Wednesday, August 31, 2016

What Liz Houle claims is not justice.

Liz Houle: Do you feel intimidated because I criticize your articles? Your articles speak for themselves. You ignore reasons that people like me do not accept the validity of the case against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. You say that it’s not personal for you that you claim they are guilty. It’s not personal for me that you are wrong. You claim that it’s only about seeking justice. I seek justice also. What you claim is not justice.

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Irrelevancy of Ms. Houle's PR Concerns

Again, Liz Houle stews over Amanda's overwhelming PR presence in the media. Again, she complains about Amanda's supporters aiming their attacks on the Kercher family. Ms. Houle claims that it's not safe for a news outlet to publish an article about the trial of Amanda Knox for all the comments that are posted. Of course Ms. Houle called it the Meredith Kercher Murder Case, but it's not Meredith who is being tried for murder.

The dispute on Disqus is not a one sided affair. There are guilters attacking Amanda's supporters also. Not all of Amanda's supporters are as polite as they should be, but I've not seen the viciousness in supporters as I have in guilters.

What of it that the Seattle Times reported that Raffaele was using Amanda's omission of him being at the murder in the statements that were coerced from her on Nov. 5-6th as a means of defending himself? That's what he and his lawyers said. Ms. Houle seems to think that the Seattle Times should have emphasized his withdrawing his alibi for her. The truth is that Raffaele didn't emphasize it. It's only by implication that if Amanda were at the murder without him that he could not be her alibi.

It's peculiar that Ms. Houle insisted that for Raffaele's computer analysis to be valid, he would have to consider the influence of public relations on media activity. However at the end of her blog she admitted that the analysis he was undertaking was the times his name was associated with the word "innocent" or the times his name was associated with the word "guilty." I don't see how she expects him to correlate public relations with that. His data doesn't offer him the opportunity to ask the people involved how they came to choose the word they used. What influenced their choice doesn't change the validity of the results he found.

More Vitriol Over Amanda's PR

Liz Houle complained about a GroundReport article being listed second place in a search for Meredith Kercher. The first place article was about a feminist organization declaring Meredith Kercher was the only female victim in the story and that feminists don't owe Amanda any special attention.

Guilters make a great deal of fuss over Amanda Knox's PR activity. Guilters inundate social media with their opinions about Amanda's guilt, but they don't want anyone talking about Amanda's innocence.

Search engines like Google are automated to search for key words and to list the links to those key words according to popularity. Popularity in this case is the number of times the links are called for. It doesn't have anything to do with the news quality of the content or the approval rating of the viewers. Sometimes there are options to like or even to dislike, but most viewers don't take time to do any of that.

Seeing links that are favorable to Amanda is not proof that her PR has deceitfully influenced the provider of that information. It just shows that people are receptive to what is presented.

Advocating Amanda's innocence is not attacking the memory of Meredith Kercher or the Kercher family. If a relative of Meredith says something about Amanda, it's not vitriol or untruths for Amanda's supporters to comment on what is said. If a supporter says something that is incorrect, a guilter has every right to reply, but that Ms. Houle doesn't like what Amanda's supporters say doesn't make them wrong.

More Speculations About Cocaine

There were only unfounded accusations that Amanda Knox used cocaine. It is not a proven fact. There are no proven records of her withdrawal from cocaine while she was in prison, and there is no gossip from guards and other inmates about her use of cocaine even though there is plenty of gossip about other things.

Mignini certainly wanted to present a case about drug induced murder, but there was nothing to his assertions. There was the assertion that some of Amanda's phone calls were to a drug dealer, but the phone number she dialed did not belong to him. Amanda spent what is considered more money than normal during the months before the murder, but that doesn't prove she spent the money on cocaine. But of course Liz Houle reports that the police confirmed Amanda was trading sex for cocaine anyhow. Having confirmed this arrangement, the police didn't seem to think it was necessary to provide evidence to prove it.

The woman who was seen on the CCTV video near the cottage does not look like Amanda and was walking away from the cottage at just before the murder was supposed to have occurred. Since the woman in the video was heading away from the cottage, she could not have been involved in the murder.

Also, it was not determined that Amanda's blood was found on the faucet. It was only her DNA. Supposedly because it was asserted that the DNA profiles for Amanda and Meredith were the same strength, Amanda's DNA had to come from blood also. However, in reality, Meredith's DNA profile was much stronger than Meredith's. So it was just Amanda's DNA from washing her hands as the motivation report said.

The Convoluted Cocaine Disconnection

Liz Houle just repackaged the story the Mirror published alleging Amanda Knox's use of cocaine. The police claimed that phone numbers in Amanda's phone led to the arrest of a drug dealer, but that dealer's phone number was not in her phone. They inferred that the drug dealer used the phone of an unknown person for Amanda to contact him. There is no way to prove what those calls were about, but they were probably wrong numbers. The identity of the person whose phone appeared on Amanda's call history was protected because he had no knowledge of Amanda.

Prosecutor Mignini wanted to claim Amanda, Raffaele, and Guede were under the influence of drugs when Meredith died, but when hair samples were tested at the time of her arrest, Amanda only showed a trace of marijuana. The main evidence put forth was that Amanda had spent a lot of money during her time in Italy. There is no evidence of what she spent it on.

Certainly, if Amanda had a cocaine habit at the time of her arrest, she would have suffered from withdrawal while she was in prison, and this facet of her medical condition would have come to light which it didn't. If she had used cocaine while in prison, the prison guards and other inmates would have blabbed about it, but in spite of everything else that was made up about her incarceration, drug addition was never mentioned.

However much Ms. Houle wanted to insinuate that Amanda exchanged sex for cocaine and that cocaine was a reason she killed Meredith, there simply isn't any truth in it. It is interesting that the Mirror called Guede a drug dealer who had been previously convicted of murder. Guilters claim Guede has no previous criminal history.

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Why Prove Amanda Wasn't Where She Was Not Proved to Be Anyhow?

It makes no difference that the courts ruled that Amanda Knox was at the villa during the murder. There is no evidence to prove it.

Why does Amanda need an alibi proving she was not somewhere there is no proof she was to begin with?

A Peculiar View of the Chris Cuomo Interview

Body language is a tricky business. Amanda only slightly dipped her head when answering "no." It may simply have been her re-positioning herself in her chair, or it could have merely been a subconscious acknowledgment of the question without any bearing on the answer.

Of course guilters want to claim deception because that's what they always think. The truth has always been that Amanda had nothing to do with Guede's crimes against Meredith Kercher.

As for Amanda's supposedly fake smile, it's not uncommon for someone imprisoned for something she didn't do to guard her emotions in interviews. Look at the other interviews with the police and prosecutors where she expected her innocence to be recognized but it wasn't.

Of course people in interviews tend to force a smile. It has nothing to do with the seriousness of what is being discussed. Subconsciously, we expect that we should smile for an audience. Maybe that's deception, but we all practice it.

In spite of Liz Houle admitting that there was no way for Amanda to have encountered Judge Nencini, Ms. Houle still entertains the ridiculous idea that Amanda not wanting to address what may have been the judge's personal beliefs as being Amanda's alluding to the judge having "some personal or emotional motivations."

And how did Ms. Houle jump from  Amanda's not speculating on emotions of the judge to her excusing the beliefs of the Kerchers as being due to their emotions? How does Ms. Houle take any of this as showing that Amanda considered Nencini's verdict as being a personal attack on her? Maybe Ms. Houle is merely acknowledging the obvious. The whole case is a personal attack on Amanda Knox. It has nothing to do with justice.

The whole case against Amanda Knox has been misinformation and distortion. Ms. Houle complains that Amanda's lawyers and PR consultant have been chipping away at the innuendos, lies, and misleading facts making up this case. In the end, it is Ms. Houle's credibility that is being questioned.

The Red Herring Accusation of Attacking Kerchers

Liz Houle seems to think that anything an Amanda Knox supporter says about the Kercher family is a direct attack on the Kerchers. It's not just communications directed to the Kerchers that is objectionable, but anything no matter what it is about the Kerchers that is being discussed.

Some things like comparing what the Kerchers are doing to Amanda Knox as being like the Holocaust are extreme, but I doubt that anyone can go back to that tweet now to reply to it. I'm not sure what good comes from stewing over it.

But most of the comments Ms. Houle objects to are expression of frustration over the injustice these tweeters see the Kerchers advocating. If the Kerchers engage in advocating wrongful accusations against Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, why should they be protected from criticism? Meredith being dead doesn't prove Amanda and Raffaele killed her.

I have to wonder what the Kerchers said about Amanda and Raffaele to rouse such responses. I do know the sort of things that Harry Rag says. Whether or not he is John Kercher Jr., Mr. Rag has said things that need criticizing. I do have to wonder if by including Mr. Rag in this compendium of attacks on the Kerchers, Ms. Houle is admitting that he is John Kercher Jr.

If the Kerchers say anything about Amanda and Raffaele, they can expect people to say something about it. Ms. Houle can call that an attack if she wants to. I call it fair. As for tweeting the Kerchers directly, the Kerchers' accounts are not active anymore.

Whose Bot Account Is Whose?

I cannot say for sure if there are bot accounts or not. I'm not sure how they would work. Just because multiple tweeters make identical or similar tweets doesn't prove they are the same person or bot program. There are only 140 characters permitted in a tweet. It's very easy for the same message to be repeated by multiple persons expressing the same sentiment.

Twitter probably could determine that an account was set up as a bot account or operated as such, but it might prove difficult to determine if it is a legitimate account or not. It might very well be that companies or organizations need automatic systems like that for dissimulating information much like robo calls do. Nobody likes robo calls, but they are unfortunately legal.

I think it's just as likely that guilters would resort to bot accounts as would innocent supporters. So I think Liz Houle doesn't have much to complain about.

Destructive Criticism

It amazes me how guilters like Liz Houle think that people like me are paid operatives of the PR firm Amanda's father hired. I likewise find it hard to believe that the organization Ms. Houle describes for furthering the persecution of Amanda Knox can be so professional without someone funding it.

The elegant misinformation that is available on the links Ms. Houle provides is quite beyond my ability to equal. I just try to express my dismay at the injustice done to Amanda and Raffaele as best I can. I would like to think that most people would be reasonable in expectations of what the innocent have to defend themselves against, but the nonsense that is dredged up for new approaches of attack seems endless.

It is ridiculous to think that any defendant might waste so much money paying for an army of defenders arguing for innocence. But guilters cannot accept that Amanda's supporters are looking for justice also.

Limits of Graphology

A lot of people want to believe that handwriting can betray the inner thoughts of a person. Analyzing handwriting can tell some things about a person, but they are usually of a general nature.

Guede's handwriting approaches being a string-type in miniature. It is a little hard to discern some of the letters which makes it a little deceptive, but it shows little irregularity which indicates good motor control which may also indicate emotion control.

Raffaele's handwriting goes back and forth from script to letters. There is also an irregularity about how he forms his letters so that particular letters are not always formed the same as the other letters of the same position of the alphabet. This may indicate an impulsive personality, but it may also indicate lack of logic in his thoughts. Also, the crossing of his "T"s doesn't always start from before the stem of the letter. This may indicate he is forgetful or procrastinating, but at least the crossing always touches the stem.

The open loops of Amanda's letters indicates that she is an open trusting person. The extreme regularity of her letters in placement and formation does indicate she is detail oriented. She does have a firm handwriting that indicates an organized mind with self-confidence. However the slight retrograde slant to her writing may indicate a subconscious wariness. (Of course it may just indicate I can't see straight.)

The main thing is that it's all relative to other things. An expert would hesitate to make any determination about a person using just one criteria from that person's handwriting. Using multiple characteristics to discern a pattern makes the analysis more valid. Even so, it is not likely to determine if someone is lying or committed murder.

Reversed Time-Line

Liz Houle claims that Meredith Kercher's body was moved and posed 18 to 20 hours after death. However, assuming the time of death used during the trial, that would mean the staging took place after the body was discovered.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Ms. Houle and the Wrong Direction Woman

How does Ms. Houle verify that the woman in the video was Amanda walking toward the murder when whoever this woman was is walking away from the villa?