Amanda Knox

User avatar
TraumaT
Posts: 3547
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:53 am

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by TraumaT » Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:52 pm

lkwalker wrote:Call me old fashioned, but I still believe that guilt should be established on the basis of evidence rather than some undefined 'common sense.'
I believe the same, actually. I have never said or even thought that Lisa's parents should be convicted simply because of a statement analysis. But it is still a very valuable tool to use in order to determine when someone is lying or just telling part of the truth. It can help the police look in the right direction in an investigation.

Of course I hope the police will find solid forensic evidence. I hope they will find Lisa's body or that one of the parents will make a confession.

User avatar
lkwalker
Posts: 6429
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:20 pm
Location: Boycotteverything
Contact:

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by lkwalker » Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:54 pm

http://toasteddolphin.com/forum/viewtop ... f=46&t=196

For Pam's benefit. Looks like she either missed this- or has no common sense...
"If you don't think to good, don't think too much." Yogi

Pam
Princess Feet
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 9:09 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pam » Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:58 pm

lkwalker wrote:The hacking was proven by HP right here and before your eyes. Or were they closed?
I am talking about prior to that.... at the time it occurred. hp didn't verify this until almost a year later.

And technically..... if it were to go to court, hp confirmed something but he did not have the original PM's..... it could have gone to court and gone either way.

But as I said to you.... don't confuse me of dredging up old history to cause a problem... I did it to explain how what you say is flawed and why....

By the way, I always thought Pack clearly had it in for you and assumed he was the guilty one. What I am trying to say is it depends who the victim is as to how one will react.

User avatar
Pigeon
Posts: 18065
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pigeon » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:00 pm

That was a duzzy. But of course it never happened, based on popular forum theory.

User avatar
Pigeon
Posts: 18065
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pigeon » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:02 pm

"but he did not have the original PM's...."

Haha. Yeah, right. Don't go into police work please....

User avatar
TraumaT
Posts: 3547
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:53 am

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by TraumaT » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:02 pm

Pam wrote:
By the way, I always thought Pack clearly had it in for you and assumed he was the guilty one.
Well, you could have fooled me. While this hacking thing was going on, both at AmKon and HoaxMasters, you seemed perfectly OK with Pack's behaviour. And it is very easy to suddenly state now that you thought he was guilty all along.

Bare nevner det.

User avatar
lkwalker
Posts: 6429
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:20 pm
Location: Boycotteverything
Contact:

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by lkwalker » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:05 pm

I'm amazed by this denial of historical evidence. I could say more but old news is, well... old.
"If you don't think to good, don't think too much." Yogi

User avatar
Pigeon
Posts: 18065
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pigeon » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:08 pm

Demand a screen capture image since those are slight more difficult to fake.

Pam
Princess Feet
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 9:09 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pam » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:10 pm

Pigeon wrote:"but he did not have the original PM's...."

Haha. Yeah, right. Don't go into police work please....
Hahahahahaha.... why didn't you post them then, you do realize that that would have stopped this whole war thing from happening hahahahahahaha

I should have said "he did not produce the original PM's"

But what I was trying to say here is being skewed because some eyes only want to see what they see and not the whole story....

I was using BE's behaviour "at the time" of accusing without so called proof as an example as to what BE is saying to TT now in this thread about her feelings on Amanda Knox or Baby Lisa.

Basically.... I was responding to this post:
lkwalker wrote:Call me old fashioned, but I still believe that guilt should be established on the basis of evidence rather than some undefined 'common sense.'

Common sense has sent many an innocent to the scaffold. Just sayin...
Get it? Practice what you preach so to speak ;)

User avatar
Pigeon
Posts: 18065
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Amanda Knox

Post by Pigeon » Sat Oct 08, 2011 3:15 pm

Doh...

Short of handing out copies of the file containing the database, what would serve as proof.

Post Reply