Connections Puzzle #328 Sat 4 May
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Amanda Knox ... NOW do you believe me?
25 Answers
On Friday 22 January
... the Prosecutor who brought the case against Amanda and Rafaelle
was convicted of corruption.
The Criminal convictions against him included ...
... corruption
... criminal abuse of power
... fabricating false evidence
... use of illegal methods to extract statements
He has been given a prison sentence.
And this is the person (sorry ... "convicted corrupt criminal") ...
... who presented the evidence against Amanda.
Italian juries will happily send an American to prison, but to corrupt one of their own law enforcers, he has got to be REALLY bad !!!!
So ... NOW do you believe me !!
... the Prosecutor who brought the case against Amanda and Rafaelle
was convicted of corruption.
The Criminal convictions against him included ...
... corruption
... criminal abuse of power
... fabricating false evidence
... use of illegal methods to extract statements
He has been given a prison sentence.
And this is the person (sorry ... "convicted corrupt criminal") ...
... who presented the evidence against Amanda.
Italian juries will happily send an American to prison, but to corrupt one of their own law enforcers, he has got to be REALLY bad !!!!
So ... NOW do you believe me !!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by joggerjayne. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Are Amanda and Rafaelle appealing?
Yes, of course ... and they will succeed.
Donald trump, on his website, has said for ages that it is the Prosecutor (not Amanda and Rafaelle) who should face a prison sentence.
Well ... now it has happened.
It was the Prosecutor himself who was the real criminal ... but then, we knew that all along.
Yes, of course ... and they will succeed.
Donald trump, on his website, has said for ages that it is the Prosecutor (not Amanda and Rafaelle) who should face a prison sentence.
Well ... now it has happened.
It was the Prosecutor himself who was the real criminal ... but then, we knew that all along.
DSJ ...
Let's think ...
Rudy Guede had previous for for breaking and entering.
One week earlier, he had been arrested for housebreaking ...
... and for the theft of a carving knife.
He had a reputation for forcing himself upon women, and not taking "no" for an answer.
His body fluids were all over Meredith.
The Police never found the actual murder weapon. It had vanished from the scene ... as had Rudy Guede.
Erm ... who did it? ... let me think. Errrrr .... could it have been ...
... Rudy Guede ???
Let's think ...
Rudy Guede had previous for for breaking and entering.
One week earlier, he had been arrested for housebreaking ...
... and for the theft of a carving knife.
He had a reputation for forcing himself upon women, and not taking "no" for an answer.
His body fluids were all over Meredith.
The Police never found the actual murder weapon. It had vanished from the scene ... as had Rudy Guede.
Erm ... who did it? ... let me think. Errrrr .... could it have been ...
... Rudy Guede ???
craft ...
Did you miss the bit about the Prosecutor being convicted of corruption for the methods he used to "Extract" (!) statements from his victims ?
No statement "Extracted" by that vicious animal can be considered to represent anything said by his victims.
And no ... Amanda's original statement (ie before she was beaten by the man now convicted of criminal abuse of power) did not even mention the barman. The police screwed that one out of her under interrogation.
Did you miss the bit about the Prosecutor being convicted of corruption for the methods he used to "Extract" (!) statements from his victims ?
No statement "Extracted" by that vicious animal can be considered to represent anything said by his victims.
And no ... Amanda's original statement (ie before she was beaten by the man now convicted of criminal abuse of power) did not even mention the barman. The police screwed that one out of her under interrogation.
-- answer removed --
hail ...
I'm not related. But I am utterly convinced that sha and Rafaelle were stitched up.
Early on in the case, as soon as I read the name of the Prosecutor who had "procuced" the so-called evidence, I smelt a rat.
About 2 years earlier, the same Prosecutor had arrested an innocent English guy, and threatened him, if he did not confess to "crimes" of which he was entirely innocent. Unfortunately for the Prosecutor, that guy was a journalist on The Guardian, who then exposed Mignini for the corrupt criminal that he is.
When the Knox case first broke, and I saw that it was Mignini who was leading it ... I smelt corruption.
Since then, every bit of evidence has the taint of a corrupt and evil Prosecutor, who has now been given a prison sentence for his evil ways.
I truly believe that they are innocent, and there has been a frightening miscarriage of justice ... and a victory of publicity over real evidence.
I'm not related. But I am utterly convinced that sha and Rafaelle were stitched up.
Early on in the case, as soon as I read the name of the Prosecutor who had "procuced" the so-called evidence, I smelt a rat.
About 2 years earlier, the same Prosecutor had arrested an innocent English guy, and threatened him, if he did not confess to "crimes" of which he was entirely innocent. Unfortunately for the Prosecutor, that guy was a journalist on The Guardian, who then exposed Mignini for the corrupt criminal that he is.
When the Knox case first broke, and I saw that it was Mignini who was leading it ... I smelt corruption.
Since then, every bit of evidence has the taint of a corrupt and evil Prosecutor, who has now been given a prison sentence for his evil ways.
I truly believe that they are innocent, and there has been a frightening miscarriage of justice ... and a victory of publicity over real evidence.
