665 users online (83 members and 582 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7
Results 91 to 98 of 98
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Katody View Post
    I see. So taking into account Guede's definitive verdict doesn't mean there must have been many attackers.

    Could you explain what does it mean, then? If it doesn't impose restrictions about the many vs one attacker then what exactly was the error of Hellmann's reasoning regarding Guede's verdict?
    No it does mean there were multiple attackers but Nencini made it clear that did not mean they had to find AK and RS guilty. Hellman's illogical reasoning has been discussed over and over, this is about Nencini. Nencini very clearly answered a question about the SCC reasoning and RGs definitive ruling. I'm sorry the concept that judges think they are guilty can't be grasped. We will have to wait for the Nencini reasoning to know more.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    No it does mean there were multiple attackers but Nencini made it clear that did not mean they had to find AK and RS guilty. Hellman's illogical reasoning has been discussed over and over, this is about Nencini. Nencini very clearly answered a question about the SCC reasoning and RGs definitive ruling.
    I see. So there is a certain circularity. Guede's verdict that there were multiple attackers is used as evidence in a separate case that finds that additional "attackers" guilty. At the same time that evidence from Guede's case cannot be contested because it happened in another trial and is definitive.

    I'm sure the Court of Human Rights will find it very interesting.

    Could you quote Nencini's clear answer?

    BTW no one on this forum managed to point out any illogical reasoning of Hellmann's motivation.

    I'm sorry the concept that judges think they are guilty can't be grasped.
    <modsnip>
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 02-18-2014 at 01:38 PM. Reason: unnecessary snark

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    N.C., USA
    Posts
    3,241
    What? The judge 'knows' he sentenced two 'innocent' people?

    How about the 1st instance judges?

    How about the 20 or so others along the way?

    *It was shown in the trial of RG that there were multiple attackers.
    It did not say exactly who the others were at the trial of RG.
    It was shown in the trial of AK/RS that there were multiple attackers.
    It did say exactly who the other two attackers were... along with RG.

    **No forum member here needs to point out how Hellmann's motivation is illogical and unreasonable... the Italian Supreme Court took care of that quite nicely IMO. Thus it was rejected.
    The Seeker / Sports Freak /

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by Katody View Post
    I see. So there is a certain circularity. Guede's verdict that there were multiple attackers is used as evidence in a separate case that finds that additional "attackers" guilty. At the same time that evidence from Guede's case cannot be contested because it happened in another trial and is definitive.

    I'm sure the Court of Human Rights will find it very interesting.

    Could you quote Nencini's clear answer?

    BTW no one on this forum managed to point out any illogical reasoning of Hellmann's motivation.


    <modsnip>.
    Doubtful that there is a leg to stand on in a human rights court. Well have to disagree on that.
    I've quoted Nencini and it was snipped, so you're welcome to go back and read the questions posed to him and his answers.

    Plenty has been pointed out about Hellman being illogical but we won't get into that here.

    It wasn't an insult, simply the truth. Some look for reasons why a judge "had" to find them guilty instead of understanding that like many people, the jury believed them to be guilty based on the case presented. Like I said we will see what Nencini's reasoning offers later.
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 02-18-2014 at 01:40 PM. Reason: snipped quoted post

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,098
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I don't know where to post this, and the case is going silent tomorrow, so there's no point in a new thread but ... BBC has produced a new documentary of the case (released yesterday) which is an overview of the case up to the decision by Nencini, so I hope this can be posted here.

    Is Amanda Knox Guilty?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgBhlvFAbUw
    A new documentary containing the a same old long debunked lies about this case.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,972
    It's unfortunate that the thread will be closed because supporting evidence for much of what has been reported in Italian news and omitted from US news is released in the documentary.

    For example, I've never seen this before, but it is part of the evidence in the Nencini Decision.

    This will have an impact on the future.



    Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgBhlvFAbUw
    Last edited by Harmony 2; 02-19-2014 at 10:30 AM. Reason: though this is evidence otto tied it into the topic and opening post so allowed to remain

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Footwarrior View Post
    A new documentary containing the a same old long debunked lies about this case.
    Yes, it is the same old evidence and case history that a few supporters of Knox have tried to (successfully?) suppress for years. It is all relevant to the Nencini verdict and future confirmation of the verdict by the Supreme Court.

    Includes Amanda Knox recording of her prison interrogation

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgBhlvFAbUw

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Thx Otto I've been looking forward to seeing this bbc documentary. Very interesting, crazy to see things never seen before after all this time.

    Until the discussion reopens...

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 943
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:01 AM
  2. Replies: 1062
    Last Post: 01-29-2014, 07:15 PM
  3. Replies: 1068
    Last Post: 11-22-2013, 07:56 AM
  4. Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 11-12-2013, 12:34 AM
  5. Replies: 1111
    Last Post: 10-21-2013, 08:29 AM

Tags for this Thread