Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Quote:

Originally Posted by anglolawyer (Post 10838805) I have actually thought of a theory that explain everything. Rudy may well have been a washing machine repair man, providing a 24/7 service, who was called to fix the damn thing by 'Mez' (yuk). That would explain both his presence and the indisputable but otherwise inexplicable fact that the machine was in perfect working order. On your point, as Mach is not here to say it, I will do so for him. It doesn't actually matter whether one can make sense of the washing machine being warm, the point is they lied in failing to explain why it was. This is what also make's Curatolo's evidence decisive. He proves they lied because they did not admit to being in the square and it doesn't matter a jot whether his evidence is internally coherent or a total pack of lies even credible. This is Italian law as we have come to understand it here after prolonged and assiduous study.

Was Rudy's pooh found in the washing machine? Big hole in your theory......

Acc. to Italian procedure it is now up to you to prove no feces in the wash. Why? Because since I can assert it, it must be part of the osmotic consideration.

Due to the size, the previous continuation thread has been, itself, continued here.

Posted By:kmortis

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1fDXsmK