny that the supreme court states Knox was there when Meredith was murdered? I'm not asking if you agree with it. Do you acknowledge they say it?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] TheeMortyToad 8 years ago

ISC says she was there, f_ckwad. Take your head out of your ass.

Normal Is A Myth.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

ISC according to news reports say she might have been there. but it also said she had never been in the murder room and that fact alone should have excluded her as a suspect.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

ISC according to its own report says she was absolutely there, there's no might have been about it. You clearly haven't read the report and clearly haven't read the segment I highlighted to you earlier on this board on another thread.
Again the fact that you need to consistently lie to defend your position says it all about its strength and validity. You're a murderer groupie and decidedly creepy immoral weirdo.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

so again, the ISC said she was definately not in Meredith's room. they said that fact alone should have excluded her. these are facts. accept it. she didn't do it.

so again. if Amanda was never in the murder room, how did she murder Meredith.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No they didn't. They said there were no biological traces of her in Meredith's room which is irrelevant and rampantly illogical when the totality of the evidence is examined. Stop lying. Cite the verbatim quote from the Cassation report where it states that Knox was definitely not in Meredith's room. Oh and try go a whole post without lying through your teeth.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

I'm not going to bother with the report. these news reports tell it all.

In March, the high court declared that Ms. Knox, now 28, and Mr. Sollecito, now 31, didn’t murder 21-year-old Ms. Kercher, a stronger exoneration than merely finding there was insufficient evidence to convict. (Fact)

Because no biological evidence from Knox or Sollecito was found at the house in Perugia where Kercher was murdered, the 52-page opinion said, their "participation" in the killing should have been "excluded."(Fact)

The judges said evidence in the case pointed to one suspect: Rudy Guede, a drifter from Ivory Coast, who received a 16-year prison sentence for Kercher’s murder following a fast-track trial in 2008. (Fact)

The judges denounced the prosecutors’ argument that there was not more physical evidence linking Knox and Sollecito to the crime because they had selectively cleaned the crime scene as illogical. Such an act would have been impossible, they said. (Fact)

The high court also wrote that the inability of the investigators to definitively put Knox and Sollecito in the murder room made it impossible to uphold the convictions, even with circumstantial evidence that pointed to their presence in the house where the murder took place.(Fact)

Even the supposed time of death, as argued by prosecutors, reflected a “deplorable approximation,” they wrote.(Fact)

It wrote that it couldn’t be ruled out that Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito might have been elsewhere in the house the night of the murder (Fact) (note might be)

these are the facts. now tell me how Amanda murdered Mereidth without being in the same room with her or shut up.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I'm not going to bother with the report. these news reports tell it all.


No. Your quote says it all.

Now again, provide the verbatim quote from the primary source- the Supreme Court report itself, not the secondary media accounts of it. I already highlighted the segment of the report that stated that Knox was definitely, assuredly, 100% there at the crime scene when Mez was murdered. You ran away from it.

Why don't you simply admit you haven't read the report, pete.
Provide that verbatim quote from the relevant passage, or else your lie is dismissed while being laughed at derisively. Just the same old same old tired repetitive lying bs from you, as always.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

the news reports are accurate. so stop the red herrings and explain how she did it. until you explain that, you have no credibility. Amanda not in the room, perhaps not even in the house. Meredith killed in her room. yet you say Amanda did it. tell me how.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

You don't know what a red herring is.
If the news reports are accurate then you should have no problem highlighting where the actual report they're commenting on says she definitely wasn't in Meredith's room and that she merely "might have been" at the crime scene.
Good luck with that as I've twice now highlighted relevant segments of the Cassation report that unequivocally states that Knox was definitely certainly undoubtedly there when Mez was murdered. This is why you're a murderer groupie as quite frankly nobody could be this obtuse.

She did it. She was helped by Guede and Sollecito (Massei, p371 on multiple attackers), left her blood mixed with Meredith's in five separate samples in three areas of the house, including Romanelli's bedroom where no trace of either girl should be and where no trace of Guede exists. She left a size seven footprint on the pillow under Mez and her footprints where shown in luminol. She lied constantly to the cops, changed her alibi constantly to the cops, revealed information that even the cops didn't know which was supported by forensic evidence and multiple independent witness corroboration. That's not including the phone evidence and computer evidence against them.

Now yet again this is what the supreme court report says:

9.4.1 Paragraph 1 (Page 45):
“…si osserva ora, quanto alla posizione di Amanda Knox, che la sua presenza nell'abitazione, teatro dell'omicidio, è dato conclamato nel processo, alla stregua delle sue stesse ammissioni, contenute anche nel memoriale a sua firma, nella parte in cui riferisce che, trovandosi in cucina, dopo che la giovane inglese ed altra persona si erano appartati nella stanza della stessa Kercher per un rapporto
sessuale, aveva sentito un urlo straziante dell'amica, al punto lacerante ed insostenibile da lasciarsi scivolare, accovacciata a terra, tenendo ben strette le mani alle orecchie per non sentire altro. In proposito, è certamente condivisibile il giudizio diattendibilità espresso dal giudice a quo con riferimento a questa parte della narrazione dell'imputata, sul plausibile riflesso che fu proprio lei ad accennare, per la prima volta, ad un possibile movente sessuale dell'omicidio ed a parlare dell'urlo straziante della vittima, quando ancora gli inquirenti non disponevano degli esiti dell'ispezione cadaverica e degli esami autoptici né delle informazioni testimoniali successivamente raccolte sull'urlo della vittima e sull'ora in cui fu percepito (testi Capezzali Nara, Monacchia Antonella ed altri). Si fa riferimento, in particolare, alle dichiarazioni rese dall'odierna ricorrente il 6.11.2007 (f. 96), nei locali della Polizia di Stato. D'altro canto, le stesse dichiarazioni calunniose nei confronti del Lumumba, che le sono valse la condanna, con statuizione ormai coperta da giudicato, avevano come presupposto del narrato proprio la presenza della giovane statunitense nella casa di via della Pergola, circostanza questa di cui nessuno, in quel momento - all'infuori, come è ovvio, delle altre persone presenti in casa - poteva essere a conoscenza (cit. f. 96).”

(… now we note, regarding Amanda Knox, that her presence in the dwelling, that was the “theatre of the murder”, was proclaimed in the trial process in alignment with her own admissions, including those contained in her signed statement in the part where she states she was in the kitchen, after the young English girl [Meredith] and another person went off to Kercher’s room for sexual intercourse, she heard a harrowing scream from her friend, so piercing and unbearable that she fell down huddled on the floor, holding her hands tightly against her ears so as not to hear more. We do indeed share the previous judge’s [Nencini’s] opinion that this part of the accused’s story is reliable, due to the plausible observation that it was she who first put forward a possible sexual motive for the murder and mentioned the victim’s harrowing scream, at a time when the investigators still didn’t have the results of the examination of the corpse or the autopsy, nor the witness information, which was subsequently gathered, about the victim’s scream and the time it was heard (witnesses Nara Capezzali, Antonella Monacchia and others). We refer here, in particular, to the statements made by the current appellant on 6th November 2007 (page 96) at the police station. Furthermore, the slanderous statements made in relation to Lumumba, that earned her a conviction, the status of which is now res iudicata, were based on the premise that the young American girl was present in the house in via della Pergola, a circumstance which in that moment nobody, apart from, as is obvious, the others present in the house, could have known

You ran away from it before. It says she was definitely there when Meredith was murdered, regardless of your bluster and lies. You truly are a morally barren person.
Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

you find yourself in a corner, you ignore facts, bluster, and insult (or try to do) you're really not very good at it though. but you still haven't answered the basic question. how did she do it.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I've just provided you with judicial facts, you big eejit. That's what the supreme court says after examining the case. You're simply childishly denying that they're saying it and I'm still laughing at you and simultaneously regarding you with contempt for being an immoral white knight weirdo with an unhealthy lust for sex killers.
The Supreme court disagrees with you regarding her being innocent and disagrees with you on Guede. Your tired babbling is utterly pathetic.
How did she do it? She stabbed Meredith, that's how. Plenty of killers leave no biological traces of themselves at the immediate vicinity and the crime scene in general. You're stupid and a sex killer groupie.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Supreme Court of Cassation report p49, paragraph three:

Resta, nondimento, forte il sopetto che egli fosse, realmente, presente nella casa di villa della pergola la notte d'ella omicidio in une moneto, pero' che non e' stato possible determinare.
D'altro canto, certa la prezenza della Knox in quella casa, appare scarsamente credible che eglinon si trovasse con lei

Translation:

Nevertheless there is strong suspicion that he (Sollecito) was, truly, present in the house in villa della pergola on the night of the homicide, however, it is not possible to determine when he was there. On the other hand, since it was certain that Knox was present in that house, it seems scarcely credible that he would not have been there with her.

So again, there's no "might have been there" about it, the report says it was certain she was there. Stop lying pete, does nothing for your nonce. 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

the news reports say may. I trust them more than I trust you. they are more honest this time.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yes I know you think media reports are more accurate than the... actual report. It's one of the many many reasons I constantly laugh at you.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

laugh all you want. I don't think the media reports are more accurate than the actual report. I say the media reports are more accurate than your translation and interpretations.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No as it's from the same translators who translated the Giordano, Massei, Hellman and Nencini reports as well as the Galati appeal, all of which have been accurate.
I laugh at you because you're jaw droppingly thick and a murderer groupie zealot who engages in magical thinking, pathological lying and bluster such as your blustering that the report has been mistranslated. You have never once validated your position in more convos than I care to remember with you.
Your stupidity is without a doubt the worst I've had to endure from Knox's toxic little cult and believe me the competition is fierce, yet you surpass even them in terms of sheer obtuseness and they're particularly dim.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Prosecution never mooted a sex game gone wrong theory, please provide the verbatim quote where they did.

Absolutely, it was the defence that came up with the theory.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

There's no mention of a sex game gone wrong at her trial or appeal. A forced sexual humiliation was mentioned, as was supported by the forensic evidence.

This is a letter from prosecutor Giuliano Mignini to the editor of the Florence Corriere:

To the editor of Florence Corriere

Dear Director,

I am Giuliano Mignini, the magistrate who performed the investigation and trials of first instance and appeal in Perugia against the people accused of the murder of Meredith Kercher, as well as the investigation into the death of Francesco Narducci linked to the one performed by the Florence Prosecution Office in relation to the masterminds of the “Monster of Florence” murders.

I saw reported the interview that the journalist Mario Spezi – a person accused in the Narducci case – did with Amanda Knox, a main defendant in the appeal trial that will start today – published in the Corriere Fiorentino on Sep. 29.

In two recent cases the Court of Cassation has annulled verdicts, which acquitted Knox and Sollecito, and which decided [by Judge Micheli] a dropping of charge against Spezi (the parts regarding ‘lack of certainty about malice’ were annulled too).

Therefore I don’t need to add anything further on that point. Instead, I need to point out the falsehood of an assertion which Mr. Spezi makes at the beginning of his article, as he tries to explain the reason for a link which, in his opinion, allegedly exists between the two cases, the one related to the Monster murders and Narducci’s death, and the one about the Kercher murder.

Mr. Spezi’s text says: “… a strangely similar background, for two different cases, behind which the magistrate thought he could see satanic orgies on the occasion of Halloween for Amanda, and ritual blood sacrifices as a worship to the Devil in the Monster of Florence case…”.

This is an assertion that Mr. Spezi and crime-fiction author Douglas Preston have been repeating for years, but does not find the smallest confirmation in the documentation of the two trials, nor in the scenario put forward by the prosecution in which the Meredith murder (which didn’t happen on Halloween but on the subsequent night) was the consequence of a sex hazing to which Meredith herself did not intend to take part, and, above all, it was the consequence of a climate of hostility which built up progressively between the Coulsdon girl and Amanda because of their different habits, and because of Meredith’s suspicion about alleged money thefts by Knox.

Furthermore the object of the proceedings in the Narducci case is the scenario about the murder of the same Narducci and the attempt, by the doctor’s father and brother, to conceal the cause of his violent death, and this included the background within which the event – which was a homicide in my opinion and in the opinion of my technical consultant, coroner Prof. Giovanni Pierucci of the University of Pavia – had developed and taken place.

I had already denied several time assertions of such kind, but Mr. Spezi and Mr. Preston, and some people connected to them, go on repeating a lie, apparently hoping that it will become true by repeating it.

Another astonishing fact is that, despite that I was the prosecutor in the Kercher trial together with my colleague Manuela Comodi and then subsequently with my colleague Giancarlo Costagliola [at annulled apeal], and despite that I limited myself to formulating judicial requests which were all agreed to by a multitude of judges and confirmed by the Supreme Court, I am still considered as the only one responsible for an accusation against Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito, by twisting its content in various ways.

In the Narducci case, in the same way, I simply limited myself to performing the investigation and requesting the remands to trial, and the trial will have to start again now because the Supreme Court has annulled the dropping of charges [by Judge Micheli] and sent back the trial to another preliminary judge in Perugia.

The purpose – quite overt – of such endlessly repeated lies, is to defame the investigator, picturing him as a magistrate who is following alleged personal obsessions rather than sticking at facts, as instead he is.

The hope that such conscious misrepresentation of reality could bring advantage to the defences (foremost that of Spezi himself) is consistent with a bad habit which has all along flourished in Italy but is now also copied abroad.

Therefore I ask you to please publish my rectification against false and seriously defamatory information.

Kind regards

Giuliano Mignini

The bolded segment is what the prosecution really claimed in court

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

There's no mention of a sex game gone wrong at her trial or appeal.

You are clearly wrong (and wrong to correct the previous poster) according to Mignini himself.

Hazing can fairly and reasonably be considered a 'game'. It is an activity for willing participants where there is a clear goal. Obviously the game (hazing) can certainly go wrong if the participants aren't willing to take part.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No, forcing somebody into being sexually humiliated is not a sex game gone wrong, it's a sexual assault.
Mignini clearly states it was against her will. The fact that you still regard a sexual assault against somebody's will as a "game", that can go wrong because the assault victim isn't consenting to it is extremely disturbing although not very surprising, considering the personalities of many of Knox's supporters.

If you're so correct, then you should have no problem providing the verbatim quote from either her trial or appeal, where the prosecutors mooted a sex game gone wrong, or why this would be relevant anyway considering proof of motive is not required by any court of law.

So are you prepared to provide the verbatim quote or not, seeing as you're so right and I'm "so clearly wrong"?

You really need professional help, if you regard the sexual assault of a young woman culminating in her brutal murder as a "game" that somehow went "wrong" simply because the victim didn't want to be assaulted. Truly disturbing mindset from you.

Provide that verbatim quote, which you should have no trouble highlighting thanks, otherwise your false claim can be comfortably dismissed.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

If you're so correct, then you should have no problem providing the verbatim quote from either her trial or appeal,

We are discussing whether it is reasonable to say that there was a "story of a sex game gone wrong' concocted by the prosecutor". As Mignini is the prosecutor then his words (which you have so kindly provided) will clearly suffice.

According to him it was hazing. Hazing can fairly and reasonably be understood as a game - activities associated with hazing can and have been described as 'hazing games'. A hazing game can reasonably be considered to have 'gone wrong' if someone is forced to participate against their will.

Indeed, the idea that something 'went wrong' can be traced back as far as 9/11/07 in a prosecutor's report.

You really need professional help, if you regard the sexual assault of a young woman culminating in her brutal murder as a "game" that somehow went "wrong" simply because the victim didn't want to be assaulted. Truly disturbing mindset from you.

This is the mindset of the prosecutor. I personally find it unlikely that it was a hazing gone wrong that culminated in this murder.

Provide that verbatim quote, which you should have no trouble highlighting thanks, otherwise your false claim can be comfortably dismissed.

Mignini: the scenario put forward by the prosecution ..... was the consequence of a sex hazing to which Meredith herself did not intend to take part.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No we're not. We're discussing whether the prosecution mooted a sex game gone wrong at their trial or appeal or not. You're asserting that they did. I'm asking you to provide the verbatim quote where the prosecution claimed this. You're showing yourself unwilling or unable to do so.
Mignini doesn't say anything about a sex game gone wrong in that letter and you clearly have reading comprehension issues if you're claiming he does.

Again provide the verbatim quote where the prosecution mooted a sex game gone wrong, or else show some integrity and admit that such a theory was never mooted. I also asked you to explain how motive is relevant when it's not required by law. You've failed to address either of these issues so can you address them by providing the verbatim quote and explaining the relevance or not?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

No we're not. We're discussing whether the prosecution mooted a sex game gone wrong at their trial or appeal or not.

No - you corrected a poster who said there was a "story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor ". You are clearly wrong to correct the poster.

Mignini doesn't say anything about a sex game gone wrong in that letter and you clearly have reading comprehension issues if you're claiming he does.

It is certainly reasonable to conclude that hazing is some form of game and it is obvious that Mignini considers it went wrong - someone was murdered as a result of it according to him.

I also asked you to explain how motive is relevant when it's not required by law.

Why do you ask? I cannot see how this is relevant to the point we are discussing - which is - is it correct to say that the prosecutor concocted a sex game gone wrong theory?

Again provide the verbatim quote where the prosecution mooted a sex game gone wrong,

If you insist-

Mignini - "Probabilmente Amanda, che Rudy cercava sempre di compiacere, lo avrà istigato ad 'ammorbidire' la ragazza inglese ea prepararla per il gioco erotico violento... mentre Amanda si 'dedicava' a Raffaele. E' quando l'azione di Rudy fallisce per l'energica resistenza della vittima che i tre si infuriano e passano all'azione violenta".

Hence a gioco erotico is mooted and according to Mignini went wrong as it turned violent.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No - you corrected a poster who said there was a "story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor ". You are clearly wrong to correct the poster.

No because when the poster said that the prosecutor concocted a story, he doesn't mean he wrote a novel, he means that the prosecution "concocted" this "story" in court to use to convict Knox, as well you know, stop being disingenuous and deliberately obtuse.
That Italian segment you posted isn't from the court transcripts and isn't attributed to Mignini anyway but a second hand Italian media summary of what they reported what happened in the court which convicted Guede.
You're saying this was used against Knox and Mignini certainly didn't say this at Knox's trial.

Please provide the verbatim quote from the Knox/Sollecito court transcripts, Massei or Nencini reports where the prosecution state in court that Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong, thanks. I've asked you this several times now. Are you able to provide the verbatim quote or not?

]It is certainly reasonable to conclude that hazing is some form of game and it is obvious that Mignini considers it went wrong - someone was murdered as a result of it according to him.

No it isn't, when the victim was sexually assaulted against her will rather than being a willing participant in a game, which Mignini makes abundantly clear and again, the fact that I need to actually spell this out to you indicates an extremely disturbing mindset on your part.

Why do you ask? I cannot see how this is relevant to the point we are discussing - which is - is it correct to say that the prosecutor concocted a sex game gone wrong theory?

He didn't concoct such a story, yet again provide the verbatim quote from the trial or appeal where such a theory was cited, thanks. Or again show some honesty and integrity and admit no such theory was mooted.

It's relevant as gravitas appears to be attached to a false claim of a sex game gone wrong theory, when the whole thing is irrelevant anyway as even if such a theory was mooted, which it wasn't, proof of motive is not required by any court of law, so if any prosecution got the motive wrong, it still wouldn't nullify the evidence against a defendant.
So how is it relevant as an issue and do you finally have that verbatim quote from the court, that I've repeatedly and patiently asked you for?

Or do you not? As again the "quote" you provided is not a quote for starters but a media news report and not what I asked for as I asked for the verbatim quote from the trial transcripts of Knox and Sollecito, not a report from the Italian media on Guede's trial, such as you c&p'd from La Nazione.

Quella sera Rudy, Amanda e Raffaele "agiscono sotto l’effetto di sostanze stupefacenti". Entrano nella casa del delitto insieme poco dopo che Meredith era tornata dalla cena con le amiche. Prima, probabilmente, Amanda "l’invidiosa" litiga con Mez. Solo dopo le 21.30, nel canovaccio del delitto tracciato dai pm, iniziano le violenze. "Probabilmente Amanda, che Rudy cercava sempre di compiacere, lo avrà istigato ad ‘ammorbidire’ la ragazza inglese e a prepararla per il gioco erotico violento... mentre Amanda si ‘dedicava’ a Raffaele. E’ quando l’azione di Rudy fallisce per l’energica resistenza della vittima che i tre si infuriano e passano all’azione violenta". Minacce e lesioni "che durano a lungo". Ed eccolo il drammatico film di quei momenti: "Meredith è inginocchiata davanti all’armadio. Rudy le immobilizza il braccio sinistro, tenendo la manica della felpa (dove è stato trovato il suo dna, ndr.) mentre con la destra cerca di violentarla. Sollecito la tiene immobilizzata dall’altra parte (in quel momento le deforma il gancetto del reggiseno dove rimarrà impresso il suo dna). Amanda è di fronte a lei e la punzecchia al collo col coltello da cucina. Meredith tenta di sfuggire e di respingere con la mano destra la lama utilizzata da Amanda, e si ferisce. Sollecito le stringe il braccio destro per bloccarla e questo spiega le ecchimosi. La situazione precipita: Amanda affonda la lama nel collo di Meredith". Mez "getta un ultimo grido disperato". Quello udito da una testimone chiave dell’inchiesta.

Google English:

That evening Rudy, Amanda and Raffaele "acting under the influence of drugs." They enter the house of the crime together shortly after Meredith had returned from dinner with friends. First, probably, Amanda "envious" argues with Mez. Only after 21.30, in the cloth of the crime traced by prosecutors, the violence began. "Probably Amanda, that Rudy was always trying to please, it has instigated to 'soften' the English girl and prepare for the violent erotic game ... while Amanda 'devoted' to Raphael. And 'when the action Rudy fails to the energetic resistance of the victim that the three rage and go to violent action. " Threats and injury "long-lasting". And here it is the dramatic film of those times: "Meredith is kneeling in front of the cabinet. Rudy immobilizes my left arm, holding the sleeve of his sweatshirt (where it was found his DNA, ed.) And with the right tries to rape her. I urge the other side holds immobilized (at that time deforms the bra hook where it will remain imprinted on its DNA). Amanda is in front of her and teases her neck with a kitchen knife. Meredith tries to escape and to reject the right hand the knife used by Amanda, and it hurts. I urge squeezes his right arm to block it, and this explains the bruising. The situation worsened: Amanda sank the knife into the neck of Meredith. " Mez "throws a last cry of despair." That hearing from a key witness investigation.

http://www.lanazione.it/perugia/2008/10/19/126624-guede_carcere_vita.shtml
This isn't attributed to a verbatim quote by Mignini, it's a journalist piece by La Nazione and doesn't say Mignini said that verbatim at Knox's trial as he couldn't have, as that piece was written in 2008 and covers Guede's trial and Knox and Sollecito's trial was in 2009.

Nice try though and nice to see that Knox supporters still need to be as slippery, dishonest and predictable as ever, even with an insufficient evidence and decidedly illegal acquittal for their killer.
Now provide the actual link to the court transcripts where the prosecution stated this verbatim to the court please, not something you've c&p'd from an Italian newspaper outa context, but the link of Mignini's statement to the court at Knox's trial... thanks.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

That Italian segment you posted isn't from the court transcripts and isn't attributed to Mignini anyway but a second hand Italian media summary of what they reported what happened in the court which convicted Guede.

Actually you are wrong. It is attributed to Mignini and it is the closing from the prepared statement.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Giuliano_Mignini's_Closing_Arguments_-_Preliminary_Hearing

The previous statement that you made - "Prosecution never mooted a sex game gone wrong theory" is clearly contradicted by Mignini -

"Probabilmente Amanda, che Rudi cercava sempre di compiacere, avrà istigato Rudi ad "ammorbidire" la ragazza inglese ea prepararla per il "gioco" erotico — violento, come riscontrato a livello medico - legale, a livello genitale, mentre Amanda si “dedicava” a Raffaele."

Further, this proves that sc_taylor is correct to say that the prosecutor mooted this sex game theory.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it isn't as I went over that page twice before originally replying to you with the nazione link and haven't come across the passage. The only thing that matched up was the la nazione article from Guede's trial a year before. Mignini couldn't have said that at Knox's trial as I've already shown you that the article I linked is from 2008 and relates to Guede's trial. Sc Taylor was referring to Knox's trial.
I tell you what - c&p the three paragraphs, the one preceding the quote you attribute to him, the quote itself and the paragraph following it. Whenever you're ready.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Sc Taylor was referring to Knox's trial.

not according to the words used.

"The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor [was utterly preposterous]. "

You argued this to be untrue

However, evidence suggests you are wrong and it is clear that the prosecutor did concoct or moot a sex game gone wrong.

- November 07 report outlines Mignini's (the prosecutor's) ideas as to sexual motivations of Knox and sollecito and that something 'went wrong'.

- Mignini (the prosecutor) in 08 explicitly talks about Knox sollecito and a sex game at trial - that clearly went wrong.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Giuliano_Mignini's_Closing_Arguments_-_Preliminary_Hearing

(try control F and write 'gioco' if you can't find it)

-Mignini's (the prosecutor's) later characterisation of a 'sexual hazing'. A game as far as the perpetrators are concerned .

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

not according to the words used

Erm, read the thread's actual heading. It says she is so guilty, not Guede is so guilty. So yeah according to the words used within the context of the thread's actual subject matter. Again stop being deliberately obtuse as a form of obfuscation, it does nothing for your already lacking in substance argument.
This is not an extract from her trial but for the preliminary hearing. It in no way states that it was a sex game gone wrong involving all parties consenting, it's saying that Knox got Guede to "soften up" Meredith by drawing her into violent sexual activity against her will, which to them was a "game", (which is even put in quotation marks in the text when one uses google translate into English), as they fully intended things to turn violent but to them, the sexual subjugation of a helpless victim was indeed a game.
And again this is at a preliminary hearing, not Knox and Sollecito's trial and appeal, which is what I asked for. You didn't even quote Mignini verbatim as this is what was said:

La notte tra il primo e il due ha una caratteristica: Meredith e Amanda erano sole in casa, per la prima loro convivenza universitaria. Non c’erano i ragazzi italiani al piano di sotto e non c’erano né Filomena Romanelli né Laura Mezzetti. Era la prima, unica notte in cui si poteva trascinare quella ragazza riservata ed innamorata del “fidanzatino” Giacomo Silenzi, oltreché attaccata alla sua famiglia e, soprattutto, alla madre e alle ragazze inglesi che facevano un po’ “mondo a sé”, in un perverso gioco sessuale di gruppo in occasione del quale ci si sarebbe potuti anche impossessare del denaro che Meredith, sempre puntualissima, avrebbe dovuto versare dopo il “ponte”, cioè il successivo lunedì 5 novembre, fermo rimanendo che ciò che spinge i tre ad organizzare il “festino” è una motivazione di tipo sessuale, con verosimili agganci nella fumettistica di cui i tre disponevano»

Again, you quoted a second hand media account of Guede's conviction.

So after being asked several times to back up you and SC taylor's claim, you're still engaging in dishonesty and not providing what you were asked to provide and taking what was actually said completely out of context.

But not as far as the victim is concerned. By your rationale, the murder of Becky Watts was a "sex game gone wrong" as it was certainly a game to her killers due to their depravity but not to the victim. An actual sex game gone wrong is really something like an accidental death via erotic asphyxiation or something. A consensual sex game involving all four that somehow went wrong is certainly not what was cited here and wasn't mentioned at their trial or appeal, which is what matters. Saying it was regarded as a game by the perpetrators doesn't cut it and you're again being deliberately disingenuous. But no surprise there.

So again, your false claim that the prosecution mooted a theory at Knox and Sollecito's trial and appeal that Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong is dismissed, as you've repeatedly failed to provide the evidence to validate your false claim, despite being repeatedly asked to do so.

You've also failed to explain the relevance as yet again proof of motive is not required by any court. So again your claims can be dismissed due to them having no substance or relevance.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Erm, read the thread's actual heading. It says she is so guilty, not Guede is so guilty

Irrelevant. The only statement relevant in this discussion is the statement you claim is untrue.

"The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor [was utterly preposterous]. "

This is not an extract from her trial but for the preliminary hearing.

Now you accept the veracity of this statement and Mignini's authorship (progress). Incidentally, a preliminary hearing can just as well be described as a trial before a trial but if you wish we can agree that these are Mignini's words in court.

It in noi way states that it was a sex game gone wrong involving all parties consenting, it's saying that Knox got Guede to "soften up" Meredith by drawing her into violent sexual activity against her will, which to them was a "game", which is even put in quotation marks in the text, as they fully intended things to turn violent.

It says that the three plan a perverse group sex game (without quotation marks here), inspired by comics (manga?). Here you can accept that Mignini is talking about a sex game, can you not?

gone wrong - to the extent the mooted sex game ended in murder it can be considered to have gone wrong. Or do you think that the 'group' fully intended to murder?

Incidentally, the newspaper has a partial record of what he actually said in court while the link is a full record of what he intended to say. I see little practical difference unless you wish to bring any up.

And again this is at a preliminary hearing, not Knox and Sollecito's trial and appeal, which is what I asked for.

You ask for a lot of irrelevant things presumably in order to shift the goalposts and move the discussion away from what you don't want to talk about.

To remind you - "The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor [was utterly preposterous]. "

your claim that this is untrue is incorrect. You have no alternative but to accept that Mignini talks about a sex game (because he did in court). You have no alternative but to accept that it went wrong (unless you believe that the group intended to murder from the outset). And you have no alternative but to accept that the previous poster was talking about the prosecutor and not any particular trial(because that is what the poster wrote).

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Irrelevant. The only statement relevant in this discussion is the statement you claim is untrue.

No it's very relevant as you quoted a second hand media account of Guede's conviction, not Knox's trial. Guede was tried separately and the subject of this thread is about Knox- "She is SO guilty". Play around all you like at acting stupid but your agenda couldn't be more transparent.

"The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor [was utterly preposterous].

I've already explained to you that that's not what the prosecution mooted anyway and cited the relevant and verbatim passage as opposed to your media accounts of different trials not involving Knox. Where does the prosecution actually say "gone wrong" anyway?
Again your agenda couldn't be more transparent- You wish people to think that the prosecutor was some perv who had fantasies involving sexual games among young people. That's not what the prosecution said at all. Provide the verbatim quote from their trial or appeal where this was said. Still refusing to do so, I see. 
This is just classic and utterly consistent behaviour of Knox's sycophant groupies engaging in smearing to draw attention away from the fact that she's guilty as sin.

No I don't accept the veracity of that statement and your dishonest attempt to claim the prosecution said that "a sex game gone wrong" caused Meredith's death, within the context that you're trying to falsely peddle it off as, is laughed at and derisively dismissed as having no merit.

No it doesn't say that at all, it essentially says that they pack assaulted her as a planned humiliation which is what he meant by hazing in his letter. Yet again I've explained to you what the prosecution meant and yet again cited the verbatim passage and yet again you're talking about a preliminary hearing.
The prosecution was perfectly validated at the hearing before Matteini to state that they suspected that Sollecito was influenced by one of his mangas, as Meredith's murder had similarities to the plot from one of his mangas in particular and she was even posed in a manner similar to a victim in that specific manga. This is nothing new at all wrt murder in general, plenty of nuts have been inspired by films, books etc. See John Lennon's murder and the attempted assassination of Reagan for details. The cops and prosecution weren't being outlandish at all with the manga suspicion, as there was evident reason to suspect this.

Yeah, I believe it was premeditated by Knox and Sollecito to a degree. Whether they meant to murder or sexually assault Meredith is another thing, but I personally suspect they intended to murder her in advance. They switched off their phones at the same time, transported the murder weapon to the crime scene and Meredith was murdered in her bedroom, intimating her killers went directly there. I believe they met up with Guede and brought him along.

I'm not interested in media reports, their coverage on the murder of Meredith Kercher has been atrocious and atrociously inaccurate. It's why I asked for the verbatim quote from the primary sources. You still haven't provided it, you merely engaged in dishonesty and slyness.

No it's not shifting goalposts as again the subject is about Knox and Taylor made his comment referring to her trial, it's actually you who's shifting goalposts by c&p'ng from a news summary regarding a separate trial and then going from that to the preliminary hearing which occurred before Guede's trial. A preliminary hearing is not the same thing as Knox hadn't even gone to trial then. The prosecution never once mooted a sex game gone wrong theory at her trial or appeal nor did they actually moot that theory at their hearing. This is simply the same tired dishonest tactics her fan club always use as they don't have a valid argument for even BARD, never mind innocence. None of you Knox supporters' arguments have stood up to the slightest bit of objective scrutiny in eight years.

No, he didn't talk about a sex game gone wrong, regardless of how many times you continue to falsely repeat it. I'm not interested in your proof by assertion fallacies or repetition, any more than I was interested in pete's.

As Mignini acutely observed in his letter re Spezi and Preston you apparently hope if you keep repeating something it'll stick. It won't. You still haven't explained why you're so hung up on motive anyway when it isn't required by any court as I keep telling you and it keeps not registering with you.

Do you think Amanda is special, is that it? That proof of motive must be required, just for her?

All you lot have is the same smoke and mirrors nonsense you engaged in from the start.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

There is no need to talk of agenda, there is not really any need for you to explain in depth, neither is there need to resort to ad hominems or other various logical fallacies. There is only one issue, which is simple, and the evidence is clear.

Issue - Is the following correct? - "The story of "a sex game gone wrong" [was] concocted by the prosecutor". (this is the idea that you do not agree with).

Evidence - comments from the prosecutor. If you are not satisfied with the reports of what mignini said in court then I am more than willing to use this source -

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Giuliano_Mignini's_Closing_Arguments_-_Preliminary_Hearing

Does Mignini moot Knox sollecito motivations involving a sex game. Yes, twice (once without quotation marks). It is clear that Mignini mooted a sex game because he said so (gioco sessuale) etc.

Does this sex game go wrong? Clearly it went wrong. In Mignini's scenario the instigators game turned into murder - it stopped being a game.

I feel it's really important to stick to the facts. If you are to correct people then you should use facts.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it's not correct for the reasons I clearly outlined. Regardless of your repetitive falsehoods and very deliberate misconstruing as part of your transparent agenda. Point out where Mignini even said at the preliminary hearing verbatim where it was "a sex game gone wrong", quote unquote. You can't as the prosecution never said it. Again regardless of your repeated lie otherwise.
I treat people as I find them. Debate honestly and you'll be treated more respectfully as respect is earned not given out like sweets to a kid. Try to falsely peddle an outline, supported by forensic evidence, of a sexual assault made by the prosecution at a preliminary hearing six days after Meredith's murder as a sex game gone wrong theory mooted at Knox and Sollecito's trial in 2009, when it wasn't even mooted at the 2007 preliminary hearing you tried to pass off as their actual trial and you'll be treated with the scorn, disdain and contempt you deserve, sorry. Stop being dishonest and you won't get called on your dishonesty.
Now yet again can you provide the verbatim quote from her trial or appeal where the prosecution mooted a sex game gone wrong? Yes or no? Or are you gonna bluster in a disingenuous manner some more?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

simply

did Mignini use the words gioco erotica, gioco sessuale (sex game)?

did Mignini say that the victim resisted?

Yes, clearly. The sex game did not work, it went wrong, it failed. In Mignini's scenario this drove the instigators to fury and then to violence.

Clearly - the statement that 'Mignini concocted a sex game gone wrong theory' is correct because it is all written down (in Italian) in that link. Which I assume you accept as a valid record. Thus you are wrong to correct the statement.

Now, I understand this may be difficult for you. Your own personal opinion that the group intended murder from the outset (while interesting) is completely irrelevant to what Mignini himself envisages and thus completely irrelevant to the issue under examination. Remember - what is at issue is what Mignini imagines - not what you imagine.

Mignini mooted a sex game theory gone wrong - he imagined (unlike you) that the instigators thought they could 'soften' the victim up and only became furious when they failed. This, while evident in Italian, is obviously difficult for you to understand because you do not agree with a single word of Mignini's outline - for you it was premeditated murder.

I also understand this may be difficult because you clearly see yourself as something of an expert on the case and seem to have extreme difficulty in accepting that you may be wrong. But demonstrably you are.

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Giuliano_Mignini's_Closing_Arguments_-_Preliminary_Hearing

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Did Mignini say "Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong"?
Yes or no?
Was a sex game gone wrong theory mooted at Knox & Sollecito's trial or appeal? Yes or no?
How did Mignini concoct Meredith's sexual assault? Do tell.

No, your subjective opinion and deliberate misconstruing of what Mignini "envisages" is irrelevant. Just the same tired murderer groupie noise Amanda's kool aid brigade have waffled for years to deflect attention away from the fact that their icon killed Meredith.

No he didn't moot it. Again provide the verbatim quote from their trial or appeal where the term "sex game gone wrong" appears, thanks.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Did Mignini say "Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong"?

Irrelevant. To remind you the statement under discussion is not 'did Mignini say such an such'.

The statement under discussion is - is it correct to say that "a sex game gone wrong theory [was] concocted by the prosecutor". (which you disagree with).

clearly according to the link provided, he explicitly moots 'sex game' and describes how this game failed (see above).

Was a sex game gone wrong theory mooted at Knox & Sollecito's trial or appeal? Yes or no?

Irrelevant. To remind you the statement under discussion is - is it correct to say that "a sex game gone wrong theory [was] concocted by the prosecutor". (which you disagree with).

The scope of this discussion concerns what the prosecutor has said about Knox sollecito - not in any particular trial.

No, your subjective opinion and deliberate misconstruing of what Mignini "envisages" is irrelevant

I don't see how this can be misconstrued or otherwise interpreted. Mignini explicitly moots a sex game and describes how this fails on resistance from the unwilling participation of the victim and the instigators descend into fury, violence and murder and obviously no longer a game.

Perhaps you can see a different interpretation of Mignini's scenario.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it isn't irrelevant. We're talking about what was said and what was not so yet again: Did Mignini say "Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong"?
Yes or no?
Was a sex game gone wrong theory mooted at Knox & Sollecito's trial or appeal? Yes or no?
How did Mignini concoct Meredith's sexual assault? Do tell.
A sex game gone wrong theory wasn't mooted and I've asked you umpteen times to provide the verbatim quote where the term "sex game gone wrong" was used as a motive for Meredith's murder at Knox and Sollecito's trial or appeal.
This should have been very very simple for you to do, if you were so right and I was so wrong. Yet you then try to falsely claim that SC Taylor was talking about Guede's trial, which you try to pass off as Knox and Sollecito's trial, then you try to make out he was talking about the preliminary hearing, which... you try to pass off as Knox and Sollecito's trial. Then you start whinging about ad hominem when called on your dishonesty.

No again it's not irrelevant. Was the phrase "a sex game gone wrong used" as a motive at their trial, appeal or even preliminary hearing? Yes or no?

No, you've just misconstrued it yet again and did so very deliberately yet again. You Knox groupies are incapable of debating honestly. Reason being, you have no argument here.

Your false claim and smearing attempts on the prosecution are dismissed, due to the fact that I've asked you lots of times now to provide the verbatim quote at Knox's trial or appeal- which was what I asked for from the very start btw- and due to your consistent either unwillingness or inability to back up your point.

Again you lot have nothing so try harp on about motive as you know you can't trump the evidence against your sex killer. You people are deeply immoral.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

No it isn't irrelevant. We're talking about what was said and what was not so yet again: Did Mignini say "Meredith was murdered due to a sex game gone wrong"?
Yes or no?

It's obviously very important to keep focus on the issue at hand. Is it correct to say that "the story of a sex game gone wrong' [was] concocted by the prosecutor"?

This is the statement that you challenged.

It is an entirely accurate statement and you have seemingly got confused.

Mignini himself says (in the original of the Italian letter you posted above) " l'uccisione di Meredith (che non avviene nella cosiddetta notte di Halloween, ma la notte successiva) è la risultante di un gioco erotico a cui non intendeva prestarsi la stessa Meredith e,". (The killing was the result of an erotic game that the victim had no intention of participating in and....)

You will notice that the word 'hazing' is absent from the original. Hence, no need for me to point out the obvious (that hazing = game). The obvious is in the original Italian letter - gioco erotica - sex game (not sex hazing).

The above is Mignini's own characterisation of the position in the two trials. Thus, if you are willing to believe the words of Mignini, his position during these two trials is one of a sex game which led to murder because the victim refused to participate. Thus, this game clearly went wrong.

You may not agree that a sex game in which someone ends up murdered can be considered to have gone wrong. You may not agree with the term 'sex game gone wrong' theory as widely reported. However, this term and its understanding has not been contradicted by Mignini. What Mignini is (correctly) complaining about is that his position has been mischaracterised as involving satanic rites.

We also have his words from the preliminary hearing which repeat the words sex game and describe how it went wrong. (discussed already at length here).

No again it's not irrelevant. Was the phrase "a sex game gone wrong used" as a motive at their trial, appeal or even preliminary hearing? Yes or no?

To remind you - the poster said that "the story of a sex game [was] concocted by the prosecutor". it is clear from the record of both the letter and the preliminary hearing that Mignini "concocted" (created, thought up) a story of a sex game gone wrong. The poster did not say "stated", "announced", "said" so I see no reason to look for such a phrase.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

It's obviously very important to keep focus on the issue at hand. Is it correct to say that "the story of a sex game gone wrong' [was] concocted by the prosecutor"?

No it is not. The words "sex game gone wrong" don't appear in any of the transcripts. Nor does the prosecution say anything about a sex game "gone wrong" either.

Here's what I originally said:

image for user Corpus_Vile
by Corpus_Vile
» 2 days ago (Thu Nov 12 2015 12:01:22) Flag ▼ | Edit ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since May 2008
There's no mention of a sex game gone wrong at her trial or appeal. A forced sexual humiliation was mentioned, as was supported by the forensic evidence.

This is a letter from prosecutor Giuliano Mignini to the editor of the Florence Corriere:

I asked you to provide the verbatim quote and you disingenuously c&p'd a second hand media account of Guede's trial and falsely claimed it was a verbatim quote from Mignini at Knox's trial. You then went from Guede's trial to Knox & Sollecito's preliminary hearing which took place a mere six days after Meredith's murder and was solely for the purpose of the prosecution claiming grounds for remanding the defendants into custody. You then took what the prosecutor actually said completely out of context and tried to pass that off as him saying it was "a sex game gone wrong". One thing you supporters have in common with Knox is a distinct lack of self awareness, as if you think anyone objectively reading this exchange can't see your dishonesty for what it is, then you're seriously divorced from reality.

No, I've already provided the translated letter, he says

This is an assertion that Mr. Spezi and crime-fiction author Douglas Preston have been repeating for years, but does not find the smallest confirmation in the documentation of the two trials, nor in the scenario put forward by the prosecution in which the Meredith murder (which didn’t happen on Halloween but on the subsequent night) was the consequence of a sex hazing to which Meredith herself did not intend to take part, and, above all, it was the consequence of a climate of hostility which built up progressively between the Coulsdon girl and Amanda because of their different habits, and because of Meredith’s suspicion about alleged money thefts by Knox.

You completely disregard the part about the climate of hostility and the suspicions over the rent money, focusing instead purely on hazing equating to sex game gone wrong. As I said, your agenda couldn't be more transparent.

No it wasn't "mischaracterised", it was simply more smear tactics by Knox supporters, as no mention of Satanism was ever made at all whatsoever, and again would be irrelevant as yet again proof of motive isn't required by any court.

I said right from the start that no mention of a sex game gone wrong was mooted at their trial and appeal and you have yet to refute this. We're talking about Knox's trial.
You still refuse to provide the sex game gone wrong verbatim quote from her trial or appeal and have failed to even do so at Guede's trial or her preliminary hearing which nobody was talking about anyway, you simply introduced these irrelevancies yourself.

Again, do you think anyone objectively reading our exchange is not going to notice the sheer amount of times you consistently refuse to provide what I'm actually asking for?
Nobody rational is interested in your subjective interpretation of what the prosecution meant at a preliminary hearing or separate trial for a different defendant.
All that's required from you is the verbatim quote of "a sex game gone wrong" at their trial or appeal from the prosecution.
Now. Can you provide this? Or not?
Yes? Or no?

*cue Lyndhen continuing to bluster yet some more about preliminary hearings and what he really thinks the prosecution actually meant* 
Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

image for user Corpus_Vile
by Corpus_Vile
» 2 days ago (Thu Nov 12 2015 12:01:22)

and

I said right from the start that no mention of a sex game gone wrong was mooted at their trial and appeal and you have yet to refute this. We're talking about Knox's trial.

You very clearly didn't. This claim is an evident lie, is it not? I have read elsewhere that you have challenged a poster to show you where you have lied. This instance will suffice.

The discussion starts with your decision to challenge the statement that The story of "a sex game gone wrong" [was] concocted by the prosecutor. That's where I come in you see. I don't agree with you.

On the 12th, you try to change the scope of the discussion to only include what was said at the trials. Evidently, you see that you were mistaken to challenge the poster. because he is right and you are wrong.

The original Italian supplied by Mignini's former colleague is far superior to your translated piece. I think you will agree.

https://m.facebook.com/notes/giustizia-per-i-poliziotti-gruppo-di-lavoro-giuttari-ex-gides/lettera-di-giuliano-mignini-al-direttore-de-il-corriere-fiorentino/230797183742158/

And in it Mignini clearly states that his position at trial was a sex game gone wrong (this is a fair and reasonable paraphrasing of his words, there is no other interpretation). Further, while the term had been widely reported by the time this letter was written he only complains about the satanic connection. Not about 'sex game gone wrong'.

You completely disregard the part about the climate of hostility and the suspicions over the rent money, focusing instead purely on hazing equating to sex game gone wrong.

To remind. The issue is whether sex game gone wrong" [was] concocted by the prosecutor". Hence your attention is drawn to those words in Italian.

Incidentally, there is no need for me to equate game to hazing. Hazing is an invention of your English version. gioco erotica is what Mignini says.

All that's required from you is the verbatim quote of "a sex game gone wrong" at their trial or appeal from the prosecution.

To remind. The issue is - is it correct to say that "The story of "a sex game gone wrong" [was] concocted by the prosecutor?"

Nothing about about trial or appeal, nothing about said, stated, announced the particular words. You are shifting the goalposts and you should stick to the point.

One thing you supporters have in common with Knox is a distinct lack of self awareness, as if you think anyone objectively reading this exchange can't see your dishonesty for what it is, then you're seriously divorced from reality.

I am fully aware that both sides of the debate are dishonest and divorced from reality. I very rarely engage in debate on this case and only on points of fact. ie the last time I posted was to point out that Knox does not deserve compensation. I'm also aware that the Knox 'camp' have an inaccurate translation of the ISC report which 'exonerates' her, which is clearly untrue. I also have some sympathy for Mignini. If one lies to the police one can expect trouble and he was only doing his job. However, I am also aware that the 'guilters' are also prone to lying, rewriting history and making things up - which is why we are having this discussion.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Erm, you haven't linked any text, simply my username. Again, read the subject matter of the thread. Do you think that anyone objectively reading SC Taylor's comment is going to equate it with Guede's trial or Knox and Sollecito's preliminary hearing a full two years before their trial? Seriously? Do you really think that Meredith's sexual assault supported by the forensic evidence was "concocted"? Do you really think you're not coming across as giving a purely agenda based argument with no substance to it at all, whatsoever?
You falsely accuse me of lying after brazenly and deliberately falsely attributing a second hand Italian media account of a separate defendant's trial as a verbatim quote by Mignini at Knox's trial a year later, so I can comfortably dismiss that.
I haven't lied at all. I said there was no mention of a sex game gone wrong theory in court which is true as you haven't been able to provide that verbatim phrase, even at Guede's trial or Knox and Sollecito's preliminary hearing. I also clearly meant mentioned court within the context of Knox's trial as well you know as again, read the thread's heading. "She is SO guilty". Guilt is not determined at a preliminary hearing but at a trial.
You have consistently refused to provide what was asked and your dishonesty and pathetic smoke and mirror tactics are plain for anyone objectively reading this exchange to see.
Mignini's letter at no point mentions "a sex game gone wrong", quote unquote.
Mignini at no point mentions "a sex game gone wrong" quote unquote at her trial.
Mignini at no point mentions "a sex game gone wrong" quote unquote at her preliminary hearing.

You went off on a different tangent bringing up Guede's trial and a preliminary hearing not me, so don't accuse me of dishonesty as you've already shown psychological projecting by falsely accusing me of moving the goalposts.

Now you have consistently refused to provide the verbatim quote for a sex game gone wrong. if the phrase was used, you would have rubbed my nose in it and quoted the verbatim phrase several times over. You're unable to do this because it was never mooted and the phrase never used.
Your false claim is therefore dismissed while being laughed at derisively.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Anyway to sum up

"the story of a sex game gone wrong' [was] concocted by the prosecutor"

A correct statement.

The story of a sex game gone wrong is described in the following -

https://m.facebook.com/notes/giustizia-per-i-poliziotti-gruppo-di-lavoro-giuttari-ex-gides/lettera-di-giuliano-mignini-al-direttore-de-il-corriere-fiorentino/230797183742158/

gioco erotica - not sexual hazing

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Giuliano_Mignini's_Closing_Arguments_-_Preliminary_Hearing

Both with and without quotation marks. What Mignini intended to say.

http://www.lanazione.it/perugia/2008/10/19/126624-guede_carcere_vita.shtml

quotes what Mignini actually said at the preliminary hearing

and if you really do insist - from the transcript of the first trial

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/20-Nov-2009-Mignini-notes-for-closing-arguments.pdf

the word gioco is used a number of times and without quotation marks.

On a number of occasions you have not accepted the term sex game because it has either appeared as 'hazing' in English or in quotation marks. With the wealth of references to sex game I hope you can now agree that Mignini is outlining a story about a sex game.

The sex game went wrong in that the result was murder. Mignini outlines this, eg how they became angry and incensed.

If you disagree that the sex game went wrong then you will have to prove that the intended outcome of the sex game was murder. ie it was a sex game gone right.

Lastly, the poster quoted above makes no claim that Mignini used the exact words "the story of a sex game gone wrong". It is therefore irrelevant to demand such words.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Anyway to sum up. No theory of a sex game gone wrong was ever mooted at Knox's trial, appeal or the preliminary hearing and your false claims have been thoroughly debunked due to your inability to provide the verbatim quote where the phrase sex game gone wrong is said
You have also failed to explain how Meredith's sexual assault was concocted.
You do realise that Guede was convicted, meaning that the court accepted the prosecution argument including what you falsely claim is a concocted theory of a sex game gone wrong, right?
And you also realise that Patrick Lumumba was at that preliminary hearing right? As in the guy Knox falsely accused of rape and murder and left him in prison for two weeks?

Nobody objective is interested in your link to a site set up by Amanda Knox's stepfather, particularly as it constantly attacks the Kerchers. Your link is dismissed as it's a hate site.

Um, you transport a knife to a crime scene where a murder then occurs and transport it to subjugate an unwilling victim to a sexual assault and you better believe you'll go on trial for murder. Knox isn't special. She doesn't get the burden of proof bar raised higher for her.

You're a murderer groupie. And I was on to your dishonest smoke and mirrors bs right from the start.
And your decidedly false claim is still contemptuously dismissed.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Nobody objective is interested in your link to a site set up by Amanda Knox's stepfather, particularly as it constantly attacks the Kerchers. Your link is dismissed as it's a hate site.

this is a photocopied transcript of the trial which includes the gioco sessuale and how it led to murder. (pp 91 and 106)

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads//Documents/OCR/2009-Nov-20-Closing-arguments-Mignini-OCR.pdf

i'm afraid you'll have to accept the veracity of this document.

Edit - I'm terribly sorry - here's the exact same document from your favoured site - Should it be dismissed as a hate site??
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/docupl/spublic/filelibrary2/trials/knoxsol/massei/2009-11-20-Testimony-MC-Closing-arguments-Mignini.pdf

You're not doing very well are you.

Um, you transport a knife to a crime scene where a murder then occurs and transport it to subjugate an unwilling victim to a sexual assault and you better believe you'll go on trial for murder. Knox isn't special. She doesn't get the burden of proof bar raised higher for her.

I understand that you personally believe that the murder was premeditated - That the sex game's intention was murder and nothing went wrong.

Unfortunately, your personal beliefs are not the subject of debate. Mignini's scenario is our concern. Where does he say that the sex game's intention was murder and nothing went wrong?

I would address your other points but they are irrelevant to the issue under discussion - is it correct to say that a sex game gone wrong was concocted by the prosecutor.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

However, I am also aware that the 'guilters' are also prone to lying, rewriting history and making things up - which is why we are having this discussion.

I see by your nonsensical use of a creepy and decidedly cultish lexicon of "guilter" that you're a true Amandafan btw.
I don't need to lie as the truth is on my side via the court transcripts and judges motivational and sentencing reports.
The fact that you needed to engage in willful dishonesty and sly (albeit easily exposed) tactics such as falsely attributing media accounts of different trials to verbatim quotes from Knox's, says it all about the strength of your argument for innocence, when even with an illogical and illegal acquittal for your little nonce, you still need to lie and engage in smoke and mirrors bs.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

any particular reason for you to reply with this second post?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Forgot to mention it the first time. Hope you don't mind. Oh and I'll also add your link to a Knox supporter site set up by her stepfather after you earlier admitted that their translations were false. 
And your false claim and pathetic attempts at smearing the prosecution to deflect attention away from the overwhelming evidence of your nonce's guilt is still dismissed and laughed at regardless of how many times you engage in your proof by assertion fallacy and childish repetition, two factors which support the general consensus that Knox supporters are akin to a cult btw.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I accept that the words sex game gone wrong do not appear in the transcripts yes. I believe the term sex game gone wrong was used by SC taylor.
You have yet to explain how the prosecution's argument re the sexual elements of Meredith's murder was "concocted", considering that Guede was convicted and Knox and Sollecito were convicted by the Massei court, meaning that both the Micheli and Massei courts and juries accepted the prosecution's argument, which wasn't a sex game gone wrong anyway, despite your desperate bluster otherwise.

You're viewing the prosecution's argument regarding the specific sexual elements of Meredith's murder, in a vacuum, again completely ignoring the context they used and the fact that they said "above all else", Meredith's murder was due to a climate of hostility that had existed between the girls due to Knox's habits and suspicions of money thefts by her. You're grasping at straws here and it's plain for anyone objectively reading to see.

No, it couldn't be deemed a hate site as that site doesn't attack the Kercher family and Patrick Lumumba constantly as the Knox supporting site you linked does, nor do its editors post offensive pictures to the Kercher family on twitter as well as stalk them relentlessly. Nor does it engage in racism and anti Semitism such as the posters on IIP do.

Nor do I see the term "sex game gone wrong" mentioned in it.

You're not doing very well are you.

Yet more psychological projection from the Cult of Knox. This coming from the guy who still hasn't provided the verbatim quote of "a sex game gone wrong", despite being asked, invited and outright challenged to umpteen times. Your lack of self awareness is hilarious.

I understand you think a sexual assault against a victim's will is somehow a "game" that simply got out of hand, culminating in her brutal murder with multiple stab wounds and other injuries, causing her to suffer for an estimated 15 minutes. As I said, your mindset is simultaneously extremely disturbing and extremely unsurprising, as it's par for the course with Knox's disciples anyway as the repugnant attacks on a murder victim and her family from Knox supporters can attest to.
However, as I helpfully pointed out to you earlier, nobody rational is interested in your subjective interpretation of what you personally think the prosecution really meant with their argument, but only if you can provide the verbatim quote of SC Taylor's comment regarding the prosecution mooting a theory of "a sex game gone wrong", quote unquote, at their trial or appeal and you've consistently failed to do so.

It's irrelevant if I personally suspect premeditation based on the available data and evidence. What's relevant is, if transporting a weapon to a future murder site will result in you going on trial for murder, and it will as Knox and Sollecito weren't on trial for manslaughter, but sexually aggravated murder, and the transportation of the knife, although the intention was disagreed upon by the court, was one of the factors which the prosecution argued.
You seem to think that transporting a knife to another location to subjugate the victim to a sexual assault against her will, somehow equates to a game which somehow dissipates the responsibility of the perpetrators. It doesn't as if you bring a weapon to what you know will be a confrontation, you accept that this could lead to harm or violence by virtue of the fact that a weapon is present.
Regardless of how you personally see things, courts would not agree with your mindset and again your psychology is quite disturbing.

No, the subject is whether or not the verbatim quote of "a sex game gone wrong" was used. Your personal belief is not the subject of the debate and irrelevant to the matter. All that matters is, if the words sex game gone wrong was used or not, as I'm going by what sc taylor said and what the prosecution said, not what you think they said or believe they meant.

So y'know, can you provide that verbatim quote where the exact phrase "a sex game gone wrong" appears at their trial or appeal?
And can you elaborate on how the prosecution concocted Meredith's sexual assault considering the convictions of Guede and first instance second level convictions of Knox and Sollecito?
Or not?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Yet more psychological projection from the Cult of Knox.

I'm terribly sorry but no. It's just a fact - you are not doing very well.

for example -

Corpus Vile: There's no mention of a sex game gone wrong at her trial or appeal. A forced sexual humiliation was mentioned, as was supported by the forensic evidence.

Yet in the transcript, which I now see you accept as legitimate (yet more progress). it specifically says - gioco sessuale - Sexual game.

Corpus Vile: This (il gioco erotico violento) isn't attributed to a verbatim quote by Mignini, it's a journalist piece by La Nazione.

Oh but I'm afraid it is attributed to him. He even wrote a document using those exact words before the hearing.

Corpus Vile: "game", (which is even put in quotation marks in the text when one uses google translate into English),

There are plenty of gioco without quotation marks.

You try to deny Mignini used the word Gioco yet the evidence is clearly there. You are clearly wrong.

I understand you think a sexual assault against a victim's will is somehow a "game" that simply got out of hand, culminating in her brutal murder with multiple stab wounds and other injuries, causing her to suffer for an estimated 15 minutes

No. This is Mignini's position (though probably slightly mischaracterised). It's in the trial transcript and other documents.

It's irrelevant if I personally suspect premeditation based on the available data and evidence. What's relevant is, if transporting a weapon to a future murder site will result in you going on trial for murder, and it will as Knox and Sollecito weren't on trial for manslaughter, but sexually aggravated murder, and the transportation of the knife, although the intention was disagreed upon by the court, was one of the factors which the prosecution argued.

Where does Mignini say the intention of the sex game was murder? Where does he describe a sex game gone right?

All that matters is, if the words sex game gone wrong was used or not,

If the issue was - Mignini used the words 'sex game gone wrong' that would be correct. However, to remind you - the issue is - did Mignini concoct the story of a sex game gone wrong.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

There is no mention of "a sex game gone wrong" at their trial or appeal- provide the verbatim quote.

Corpus Vile: There's no mention of a sex game gone wrong at her trial or appeal. A forced sexual humiliation was mentioned, as was supported by the forensic evidence.

Yet in the transcript, which I now see you accept as legitimate (yet more progress). it specifically says - gioco sessuale - Sexual game.

But not "sex game gone wrong" which is what SC taylor said and which was the verbatim quote I asked for, which isn't registering with you and which you still haven't provided.

Corpus Vile: This (il gioco erotico violento) isn't attributed to a verbatim quote by Mignini, it's a journalist piece by La Nazione.

Oh but I'm afraid it is attributed to him. He even wrote a document using those exact words before the hearing.

I didn't ask for second hand media accounts of separate trials or preliminary hearings two years before trials, I asked for the verbatim quote where the prosecution used the words "a sex game gone wrong".
Which you still haven't provided.

No I didn't, I denied he used the term "a sex game gone wrong" and asked you repeatedly to provide the verbatim quote where he says this.
Which you still haven't provided.

No. This is Mignini's position (though probably slightly mischaracterised).

No it isn't. Provide the verbatim quote where he says "a sex game gone wrong".

It's in the trial transcript and other documents.

No it isn't. Provide the verbatim quote where the documents and transcripts say "a sex game gone wrong".

Where does Mignini say the intention of the sex game was murder? Where does he describe a sex game gone right?

Where does he describe verbatim "a sex game gone wrong"? Can you provide this quote or not?

If the issue was - Mignini used the words 'sex game gone wrong' that would be correct.

That was the issue and is indeed correct. Honesty at long long last from you finally.

However, to remind you - the issue is - did Mignini concoct the story of a sex game gone wrong.

And he didn't as he never uses the phrase sex game gone wrong. Guede was convicted as were Knox and Sollecito at their trial and second level appeal meaning the courts and juries accepted his arguments, meaning he concocted nothing.

Your final concession is noted and accepted.


Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

A forced sexual humiliation was mentioned, as was supported by the forensic evidence.

No . A forced sexual humiliation was not mentioned. Please provide the quote, or again here I will have to conclude you are simply wrong.

I think you'll find a sex game was not only mentioned, it was explicitly stated. gioco erotica, gioco sessuale.

It went wrong in Mginini's mind. Unless you can prove that in Mignini's scenario the aim of his mooted (and mentioned) sex game was murder.

To remind the issue - the story of a sex game gone wrong [was] concocted by the prosecutor. Concocted means made up or created not said or announced. verbatim quote irrelevant.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Already did in the letter I posted from Mignini where he mentions a sexual hazing which is a humiliation.

I think you'll find a sex game was not only mentioned, it was explicitly stated. gioco erotica, gioco sessuale.

But we're talking about where "a sex game gone wrong was mooted and I've already explained the context of the prosecution's argument, which the court accepted by virtue of the fact that they convicted the defendants at their first instance trial.
At no point is "a sex game gone wrong" mooted.

It went wrong in Mginini's mind. Unless you can prove that in Mignini's scenario the aim of his mooted (and mentioned) sex game was murder.

Nobody cares about your spurious claim that you can read Mignini's mind. All that matters is what was said.

Here's what SC Taylor said the prosecution said and he even puts "a sex game gone wrong in quotation marks, as if it's a verbatim quote.

by sc_taylor
» Fri Mar 27 2015 15:02:01 Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since January 2000
Post Edited: Fri Mar 27 2015 15:40:42
Oh no she's not! She's just been acquitted. Italy's Court of Cassation has comprehensively cancelled the conviction and not even permitted a re-trial.

I always believed her to be innocent. The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor was utterly preposterous. Pure fabrication and conjecture. I am astonished anyone ever believed it.

It's a classic case of trial by media. Character assassination and presumption. What people seem to be forgetting is the standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" - there is so much doubt in this case how can anyone possibly convict? The whole thing is truly appalling. Almost four years in jail for an innocent person.
Re: She is SO guilty

Then I said:

Prosecution never mooted a sex game gone wrong theory, please provide the verbatim quote where they did

Then you engaged in a load of disingenuous waffle while failing- and still failing- to provide the verbatim quote where "a sex game gone wrong" quote unquote in accordance with SC taylor's actual quotation marks was mooted by the prosecution.

Instead you babble about Guede's trial, preliminary hearings and trying to pass off what you fervently believe the prosecutor really meant as a verbatim quote regarding what he actually said.

As I said, your agenda couldn't be more transparent. But nice to see you finally concede that the prosecution never said it was "a sex game gone wrong".

You have yet to provide anything of substance for how the prosecution's argument
was "concocted", considering the convictions of the defendants, meaning multiple courts and juries accepted the prosecution's argument. Can you try to keep up and stop ignoring what people are actually asking you? Thanks.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Sorry to butt into this 'debate' with the fractious Knoxii, corpus vile, but some clarification is needed. Those comments were indeed made in the closing arguments of the trial of Rudy Guede, not Amanda Knox. And, Mignini did indeed use the terms 'gioco erotico' and 'gioco sessuale' there.

However, (and this is why I refuse to debate with the likes of them) they apply their Anglo-Saxon sensibilities to translate and interpret the Italian, and falsely attribute to Mignini a reasoning he did not intend. Those terms have a much more ample and generic meaning than “sex game”. The phrase though is more common in Italian (and probably Europe) than the corresponding “erotic game” would be in the US. There is a historical/philosophical/mythical understanding of Eros and the concept of the “erotic” is more pronounced, sophisticated and nuanced in Italian and French culture than it is in the US. As an example is the Italian Wiki article on “erotismo”. Compare it to the English one by clicking on “English language version” and you’ll instantly see the difference.

Because of this difference, “gioco erotico” is a term that’s difficult to adequately translate into English, not so much because of lack of terms, but because of the distinct cultural differences in how eroticism is viewed. Mignini doesn’t use ‘gioco di sesso’ but ‘gioco erotico’ as a more ample description, that might entail sex or might not, but that nevertheless involves strong attraction and manipulation. The key aspect here is not that it was necessarily sexual (much less consensual), but that it was violent.

It is within that context that Mignini made his closing arguments, when he was well within his rights to speculate on the motives and psychology of Rudy Guede, Amanda Knox, and Raffaele Sollecito.

It is within that context that Mignini made his closing arguments, when he was well within his rights to speculate on the motives and psychology of Rudy Guede, Amanda Knox, and Raffaele Sollecito.

It is a fact, well referenced to in the evidence, trial, appeal and Supreme Court rulings that Guede sexually assaulted Meredith Kercher in the company of others. The restraining marks and bruises on her body attest to that, plus the size of some bruises indicated a woman’s fingers, not a man’s. The trial and appeal courts convicted all three of sexual assault, and the Supreme Court’s experienced criminal court Section I rightly overturned the venal Hellman appeals court decision and suborned experts Conti and Vecchiotti.

That the Florence Appeal court’s decision was sent to a civil court section V only indicates the influential Sollecitos, in accord with the US State Department on behalf of Amanda Knox, engineered this perverse decision. However, even this court could not enter a finding of innocence, but rather, acquitted them on Art. 530.2 “the case not being proven”.

It is that finding which deserves scrutiny, much as the Amandeerleaders would like to waste time on the evidence or what Mignini said seven years ago.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I know he used the term, but we know that's not what Knox's Kool aid brigade are trying to pass it off as. As I said to Lyndhen, they're trying to pass it off that the prosecutor was some perv caught in the thrall of some sordid fantasy involving a sexual game which somehow went wrong among young people, when Mignini stated that they tried to draw Meredith into a violent perverse sexual game against her will and that "above all else", this culminated from a climate of hostility that was already there between both girls due to disagreement over Knox's habits and suspicions over stolen money.
By Lyndhen's rationale, the murder of Becky Watts could be twisted into "a sex game gone wrong" as the concept of kidnapping and raping young girls was certainly considered akin to a game to her killers if previous text messages between the two are anything to go by.

They were indeed convicted of sexual assault, making the claim that the prosecution "concocted" any sexual element ludicrous.

I basically only interact with these loons in order to provide info for the benefit of impartial readers, as Knox's cult are incapable of debating honestly.


Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

The prosecution IMO treaded very lightly on indications of sexual sadism as the motive for the crime. Judge Micheli seemed to get it, even more so than Judge Massei.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

hahahahahahahahaha, priceless, you actually did it! You actually edited your worthless website in order to win a stupid argument. Magnifico! you change'a di history! you say no no no it dinno no 'appen. seee. I didn'a say eet. looki looki.

Don't you see - your website is supposed to be a reliable and believable source. . Are you not supposed to be trustworthy? But no  because you want to help your leetle fwiend you delete the evidence and brush it under the carpet.

leetle preek.

But of course two can play at this game.

Sorry, to butt into this conversation Lyndhen, but I must admit that Corpus Vile and I are worthless individuals. You see we are obsessed with murder cases especially involving young women and sex (I realise you must find that disturbing). And we are really obsessed with this one and we've learnt so much information. We've read everything there is to know about it and we could like take a degree in it - but what's absolutely awful is that the case is over and we've got absolutely no one to play with. No more fun. Please please play with us, or all our knowledges are lost like tears in the rain.😢

Don't worry manfromatlan-63369. I completely understand and I really do sympathise 😃. But, word of advice, I'd edit your post if I were you, people will laugh at you.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

You are reaching now, aren't you? See the notation it's based on Wiki software? See the "history" button to the right? That lists the edits made so how is it a big secret I tried to 'hide'?. You didn't need to use Way Back 😀

Especially when I thanked you for pointing it out and said I was going to edit it? To better reflect the prosecutor's use of the terms gioco erotico and gioco sessuale and as evidenced by the contextual statements?

Aside from that you seem confused about the term "primary source". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source The Wiki's mission statement isn't a 'primary source', get that? Please quote a primary source where the prosecutor used the term "sex game gone wrong".

Otherwise you're just wasting my time, good bye.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

You still don't get it, do you. You are literally the guy who goes and changes the wikipedia page to win your argument. 

Please quote a primary source where the prosecutor used the term "sex game gone wrong"

Hey, I'll set up my own site and make some crap translation with it in. You actually do do that kind of thing on your site don't you (Mignini's letter) .

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Not at all - I think it's so sweet that you think your friend needs help.

Prosecution never mooted a sex game gone wrong theory, please provide the verbatim quote where they did

Yes, I've always understood your (one and only) argument. But it's nonsense.

Where did sc_taylor say Mignini used those exact words?

Sex game gone wrong is an accurate description of the story that the prosecutor concocted unless the prosecutor considered the intent of the game was murder.

Please both - your ideas.

Edit to add - Vile, your friend is a bit odd with all his babbling (I think you've been using that word;)) about gioco - has he not noticed that gioco sessuale is also used? What's his explanation - sessuale just means attraction not necessarily sexual? By gosh - the Italians must be a confused bunch. Anyway - I look forward to his extraordinarily convincing explanation.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Not at all - I think it's so sweet that you think your friend needs help.

Eh? 

Yes, I've always understood your (one and only) argument. But it's nonsense.

But again nobody cares about what you think the prosecution meant but only what they said.

Where did sc_taylor say Mignini used those exact words?

Now who's talking nonsense? 
He said he used those words when he put "a sex game gone wrong" in quotation marks when claiming that the "story" was concocted by the prosecutor of "a sex game gone wrong". Who else do you think he was quoting? Comodi?

Sex game gone wrong is an accurate description of the story that the prosecutor concocted unless the prosecutor considered the intent of the game was murder.

No it isn't, unless you can find where he said "gone wrong" and unless you disregard what was said about it being against the victim's will and against the backdrop of a climate of hostility and suspicion of theft.
But keep clutching at straws. 
Why don't you address Cassation's report and its discrepancies rather than, as was already observed, burble on about what you really think the prosecution meant seven years ago? Doesn't say much for your Amanda is innocent spiel, if you can't focus on more contemporary issues.

Edit to add - Vile, your friend is a bit odd with all his babbling (I think you've been using that word;)) about gioco - has he not noticed that gioco sessuale is also used? What's his explanation - sessuale just means attraction not necessarily sexual? By gosh - the Italians must be a confused bunch. Anyway - I look forward to his extraordinarily convincing explanation.

Your cognitive dissonance is of less interest to me than your dishonesty, wishful thinking and repetitive proof by assertion fallacy.

The context of the argument by the prosecution has been explained thoroughly to you. Nobody is going to keep repeating themselves simply because you refuse to recognise the context as part of your smoke and mirrors routine.

Oh and whenever you have an explanation for how multiple courts of law accepting the prosecution argument equates to a "story concocted", then I'm all ears. 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Next, ol' Lyndhen will be discussing "satanic theories", LOL.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Actually I discuss the satanic theory and find that Mignini is right to complain - have you read this?

His complaint is outlined in a letter to a newspaper. Incidentally, do you find the original Italian or the translated English to have more credence. CV prefers the latter, do you not find this odd?

Out of interest, would you care to explain how gioco sessuale is not sexual?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

You've already conceded that Mignini didn't say "a sex game gone wrong", whcih is what I had issue with. Dunno why you're still here flogging a dead horse.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Out of interest, would you care to explain how gioco sessuale equates to "sex game gone wrong" when the prosecution clearly states it's against the victim's will an d never says anything about a game gone wrong anyway?
As your argument of "well hey man, she ended up dead, it must have gone wrong!" simply isn't very convincing. Is all.
Was Meredith sexually assaulted?
Was she restrained while being assaulted?
Are you saying that her killers never meant to harm her and were only playing a game which somehow went wrong?
How does bringing a knife to a murder site equate to no harmful intent? Are you saying it's possible to bring a knife to subjugate a victim sexually against her will, while all the while thinking no harm may arise from your actions?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Did I say it wasn't? There you go again ignoring the sexual violence, torture and sadism for which there was ample evidence presented to the court.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

He tried that earlier by saying that the prosecution were "mischaracterised" when they mentioned their suspicions re Sollecito's mangas, and then backed away from the whole manga thing when he realised there were solid grounds for suspicion in this regard. 
Just the same old same old with them. Even with an acquittal they can't give any argument of substance at all whatsoever.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Why don't you address Cassation's report and its discrepancies rather than, as was already observed, burble on about what you really think the prosecution meant seven years ago?

Unfortunately, this is part of the scope of our discussion - simply is it correct to say that the prosecutor concocted the story of a sex game gone wrong.

Doesn't say much for your Amanda is innocent spiel, if you can't focus on more contemporary issues.

Irrelevant. The issue is very simple. The story of a sex game gone wrong was concocted by the prosecutor. Is this an accurate comment?

Yes, of course it is and it shall be remembered as such. Whether this reflects badly on the prosecutor is irrelevant.

To address your other points

Where does concocted mean said the exact words? please answer.

sex game gone wrong is a well known phrase often used to describe such scenarios (google it if you will), repeated many times and never once challenged by Mignini himself.

Concocted means 'made up, invented, created'. If we are to accept your understanding of sc_taylors comment then we will have to accept that Mignini actually invented the phrase 'sex game gone wrong' and this is clearly not true.

I feel that your mistake here is that you rather jumped on sc_taylors comment without thinking or reading it carefully.

Next

1- the prosecutor describes a sex game.
2- The prosecutor describes how the sex game ended in murder.

To the extent that the game ended in murder it can reasonably deemed to have gone wrong.

Unless

- the prosecutor argues the aim of the game was murder - please present evidence of this. ( a game gone right)
- The game was not a game.

Which is it?

I'm afraid I won't deal with the rest of your post because it is irrelevant to the issue at hand - is it correct to say that the story of a sex game gone wrong was concocted

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Unfortunately, this is part of the scope of our discussion

This isn't a discussion, it's you raving that Mignini mooted "a sex game gone wrong" while refusing to provide the verbatim quote of him saying that, before going on to admit he never said that, before now insisting that even if he didn't say it, he really did mean it.
Meanwhile I'm laughing at your desperate wish for others to equate your personal beliefs with what was factually said.

simply is it correct to say that the prosecutor concocted the story of a sex game gone wrong.

No really, it simply isn't as you haven't been able to provide the quote of him saying that and you conceded earlier he never said that, so it's all good.

It's irrelevant that you can't make an argument for your icon's innocence, feeling the need to try and pass of what was said seven years ago at preliminary hearings and separate trials as what was said at Knox's trial, instead, so you don't have to address Cassation's illogicality and violation of their own procedure? Okay.
Again, read the thread's heading, which is about Knox being guilty. Your refusal to address Cassation's discrepancies, (as in the court which acquitted her) preferring to concentrate instead on ultimate irrelevancies such as motive, and what you think the prosecution really meant with their argument which was accepted by multiple courts and juries, is duly noted.

Where does concocted mean said the exact words? pleas[/b]e answer.

Right here, note where he attributes a quote to Mignini:

The story of "a sex game gone wrong" concocted by the prosecutor was utterly preposterous. Pure fabrication and conjecture. I am astonished anyone ever believed it.

I'm going by what he said Mignini said.

Concocted means 'made up, invented, created'. If we are to accept your understanding of sc_taylors comment then we will have to accept that Mignini actually invented the phrase 'sex game gone wrong' and this is clearly not true.

I'm going by the words he took the trouble to post, not my personal spin on his words but the words he used and I know it's clearly not true that Mignini invented or even said those words, hence the reason I called him on it and then laughed repeatedly at your blustering re what you think the prosecution really meant.

I feel that your mistake here is that you rather jumped on sc_taylors comment without thinking or reading it carefully.

Nope, I'm going by what he actually wrote, not what I really believe he meant, and you've again conceded that Mignini didn't say "a sex game gone wrong", so again, it's all good.

1- the prosecutor describ... *rest of boring and already long debunked waffle snipped.*

Nobody cares what you feel the prosecution meant, as has been patiently explained to you, several times now. But only what he said.

is it correct to say that the story of a sex game gone wrong was concocted

No it isn't and you've twice admitted he never said that. Regardless of your repetitive mantra otherwise. You've also yet to explain (still) how a conviction equates to the prosecution argument being "concocted".
You've yet to explain how it was "concocted" considering all three were on trial for sexual assault as well as murder. You've yet to explain your disregarding of the prosecution's argument on above all else the climate of hostility between both girls and money theft suspicions and explain why you're viewing the sexual elements of Meredith's murder in a vacuum and trying to pass this off this equating to "a sex game gone wrong". You've yet to explain why you think motive is so important when it's not required by any court of law. (But hey, why break a trend, eh?)

I take it you're gonna bore oops I mean regale us some more with yet more insistence on what you fervently believe Mignini really meant, and that the prosecutor really did concoct a theory of a "sex game gone wrong" while conceding that he never actually said anything about sex games gone wrong, while we continue laughing at you? 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Menwhile I'm laughing on your desperate wish to equate your personal beliefs with what was factually said.

What was factually said was in Italian so there is obviously a need to paraphrase when conversing in English but I can wholeheartedly assure you that I am not using my personal beliefs when I say the term is a fair and reasonable description of the prosecutors position. The phrase has been used numerous times -

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-21937825
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Mission_Statement

It appears that only you have objections to the use of this phrase to describe the prosecutors position (and possibly your friend), not even Mignini chose to complain about it.

Moot means propose put forward, concoct means make up, create - according to the dictionary. Neither mean 'said' as you would have it and thus a verbatim quote is not needed. Therefore as my consist position has been - the story of a sex game [was] concocted by the prosecutor is an accurate description of the prosecutors position.

The rest of your post seems somewhat irrelevant.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yet again I'm going by what SC Taylor said which was that the prosecutor concoted a theory of a sex game gone wrong and I originally right from the start asked for this verbatim quote.
It's you who focused on the argument of a violent perverse sexual erotic game against the victim's will in a vacuum, while cheerfully disregarding the context and what else was actually said. You also disregarded the fact that the three were also up for sexual assault- sexually aggravated murder.

No I have objections to what SC taylor quoted the prosecutor as saying and I have objections to your argument as you don't have one. You haven't even really made clear what you think the prosecution meant, other than they must have meant a sex game gone wrong because Mez ended up murdered after being sexually assaulted. That's a ridiculous argument so we can comfortably dismiss it.

How was Meredith's sexual assault "concoted"? How was any argument the prosecution made wrt the sexual elements of her murder "concoted", considering Guede's where he belongs at present and Knox and Sollecito were convicted by the Massei court at their trial?

You have yet to explain this.

How is the rest of my post irrelevant considering your argument? How is your argument even relevant when proof of motive isn't required as I've explained to you umpteen times before?

Again your lack of self awareness is stunning. You claim to agree with Cassation's conclusion, yet refuse to discuss Cassation's discrepancies citing it as "irrelevant", but seem to think that ocusing on what was said at separate trials for different defendants and preliminary hearings years ago, somehow has relevance.

This is you lot in a nutshell. You couldn't trump the evidence, you couldn't trump the logic of the courts which convicted and couldn't point out any legal, procedural or systematic errors they may have engaged in. So you focus on smearing such as falsely claiming the prosecution mooted a sex game "gone wrong", or that the forensic specialist lied, or that Mignini was corrupt or whatever other bs you come up with from one day to the next.
Smoke and mirrors nonsense and as I said, your agenda couldn't be more transparent.
You're simply a murderer groupie with no argument here. A morally barren individual who thinks nothing of engaging in dishonesty and irrelevancies in order to defend a callous sex killer and convicted criminal. Knox sure can attract 'em.
Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Yet again I'm going by what SC Taylor said which was that the prosecutor concoted a theory of a sex game gone wrong and I originally right from the start asked for this verbatim quote.

Which is irrelevant. Does concoct mean say?

such as falsely claiming the prosecution mooted a sex game "gone wrong",

The prosecution clearly mooted a sex game gone wrong. Is this website wrong to use that phrase?

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Mission_Statement

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

It's irrelevant that SC Taylor made a false comment as to what the prosecutor said and that I asked him for the verbatim quote to highlight this? Think before you post.

How did Mignini "concoct" a story of "a sex game gone wrong" when he doesn't say this and multiple courts of law and juries accepted the prosecution argument? Can you validate your position in this regard or not?

Yes, the website is wrong to use that phrase as the phrase isn't mentioned.
The prosecution said that Meredith's killers tried to draw her into a perverse violent sexual game against her will, which culminated against a backdrop of a climate of hostility between the two girls over disagreements over Knox's habits and suspicions over money thefts, not that it was "a sex game gone wrong".

Again, your refusal to address the discrepancies of Cassation's ruling- something actually valid and relevant- and preference instead to engage in falsehoods about a sex game gone wrong is duly noted.
Your refusal to explain the relevance of motive is duly noted.
Your refusal to provide the verbatim quote of "a sex game gone wrong" is duly noted.
Your refusal to explain how the sexual, aspects of Meredith's murder were "concocted" is duly noted.
Just the same hot air lacking in substance noise from Amanda's fan club as always.
So once again, your false repetitive burblings are still derisively dismissed.
And wrt the thread's actual subject matter, the OP is correct. She is SO guilty. And you lot have SO failed to make even a plausible case for BARD, never mind innocence, for your callous narcissistic sex killer.
Killers gonna kill, groupies gonna group, and you're a morally bankrupt murderer groupie. Sucks to be you. 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Again, your refusal to address the discrepancies of Cassation's ruling- something actually valid and relevan

Is it valid and relevant? The case is over and is now history. The only relevant thing is that people don't start to rewrite history.

It's irrelevant that SC Taylor made a false comment as to what the prosecutor said and that I asked him for the verbatim quote to highlight this? Think before you pos

I meant the verbatim quote requirement is irrelevant.

Yes, the website is wrong to use that phrase as the phrase isn't mentioned.

Even the website you have on your profile page disagrees with you.

The prosecution said that Meredith's killers tried to draw her into a perverse violent sexual game against her will, which culminated against a backdrop of a climate of hostility between the two girls over disagreements over Knox's habits and suspicions over money thefts, not that it was "a sex game gone wrong".

which culminated in her death.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

your opponent really doesn't know his a from a hole in the ground. but he does know how to defend a position. if I were in a war I'd want to have him in the hole in front of me. no one would get past him. but his insistance that Knox went to the house with the intent to kill Meredith is a new one to me. I hadn't heard that from him before. have fun.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Gosh, if I didn't know any better, I'd say you were giving me a back handed compliment, pete.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Wrt the actual discussion which you feel is relevant enough to take part in, yes it's relevant. A helluva lot more relevant than your focusing on what you think the prosecution meant with their court accepted argument.

No it isn't irrelevant. If somebody makes a claim about what somebody said and takes the trouble to quote what the person claimed was said, in this case, with quotation marks attributed to one of the prosecutors of "a sex game gone wrong", then the verbatim quote is very relevant.

Yes I know it disagrees with me. Just because I think they've done an excellent sterling job making court established facts available to the public via the primary sources on Meredith's case, doesn't mean I have to agree with them re a sex game "gone wrong" being mooted. I can respect a site and appreciate their work while respectfully disagreeing with them on this issue.

So? What's your point? By your rationale any sex murder is a sex game gone wrong as it culminates in a death but is a game to the perpetrator. There is a standard definition to a sex "game", namely it's a sex game when it involves consensual parties. Trying to draw a victim into a perverse violent sexual game against her will- the subjugation of a helpless victim being a game to the depraved killers- isn't objectively a sex game, it's sexual assault, due to there being a non consenting victim involved, making it a sex crime... see how that works? That you can't see this is again, very disturbing to say the very least.

Are you saying that Meredith's killers didn't intend any harm to come to her to justify your "sex game gone wrong" argument? That they subjugated her with knives, restrained her and tortured her without meaning to harm her, not knowing at all that this could lead to her death?
You need your head examined mate.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

concoct doesn't mean say, does it:)?

I see, if someone tells "a shaggy dog story" then it's not a shaggy dog story if there's no shaggy dog in it?

Romeo and Juliet isn't a story of "doomed love" because Shakespeare didn't actually write doomed love.

verbatim quote - utterly irrelevant.

doesn't mean I have to agree with them re a sex game "gone wrong" being mooted

But it does mean that if you are so different in your opinions then you have to explain yourself more than just saying 'verbatim quote! Verbatim quote!'. And now , at last, I see that you have ventured in detail to explain what is wrong with "sex game gone wrong". Well done - but there are problems.

here is a standard definition to a sex "game", namely it's a sex game when it involves consensual parties.

If you actually read what Mignini says you will see that the game is the idea of the accused - they are the consensual parties intent on an evil, violent, sexual game (this is where the idea of 'sex game' is fair and reasonable).

Trying to draw a victim into a perverse violent sexual game against her will-

Correct and accurate summation. It's their game. Violent, perverse, disgusting and evil - but Mignini does not give the aim of murder for the game. They become furious, uncontrolled when the victim resists and then it leads to murder. (this is where the idea of 'gone wrong' is fair and reasonable).

Are you saying that Meredith's killers didn't intend any harm to come to her to justify your "sex game gone wrong" argument? That they subjugated her with knives, restrained her and tortured her without meaning to harm her,

You seem to give the impression that sex game gone wrong somehow suggests that the victim was a willing participant and oops - just got murdered because things kind'a got out a hand. But that's because you're oversensitive and self obsessed . There is a reason why "sex game gone wrong" is a fair and reasonable description of Mignini's scenario - because his scenario and the phrase underline the perversity of the game and underline that murder was not premeditated aim of the game.

not knowing at all that this could lead to her death?

And there we have the evidence. This is your personal opinion and you are allowing it to cloud your understanding of the prosecutor's position. You are far too over sensitive and self obsessed.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Once they transport a knife to the cottage your special pleading falls flat on its face.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

He genuinely seems to think that while it's correct to say that they fully intended to draw Meredith into a violent perverse sexual erotic game against her will, it's still, accurate to say that things "went wrong" because she died as a result of them attempting to draw her against her will into a perverse violent sexual erotic game, Therefore they're not ultimately responsible for what happened as it was just a bit of fun on their part. That one can subject a victim to a sexual assault with knives yet still have no inkling that murder could ensue in this scenario. Which therefore makes it "a sex game gone wrong". 
Truly disturbing mindset from Knox's supporters.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

It reminds me of Bill Clinton's verbal contortions to avoid admitting to a 'sexual relationship' with Monica Lewinski, ending with his now famous quote: "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is." 😂
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070613104317AA7q47K

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

It reminds me of a 'sexual relationship'

that's coz you're obsessed with sex and murder 

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

That would be Amanda Knox :)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

So says the guy who is an administrator on a murder sex website hehe

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Nah, it's reduced to one line witticisms. I guess its lips got tired :)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I posted a longer post calling you scum I think - maybe you missed it because you're not very good at reading. You're better at rewriting the evidence to win an argument.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

You seem to have a problem understanding what "evidence" and "primary source" means. That's OK, judges Marsca and Bruno of the ISC seemed to have a hard time understanding those concepts too :)

When you resort to abuse I guess it means you lost? 😎

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

By gosh you must be an expert on this case. I bet you're so sad it's over.

And no. You are mistaken here (surprise - I didn't realise you were stupid as well). you tampered with evidence.

When you resort to abuse I guess it means you lost? 😎

hahahahaha, lol no. Otherwise coprus vile lost before he began 

No, when you resort to cheating that means all bets are off.

You really don't get what you did with your lil' edit there. It showed that you are not a reasonable person. You don't care for reason and why that phrase might have been on the page in the first place. You just get rid of it to win an argument.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Bets are off? Is that a threat? Like where your friends on the ISF forum discussed looking up a female critic who disagreed with you, stalking and harassing her?

Or like the Amanda Knox's supporter who constantly harasses Meredith Kercher's family? You clearly are of their ilk.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Bets are off? Is that a threat? Like where your friends on the ISF forum discussed looking up a female critic who disagreed with you, stalking and harassing her?

Or like the Amanda Knox's supporter who constantly harasses Meredith Kercher's family? You clearly are of their ilk.

hahahahahahahahaha. You really are obsessed with sex and violence, aren't you? Jeez, I almost feel sorry for you.

No, bets are off doesn't mean that. You see I'm most used to discussing history and film (never discussed this case at any length before actually) and within those discussions certain conventions are adhered to. Like I've never had anyone actually trying to create or destroy the evidence for their argument. So 'bets are off' means I don't see why I should follow any conventions, such as fairness or politeness.

pervert.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Oh OK then. Try to read up before you go on about a case you don't know much about and, do consult a dictionary next time you pretend to know what "primary source" means.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Oh OK then. Try to read up before you go on about a case you don't know much about and,

Ah, well I actually know quite a lot about the case and had followed it from November 07. It's just I can never see the point in discussing criminal cases (it should be a matter for the courts) and must of the people who discuss it (or any murder cases - to be honest from either side) are usually mad.

Plus of course, I'm not actually discussing the case. I'm discussing how it should be accurately remembered.

do consult a dictionary next time you pretend to know what "primary source" means.

Well, I couldn't be bothered to argue the toss before about whether the mission statement is a primary source but actually it is. You see, it's the primary source for your group's mission - the go to for people and historians in the future who want to know what you are about and what your attitudes to things are.

Now attitudes may change - but not just to win an argument.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Now there you go with the dishonest argument again. The primary sources in the Wiki are the original case files. The Mission Statement is a statement of purpose, an edited document. And to date, you have avoided answering the specific question posed to you: where did prosecutor Mignini ever say it was a sex game gone wrong?

Now put on ignore.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Now put on ignore

ah the deluded cheating coward crawls off.

The primary sources in the Wiki are the original case files.

You don't get many things - I'm not interested in the original case. I'm interested in the psychopaths like you who rant on about this case and what you think - which is why the mission statement is very much a primary source.

And to date, you have avoided answering the specific question posed to you: where did prosecutor Mignini ever say it was a sex game gone wrong?

swivel 😁

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

A murderer groupie calls a non murderer groupie "scum"?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

He said the prosecutor concocted a story of "a sex game gone wrong", his words and quotation marks. I asked for the verbatim quote where "a sex game gone wrong" was said. Nobody rational is interested in your spin on what you think SC taylor or the prosecutor meant, but only if Mignini made the quote that was attributed to him. That's it. But again, keep clutching at straws.
You still haven't explained how the term "concocted" is justified, considering the trial convictions.

Not really no as I'm going by what was said in this thread. I can't speak for other people who haven't taken part in this discussion.

No as again, it would only be a "sex game gone wrong" if all parties were consenting and Meredith died accidentally after consenting. Trying to subject a victim to a sexual attack against her will nullifies the "gone wrong" part. If you restrain a victim and cause harm to an unwilling victim with knives, then you don't get to say that it went wrong because the victim died, as the intention to cause harm is there to begin with and legally you're culpable if a death ensues. Therefore legally you don't have the defence that things "went wrong", that's completely ludicrous.
It's not my personal opinion to say they intended to cause her harm, as if you restrain a victim against her will with knives, and the victim dies, you better believe you'll go on trial for murder and will be held legally culpable if the victim dies due to your actions.
That I need to actually spell this out to you says it all about your mentality.

Oh I'm not oversensitive I'm just not in to liars twisting things completely out of context such as you're still attempting to do.
Yet again how is SC Taylor correct in saying Meredith's sexual assault was concocted?m How did the prosecution concoct the theory that Meredith was subjected to a violent sexual pack attack? How is it not justified to speculate on the defendants intentions when said speculation is supported by forensic evidence of sexual assault?
You don't have an argument here.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

You lie you lie, you silly leetle man. You tell me the website is wrong!!!! But website no say 'sex game gone wrong' - website say some other nonsense. So you believe all along that 'sex game gone wrong' is right and website is wrong for not saying it????????

You are verry verry verry confusing, issa no good'a.

You need to go back and edit your post to say that you do agree with what the website says otherwise this discussion makes absolutely no logic sense, does it?

You believe me, no? - here are your words

Yes, the website is wrong to use that phrase as the phrase isn't mentioned.

You must explain 

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

The first 90% of your post is simply waffle so I won't bother addressing it.

I already did explain it. Your inability to process information is of no interest to me.

Are you going to explain how what the prosecution said was "concocted" or not?

Are you going to explain how a victim being murdered due to a pack attack equates to a sex game "gone wrong?"

Are you indeed going to address any of the points raised or are you going to continue to troll some more, boring everyone to tears in the process?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Maybe you are too stupid to understand 

I already did explain it. Your inability to process information is of no interest to me

No, you are evidently telling a really big lie. 

Explain -

Yes, the website is wrong to use that phrase as the phrase isn't mentioned.

But the website doesn't say 'sex game gone wrong' and you said the website was wrong.

So is 'sex game gone wrong' right? You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Sorry, that's just more dribble. If you can articulate yourself properly, rather than in the garbled manner you're currently waffling, then maybe I could address whatever point it is you're trying to make.
I notice you still refuse to validate your position as to precisely how the prosecution's argument was "concocted", or how a murdered sexually assaulted victim equates to a sex game "gone wrong", btw. I knew your true troll murderer groupie colours would come boogying out eventually.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Sorry, that's just more dribble. If you can articulate yourself properly, rather than in the garbled manner you're currently waffling, then maybe I could address whatever point it is you're trying to make

What are you babbling about you idiot? Point out where I have made a mistake in the post, or are your reading skills at the level of Janet and John?

Now, please answer the question because you are making no sense whatsoever.

You claim the website is wrong to use the phrase "a (non consensual) 'sex game' which escalated out of control;"

Here's what you said

Yes, the website is wrong to use that phrase as the phrase isn't mentioned.

So what are you on about now - are you arguing that 'sex game gone wrong' is correct now?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I said the phrase sex game gone wrong wasn't used, therefore I disagree with a sex game gone wrong being "concocted by the prosecutor" and attributed as a quote to him. Your inability to comprehend plain English is of no interest to me.
The context of the prosecution's argument has been explained to you in this thread and indeed by the website anyway. Your obtuseness is of no interest to anyone reasonable.
You still haven't explained how the prosecution's argument was "concocted".
Are you going to justify your argument, or not?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I said

Nobody is interested in what you said because you are evidently a deranged fantasist.

Why on earth do you claim the website is wrong to use the phrase "a (non consensual) 'sex game' which escalated out of control;"? You are clearly deranged

What on earth do you mean by 'garbled manner' in my post of Nov 18 2005 02:17:05? You are clearly deranged.

But I suppose you'll probably wet yourself or burst into tears if I don't answer your questions and of course I can't expect you to answer my questions if I don't answer yours. So, because I'm feeling generous to the demented...

the phrase sex game gone wrong wasn't used, therefore I disagree with a sex game gone wrong being "concocted by the prosecutor" and attributed as a quote to him.

Rubbish - quotation marks are used to cast doubt on what appears in the quotation marks. For example the prosecutor concocted a "sex game gone wrong". You know (though you're probably too stupid) it's when people use their fingers for quote marks. Like Corpus Vile is a "respected and serious poster" (yeah, right, he's a fruit loop). Or Manfromatlan's website is "fair and balanced".

You still haven't explained how the prosecution's argument was "concocted".

He used some evidence and ideas to make up a story. There you go.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

The trial court found her guilty of transporting the knife to the cottage. She was found guilty of murder, and in any American court that most likely would have been it. Just fortunate for her Italy gave her the opportunity to shop around for a verdict she agreed with.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

A murderer groupie calls a non murderer groupie "scum"?

No you  are the murder groupie 

Who's been whining repeatedly about this case for years? on this and other websites?

You are indeed obsessed. 

(Disclosure - In case you hadn't noticed the case is over and I'm not particularly interested in it)

What I find fascinating is how you people act - a wonderful psychological study 

Please carry on - you are fascinating.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

You're the one engaging in dishonesty to defend a sex killer. Try again. Again your lack of self awareness is hilarious.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Very simple question

Where have I defended anyone?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

In this thread when you engaged in dishonesty in defence of Amanda Knox, by smearing the prosecution and trying to pass of her callous sex crime as something "gone wrong", simply because her victim was murdered. Try to keep up.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

, by smearing the prosecution

where?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Sorry, your false claim of "a sex game gone wrong" has already been thoroughly debunked. I gave you umpteen chances to provide the verbatim quote where this was said. I gave you umpteen chances to explain how the prosecution's argument was "concocted" and where precisely the term sex game gone wrong was used.
You blustered and ignored the questions and then bizarrely lapsed into pidgin English and claimed I was "stooped", before going back to edit your post.
You don't have an argument here and once your position has been thoroughly debunked, you engage in the same tired routine as the rest of your fellow cultists and endlessly repeat yourself, hoping it'll finally stick.

Ah, so now you're telling me what SC taylor really meant, as opposed to what he said, gotcha. Just like you knew what Mignini really meant, eh?

He used some evidence and ideas to make up a story. There you go.

Meredith's sexual assault was made up? Their being on trial for sexually assault and murder was made up? Their trial conviction- meaning the court accepted the prosecution's argument- and Guede's finalized conviction was made up? Again, think before you post.

Your bare faced assertion is dismissed as you've nothing to justify your false claim that the prosecution made up the sexual aspects of Meredith's murder.
How do you use evidence to "make up a story"? What "evidence" did he use? If there was evidence of a sexual assault, how was the story of a sexual assault made up?
Keep tying yourself in knots, it's way entertaining. Also I notice you're getting steadily more shrill and obnoxious with each post. As I said, I knew your true murderer groupie colours would eventually show. All one needs to do with you nonce aficionados is hand you the rope. The rest takes care of itself. You simply lack the self awareness to see this, something you have in common with Knox btw.

So in conclusion, you've failed miserably to validate your position that the prosecution mooted "a sex game gone wrong" and have now been reduced to trolling and mindless repetition. As I said from the start even with an acquittal you still can't make a case for innocence for your sex killer or justify any instances of illogicality from the prosecution, so are reduced to smearing instead. Tsk tsk.
Anyway off you go back under your bridge, you nonce admiring miserable immoral pathetic excuse for a human being. Your false debunked claim is dismissed.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Meredith's sexual assault was made up? Their being on trial for sexually assault and murder was made up?

I really do get the impression that you get some kind of sexual gratification  out of repeating this. Are you a perverted cheat like your friend? Is that what drives you? Do you see sex and violence everywhere you look?

Incidentally? Please provide the exact quote (part in italics).

You blustered and ignored the questions and then bizarrely lapsed into pidgin English and claimed I was "stooped", before going back to edit your post.

Liar - proof?. Only complete scum obsessed with sex and murder goes back to edit their websites to try to win their arguments.

Anyway off you go back under your bridge, you nonce admiring miserable immoral pathetic excuse for a human being. Your false debunked claim is dismissed.

Some may say that my curiosity in freaks like you and your pervert friend is a little immoral.

But really, I'm not the one who treats a horrific murder as something like a game to have 'fun' with.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Let's try this again. You agreed with the false claim that the prosecution concocted a sex game gone wrong, then had your position debunked re a sex game gone wrong theory.
I then asked you how the prosecution's argument was "concocted", considering it was supported by forensic evidence, all three were up for sexual assault as well as murder and one is indeed in prison for sexual assault and murder.
You said he used some evidence to make up a story. I asked you to elaborate on this to justify your position.

You've failed to do so yet again, surprise surprise, just as you've consistently failed to back up any of your points with anything of actual substance.

Lol, now you're lying over your silly spelling mistake of stupid as "stooped" and shrilly rave that I'm scum for pointing this out to you? Dear oh dear, you've gone into full blown meltdown mode, haven't you?

Actually you are and once again Knox cultists show how they're the epitome of psychological projection. You're the morally barren creep insisting that it must have been a sex game gone wrong due to Meredith being murdered, not me.
You're the one who makes bald assertions, yet refuses to provide anything remotely credible to back up said assertions. You're the one defending a sex killer and convicted criminal. You're the one viewing two words in a complete vacuum, meaning you clearly regard the whole thing as some sort of game to score points off.
You and the rest of your toxic ilk are simply the 21st century equivalent to Manson groupies and if this were back in his day, you lot would have been right outside that courtroom with your heads shaved and great big "X"'s carved on your foreheads.
If your nonce was so innocent and so railroaded, your arguments would be far better and you wouldn't have needed to engage in the easily exposed dishonesty you attempted earlier in this discussion as the truth can't be trumped.
You people simply like what Knox did and are happy she got away with it. You get a vicarious thrill out of her callous crime. It empowers you on some dark level you're quite possibly loathe to admit even to yourself, but you lot like what Knox did. It's why Knox's supporters constantly attack her victim and her family online and stalk them on twitter. They didn't get to do the deed themselves so feel that prolonging the victim's family's pain is the next best thing.

It's you lot who are a pack of deeply immoral scumbags. And I'll take defending innocent victims and their innocent families and debunking the false claims of murderer groupies over cheerleading for sex killers any day of the week mate.
You truly are a pathetic excuse for a human being. Again, sucks to be you.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

hahaha - I see what you did there guilter. you just reposted your post.

please - evidence I am a knox supporter?

please - how do I smear prosecutor?

Please answer - you are having fun aren't you?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Again, your stupidity and inability to process information and reading comprehension difficulties are of no interest to me, sorry. I'm afraid nobody reasonable is going to keep repeating themselves for you, simply because you have all the intellect of your average carrot.

Please answer - you are having fun aren't you?

Am I having fun watching you go into complete meltdown mode and stalking me in a would be presidential assassin kinda manner while all the while insisting you've no interest in this case and being reduced to garbled Pidgin English? Take a wild guess.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

You are having fun discussing a sex murder case because you clearly get some kind of sexual gratification out of. How do I know this. Well Pete above said to me

Have fun

I presumed he was not being serious. Nothing about this case is fun. It's actually quite unpleasant and disturbing. And I felt like pointing this out to him

But alas, you did not pick this up. You thanked him. You really do think this is fun don't you. Well, I'll see how long I can last - but it is quite disturbing.

Am I having fun watching you go into complete meltdown mode and stalking me in a would be presidential assassin kinda manner while all the while insisting you've no interest in this case and being reduced to garbled Pidgin English?

Yes, sure. You think it's fun. Repeating over and over again the name of the victim like some kind of mascot for your team.

Oh by the way. the first time I used the term guilter I used it in quotes because I was referring to the fact that others might call you as such. But if guilter annoys you so I shall certainly use it 

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Gosh, yet more psychological projection from the cult of Knox. You guys just can't help smearing people can you?

Nothing about this case is fun. It's actually quite unpleasant and disturbing.

Wow, something I completely agree with you on. Equally unpleasant and disturbing is your willingness to engage in dishonesty to defend a callous sex killer and to rationalize a young woman's murder as a sex game "gone wrong", simply because the woman ended up being murdered. You and the rest of your addled cult need long term professional help IMO.

I also note that another example of the cult like mentality of Knox supporters is to take any justified critique of their behaviour and simply throwing it back at the observer, such as you're doing now with your completely pathetic "that's-what-you-are-but-what-am-I" routine you're now engaging in, which is completely consistent with her supporters tactics elsewhere online.

You can feign disinterest and deny you're a murderer groupie all you like. You're fooling nobo0dy here, stalker.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Nothing about this case is fun. It's actually quite unpleasant and disturbing.
Wow, something I completely agree with you on.

Liar - you are getting your sexual gratification by repeating ad nauseum horrific arguments in a sex murder trial . That is your motivation.

have fun.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)
Re: She is SO guilty

image for user Corpus_Vile
by Corpus_Vile » 1 day ago (Tue Nov 17 2015 13:09:41) Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since May 2008

Gosh, if I didn't know any better, I'd say you were giving me a back handed compliment, pete.

Equally unpleasant and disturbing is your willingness to engage in dishonesty

As you rewrite websites to fit your story.

to defend a callous sex killer

where?

and to rationalize a young woman's murder as a sex game "gone wrong"

Proscutions characterisation. BBC characterisation, Mignini had no problem with the phrase and

this website
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Mission_Statement

ooops - you've tampered with the evidence there.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Liar - you are getting your sexual gratification by repeating ad nauseum horrific arguments in a sex murder trial . That is your motivation.

A) I'm not the one who brought the topic up, SC Taylor did and you agreed with him/her and engaged in dishonesty when trying (and failing miserably) to justify your falsehood. Don't whinge about it now, due to you being thoroughly owned in this discussion and your position being demolished. 

B) Do you have a paypal account by any chance? That way I can deposit 50c in it and you can go ring somebody who cares about your opinion of me, or your irrational raving.

No, you engaged in dishonesty plain and simple, trying to pass off a second hand media account of Guede's trial and a preliminary hearing as a verbatim quote by Mignini at Knox's trial. I even linked the article you C&P'd from.
You then tried to pass off your subjective opinion of what you really feel Mignini meant as to what was actually said.
You then tried to pass Meredith's murder off as a justification for a sex game "gone wrong" due to her being murdered, implying that no harm was meant to her, which is a reprehensible thing to say.
So yeah you were and are still being dishonest with the hot air bluster you're dribbling now.

No it wasn't as you were unable to provide the verbatim quote of the prosecution mooting a sex game gone wrong, that's not what the prosecution characterised at all. You then conceded that Mignini never said that.
You then insisted it was concocted yet refused to provide a plausible justification for this. That you can't see this is hilarious.

I haven't rewritten anything, as I'm not involved with that website or an editor of it. You should really get on to them with whatever noise it is you're dribbling, rather than a bloke you're having a discussion with on the internet.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I haven't rewritten anything, as I'm not involved with that website or an editor of it.

So what did the website originally say before it was rewritten?

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Erm, that's already been covered with your exchange with ManFromAtlantan, I suggest you go over it again and then again some more, due to your proven woeful attention span and inability to process info. Again, I'm not involved with that website. You're barking up the wrong tree whinging to me about any issues you may have with it as I'm not an editor or indeed connected in any way to it.

And again your position was already thoroughly debunked anyway. Unless you have something new to bring to this specific aspect of the wider debate on Knox's guilt/innocence or wish to discuss other aspects of the case, then I don't see the need to keep entertaining your repetition of already refuted arguments.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

It said 'sex game gone wrong' and he changed it because it didn't fit with your argument.

This is just pure dishonesty. He changed it on that specific date specifically because you were having a fixation on the phrase and losing an argument.

Maybe, he could have independently arrived at the decision to change it. But he did not. He buried it because all you people are interested in is winning the argument.



[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No, he changed it for the reasons he patiently explained to you, which as usual failed to register with you due to your obtuseness and admiration of sex killers.

How was I losing an argument, considering I asked you to provide something and you were unable to do so and indeed had to engage in dishonesty to try and bolster your laughably untenable position?

All I'm interested in is providing factual information on Meredith's case. All you're interested in is currying favour for Amanda Knox in the court of public opinion, and if it means lying and propagating falsehoods then so be it. Murderer groupies like you have no problem with such things. Therein lies the difference between us.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Cheating!:)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago



Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

if the evidence don't fit.

delete it.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yes thanks for conceding that the evidence doesn't fit into your false claim of a sex game "gone wrong".

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

You know that's not true don't you. so why bother saying it?

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

well? You are clearly lying here? You have no answer.

As you have no answer to rewriting the evidence.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

It is true, as you've failed miserably to provide credible evidence for your false claim and you've just conceded the evidence doesn't fit to support your false claim.


Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I am sure you have the self awareness to realise that you are not telling the truth

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

your opponent really doesn't know his a from a hole in the ground. but he does know how to defend a position

evidently not.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

has he changed his position and come to accept yours? If he still hold his original posiion after all your exchanges, he has defended his position.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Says the troll who has consistently failed to defend any argument he's made. You Amandafan nonce admirers truly are the epitome of psychological projection, aren't you Lyndhen?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

actually I've proven every argument I've made.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I think he's replying to me. He's addicted.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

actually I think he was referring to both of us. but you are right. he is adicted and perhaps a little rabid.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

A) I was talking to Lyndhen not you.
B) No you haven't.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

See Pete. I'm always right 

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

I suppose the position of his response and the language contained there in misled me. that is language he normally reserves for me.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

that is language he normally reserves for me

Or anyone who doesn't agree with him. Really quite impolite fellow.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

"Really quite impolite fellow"

very

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I am telling the truth as you were given ample opportunity to provide the verbatim quote where the prosecution mooted a theory as a sex game gone wrong. You then focused on the words sexual game in a vacuum, disregarding that it was against Meredith's will and the context of the prosecution's argument and took this to mean a sex game gone wrong. It went wrong for you because the victim ended up murdered. This was pointed out to you umpteen times and as a counterpoint you simply repeated yourself again and again, which is yet another reason still how I know you're a Knox groupie.
You were already debunked and unless you provide a new argument, nobody rational will entertain you. Still, it's way entertaining to see that you're reduced to trolling at this point.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I am telling the truth as you were given ample opportunity to provide the verbatim quote where the prosecution mooted a theory as a sex game gone wrong.

Verbatim quote is irrelevant.

You then focused on the words sexual game in a vacuum, disregarding that it was against Meredith's will and the context of the prosecution's argument and took this to mean a sex game gone wrong.

I don't think it was a very good idea for Mignini to use the sex game scenario but I can understand that he did it to provide the strongest possible motive for murder. Irrespective of my thoughts or yours, he did use scenario of a sex game.
Another problem with the sex game scenario is that it ended with murder. If the aim of the sex game was not murder then it's more than reasonable to describe it as a sex game gone wrong. Many have and Mignini has not complained (while he did complain about the satanic connection).
I find his scenario problematic, but it is fairly and reasonably described as a sex game gone wrong.

This was pointed out to you umpteen times and as a counterpoint you simply repeated yourself again and again,

I've addressed the point and you have repeatedly failed to address my points

which is yet another reason still how I know you're a Knox groupie.

Clearly this is not true and you should provide evidence to support it if you intend to carry on saying it. Though I will admit to the fact that I find the 'guilters' far far more insane than any 'Knox groupies'. This whole conversation is evidence of your insanity.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Nobody cares about your already debunked repetition or your clear lack of understanding of the word "irrelevant". You're stupid as you've richly demonstrated over and over.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Nobody cares

This is indeed fairly accurate. Nobody cares that you think the formerly accused are actually guilty. The 'knoxie fan group' clearly don't care and I think you and your friends are quite sad about this.

I care to the extent that I don't see why people should rewrite history and of course I am interested (not really in the case) but actually in you and how insane you people are.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Still with your reading comprehension difficulties and disregarding of what was actually said, eh troll? Like I said, feel free to have the last word, you're clearly not worth entertaining anymore as yet again:

Nobody cares about your already debunked repetition or your clear lack of understanding of the word "irrelevant". You're stupid as you've richly demonstrated over and over.


So again (as I know you've the attention span of a gnat),if you don't get a response, it's because you haven't said anything worth addressing and are being the same boring troll you've shown yourself to be.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

if you don't get a response, it's because

I expect it's because you have finally accepted that 'sex game gone wrong' (no matter how unwise) is a fair and reasonable characterisation of the prosecutor's scenario.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

 Your trolling sucks. 'bye.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Your trolling sucks. 'bye

I hope it is bye, but I'm rather afraid that you won't be able to deal with your addiction.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

hahaha you really are addicted, Vile.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Only to murderer groupies. That would be you btw pete.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

still here?

I thought your "work was done here".

M. flip flop.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Eh? I said my work here was done and had no need to engage with you, oh dim one due to your rampant dishonesty and consistent running away from challenges to validate your position. You were sufficiently defeated and had been given enough rope to hang yourself several times over, so I no longer had any need to feed you. Try to keep up.
However, I never said I was done posting on this board, or debating this case or interacting with other posters. Again, your stupidity is of no interest to anyone. Gonna follow me around some more?

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Eh? I said I was done with you,

No, you didn't - you said your "work was done here". That's the verbatim quote.

However, I never said I was done posting on this board,

You're evidently done with trying to defend your position. Now you're just reduced to calling Pete a murderer groupie.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

... So you are gonna follow me around some more. That's so cute. Have fun.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

if he knew how rediculous calling me a murder groupie is he probably still say something just as rediculous. but it doesn't bother me. I've been on the boards over 10 years. I've been called much worse names in the past.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

our opponent really doesn't know his a from a hole in the ground. but he does know how to defend a position. if I were in a war I'd want to have him in the hole in front of me. no one would get past him.

evidently not.

he ran away.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

he'll be back like the proverbial bad penny.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

he'll be back like the proverbial bad penny.

I'm sure he will. He's addicted.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago



[–] pete-293 8 years ago

surprised it took him this long.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yet whenever I visit this board, there's always you and Lyndhen hanging around here ready to respond to my posts like clockwork. I'm surprised blackjack hasn't turned up to wail yet again separate trials equating to Knox's rights being violated. Keep holding that torch.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

surprised it took him this long.

If you look at the comments section on the youtube links he posted he was also trolling people there. He obviously gets his fix elsewhere.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

More psychological projection from the Cult of Knox. You did nothing but troll the last time I made a fool out of you, with your disingenuous attempt to pass off Guede's trial and the Matteini hearing as Knox's trial and also stated that you wouldn't address Cassation's report until I declared that Knox was found factually innocent. That's the epitome of trolling you, immoral sex killer shill.
How about you credibly defend your position and credibly justify Cassation's report, rather than whinging what a dick you think I am? That might help.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

He obviously gets his fix elsewhere.

evidently not.

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

do you think he realizes how much of a joke he is?

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

This is coming from the white knight murderer groupie who still insists that absence of evidence equates to evidence of absence, despite being objectively refuted with several examples, and also thinks that more gravitas should be given to a website set up by Amanda Knox's stepfather, than an actual court of law. Too funny.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

do you think he realizes how much of a joke he is?

I think he forgot why he ran away last November.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Says the guy who always seems to be hanging around here every time I pop in and feels the need to answer to my posts regularly.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Says the guy who always seems to be hanging around here every time I pop in and feels the need to answer to my posts regularly

There is a need for someone objective (such as myself) to counter your more extreme points.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

A) You're in no way objective, hence your dishonesty, mindless repetition and refusal to address Cassation's report and fleeing from questions.

B) You have never credibly countered any of my points, you simply engaged in A).

C) You hang around here cuz you wish to get into a sex killer's knickers, as you're a hybristophilliac. You're a deeply immoral pathetic excuse for a decent human being.
Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] pete-293 8 years ago

he's raving again.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain (Isaac Asimov)

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

he's raving again

objectively speaking, he does indeed seem quite quite mad.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yeah perhaps I should shill for a callous sex killer like you two and burble about how not guilty equates to innocence to meet your criteria for sanity. I can dream nonce fanboy trolls, I can dream. 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Here is clear evidence of my objectivity

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1783413/board/nest/248112116?p=2&d=250796432#250796432

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it isn't. Not interested in your previous comments as you've proven via your dishonesty that you're in no way objective and are a murderer groupie.
You've failed miserably to back up your position in any way.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1783413/board/nest/248112116?p=2&d=250796432#250796432

Read the link and respond in a manner other than insult.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

I'm not insulting you by accurately telling you that you're a murderer groupie. Nobody would engage in such dishonesty if they weren't. You'e a dishoinest scumbag who admires what a killer did and I'm not interested in your earlier comments as your willful dishonesty and trolling shows what a murderer advocate you are and murderer advocates don't get to speak for murder victim's families. You're a low life. But you know that already.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Nobody would engage in such dishonesty if they weren't. You'e a dishoinest scumbag who admires what a killer did and I'm not interested in your earlier comments as your willful dishonesty and trolling shows what a murderer advocate you are and murderer advocates don't get to speak for murder victim's families. You're a low life. But you know that already.

I said without insult.

I advocate for neither side. I merely point out facts and correct those from either side - as is clearly demonstrated in the link which you have read. I am objective and have been for many years and you are most clearly not.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No you don't, stop lying. You're completely dishonest and devoid of facts, from your false claims claims of sex games gone wrong to false claims of findings of innocence to false passing off of hearings as actual trials to constant trolling and deliberate evasion. You truly do have a monstrously inflated and deeply deluded opinion of yourself and your lack of self awareness is hilarious.
Stop engaging in such laughably pathetic behaviour and you'll be treated with more civility.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

The link to my previous posts clearly evidences my objectivity and a good grasp of the facts.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No it merely highlights how self deluded you are and that you have the same lack of self awareness as your icon, Amanda Knox.

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

Read the link I provided - it shows my objectivity in that I criticise a Knox supporter and explain why they are wrong.

You are clearly biased and lie. For example. You lie that Knox was not exonerated when you know full well that exoneration in this case is irrelevant.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

No you've shown via your dishonesty and trolling what a sicko murderer groupie you are, sorry.

To you it is, as you're a nonce groupie. To everyone else normal it's whether they did it or not, hence the thread heading. You're probably fapping to this exchange, grubby little sex killer advocate that you are. 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

There you go, ignoring the context again. Further down: "The motive is based on an argument escalating into violence, with Knox and Sollecito aiming to abuse and humiliate Meredith Kercher, leading to her murder."

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

But thanks for the suggestion, I edited the Mission Statement to make it clearer for those who fixate on the term.

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

I edited the Mission Statement to make it clearer

Don't think so.

And you forgot to answer my questions

Actually I discuss the satanic theory and find that Mignini is right to complain - have you read this?

His complaint is outlined in a letter to a newspaper. Incidentally, do you find the original Italian or the translated English to have more credence. CV prefers the latter, do you not find this odd?

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Your comprehension problems aren't my problem.

Where did I offer to discuss Satanic theory with you?

Address your concerns about corpus vile to him, will you?

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

No seriously, have you read what I've written?

and where's the edit?

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

The BBC used colloquial English to simplify a complex case and describe the motivations. It also made the error of not explaining the background.

The Meredith Kercher Wiki website (Disclosure: I am one of the editors) explained it was the Supreme Court decision of 2013 which directed the Appeals court to consider "a range of possible motives".

You do appreciate the Appeals Court found Knox and Sollecito guilty of sexual assault? That is the context of the "sexual game" theory. Mignini (and the courts) knew exactly what was meant, a motivation to sexually abuse and humiliate Meredith Kercher. That some Anglo-Saxons don't get the meaning is too bad.

Funny that you seem fixated on the word, without acknowledging what Italian speakers have explained several times over in the Wiki?

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Thee you go again, misrepresenting what I said. If my argument was too difficult for you that's OK since I wasn't addressing you in the first place.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

She is so guilty, indeed :)

[–] TheeMortyToad 8 years ago

Hey, fancy seeing you 'round these parts :)

Normal Is A Myth.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

I love movies, mostly review them on Twitter and other sites though.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Saw this movie too. It certainly did not establish Knox's innocence. It was ambiguous, leaning towards guilt.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Odd. I keep getting e-mail notifications from the obsessive lyndhen, responding to me even though I chose to ignore him. Sorry, but once you lie about what I said or wrote I have no interest in 'debating' you. Stop stalking me, thanks.

[–] Corpus_Vile 8 years ago

Yeah, stalking and Knox cultists seem to go hand in hand.
He stalked me onto other threads on this board after failing to validate his sex game gone wrong spiel, only this time he was demanding a link that DNA evidence existed against Knox after telling me he'd followed the case for a "long time". 

Hey, look at that! She's not crazy, she's being chased by a cheetah!

[–] Lyndhen 8 years ago

To be fair - following you to another board would be termed stalking. I certainly hope you don't dare to do this to me. If your definition of stalking is replying to people in different threads on the same board then you are evidently a serial stalker.

[–] manfromatlan-63369 8 years ago

Yeah, convicted liar and these folk have a lot in common, don't they?