Headsup: In "Talking To Strangers" Malcom Gladwell lied to his readers with an inaccurate and venomous attack on Italian justice that gives aid to the mafias. Below is the seventh of maybe 10 posts providing the ACCURATE information Gladwell should have done. Series starts here.

Tuesday, October 08, 2019

Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #5 Bra Clasp

Posted by The Machine



Dr Stefanoni with Dr Mignini, two world-class professionals

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.

1. This Evidence Series Overview

In 35 paragraphs Malcolm Gladwell made 35 false claims in his angry diatribe pro-Knox.

We have seen before - mostly long ago and now long gone - numerous incompetents with chips on their shoulders toward police and courts and Italians and even all non-Americans, and a besotted attitude toward a false Knox.

And now Gladwell, all of a sudden, leapfrogs all of them.

In our very first post we quoted Gladwell quoting the hoaxer Peter Gill on the DNA as if he was the word of God. The slightest checking would have revealed that as a hoax.

This is the fifth in my sub-series on Gladwell’s demonstrably false claim that there was no physical evidence linking Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito to Meredith’s attack and death.

2. The Bra Clasp Evidence STILL Stands Up

First, bear in mind that the potshots taken at this DNA evidence were from thousands of miles away. None except Hampikian had even visited any Italian lab.

The hoaxer Hampikian visited only the lab of the 2011 “independent experts” at first appeal, who he was illegally trying to bias - with American science which was behind European science at the time.

Check this out for why that lab was closed down. Among other reasons, human bodies were lying around. Nice team Gladwell has picked for himself… 

As with the footprints, Gladwell completely ignores the bra clasp DNA evidence in his book. Maybe not a surprise. Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was quite definitely on that clasp.

Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found in profusion on Meredith’s bra clasp. His DNA was identified by two separate DNA tests. Of the 17 loci tested in the sample, Sollecito’s profile matched 17 out of 17.

“Both by the quantity of DNA analyzed and by the fact of having performed the analysis at 17 loci with unambiguous results, not to mention the fact that the results of the analysis were confirmed by the attribution of the Y haplotype to the defendant, it is possible to say that it has been judicially ascertained that Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was present on the exhibit; an exhibit that was therefore handled by the defendant on the night of the murder.” (The Nencini report, page 267).

David Balding, a professor of statistical genetics at University College London, analysed the DNA evidence against Sollecito and concluded that the evidence was “strong”

“…because Sollecito is fully represented in the stain at 15 loci (we still only use 10 in the UK, so 15 is a lot), the evidence against him is strong…”

In Andrea Vogt’s excellent BBC documentary he said the bra clasp evidence against Sollecito was “extremely strong”.

DNA expert and creator and former head of the Caribinieri labs, General Professor Luciano Garofano, said the result of the DNA test on the bra clasp was “perfect”.

Numerous forensic experts have effectively ruled out contamination at the cottage

Professor Balding of London University also said Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith on Meredith’s bra clasp can’t be explained by environmental contamination.

He also said there was a “much greater likelihood“ that the DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp came from Sollecito and that’s the reason why it’s “extremely strong“ evidence against him.

He told Chris Halkides that people walking in and out of the room etc would be unlikely to contaminate the bra clasp.

On the BBC documentary, he said contamination from passers-by isn’t an issue and that he has taken that into account and it’s extremely unlikely.

Professor Novelli pointed out there’s more likelihood of meteorite striking the courtroom in Perugia than there is of the bra clasp being contaminated by dust.

“The hook contaminated by dust? It’s more likely for a meteorite to fall and bring this court down to the ground.”

Alberto Intini, the head of the Italian police forensic science unit, also excluded environmental contamination at the Massei trial because “DNA doesn’t fly.”

Professor Torricelli testified that it was unlikely the clasp was contaminated because there was a significant amount of Sollecito’s DNA on it.

It’s almost impossible for the Scientific Police to have contaminated the bra clasp at the cottage.


Some of Amanda Knox’s supporters once tried to claim a forensic technician transferred Meredith’s DNA onto the bra clasp - which would be tertiary transfer.

However, there’s not one scientific study published in a prestigious, peer-reviewed journal demonstrating tertiary transfer of touch DNA.

Amanda Knox’s supporters long ago claimed that there was a speck of dust on one of the gloves of a forensic technician, but it’s impossible to obtain a full DNA profile from dust. Sollecito’s DNA on the bra clasp was a full DNA profile.

Numerous forensic experts have effectively ruled out contamination in the laboratory

Dr Stefanoni last handled Sollecito’s DNA 12 days before she analysed the bra clasp. This means that contamination couldn’t have occurred in the laboratory.

Judge Chieffi noted that Conti and Vecchiotti had excluded contamination in the laboratory.

“Laboratory contamination was also excluded by these experts [Conti and Vecchiotti].” (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 92).

Professor Novelli ruled out contamination in the laboratory.

“Prof. Novelli said that the origin or vehicle of any contamination must be demonstrated: he added that at the Scientific Police laboratory he had seen the 255 samples [68] extracted, had analysed all the profiles, and had not found any evidence of contamination; he ruled out in an absolutely convincing manner that a contamination agent could be present intermittently, or that DNA could remain suspended, and later fall down in a specific place.” (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 94).

Judge Chieffi also noted in his Supreme Court report that the negative controls to exclude laboratory contamination had been carried out:

“since all the negative controls to exclude it [contamination] had been done by Dr Stefanoni.”  (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 93).

When the defence experts observed the DNA tests being carried at Dr Stefanoni’s laboratory in Rome, they had no objections.

“the probative facts revealed by the technical consultant [Stefanoni] were based on investigative activities that were adequately documented: sampling activity performed under the very eyes of the consultants of the parties, who raised no objection.” (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 93).

The Scientific Police didn’t find a source for Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp anywhere the cottage

Judge Chieffi pointed out that Sollecito’s DNA was never found alone at the cottage in his Supreme Court report. The only trace of his DNA was mixed with Knox’s DNA on the cigarette butt in the kitchen. This means the mixed DNA sample could not have been the source of the DNA on the clasp because Knox’s DNA would also have been found on it.

‘’Sollecito’s DNA was never found alone [at the crime scene], as the only trace of his that was collected and analysed was the one on the cigarette stub found in the ashtray of the kitchen in Knox’s flat, mixed with Knox’s DNA. Thus, even if perchance we wanted to assume that DNA had migrated from the kitchen to the room of the young Englishwoman, we would also have had to find Knox’s DNA on the bra clasp.’ (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 92).




3. Conclusions On This Evidence

You have to place the bra clasp evidence into the wider context of the other pieces of evidence against Sollecito i.e. his multiple false alibis and numerous lies to the police, the bloody footprint on the bathmat that matched the precise characteristics of his foot, the bare bloody footprint revealed by Luminol that matched his foot and the fact Meredith’s DNA was found on the blade of his kitchen knife.

Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA was found on the exact part of Meredith’s bra clasp that had been bent out of shape during the attack on her. It is far more plausible that his DNA ended up on the deformed clasp because he applied enough pressure to bend it out of shape than to believe his DNA was carried by a gust of air or floated on a speck of dust and landed on it by some incredible coincidence.

Why should a judge or juror favor a lower probability transfer scenario - tertiary transfer via sloppy forensic technicians - over a higher probability transfer scenario - primary transfer in the course of murder, especially when you consider all the other pieces if evidence against Sollecito?

Malcolm Gladwell hasn’t addressed the bra clasp evidence let alone refuted it.

He hasn’t explained why numerous renowned DNA experts - Dr Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr Renato Biondo, Professor Luciano Garofano, Professor Giuseppe Novelli, Professor Francesca Torricelli and Professor David Balding - are wrong about its probative value.

He hasn’t even explained where Sollecito’s DNA came from and how it ended up on Meredith’s bra clasp.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (12)

Wednesday, October 02, 2019

There’s This Powerful Evidence Of Knox’s Crimescene Presence - Locked Right Inside Meredith’s Room

Posted by James Raper



Red star, where lamp found; blue star, lamp’s normal position

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. The Lamp Tellingly Not Mentioned In Knox’s Book

During the case it was frequently suggested that there was no actual evidence of Knox’s presence in “the murder room”, i.e in Meredith’s bedroom.

Now, years later, this is parroted by Malcolm Gladwell.

However this is to ignore the presence of her desk arc lamp there, not to mention a preponderance of other circumstantial evidence, including a knife with Meredith’s DNA on it’s blade in Sollecito’s kitchen.

Also, by the way, one must ignore, as the 5th Chambers of the Supreme Court duly noted, the compelling forensic evidence that Knox had washed Meredith’s blood off her hands in the small bathroom. Quite how she had blood on her hands without her having been in the room, which was locked until forced open, would be a mystery though the 5th Chambers explained “her contact with the victim’s blood would have occurred after the crime and in another part of the house.”

“Would have”? Yea, right! So come on, show us where that other blood is! If, perchance, they meant blood that had been removed then who, one wonders, would have done that? The 5th Chambers did not even ask itself the question, but in any event it accepted that Knox was in the cottage at the time of the murder.

Back to the lamp.

2. Who Had Reason To Move The Lamp

The bald facts are that Knox had such a lamp which was the only source of illumination for her own room. When Meredith’s locked door was forced open, Knox’s lamp was found on the floor immediately behind it.

What was it doing there? This was not a question that was ever adequately adressed by any of the judges when considering her complicity in the murder.





Let us redress that oversight.

Knox denied knowing that her lamp was in Meredith’s room and has never offered a plausible, indeed innocent, explanation for it being there. Accordingly we can rule out that Knox had lent it to Meredith at any time.

This leaves us with two possible options; that either Meredith or Rudy Guede had taken it from Knox’s bedroom, without her consent, and for some purpose.

Why would Meredith have done this? She had a wall light above her bed and her own desk lamp, neither of which were not working. Even if she had, why on the night of (and in the no more than two hours before) her murder, only to leave it on the floor behind her door? There is no reason at all to believe that Meredith had borrowed the lamp just prior to her death that evening.

Likewise, no plausible explanation can be offered for Guede taking the lamp.

If Knox was unaware that her lamp was there, could she have been unaware that it was not in her room?

Two days after the discovery of the murder this is what Knox wrote in her e-mail, referring to the discovery of Filomena’s broken window after she and Sollecito had returned to the cottage –

Convinced that we had been robbed I went to Laura’s room and looked quickly in, but it was spotless like it hadn’t even been touched. This, too, I thought was odd. I then went into the part of the house that Meredith and I share and checked my room for things missing, which there weren’t.

How could she have possibly have missed it? Her own room was quite small and cramped and the desk lamp should have been either on her desk or her bedside table. It would have been a fairly prominent item, and an important one, because she had no other means of illumination,  and it’s absence would be impossible to miss even if, while checking, she was only paying mimimal attention.

Furthermore, according to her account she had been in and out of her room when visiting the cottage earlier that morning. She had undressed for a shower in her room but had to return for a towel, and then return to her room again to get dressed. Never noticed that her lamp was missing be it she had no reason to actually check on that occasion.

Knox was, of course, lying (there are many aspects of her e-mail which are simply not credible) but she had to say that she checked her room because there had been a burglary, had there not? She has to convey the impression that she herself believed, innocently, that there had been a genuine burglary and in doing so she was hoping to draw the investigators’ attention away from two important matters. The first was that the burglary was staged. That is now a settled judicial fact in the case. The second was that there had been a post murder manipulation of the crime scene by the removal of blood traces, though ultimately the Supreme Court did not accord this the status of a judicial fact, largely due to obfuscation on it’s part, and a tendency to put the telescope to it’s blind eye.

Furthermore the Supreme Court did not mention Knox’s lamp at all.

Obviously it’s presence, in the position in which it was found, in Meredith’s room, plays into the notion of a post murder manipulation of the crime scene. If Meredith is a most unlikely agent for it being there, then how do we rate Knox and Guede’s agency?

Knox’s lamp and Meredith’s lamp were both on the floor, at either end of Meredith’s bed. This suggests that they were being used to check under the bed as this area, with the wall light on, would have been in shadow.

It is difficult to imagine what incriminating item Guede would have been looking for and why it would have been of particular importance to him, to the extent that he ignored everything else. We have to bear in mind that the room already had incriminating forensic traces of his presence there, and fairly obvious ones at that, which it never occurred to him to remove. We know that he had blood on the sole of his left shoe but the positioning of these prints did not indicate that he was looking under the bed. No, they went straight from Meredith’s room to the front door, not even changing direction to lock Meredith’s door, enter the small bathroom, or Filomena’s room.

It is admittedly speculation but Knox might have been looking for an earring. She’d had her ear pierced several times and from a photograph of her taken by the press outside the cottage we can see that one of her earrings is missing.

The very presence of that lamp there has to be considered as potentially incriminating and of Knox. It is a fact that has to be assessed and evaluated, and Knox would surely have appreciated that questions would be asked and that adverse inferences could be drawn. That this is obvious is recognized even by her own supporters whose response is to take Knox’s e-mail at face value and claim that her lamp was a plant by the police.

Yes, really.

The lamp is part of the overwhelming circumstantial case against Knox and, I would argue, has had a particular resonance for her since, so much so that she has always simply ignored it.

Why would she leave it there? Probably for the same reason that she did not get around to removing the trace of her own blood on the faucet of the sink in the small bathroom. Not thinking clearly because she was shattered, having been up all night and, probably, as a result of having indulged in drugs and/or alcohol.

In any event it was left behind. An oversight which, at some point, must have occurred to her. When might that have happened? It would have had to be when she was no longer in possession of Meredith’s keys or, at least not in a position to retrieve these in time given the train of events set in motion.

A perpetrator would not want to be found in possession of those keys. On the face of it the keys could have been taken by Guede, but clearly the keys had remained in the possession of those who had arranged the staged burglary and the post murder manipulation of the crime scene, and it is very improbable (as argued elsewhere) that Guede had any involvement with that.

Very probably the keys were tossed away into heavy undergrowth afterwards, or disposed of down some drain and then, some time later, Knox had the sudden realisation that this left her and Sollecito with a problem. She could not simply retrieve the lamp and return it to her room without breaking down Meredith’s door.

Actually that could have been done, though not without some difficulty, and it would have fitted with a burglary and a violent assault on Meredith, though here the intelligent observer would have to assume from the circumstances, and no doubt Knox and Sollecito would have pondered on this, that Meredith had surprisingly been unable to thwart the lone intruder, had locked herself in to her room with her phones still with her, and would have undoubtedly called the emergency number for the police while all this, and the breaking down of her door, was going on.

However when exactly the oversight occurred to her would also be critical. I personally believe that it was much later than most people would think. I do not think that the plan to stage a burglary and remove the blood traces from the corridor was put into operation until after they had listened to music for half an hour from 5.30 am and maybe was still in operation when Knox was seen by Quintavalle at his store at 7.45 am. When they had finished that I have no idea but it would have been at a time in the morning when it was unlikely that anyone i.e Filomena would come calling. And they could still have cleared off to Gubio for the day.

So, throwing away the keys could be after, say, 9 am, and then some time after the dreadful realisation dawns.

Perhaps it was always the case that Knox and Sollecito needed to be present when the murder was discovered, and in circumstances which they could control in such a manner as to convince others of their complete lack of complicity in what had happened. Maybe much of what then happened had already been pre-planned, including the story of Knox visiting the cottage to have a shower etc.

If one assumes this and that then Knox realises her mistake with the lamp, then what subsequently transpired makes a lot more sense.

A discovery process which had initially seemed manageable became, with her error, laden with danger. The lamp had to be retrieved but, with Sollecito’s assistance, this could still be achieved in the confusion of Filomena and her friends attending the cottage and breaking down the door themselves. Should Filomena have perhaps baulked at the idea of doing any damage then I suspect Knox and Sollecito would have pressed her to authorise this, if not actually do this themselves, and just how innocent would that have then made them look! Win, win. What would complicate matters was if the police were also there, imposing order and preserving a crime scene, and so the possibility of anyone alerting the police had to be delayed.


Now let us look at the phone records with the above in mind.

3. Zooming In On The Timing Of Events

From 12.07 until 12.35 am on the morning of the discovery of the murder, Knox and Filomena exchanged telephone calls, whereby Knox slowly ramped up the worry on Filomena’s part as to what was going on and Meredith’s safety. As a consequence of the first call, by Knox, made from Sollecito’s bedsit, Filomena asked her to check certain things out e.g ring Meredith’s phones and keep her informed, but otherwise had not heard enough to indicate that she herself needed to return to the cottage, or that the police needed to be involved.

However Filomena remained concerned and called Knox three more times until Knox answered her from the cottage at 12.35 to inform her that her bedroom window had been broken and her room had been trashed. Knox would have been fully aware what the effect would have been of the latter call. Filomena was adamant. Knox had to call the police. More importantly, for Knox, Filomena would now definitely be returning to the cottage. Who would get there first? Filomena or the police? The answer, for Knox, would not be in doubt. It was another 16 minutes before Sollecito called the 112 number, time enough for Filomena and her friend (who were on the road when they had spoken) to arrive before the police.

At 12.47 whilst awaiting the arrival of Filomena, Knox called her mother.

The circumstances of that call are extremely puzzling. In retrospect I think the call was simply to fill in time and keep her nerves steady.

As to that call (4.47 am Seattle time, while Edda and Chris were still asleep, and prior to the discovery of Meredith‘s body) Knox not only did not mention that in her e-mail but in taped conversation with her mother and in her trial testimony she steadfastly declined to recall that it had occurred. Ostensibly the call would have been, of course, to report the break in. So what would be the problem with that? On the other hand, what was so important about it that her mother should know, and at that moment? Knox was aware of the time difference between Italy and Seattle, and that it would have been early in the morning in Seattle, as she acknowledged in her trial testimony. If Knox had a premonition then why not wait a little longer for resolution? Indeed, Edda’s puzzlement with her daughter was expressed on tape as follows –

A: Oh, I don’t remember this.

M: OK, you’d called me once telling me…

A: Honestly, maybe I was shocked.

M: Yes, but this happened before anything had really happened, besides the house…

A: I know that I was calling, but I remember that I was calling Filomena; I don’t remember having called anyone else, and so the whole thing of having called you… I don’t remember.

M: Mhmm… why? Do you think? Stress?

Knox clearly did not want to discuss her motive for the call, then nor later, nor as to what had transpired in conversation with her mother (and stepfather) before the discovery of Meredith’s body.

On her Facebook page Knox had written that she enjoyed new situations and “the bigger and scarier the rollercoaster the better”. Well, her error was going to make for one mother of a rollercoaster, one that would scare the life out of her.

Not only was the timing of the 12.47 call inconvenient to her mother but I found it interesting to note from Knox’s phone records (covering 2nd Oct - 3rd November) that mother and daughter do not appear to have called or texted each other once by phone up until that 12.47 call. It would appear then that in so far as they remained in direct communication with each other for that period it must have been by e-mail or Skype. Indeed Knox has referred to such communication being via internet café. One can therefore imagine that her mother was very surprised to receive that call. It is also very difficult to accept that Knox could not recall a phone call she was not in the habit of making.

Until Knox published her book the only information that was available about the 12.47 call (apart from the phone log which showed that it lasted 88 seconds) came from her mother (who reported that her daughter was concerned about the break in) and her stepfather Chris Mellas. Mellas says that he interrupted the conversation between mother and daughter to tell Amanda to get out of the cottage. In her book Knox tells us (her memory now having returned) that he yelled at her but that she was “spooked” enough without that. But what had really happened to spook her? It was just a burglary after all, even if the matter of Meredith’s whereabouts was as yet unresolved. None of her own possessions had been stolen.

Furthermore Filomena was on her way to take charge. The call she made to her mother after the discovery of the murder (the one she remembered) was perfectly understandable, the prior call, without further context, less so.  Readers will already know where I am coming from, but I believe that it was whilst walking back to the cottage with Sollecito that Knox realised her mistake with the lamp. However, it could have been earlier than that. In any event this realisation would have set the cat amongst the pigeons for her. So, it was both a comfort and a rehearsal call, not simply because there had been a burglary, but because she knew a hazardous set of events was about to unfold on Romanelli’s arrival at the cottage. The fact that her mother and stepfather already had the jitters was not a good omen.

Still, retrieving the lamp and returning it to her own room remained perfectly feasible, provided the police were not there. However Romanelli had yet to arrive and time was running out. Both Knox and Sollecito knew that any further delay in calling the police would look suspicious. Finally they did so, at 12.51, though it is probable that the postal police had unexpectedly arrived before then. In my book I have argued that the likely time of arrival of the postal police was probably about 12.48-9. Indeed that may have been why Knox brought her call to her mother to an end.  (e.g “Looks as if someone is coming. Gotta go now.”)  I wonder if that is another reason why Knox would not want to remember the call, particularly during the taped conversation with her mother in the prison. She would not want to prompt her mother to that recollection. That wouldn’t fit with the claim, as related to the postal police, that they had already called the Carabinieri. In any event, the opportunity to retrieve the lamp had been lost.

I have always thought that the oddities in Knox’s own account of events reveal and explain much even if, ostensibly, she appears to be giving an innocent account of everything. In her e-mail she refers to her panic and specifically links this to concern over Meredith’s whereabouts and safety. However the panic had apparently suddenly subsided, and her concern was significantly lacking, non-existent actually, when the postal police made their surprise entrance before the arrival of Filomena and her friends. We can also see why she says, before that, that Sollecito would want, and allegedly attempt, to break Meredith’s door open.

Had I been in Knox’s shoes, and with a mutual alibi with Sollecito, I too would have thought the discovery of the murder of “my best friend” would have been manageable, but for that damned lamp. There would be questions to be answered, of course, but she had already thought all that through, hadn’t she?

As it happened, things did not turn out too bad for her in the immediate aftermath. She was not, she thought, under immediate suspicion as she must have feared she would be. Seemingly nobody had twigged to the lamp business, nor to the staged burglary. She must have thought the police immensely stupid for her to have got away with that, as she thought she had. She was also the centre of attention and coping reasonably well, but for that dicey moment when she was shown the drawer of knives in the kitchen. Her confidence had soared sufficiently for her to even claim that she had checked her room and had found nothing missing!

In her e-mail she also wrote –

It was then that we decided to call the cops……. [Raffaele] first called his sister for advice and then called the Carabinieri. I then called Filomena who said she would be on her way home immediately. While we were waiting two ununiformed police investigators came to our house. I showed them what I could and told them what I knew. Gave them phone numbers and explained a bit in broken Italian, and then Filomena arrived with her boyfriend Marco-f and two other friends of hers. All together we checked the house out, talked to the police and in a big [word missing] they all opened Meredith’s door. I was [standing] aside really having done my part for the situation.

Knox is in overdrive here. First of all, she did not call Filomena in their last telephone conversation. It was the other way around. Secondly, that call was not after Sollecito had called 112. Thus she has the 112 call some 16 minutes before it was actually made rather than 16 minutes after it should have been made. And finally, what does she mean by saying “I was standing aside really having done my part for the situation”?

The “situation”? That rollercoaster has turned into barely concealed “duper’s delight”!

But wait! What were those “hard facts” she claims the police had mentioned later during her interview?

Let me see. Hmm. Suspicions, certainly. The locked door, the lamp, the quilt, the staged burglary? An e-mail in which she is is just a bit too full of herself and the content of which, in places, was just a bit too unreal, daffy and lah-di-dah, to be true? The strange and inappropriate behaviour at the police station? No wonder she didn’t ask the police to elaborate.

4. Additional Information On The Lamp

This is adapted from my book (US version and UK version). There is additional information in Parts 3-6 including Knox’s trial questioning of this previous slightly different version.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (23)

Saturday, September 28, 2019

Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #4 Staged Break-In

Posted by The Machine



Jury in 2009: “How did huge rock fit through tiny crack?”

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. Series Overview

This is the fourth in my series de-hoaxing the Gladwell claim of “no evidence”.

The zombie “there is no evidence” hoax that Gladwell bizarrely revives was never attempted in Italy. News of it caused giggles and irritation in Italy as this post on the pricey and ineffective Knox-Mellas family lawyer (who soon exited, no surprise there) attests. 

It was a claim very frequently made (and then shot down) by the self-serving hoaxers listed in Part 4(3) of this post.

2. How Guede As Stager Was Ruled Out

Malcolm Gladwell ignores yet another of the myriad incriminating area of physical evidence against Amanda Knox: the break-in hoax.

That the providing of even the slightest proof that the break-in via Filomena’s window was real, and not staged from within, was one of the worst failures by the defenses.

All courts up to the Italian Supreme Court (several times) determined that the break-in was staged, and it was not staged by Guede as Gladwell presumably thinks

These determinations are judicial facts, not subject to appeal. In the Supreme Court report concluding Guede’s legal process in 2010 with his guilt reaffirmed, Judge Giordano wrote:

And it should also be noted, as the judges of the lower courts have correctly held, that following the murder an activity occurred intended to simulate an attempted theft, which the judges of lower courts and the defence of the same appellant agree was an operation done by others and not by the defendant.” (Judge Giordano’s Supreme Court report).

In 2013 the Italian Supreme Court criticised Judge Hellmann (in the course of their annulment of his bent 2011 “not guilty” outcome of Knox’s and Sollecito’s first appeal) for ignoring these judical facts because they are held to be indisputable.

...to the reconstruction made in the context of Rudy Guede’s murder trials, the outcome of which became definitive with the judgment handed down by this Court on 16 December 2010, during which the simulation was held to be undisputed and certainly attributable to individuals other than Guede.

Judge Chieffi explained why it’s an indisputable fact that the break-in at the cottage was staged in that Supreme Court report.

The conclusion that the crime had been simulated was based on a series of facts with a high level of probative value constituting a valid inferential basis, on the strength of which the first instance statement of reasons produced a logical dissertation (pages 35‐42) anchored in the facts that:

(1) nothing (not even jewellery or the computer) was missing from Romanelli’s room, which was the focal point;

(2) there was no evidence of climbing on the outside wall of the house over the distance of 3.5 meters from the ground to the window through which the phantom burglar supposedly entered, nor was there any trace of trampling on the grass on the ground underneath the window;

(3) there were no traces of the blood of the climber on the window sill, which he would have had to grip among the glass shards in order to sneak inside the room;

(4) the glass shards were found on the inside but not on the outside of the window, a sign that the rock was thrown with the outside shutters closed, forming a shield that prevented pieces of glass from spraying to the outside;

(5) the shards were found in abundance on top of the clothes and objects ransacked by the alleged intruder, proving that this ransacking had occurred before the window was broken;

(6) the sound of the rock, hypothetically thrown from the ground, had not startled the young English woman so as to make her call for help outside the house before being attacked (given the lapse of time between the throwing the stone and the climbing up the wall). (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, pages 63-64).

Judge Chieffi also noted that the trail of Rudy Guede’s didn’t go into Filomena’s room because his bloody shoeprints led straight from Meredith’s room and out of the cottage.

...asserted that the bloody shoeprints of the aforementioned [Rudy Guede] indicated the path he took from the unfortunate Meredith’s room to the main door of the house without going into Romanelli’s room, given that ‐ as was previously stated ‐ the traces of blood of the victim mark the path taken by Guede without any deviation. (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 64).

This is the core explanation of the Supreme Court for determining why Rudy Guede could not have staged the break-in.

It’s worth repeating and highlighting this fact: there were shards of glass on top of the clothes and objects on the floor of Filomena’s room. This proves the window was broken AFTER the room was ransacked.

Four witnesses, including two police officers, said there were shards of glass on top of the clothes on Filomena’s floor.

Michele Battistelli, the Postal Police inspector, expressed himself on this point in the following way during the prosecution hearing at trial on 6 February 2009:

... it was a little topsy-turvy, in the sense that it was mostly … There was clothing out, thrown around a bit, and scattered pieces of glass. Glass pieces were on the floor and the curious thing, which stood out for me, is that these glass pieces were on top of the clothing.

I noticed this to the point where I started playing with the notion, in the sense that I immediately said that, for me this was a simulation of what I was seeing, basically this…

The things that I noticed, the camera, the computer, if they played into the theory of a hypothetical burglary, I saw that inside the house practically everything was there. There was a laptop, a digital camera, things that can be easily taken, so…”. [Transcript of the 6 February 2009 hearing, Trial Court, Page 65 et al.]

And testimony from Filomena herself:

Picking up the computer I noticed that I lifted some glass, in the sense that the glass was on top of things. I remember very well [the glass] on top of the computer bag because I was careful as it was all covered with glass.

We mentioned this, saying, the burglar was an idiot, he did not take anything… the jewelry is here, the computer is here… and in addition to the fact that he didn’t take anything, the pieces of glass are all on top of the things.(Filomena Romanelli, Amanda Knox’s housemate, at trial).

Pernicious Knox troll Bruce Fischer tried to claim, unsubstantiated as is usual for him, that the break-in wasn’t staged because Filomena’s clothes were already on the floor.

But in her trial testimony, unshaken by the defenses, Filomena made it crystal clear that her room had been ransacked.

I entered my room and I saw the broken window and everything in chaos, the clothing, a big mess, everything was all disheveled, everything ... Everything scattered, there was the open closet, a mess on the desk, everything out of place.

In his 2009 trial report, Judge Massei noted that she was tidy:

As she is usually very orderly… (The Massei report, page 53).

In 2014 at the rerun of the first appeal, Judge Nencini highlighted the fact there were shards of glass on top of the clothes and objects on the floor in his report.

The fact that the glass fragments from the window wound up on top of the strewn clothing and objects… is surely incompatible with a breaking of the glass in a phase preceding the ransacking inside the room of the apartment.

The window glass evidently was broken after entry into the cottage, by someone who was already inside and had already arranged the disorder that was then seen by the witnesses.(The Nencini report).

In 2015 even Judge Marasca of the Supreme Court who illegally mis-stated much evidence drew attention to this fact in his report.

And moreover, the staging of a theft in Romanelli’s room, which she [Knox] is accused of, is also a relevant point within an incriminating picture, considering the elements of strong suspicion (location of glass shards - apparently resulting from the breaking of a glass window pane caused by the throwing of a rock from the outside - on top of the clothes and furniture)...

... a staging which can be linked to someone who as an author of the murder and flatmate with a formal connection to the dwelling - had an interest to steer suspicion away from himself/herself…

... while a third murderer in contrast would be motivated by a very different urge after the killing, that is to leave the dwelling as quickly as possible.” (Judge Marasca’s Supreme Court report).


3. Who Did Stage The Break-in?

Judge Massei determined that Amanda Knox had tracked Meredith’s blood into Filomena’s room, because their DNA was found mixed on the floor.

It was also said of the traces highlighted by Luminol and of how these very traces, because of the certain presence of blood in abundance in the house and because of the lack of indication, beyond the mere hypotheses made, of substances which could actually have been present and present in various areas, indicate that Amanda (with her feet stained with Meredith’s blood from having been present in her room when she was killed) had gone into Romanelli’s room and into her own room…

Leaving traces [which were] highlighted by Luminol, some of which (one in the corridor, the L8, and one, the L2, in Romanelli’s room) were mixed, that is, constituted of a biological trace attributable to [both] Meredith and Amanda, and others with traces attributable only to Amanda (the three found in her own room and indicated as L3, L4 and L5) and only to the victim (one found in Romanelli’s room (the L1). (The Massei report, page 380).

His “from the outside” was of course without proof, and so an illegal finding, but his court went along with the glass shards.

One of the trial prosecutors, Dr Mignini, argued the staged break-in was the key to resolving the mystery. As Barbie Nadeau reported on 20 November 2009:

Dr Mignini’s closing arguments late in 2009 focused not only on Knox’s alleged guilt in the murder, but on her dominance over Sollecito and Guede.

The prosecutor also recounted the other charges against her, including staging a crime scene, which he believes is proof of Knox’s involvement. He described a bedroom in the back of the house the girls shared where a window had been broken with a large rock, as he described, “to create the illusion of a break-in the night of the murder.”

Dr Mignini tried to transport the jurors into the house through visual images and provocative suggestions. “The key to this mystery lies in the bedroom of Filomena Romanelli,” another tenant in the house, he told the jury.

“The window was broken from the inside, not the outside. The glass was on top of the clothes that had been strewn around the room, not under them. The break-in was staged and Knox is the one who did it.” (Barbie Nadeau, The Daily Beast).

In another report Barbie Nadeau stated that the mixed-blood evidence in Filomena’s room seems the most damning piece of evidence against Amanda Knox.

The only forensic evidence against Knox is the presence in her house of five spots where the blood and DNA of the roommates had commingled. Of those five, the most damning is a drop of Kercher’s blood with Knox’s DNA found (with the aid of Luminol, a substance used in crime-scene investigations to find blood that has been cleaned up) in the bedroom of Filomena Romanelli, one of the two Italian women who also lived in the house.

The prosecution alleges that a break-in was staged by Knox and Sollecito in Romanelli’s room: the window was broken with a large rock and the room was ransacked, but nothing was taken—even, though expensive sunglasses and jewelry were in plain sight. Clothes were pulled from Romanelli’s dresser drawers but the glass shards from the broken window were found on top of them, leading police to believe that the window was broken after the ransacking took place, not before.

Barbie Nadeau added that the defence didn’t prove a counter scenario to the staged break-in.

The defense did not contest any of the lab results, or provide a counter scenario to the staged break-in, or offer testimony to explain why Knox may also have been bleeding (except to say that it is common to find mixed DNA from two people who shared a house).

Judge Massei in 2009 and Judge Nencini in early 2014 both convicted Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito of staging the break-in at the cottage.

In 2015 Judge Marasca of the Supreme Court curiously didn’t confirm Knox’s and Sollecito’s convictions for staging the break-in at the cottage, despite noting that it can be linked to someone who had a connection to the cottage.

“And moreover, the staging of a theft in Romanelli’s room, which she is accused of, is also a relevant point within an incriminating picture, considering the elements of strong suspicion (location of glass shards - apparently resulting from the breaking of a glass window pane caused by the throwing of a rock from the outside - on top of the clothes and furniture) a staging…

... which can be linked to someone who as an author of the murder and flatmate with a formal connection to the dwelling - had an interest to steer suspicion away from himself/herself, while a third murderer in contrast would be motivated by a very different urge after the killing, that is to leave the dwelling as quickly as possible.


4. Conclusion On the Staging

Malcolm Gladwell claims withtout his own proof that there’s no evidence linking Amanda Knox to Meredith’s murder and the investigation was botched.

Well, yes there was, as all courts ruled. Please see above.

This renowned intellectual hasn’t even provided a single argument of his own in his book to substantiate his claims - he just provides a short and misleading quotation from Peter Gill.

Providing proof is essential in academia, science and law. It’s one of the most basic skills taught in schools.

This eccentric and unworldy academic reminds me of an insufferably arrogant student who sits an examination and then writes nothing on his paper because he doesn’t need to.

I’ve seen no evidence of his renowned intelligence. He certainly hasn’t displayed any higher-order thinking skills such as hard facts, analysis, and evaluation here.

5. Some Of The Supporting Posts On TJMK

Click for Post:  Ted “There Is No Evidence” Simon’s Tired Mantra Misinforms Americans And Provokes Italian Hard Line

Click for Post:  Amanda Knox Confirms She Staged A Break-In in Seattle Long A Sore Point To Previous Victims

Click for Post:  Understanding Micheli #2: Why Judge Micheli Rejected The Lone-Wolf Theory

Click for Post:  Understanding Micheli #4: The Staged Scene - Who Returned To Move Meredith?

Click for Post:  Powerpoints #8: Forced Entry Via Filomena’s Window Fails The Giggle Test

Click for Post:  This Was Definitely Not A Close Or Indecisive Case - Reasonable Doubt Was In Fact Totally Eliminated

Click for Post:  A Visual Guide To The Staged Break-In Via Filomena’s Window

Click for Post:  How Much Or How Little To Blame Rudy Guede? The Defenses’ Immense Headache Coming Up

Click for Post:  Why Is Appeal Prosecutor Crini So Very, Very Interested In The Precise Position Of Filomena’s Door?

Click for Post:  The New 80,000 Pound Gorilla In The Room Introduced By The Italian Supreme Court

Click for Post:  The Seattle University Panel: Some Of The Ways In Which Steve Moore Got His Analysis Wrong

Click for Post:  Another Prominent US Legal Commentator On The Evidence Points That Simply Won’t Go Away

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (14)

Thursday, September 26, 2019

Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #3 Footprints

Posted by The Machine



Bare footprint in corridor matching Sollecito in EXACT dimensions

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. Series Overview

This is the third in my evidence series of posts, a main part of our de-hoaxing of Malcolm Gladwell..

This post responds further to Gladwell’s bizarre “no evidence” claim in his Talking To Strangers.

It summarizes four sets of bloody footprint and shoeprint evidence, which all must have happened in the minutes and perhaps hours after Meredith died.

The four sets are: (1) strong evidence of Sollecito’s bare foot on the bathmat, (2) strong evidence of Knox’s and Sollecito’s bare feet in the corridor and in Meredith’s room, (3) strong evidence of Guede’s shoeprints leading from Meredith’s bedroom to the front door, and (4) indicative evidence of Knox’s shoeprint in Meredith’s bedroom.

Only shoeprints were attributed to Guede. There is zero evidence that he ever removed his shoes and not even a scenario of why he ever should have done.

Here’s a tip to our many new-ish readers, some great advice which might have curbed Gladwell’s disaster:

In the REAL world in the Italian courts these items (presented only once, at trial, and not at any appeal level) were very compelling items of evidence. Some topnotch experts, the best in Italy, presented their scientific outcomes at trial.

In the real world the thoroughly outgunned defenses had only weak and dispirited comebacks. ONLY what was put across and challenged in the courtrooms really mattered. 

But in the FICTIONAL world of the Knox “public relations” army of online thugs with its appalling ignorance and misrepresentations, many of them malicious and self-serving, the hoaxing of these items really switched into overdrive.

NONE of their fictional ramblings mattered in Italy. Almost nobody in Italy was paying attention, and at times the defense teams were clearly irritated by them.

Here is a good hoax example.

In mid-trial in 2009 Kermit created the Telling Case Of The Doctored Footprint powerpoint which shows just how far these misrepresentations were taken. 

Why can you believe we are not hoaxed or hoaxing?

Simple. Because every one of our analyses and reports is based on trusted reporting and court transcripts and an enormous body of official documents, many of them professionally translated.

The 2009 trial’s very intense evidence phase (some three times as many days as the defense phase) was never repeated. Only one jury observed it. But the Chieffi Supreme Court in 2013 and the Nencini Appeal Court in 2014 put many of the evidence findings at trial on steroids.

2. The Bathroom

It’s impossible to overstate the significance of the bare bloody footprint on the bathmat.  It is such significant evidence for two reasons:

(1) it matched the precise characteristics of Raffaele Sollecito’s foot;

(2) it could not possibly belong to Rudy Guede because there were irreconciliable differences with Guede’s foot.

Here are our main analyses. The first post links to half a dozen earlier posts which in some cases go into great depth.

Click for Post:  Questions For Sollecito: Can You Realistically Account For The Hard Evidence On The Bathroom Mat?

Click for Post:  The Incriminating Bathroom Evidence: Visual Analysis shows the Footprint IS Sollecito’s

At Guede’s final 2010 (Supreme Court) appeal Judge Giordano pointed out there were bloody footprints not attributable to Rudy.

It is one of the reasons why all courts including three times the Supreme Court definitively ascertained there were multiple attackers.

Judge Giordano also noted that the forensic experts attributed the knife wounds on Meredith’s neck to different knives.

In the 2013-14 Supreme-Court-ordered repeat of the Knox and Sollecito appeals of the 2009 trial verdict, Judge Nencini pointed out these irreconcilable differences between the bloody footprint on the bathmat and Guede’s foot.

“Guede’s foot presents irreconcilable differences with the bathmat imprint“ (The Nencini report, page 275).

These definitive rulings need to be writ large for Malcolm Gladwell, Peter Gill and the other high-profile supporters of Amanda Knox in the media because it completely debunks the myth that Rudy Guede acted alone.



Rudy Guede shoeprints in red

3. The Corridor

There were both shoeprints and footprints in the corridor. The five Luminol-revealed footprints (from bare feet) were assigned by the experts Dr Rinaldi and Dr Boemia as follows: One was compatible with Sollecito’s right foot, and two others were compatible with Knox’s right foot.

To repeat, only shoeprints were attributed to Guede. There is zero evidence that he ever removed his shoes and not even a scenario of why he ever should have.

As I’ve already pointed out, numerous judges, including judges from the Italian Supreme Court, have noted that Guede didn’t even enter Filomena’s room - where the break-in was staged - or the blood-spattered bathroom after he had left Meredith’s room.

...asserted that the bloody shoeprints of the aforementioned [Rudy Guede] indicated the path he took from the unfortunate Meredith’s room to the main door of the house, without going into Romanelli’s room, given that ‐ as was previously stated ‐ the traces of blood of the victim mark the path taken by Guede without any deviation. (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 64).

Note: “without any deviation”.

...the investigative data collected immediately after the event, such as Rudy’s shoeprints (along the path of his flight) and the traces of the victim’s blood detected in many spots in the bathroom used by Ms Knox and Ms Kercher, surely carried there by third parties present in the house after the murder. (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 66).

Note: “along the path of the flight”.

The trail of Rudy Guede’s bloody shoeprints is significant evidence also because it proves that he couldn’t have been one of those to stage the break-in at the cottage, or to track Meredith’s blood into either the small bathroom or Filomena’s bedroom.

The Italian Supreme Court definitively ascertained that Rudy Guede didn’t stage the break-in in Filomena’s room.

And it should also be noted, as the judges of the lower courts have correctly held, that following the murder an activity occurred intended to simulate an attempted theft, which the judges of lower courts and the defence of the same appellant agree was an operation done by others and not by the defendant [Rudy Guede]. (Judge Giordano’s Supreme Court report, page 18).”

The Italian Supreme Court also definitively concluded (no possibility of appeal) that Amanda Knox was at the cottage when Meredith was killed, and that she had been the one to track Meredith’s blood into the small bathroom.

Given this, we now note, with respect to Amanda Knox, that her presence inside the house, the location of the murder, is a proven fact. (Judge Marasca’s Supreme Court report).

Note: “proven fact”.

“Another element against her [Amanda Knox] is the mixed traces, her and the victim’s one, in the ‘small bathroom’, an eloquent proof that anyway she had come into contact with the blood of the latter, which she tried to wash away from herself’. (Judge Marasca’s Supreme Court report).

Judge Massei and Judge Nencini attributed the bare bloody footprints in the hallway that were revealed by Luminol to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito because they matched their feet.

Both seem to have been rearranging the crime scene half-naked, barefoot, and possibly with gloves on. 

Malcolm Gladwell and his favorite expert Peter Gill have completely ignored the trail of Rudy Guede’s bloody shoeprints in the hallway that were revealed by Luminol

Judge Massei made the common-sense observation that the Luminol must have been reacting to blood because there was an abundance of blood at the cottage and there’s no evidence of any other substance at the cottage that also reacts to Luminol.

“It was also said of the traces highlighted by Luminol and of how these very traces, because of the certain presence of blood in abundance in the house and because of the lack of indication, beyond the mere hypotheses made, of substances which could actually have been present and present in various areas, indicate that Amanda (with her feet stained with Meredith’s blood for having been present in her room when she was killed) had gone into Romanelli’s room and into her own *room+ leaving traces [which were] highlighted by Luminol, some of which (one in the corridor, the L8, and one, the L2, in Romanelli’s room) were mixed, that is, constituted of a biological trace attributable to [both] Meredith and Amanda, and others with traces attributable ‘’only to Amanda (the three found in her own room and indicated as L3, L4 and L5) and only to the victim (one found in Romanelli’s room, the L1). (The Massei report, page 380).

DNA expert Luciano Garofano says the Luminol-revealed footprints at the cottage are in blood because of their high luminosity and the DNA test indicated the presence of Meredith’s blood.

But let’s see what the prints actually mean. First of all, from their sheer luminosity they are blood. The DNA test showed Meredith’s blood in all cases except for two places in which we have a mixed Amanda and Meredith sample.

In 2015 Judge Marasca’s Fifth Chambers (wrongly entering into the evidence - it is actually the domestic-crimes court) dismissed the Luminol prints as evidence because the TMB (Tetramethylbenzidine) tests that are used to confirm the presence of blood were negative.

However, Luminol has been found to be five times more sensitive than TMB. This explains why the TMB tests yielded negative results, but the Luminol didn’t.

Both tests are presumptive. A negative TMB doesn’t mean that there was no blood. The fact that Meredith’s DNA was found in three of the traces highlighted by Luminol indicates that it was reacting to Meredith’s blood and not bleach.

Bleach destroys DNA. The Luminol couldn’t have been reacting to bleach anyway because bleach dissipates after a couple of days and there will be no trace left. The Luminol tests at the cottage were carried out on 18 December 2007, a deliberate and routine delay to allow bleach traces and other red herrings to disippate.

You could argue that the Luminol could have been reacting to another substance such as fruit juice or rust. But does anyone really believe Knox and Sollecito had dipped their feet into a bucket of fruit juice or rust and then walked around the cottage? The trial jury didn’t.

4. Meredith’s Bedroom

Two imprint experts from the Scientific Police - Dr Rinaldi and Dr Boemia - testified at the trial in Perugia that there was a woman’s bloody shoe print on the pillow in Meredith’s room that matched Amanda Knox’s foot size.

Chief Inspector Boemia claimed the shoe print was made by a woman’s shoe brand, ASICS, and it couldn’t have belonged to a man.

Chief Inspector Boemia’s investigation of merchants and shoe manufacturers led him to identify a woman’s shoe brand, ASICS, on which he then focussed his attention in consideration of the specific form of the sole, whose width was equal to 40mm, which contained a circle just next to the hind part of the heel.

Inspector Boemia reiterated during the course of his deposition that the photo 105 print could not have corresponded to that left behind by a man’s shoe, taking into account the different range in width one would expect from a man’s shoe, measuring around 60mm in width.’  (The Massei report, page 343).

Professor Luciano Garofano also believes there was a WOMAN’S bloody shoe print on the pillow in Meredith’s room.

“Now is the question of the small shoeprint in the pillow. There is neither the heel nor the toe, so it’s hard to say the size of the shoe. You could estimate that has been made in the area of size 37 or 38, which of course, is Amanda’s size. Hard to prove, though.” (Luciano Garofano, Darkness Descending).

5. In Conclusion

The two defenses were provided with chance after chance to discredit these three areas of evidence. They never did, and their only comeback was to try to divert all eyes elsewhere.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Friday, September 20, 2019

Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #2 Mixed Blood

Posted by The Machine


Meredith’s blood mixed with Knox DNA in five places

1. The Evidence Series

This is the second post in my series responding to Gladwell’s “no evidence” claim

We’ve already summarised what seems to be Gladwell’s position in the polemical “Knox chapter” in Talking To Strangers thus:

  • Gladwell has chosen sides AGAINST the globally respected forces of Italian justice, which the FBI cooperates with a lot.

  • Gladwell has chosen sides WITH the looniest of self-serving conspiracy theorists, with the anti-justice mafias cheering them on.

That seems to make him a classic example of his own thesis (be wary of strangers). We have listed those we suspect addled Gladwell in Part 4 (3) of this post. Widely discredited, they persist in keeping their theories online. 

2. Compelling Evidence At Trial

According to the forensic biologist team from the Scientific Police in Rome headed by Dr Stefanoni, there were five samples of Amanda Knox’s DNA or blood mixed with Meredith’s blood in three different locations in the cottage.

In the small bathroom a mixture of Meredith’s and Knox’s blood DNA was found in three places: on the cotton bud box, the side of the basin, and the bidet. Trial Judge Massei wrote this:

The mixed trace specimens found in the sink and in the bidet and on the box of cotton buds therefore signify that Amanda, soiled with Meredith’s blood, entered the bathroom which was right next door to the room in which Meredith had been stabbed; putting her hand against the door she left a mark on it and the dribble of blood which remained is a sign [proof] of this, and left a mark also - also with Meredith’s blood - on the light switch; she touched the cotton-bud box which was on the sink and left a mixed trace specimen of herself and of Meredith; to clean her hands she used the sink in which, through the act of scrubbing, she left her own biological trace mixed with that of Meredith, and used the bidet, most likely to wash her feet, which must have become blood-stained in Meredith’s room…

The Massei trial court, Chieffi Supreme Court, Nencini appeal court, and even Marasca/Bruno Supreme Court, all endorsed this bathroom scenario. No other was even voiced, which Gladwell “forgets” to say. 

The bathroom swabs show that Meredith and Amanda Knox MUST have both been bleeding at the same time. This is overwhelming proof that Knox was at the cottage when Meredith died and took part in the fatal attack, which Gladwell “forgets” to say.

The fourth swab of mixed DNA was in the corridor. The fifth was in the center of Filomena’s room, plus one trace of Meredith’s blood alone by the window. No Guede DNA was found in that room, which Gladwell “forgets” to say.

All DNA processing was in front of defense observers, which Gladwell “forgets” to say. Amanda Knox’s lawyers had to concede that her DNA had mingled with Meredith’s blood, which Gladwell “forgets” to say. They confined their rebuttal to suggesting arcane ways that could have happened, all with zero proof, which Gladwell “forgets” to say.

Jury members confirmed that it was damning evidence. Barbie Nadeau points out in Angel Face that the jurors accepted the mixed blood evidence as firm.

The defense’s other biggest mistake, according to interviews with jurors after the trial, was doing nothing to refute the mixed-blood evidence beyond noting that it is common to find mingled DNA when two people live in the same house. (Barbie Nadeau, Angel Face, page 152).


Meredith’s blood with Knox DNA in Filomena’s room

3. Confirmations By Other Experts

Dr Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA Unit of the Scientific Police, reviewed Dr. Stefanoni’s investigation and the forensic findings in 2008.

He confirmed that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable. He praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team:

“We are confirming the reliability of the information collected from the scene of the crime and at the same time, the professionalism and excellence of our work.”


Additionally the DNA and forensic evidence was also reviewed by Dr Luciano Garofano the retired creator of the Carabineri’s elite laboratories in Rome and other cities.

He confirmed that Amanda Knox’s blood was mixed with Meredith’s blood in the small bathroom and Filomena’s room in Darkness Descending by himself and Paul Russell. He explains how he could tell.

“However, here is the electropherogram and you can see that the RFU value is very high, so the sample is undoubtedly blood, which is the body fluid that provides the greatest amount of DNA.

In some cases you see higher peaks of Amanda’s DNA than Meredith’s. Amanda has been bleeding. (Luciano Garafano, Darkness Descending, page 371).

Luciano Garofano also asserts that there was copious blood loss by Amanda Knox on the night of the murder.

“Let’s say the assassin used the basin and bidet to wash the knife: if you look at the electropherograms you’ll see that there seems to be more of Amanda Knox’s blood than Meredith’s. There is a copious blood loss by Amanda.”  (Luciano Garofano, Darkness Descending, page 374).

Additionally both Judge Massei and Judge Nencini who presided over the 2009 trial in Perugia and the 2012 appeal in Florence respectively regard the mixed DNA samples incriminating pieces of evidence against Amanda Knox and proof she had tracked Meredith’s blood into the small bathroom and Filomena’s room where the break-in was staged.

They believe that in one or two instances Amanda Knox’s DNA could be from “epithelial rubbing” rather than blood but either way two sets of DNA are there in five instances. (Unless we’re emitting a body fluid, epithelial DNA is all we leave, a lot, by pressing hard with a hand or a foot.)

Additionally the FINAL Italian Supreme Court ruling stated the mixed DNA evidence was “eloquent proof” she had come into contact with Meredith’s blood and had washed it off in the small bathroom, which Gladwell “forgets” to say.

Another element against her [Amanda Knox] is the mixed traces, her and the victim’s one, in the ‘small bathroom’, an eloquent proof that anyway she had come into contact with the blood of the latter, which she tried to wash away from herself (it was, it seems, diluted blood, while the biological traces belonging to her would be the consequence of epithelial rubbing). (Judge Marasca’s Supreme Court report).

4. Discounting Rudy Guede

Guede could not have tracked Meredith’s blood into the small bathroom and Filomena’s room because his bloody footprints only led straight from Meredith’s room and out of the cottage (see my next post) which Gladwell “forgets” to say.

This fact has been noted by multiple judges and the Italian Supreme Court. The 2009 Massei trial report:

Rudy, who, on leaving Meredith’s room (according to what the shoe prints show), directed himself towards the exit without deviating or stopping in other rooms.(The Massei report, page 379).

And the 2013 Chieffi Supreme Court report:

the investigative data collected immediately after the event, such as Rudy’s shoeprints (along the path of his flight) and the traces of the victim’s blood detected in many spots in the bathroom used by Ms Knox and [49] Ms Kercher, surely carried there by third parties present in the house after the murder.“ (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 66).

5. Additional Posts Confirming

Click for Post:  Netflixhoax 13: Omitted - How The DNA Processes And Evidence Points Were Deliberately Misrepresented

Click for Post:  The DNA Hoax: Ways To Rebut The Drive-By Critics Of The Case On The DNA Dimension

Click for Post:  Carabineri Labs Might Prove Fourth And Conclusive Scenario For The Mixed DNA Samples In The House

Click for Post:  Beyond Massei: On The Seemingly Insuperable Mixed Blood Evidence By All The Expert Witnesses

Click for Post:  Explaining The Massei Report: The Mixed Blood Evidence Samples As Seen By Judge Massei

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: 15 Questions That Drew Griffin On CNN Tonight SHOULD Have Asked

Click for Post:  Our Take On The Case For The Prosecution: #1 The DNA Evidence


Meredith’s blood alone, by window in Filomena’s room

6. Our Next Post

Click for Post:  Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #3 Footprints

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (12)

Tuesday, September 17, 2019

Explaining To “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was: #1 Knife DNA

Posted by The Machine


Carabinieri labs court exhibit 2013; 2007 charts at bottom

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. Series Overview

This is the first in a series of short posts rebutting this claim Malcolm Gladwell made:

There was never any physical evidence linking either Knox or her boyfriend to the crime.

Gladwell is a renowned Canadian academic and author and contributor to The New Yorker. He is right now giving numerous media interviews to promote his new book Talking To Strangers.

We have already done some point-by-point analyses of what is wrong with Gladwell’s mistake-prone chapter on “the Knox case” (he only names Meredith once) here and here.

It was mentioned that Gladwell chose to go with the US conspiracy theorists (which the defense teams mostly ignored) rather than the trusted and globally respected Italian law enforcement.

If you’re expecting the renowned intellectual to comprehensively demolish the DNA and forensic evidence against Knox and Sollecito, and provide some exculpatory evidence that proves they’re innocent, you’ll be sorely disappointed.

I could give you a point-by-point analysis of what was wrong with the investigation of Kercher’s murder. It could easily be the length of this book.

But he doesn’t. He never will.

Gladwell’s claim that there was never any physical evidence linking Knox or her boyfriend to the crime is demonstrably false and would be news to the two defense teams.

My series will cover the multiple pieces of DNA and forensic evidence linking to them to Meredith’s murder: the double DNA knife (this post), the bra clasp evidence, the mixed-blood evidence, the bloody footprint evidence, and the staged break-in.

Others will cover the very telling Knox lamp and Meredith’s door. What impacted the unanimous jury was more complex still. See here.



Carabinieri central labs (Roma RSI) in northen Rome

2. The AK And MK DNA Knife

The knife shown at top was tested for DNA twice, in 2007 in the Scientific Police Labs in Rome, and in 2013 in the Carabinieri labs in Rome. Defence observers were present at all processing and raised no objections. The markers showing there are from the Carabinieri’s extraordinarily conclusive 2013 presentation.

At Knox’s and Sollecito’s appeal in 2011 Judge Hellman (a business judge with only one murder case, a fiasco, behind him) had appointed two independent experts. That was actually illegal as no new experts should be appointed at appeal stage. The elite Carabinieri labs and experts with vastly better equipment and training than the academic consultants were available then and the normal course.

Despite strong conclusions, the independent experts never finished their Hellmann-ordered testing, for reasons that made no legitimate sense. The elite Carabinieri labs completed the work, with devastating effect on the defence.

1. Gladwell’s wrong claim

The only physical evidence Gladwell mentions in his book is the knife evidence.

Gladwell says very little about it. In fact, he can’t even be bothered to provide his own opinion - he just offers a puzzling quote from the much-challenged English expert Peter Gill:

The amplified DNA product in sample B was also subjected to capillary gel electrophoresis. The electrophoretic graph showed peaks that were below the reporting threshold and allele imbalance at most loci. I counted only 6 alleles that were above the reporting threshold. The electrophoretic graph showed a partial DNA profile that was claimed to match Meredith Kercher. Consequently, sample B was border- line for interpretation.

Gill is hoaxing the uninitiated here. It is not the height of the alleles that matter, it is the number of STRs, and there was an STR match in 29 of the 30 indicated. 

Besides, such isolation of one evidence item is forbidden under Italian procedure, as I explain below. It can only be taken in context and the context is damning here.

2. Prosecution’s real case

Charts created in 2007 for Meredith’s DNA and swabs from the knife are shown down the bottom here (click for larger images). They disprove Gill’s hoax which Gladwell swallowed whole.

The DNA found on the blade of Sollecito’s kitchen knife was an exact match for Meredith’s DNA. When you look at Meredith’s DNA chart superimposed on sample 36B, you can clearly see that all the alleles match up. And quite conclusively, 29 of the 30 STRs do match up.

In support, a number of independent forensic experts - Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Giuesppe Novelli, Professor Francesca Torricelli, Luciano Garofano, Elizabeth Johnson, Greg Hampikian and Bruce Budowle - have all confirmed that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade.

“...the consultant [Professor Novelli] also did a statistical calculation with the purpose of determining the probability that the profile could belong to someone other than the victim Meredith Kercher. The calculation of the Random Match Probability came to one chance in 300 million billion.” (The Nencini report, page 230).

In support, Sollecito provably knew that Meredith’s DNA was on the blade when he lied about accidentally pricking her hand whilst cooking.

“The fact there is Meredith’s DNA on the kitchen knife is because once when we were all cooking together I accidentally pricked her hand. I apologised immediately and she said it was not a problem.”

Gladwell doesn’t explain how Meredith’s DNA might have ended up on the blade of Sollecito’s kitchen knife. Meredith had never been to Sollecito’s place, making it impossible for the knife to have been contaminated with Meredith’s DNA.

In support, Dr Stefanoni analysed the traces on the knife six days after last handling Meredith’s DNA. This means laboratory contamination can be ruled out.

In support, in 2009 Judge Micheli ruled out contamination during the collection phase because the knife was sequestered from Sollecito’s apartment on Corso Garibaldi by a different police team to the one that collected evidence from the cottage on Via della Pergola on the same day.

In support, in 2010 the Attorney General for Umbria Giovanni Galati made the following common sense observation for the Republic’s 2011 counter-appeal.

“It is evident that the “non-exclusion” of the occurrence of a certain phenomenon is not equivalent to affirming its occurrence, nor even that the probability that it did occur.” (The Galati appeal, page 57).

He goes on to explain that unless there is proof of contamination of the knife and bra clasp, you can’t simply claim there was in order to nullify this evidence:

...if one is not able to [67] affirm where, how and when they would have happened, they cannot enter into a logical-juridical reasoning aimed at nullifying elements already acquired, above all if scientific in nature. (p57).

In support, in early 2013 the Italian Supreme Court noted that contamination in the laboratory had been ruled out actually quoting those “independent” experts who showed a strong defence bias.

Laboratory contamination was also excluded by these experts [Conti and Vecchiotti].” (Judge Chieffi’s Supreme Court report, page 92).

Finally, in support, in November 2013 the Carabinieri lab re-test of the knife and sample stored was reported by Andrea Vogt thus.

The RIS Wednesday deposited their forensic report on trace 36i, a spot of DNA identified (but not earlier tested) on the kitchen knife alleged to be the murder weapon. “Cento Percento” (100 percent) said Major Berti, discussing compatibility. The RIS found that the DNA was compatible with Amanda Knox, and excluded that it was that of Sollecito, Guede or Kercher.

The RIS expert was asked only a few questions from attorneys and the judge. The judge asked why the RIS had done two amplications of the DNA and not 3 or 4. Major Berti described that two is considered the minimum number of amplifications necessary, according to today’s forensic standards, doing less (or more) might have diminished the reliability of the results. The judge also asked about the age of the equipment used. Berti responded that the forensic kit used this time has been commercialized since 2010 and available for use since 2011.

And our own comment on that.

Hard to see any game changers in today’s strong but undramatic testimony. The Carabinieri RIS DNA experts could not be shaken. All momentum remains with the prosecution and with the Supreme Court’s “givens” on the evidence, such as the presence of three attackers in Meredith’s room. The defenses seem to be giving up. They could have phoned it in.

So Gladwell swallowed the illegal Gill hoax. All the experts and courts got it right. All the alleles and 29 of the 30 STRs on the charts below do match up.

And from the start Gill makes a fundamental breach of Italian procedure in considering any piece of evidence separately and in isolation from the other pieces of evidence and making something of it.

That is to prevent such hoaxing, which has been rampant in the pro-Knox campaign. The Supreme Court in 2013 in annulling the 2011 RS and AK appeal outcome firmly stated that was unacceptable procedure under Italian law.

Gill doesn’t address any of the other incriminating pieces of evidence against Knox and Sollecito - the computer and telephone records that provide irrefutable proof that they both lied repeatedly; the staged break-in and the fact that it couldn’t have been staged by Rudy Guede; the bloody footprint on the bathmat which matched the precise characteristics of Sollecito’s foot; and the fact Amanda Knox knew specific details about the murder kept secret from the public.

Gill did admit in an e-mail to TJMK’s Swansea Jack that he didn’t know how the DNA was transferred and that he had simply made a list of all of the possibilities.

Thanks for your email.

I cant control how people interpret my comments.  I am not getting involved in a debate that specifically addresses the ultimate issue of innocence/guilt of individuals since that is the purpose of the court.  I can only comment on the probative value of the DNA evidence. I dont know definitively how the DNA was transferred - I simply make a list of all of the possibilities. I dont comment on the non-DNA evidence.

Regards, Peter


3. Past Posts Which Expand Proof

Click for Post:  Understanding Micheli #3: How Damning Is The DNA Evidence?

Click for Post:  Trial: Judge Massei Rejects Feeble Defense Bid To Throw Out DNA Evidence

Click for Post:  Questions For Sollecito: Why So Many Contradictory Explanations Of How DNA Got On The Knife?

Click for Post:  Understanding Why The DNA Is On The Knife

Click for Post:  Appeal Session #3: The Carabinieri Labs Report On The DNA On The Knife

Click for Post:  An Investigation Into The Large Knife Provides Further Proof That This Was THE Knife

Click for Post:  Multiple Attackers and the Compatibility of the Double DNA Knife (Exhibit 36)

Click for Post:  How The DNA Processes And Evidence Points Were Deliberately Misrepresented

4. The Double DNA Charts

Charts created in 2007 for Meredith’s DNA and swabs from the knife are shown (click for larger images).

1. Knife swab


2. Meredith’s DNA


3. Both overlayed


5. Our Next Post

Click for Post:  Explaining to “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was #2 Mixed Blood

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (13)

Saturday, September 14, 2019

How A Lazy Gladwell Was Duped About The Case By Malicious “Strangers” He Foolishly Believed

Posted by Peter Quennell


1. What Actually is Gladwell’s Book Thesis?

It’s hard not to laugh. Gladwell’s thesis is actually: Don’t be taken in.

Strangers are not always what they seem. A mind-fail which, for some reason, he thinks happens to law enforcement all the time.

In other words: with conspiracy theorists and Russian hackers and Nigerian princes and bumbling cops all rife in the world today, do look before you jump.

That, or suffer buyer’s remorse. Don’t jump the wrong way. Really. That is what he came down to Earth to tell us.

2. How Gladwell Has Jumped The Wrong Way

See Gladwell’s take on the case in this previous post.

The dangerous shoot-from-the-hip Gladwell doesn’t actually know Amanda Knox. She is a “stranger” in his definition.

He clearly has no idea what the erratic, abrasive, irresponsible Knox 1.0 of 2007-10 was really like, the one that without question led the attack.

She was not in Perugia for serious study, everyone knew this. She was not even enrolled in a course that could earn degree credits at UW, her Seattle university.

Most of her days, she was doing drugs or hanging out with her dealer or hitting on customers in Patrick’s bar. Everybody started avoiding her.

Even Sollecito thought she was weird, after he got entangled in her Typhoid Mary wake. He blamed her from the time of his arrest, and still does. 

Nevertheless, Gladwell burbled on about her sheer amazingness thus:

“an immature, sheltered, middle-class girl from Seattle” who of course would never be “interested in engaging in murderous sex games with a troubled drifter.”

Hard to believe, but Gladwell’s best shot at framing this stranger, the real Knox, was wildly inaccurate.

Knox’s own parents and lawyers knew full well that she was a loose cannon. Everybody knew by early in 2008. Her own lawyers warned publicly that she was.

So they did all they could to adjust her default mode. She was taught to hate Dr Mignini, and try to act lovably daffy, and the PR became barbarically vicious.

But they were not exactly succesfull. Her trial was a disaster. Prosecution and experts did a brilliant job. Her condescending, callous stint on the stand shocked many. On some days, defense lawyers did not even turn up.

So after a unanimous and well-argued conviction in 2009, Knox was radically transformed. Now she was to be in “I’m the real victim” Knox 2.0 mode. No mention of Meredith’s name was to be made. Media was to be bribed or threatened. It was to be saturated with Knox happy-news. The Kerchers were to be stalked, and Italy and Italian justice were to be trashed, in the US and UK. 

Dim-wittedly uncomprehending, Gladwell jumped aggressively to the support of this faux Knox, and this defamatory, lie-based campaign, with no sign he had taken his own advice to look first.

He’s thus fallen in with very unsavory “strangers”. Shades of the professional hoax exposure Benjamin Radford similarly duped a while back.

To summarise:

  • Gladwell has chosen sides AGAINST the globally respected forces of Italian justice, which the FBI cooperates with a lot.

  • Gladwell has chosen sides WITH the looniest of self-serving conspiracy theorists, with the anti-justice mafias cheering them on.

Nice doing. And it gets worse.

3. Like Monty Python On Steroids

In Gladwell’s take, numerous highly-trained cops, and some of the world’s best crime-scene analysts well known in FBI circles, and a dozen renowned prosecutors, and the Massei and Nencini juries, and over thirty judges, all ran some kind of gigantic hoax.

It gets worse. 

Knox’s high-powered defense did not say a word about this. They had a very easy route to complain but there was not even one complaint lodged. In fact, to the contrary, it was Knox they publicly complained about. One high-powered Rome lawyer walked right off the job.

It gets worse.

The US Embassy in Rome monitored the court and the prison at Capanne, and each time reported to Washington that all was fine. An Italian MP also monitored Knox and reported nothing wrong.

It gets worse.

In Gladwell’s take this is how all Italian media and 2/3 of the Italian population that was watching were taken in. They did not REALLY see three bent courts, or the wild battle between Sollecito and Knox that went on for years, or that mountain of evidence.

So why this huge globally unique hoax?

This is how Gladwell explains. It’s all because “they” read Knox wrong. He has zero evidence for it but that really is his claim. Those daffy Italians… “Gladwell’s here, Knox, I have them on the run.”

And it gets worse.

This was a hoax not only against Knox. It was also against the Italian, Sollecito, as well, who came from a well-connected and quite wealthy family who could pull strings (well, in theory; in practice they were forced to put their campaign on ice, and Sollecito’s sister got booted out of the Carabinieri for polluting the jury pool).

And even worse.

This hoax happened in a country which hosts 3 of the UN’s 10 apex crime institutes, which has a murder rate and prison incarceration rate only 1/7 that of the US, and which does not have even ONE Innocence Project case.

4. Posts For Victims Gladwell Dupes

Here is a short selection of educational posts. They are each backed up by dozens more.  Do please read all of the headlines, and if possible some of the posts.

1. The Real Italian Justice System

Click for Post:  The Almost Unique Carefulness Of Italy’s Justice System

Click for Post:  Why Numerous American JUDGES Favor The Supremely Neutral Italian Kind Of System

Click for Post:  Compared To Italy, Say, Precisely How Wicked Is The United States?

Click for Post:  Italy’s Advanced, Effective, Humane Law & Order System Also Adopted By City Of New York

Click for Post:  Italy’s Unpopular Politicians And Mafia Fellow Travelers Against Italy’s Popular Justice System

Click for Post:  So Where Would YOU Want To Go On Trial? In Italy Or In The U.S.?

2. The Real Amanda Knox

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: Why The Huge Lie About Your ZERO Academic Intentions In Europe?

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: Why So Many False Claims In Accounts Of Your Visit To The House?

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox and Sollecito: Why Claim Rudy Guede Did It Alone When So Much Proof Against?

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: Why Does Book Smear Others On Drug Use, Severely Understate Your Own?

Click for Post:  Master Manipulators, Masks, and Murder: Parallels Of The Amanda Knox And Scott Peterson Cases

Click for Post:  Is The Raffaele Sollecito Defense Team About To Separate Him From A Radioactive Amanda Knox?

Click for Post:  The Amanda Knox Book: Good Reporters Start To Surface Amanda Knox’s False Claims In Droves

Click for Post:  Demonizations By Knox: Book Claims About Prison Traumas Contradicted By Many Solid Sources

Click for Post:  Omitted - How Amanda Knox Falsely Accused Dr Mignini Of A Felony

3. The Real Strangers To Mistrust

These mafia poodles seem the most likely to have duped Gladwell. Some of them wrote the crackpot “Forgotten Killer” (amazingly still on sale), a xenophobic, racist book which framed Guede as the sole killer, trashed many reputable Italians, and misrepresented the case.

Click for Post:  Exposing Peter Gill: An Opportunistic Expert Never At Trial and Never At Either Rome Police Lab

Click for Post:  New Mignini Interview Makes Doug Preston Look Increasingly Incompetent And Vindictive

Click for Post:  Disarray And Decay In The Pro-Knox Parade: Bruce Fischer’s Epidemic Of Malicious Claims

Click for Post:  How Greg Hampikian Abuses Two Positions of Trust In Serially Misrepresenting The Hard Evidence

Click for Post:  Netflix Hoax Producers Morse, Blackhurst, McGinn Commited Stalking Crimes

Click for Post:  How With Myriad False Claims John Douglas Pushes To Forefront Of Pro-Knox Crackpots

Click for Post:  How With Myriad False Claims Steve Moore Pushes To Forefront Of Pro-Knox Crackpots

Click for Post:  After 6 Years Michael Heavey Still Heedless Of Errors Pointed Out Again & Again & Again


5. The Best Thing Gladwell Can Do Now

Gladwell is a dangerous menace, inciting such hate. He can expect strong push-back. He should be in career-saving mode.

Best advice would be to bite the bullet, and belatedly learn from each of those posts. Then apologize and withdraw the misleading and insulting book, and try hard to get the Knox case right next time.

Next posts: hard and unshaken evidence that Gladwell has swallowed the conspiracy theories about. And more about the REAL Dr Mignini and Rudy Guede who he so demonized in his quixotic attempt to refurbish Knox.

6. Our Next Post

Click for Post:  Explaining To “No Physical Evidence” Gladwell Just How MUCH There Was: #1 Knife DNA

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (7)

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

Seems The “Psychology Expert” Malcolm Gladwell Owes Italy A Major Apology And Recant

Posted by Peter Quennell


Ironic headline? First thing, try telling the truth?

1. First Of Several Critiques

This is our first quick take on Malcolm Gladwell’s bizarre and increasingly controversial depiction of the case.

He lies extensively about Italians and Italy. Not one was contacted to check the facts. Gladwell’s dishonest smears have been made into a major selling point for the book - the publishers’ press release emphasizes Knox.

Many of our quick rebuttals here will be expanded-on in several more posts in the next few days. For now we suggest that you read up on the smoking guns which the utterly clueless Gladwell missed.

On the night of November 1, 2007, Meredith Kercher was murdered by Rudy Guede. [The BLACK guy ALONE did it? A racist PR trope. ALL courts said the evidence proved 2 or 3 attackers. It was impossible AS DEFENSES AGREED to prove a lone attacker.]

After a mountain of argumentation, speculation, and controversy, his guilt is a certainty [not his guilt ALONE].

Guede was a shady character [no he wasnt] who had been hanging around the house [he had friends downstairs] in the Italian city of Perugia, where Kercher, a college student, was living during a year abroad. [She was a high performer unlike Knox, enrolled at the main university unlike Knox, and not on drugs unlike Knox.]

Guede had a criminal history. [He had NONE. Only Knox & Sollecito had police records then.]

He admitted to being in Kercher’s house the night of her murder—and could give only the most implausible reasons for why. [Knox and Sollecito each gave multiple alibis and contradicted one another.]

The crime scene was covered in his DNA. [Covered? No it wasn’t. There was more Knox DNA.]

After her body was covered [the courts all believed by Knox] he immediately fled Italy for Germany. 

But Rudy Guede was not the exclusive focus of the police investigation [because Knox fingered PATRICK first] nor anything more than an afterthought [untrue] in the tsunami of media attention that followed the discovery of Kercher’s body.

The focus was instead on Kercher’s roommate. [Not immediately; not till after, under no pressure, she REPEATEDLY accused Patrick of murder and admitted to being there when Meredith died.]

Her name was Amanda Knox. [Seemingly solely in Perugia for drugs; she was not enrolled at the main university, and had no work permit, and little money though funding REQUIRING SUPERVISION was easily available from her Seattle university.] 

She [said she] came home one morning and found blood in the bathroom.

She and her boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, called the police [after the police had already arrived]. 

The police came and found Kercher dead in her bedroom; within hours [untrue] they added Knox and Sollecito to their list of suspects [untrue; they did not even have status of WITNESSES].

The crime, the police believed, [untrue; this was a prosecution proffer, as the murder was believed unintentional]  was a drug-and alcohol-fueled sex game gone awry, featuring Guede, Sollecito, and Knox. [Guede was not even known about for 2 weeks. Knox had framed Patrick and HE was locked up; she left him there for two weeks, and rightly served three years for this felony.]

The three were arrested, charged, convicted, and sent to prison - with every step of the way chronicled obsessively by the tabloid press. [Which tabloid press?  Coverage was no different than numerous cases in the UK and US.]

“A murder always gets people going. Bit of intrigue. Bit mystery. A whodunit,” British journalist Nick Pisa says in the documentary Amanda Knox - one of a vast library of books, academic essays, magazine articles, movies, and news shows spawned by the case. [Read our Netflix Hoax series on this. That “documentary” was created by Knox PR.]

“And we have here this beautiful, picturesque hilltop town in the middle of Italy. It was a particularly gruesome murder. Throat slit, semi-naked, blood everywhere. I mean, what more do you want in a story.” [Pisa did numerous OBJECTIVE reports as we have shown.]

Other signature crime stories, such as the O. J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey cases, are just as enthralling when you rediscover them five or ten years later. The Amanda Knox case is not. [There was a real victim here, Gladwell apparently forgets.]

It is completely inexplicable in hindsight. There was never any physical evidence linking either Knox or her boyfriend to the crime. [There was a mountain of evidence, see the list of 400 points as described by the trial judge in 440 pages.] 

Nor was there ever a plausible explanation [untrue; Gladwell completely misses the real sharp-elbowed, noisy, lazy, dirty, jealous Knox who was sleeping with a dangerous drug dealer] for why Knox, an immature, sheltered, middle-class girl from Seattle - would be interested in engaging in murderous sex games with a troubled drifter [Guede was not troubled or a drifter; Gladwell sure is free with the racist remarks] she barely knew [untrue].

The police investigation against her was revealed as shockingly inept. [No it wasnt, not even one item of evidence was discredited.]

The analysis of the DNA evidence supposedly linking her and Sollecito to the crime was completely botched. [No it wasnt, defense observers watched ALL PROCESSING without complaint].

Her prosecutor was wildly irresponsible, obsessed with fantasies about elaborate sex crimes. [Defamatory total nonsense, he has ZERO interest in fantasies and GAVE KNOX BREAKS such as the 17 Dec 2007 interview; and there were TWO prosecutors at trial and various others at appeal; at trial Manuela Comodi presented more than half of the case].

Yet it took a ruling by the [infamously bent] Italian Supreme Court, eight years after the crime, for Knox to be finally declared innocent. [Knox was not declared innocent. And it was not ITALY that spun the process out for eight years. It was mafias and families of the two perps repeatedly corrupting the courts that did that. The bent Fifth Chambers of the Supreme Court broke Italian law in dismissing hard evidence.]

Even then, many otherwise intelligent, thoughtful, people disagreed [otherwise intelligent? Even the Supreme Court said Knox was present at the scene of the crime].

When Knox was freed from prison, a large angry crowd gathered in the Perugia town square to protest her release. [And Sollecito’s; they had seen a very fair trial in 2009 and knew the 2011 appeal was bent.]

The Amanda Knox case makes no sense. [Exactly what cases do? Absurd point.]

I could give you a point-by-point analysis of what was wrong [go right ahead if you can; but no more mindless cut-and-paste fictions from the vicious Knox PR] with the investigation of Kercher’s murder.

It could easily be the length of this book [and all of it fictional, judging by this book. Both perps had large defense teams; where are THEIR complaints?]

I could also refer you to some of the most comprehensive scholarly analyses [untrue] of the investigation’s legal shortcomings, such as Peter Gill’s meticulous [and seen as a hoax by numerous better experts] “Analysis and Implications of the Miscarriages of justice of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito” in the July 2016 issue of the criminology journal Forensic Science International, which includes paragraphs like this: 

The amplified DNA product in sample B was also subjected to capillary gel electrophoresis. The electrophoretic graph showed peaks that were below the reporting threshold and allele imbalance at most loci. I counted only 6 alleles that were above the reporting threshold. The electrophoretic graph showed a partial DNA profile that was claimed to match Meredith Kercher. Consequently, sample B was border-line for interpretation.

[This is a hoax. Some 29 of 30 STRs matched, as Gill knows very well. And this was a tiny fraction of a huge body of DNA, see the Wiki’s massive spreadsheet for hundreds of swabs and tests - which defenses HURRIED PAST as did Gill.]

But instead, let me give you the simplest and shortest of all possible Amanda Knox theories. Her case is about transparency. [Nonsense. This was one of the most transparent legal processes in recent history; does Gladwell even KNOW about the massive number of documents?]

If you believe that the way a stranger looks and acts is a reliable clue to the way they feel - if you buy into the Friends fallacy - then you’re going to make mistakes. [Totally irrelevant. This was NOT why Knox was charged.]

Amanda Knox was one of those mistakes. [And Gladwell’s pretentious book is about how WE cannot see truth?]


2. Our Next Post.

Click for Post:  How A Lazy Gladwell Was Duped About The Case By Malicious “Strangers” He Foolishly Believed

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Reagan Arthur Of Publishers Little-Brown Also Has Liability For Malcolm Gladwell’s Defamatory Mess

Posted by Peter Quennell


Reagan Arthur, Incompetent Editor, Little-Brown


Our post just above offers first corrections of Malcolm Gladwell’s hallucinatory screech on the case. 

Reagan Arthur is the VP and Gladwell’s editor at publisher Little-Brown, the book’s publishers on Sixth Ave in New York, an arm of the French group Hachette.

She seems to have done little or no due diligence at all. Nobody in Italy was consulted on the facts.

And yet Reagan Arthur allowed or encouraged Gladwell’s serious defamations of defenseless Italians and their fine justice system - which she would NEVER have done in an American case, one can bet.

Is Reagan Arthur just lazy, or just bigoted, or just incompetent, or all three?

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (6)

Thursday, September 05, 2019

The Pro Truth, Pro Justice, Pro Italy, Pro Meredith Reporting On The Case #1

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


Hall of Fame: 80 reporters & analysts channeled truth of case

1. Context Of The Post

This post and the next represent our “Hall of Fame” of the truthful reporting faction.

A third and fourth post will follow, our “Hall of Shame” of the biased, incompetent and corrupt reporting faction. That uniquely large faction includes way too many reporters, investigators, lawyers, bloggers, and book-writers.

All these four posts flow directly from our 8 August post on the English-language reporting vehicles. We separated out “the media” that Knox endemically demonizes into these three groups.

No media outlet demonized Knox. The reports on her drugs and sex and relationships and highly suspect behavior were all reality-based; in fact they could have gone even further.

And no reporter demonized her, either, as this and the next post will show.

The two next posts on the biased faction, however, will show how 70-80 percent of reporters did demonize Italy and many Italians, and misrepresent both the real case and the real Knox. 

We have already noted just how especially undermining to Knox’s dishonest media-demonizing, in Italy, Ireland, and the US, was the pesky presence of Raffaele Sollecito.

He was treated identically to Knox from 2007 to 2015 in all possible ways. That was despite his being from an influential Italian family with “connections”. And he never blamed the media. In fact, he consistently blamed Knox for his predicament.

We have already noted also that Knox dropped her own self in it, with no help at all from the media, when she was on the witness stand in mid 2009.

Our next post on the truth faction will show how Knox has dropped her own self in it multiple times, as the truth media has each time accurately passed on.

2. To Whom Do We Offer Praise?

Please click to open the full “True” database in Acrobat PDF here or Word Doc here showing the 80 we want to recognise so far.

Despite some really tough reporting conditions, the masterlist currently includes EIGHTY professional reporters, lawyers, investigators and commentators who all went the extra mile in their reports.

Included are 36 professional journalists and reporters; the others mostly worked unpaid; 14 at least are lawyers; 7 have written books (one, James Raper, also posts on TJMK). At least 20 run websites. Around 60 have been quoted in our posts, some a number of times.

Excluded from this project are most of the reviewers of the 2012-2015 Sollecito and Knox books, the 2016 Netflix hoax documentary, and some recent Knox media events. This is because, though often strongly suspicious of what they heard and saw, they had not yet managed much depth. Thanks to them anyway.


Sub-table: Career reporters. Click for larger version.


3. A Tough Reporting Task In English

Despite some closed-court sessions, this wasn’t a tough case for the Italian media to report very accurately.

Various court sessions were broadcast live, the Italian law and process were well-known, Knox and Sollecito and their defenses leaked prolifically, and numerous talk-shows and interviews spread the details.

The Italian majority rejecting the final verdict do so because of the blatantly obvious breaking of Italian law.

The pro-truth foreign-reporters pool mostly working out of Rome could follow the case and the reporting in Italian. They could seek interviews and legal advice. They repeatedly for example received confirmation from the US Embassy that all was going well. An Italian MP repeatedly told them that Knox was doing just fine in Capanne.

The BBC, NBC and Sky News had camera teams on the ground and could send more teams from London and New York though that took time. Broadcasts except for the biased NBC morning shows were on a high plane

Their big difficulties were (1) in finding the time and funding to get to the Perugia court (two days travel, one day court; hotels do not come cheap) and (2) ensuring paying outlets for their intermittent bursts of reporting from 2007 to 2015 in the US or UK. And yet only two (see the forthcoming Bias posts) let that group down.

As tor the others on the main list of 80, they had to overcome not always speaking or reading Italian, not always being located in Italy or even able to visit Italy, not having any court documents, and not always on top of Italian law and court procedures.

And even if they did visit, who could they talk to? The police and prosecutors were circumspect, and the defense forces and Knox-Mellas family simply lied all the time. Most documents were neither put online (except by us) or readily available from the police or court officers. We offered the only reliable translations.

Finally, almost all of those listed here had to contend with the dangerous stalkers and character-assassins organized by Curt Knox, David Marriott and Bruce Fischer - all of whom could have been charged had this been a US case.


Sub-table: Book-writers. Click for larger version.

Sub-table: Investigators. Click for larger version.


4. Great Reporting, Reflected In Many TJMK Posts

Sixty of those 80 reporting and commenting truthfully have been quoted and credited in many hundreds of our posts (we’ll play catch-up on the other 20) as our left-column Search ap shows.

We’ll go into many of the telling points they made in the next post.

The remarkable Andrea Vogt and Barbie Nadeau, both Italy-based, and both carried by various media outlets, were credited in numerous posts.

Nick Pisa was widely presumed anti-Knox after he was entangled in the barbaric Netflix hoax. So we linked to some 50 posts where Nick Pisa had been our main source. Not even one misrepresented Knox. 

Danielle Lenth, then a Sacramento law student, published a commendable academic study showing the case would have been handled similarly in any American court. We’ll post more on that soon.

Victoria Brownworth and Selene Nelson nailed the faux-feminist group that blamed all men (really) for Knox’s plight - while ignoring the inconvenient RS!

The actress Hayden Panettiere is on the list, because to our surprise - we thought the PR had headed this off - she studied Knox, and in the Lifetime movie really brought out her petulant, narcissistic, uncaring side. 

And of course John Kercher is on the list, as he wrote a brilliant, heartbreaking book, about the very talented daughter he lost.


Sub-table: Career lawyers. Click for larger version.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Monday, August 26, 2019

Re The Seriously Bizarre Lovefest Between Knox And Theo Von

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


Theo Von enabled dangerous Italy-trasher Amanda Knox


Enough of the mis-education acts please. 

Instead, actually educate. Demand the truth. Here’s a tip to future Knox interviewers, those who are not mere PR shills and wish to avoid looking lifelong fools:

DO YOUR HOMEWORK PLEASE?!!

A very good place to start would be here.  See the previous mentions of the interview on TJMK here and here.

By the way, did Theo Von pay Knox a fee to pull the wool over his many fans’ eyes? Does anyone know?

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (6)

Wednesday, August 21, 2019

New $160 Million Washington Museum Astonishing On Vast War Between Fake News And Hard Facts

Posted by Peter Quennell

Video by Agence France Presse.


The old Washington DC spy museum was a dusty predictable place with smallish crowds.

The ultra-modern “International Spy Museum” (called that because the focus is worldwide) opened two months ago, and is already one of DC’s biggest magnets for museum crowds.

It has leapfrogged such museums world-wide in the external look and the immersive hands-on experiences in numerous high-tech rooms. Maybe allow two days! Hard to see it all in one.

The design was by the London architect firm that Richard Rodgers heads. He designed various transparent and inside-out buildings that are really fun to be around, such as the London Stock Exchange and the Beaubourg Museum in Paris, France.

This expose could leave folks like us mentally rewinding it for days, as it hits home the true vast scale of today’s information v disinformation war - of which we too are a part.

A trend strongly on our side is that more and more people are becoming picky in what they accept. The more hard facts, the better, both science and website hits say. Serious media is gaining greatly from this.

There was a time when TJMK and the Wiki could have been dismissed (or sued). But we got beyond that point back in 2015 when our hard-facts posts rebutting the Marasca-Bruno sentencing report went up and when we found out about Rocco Sollecito’s role.

Posts on those has sure made some of the mafia poodles disappear!

We already have enough hard facts at hand to show up all of the biased reporters, and all of their false claims. But first, those have to be gathered into a single tough read.

See the previous post as an example of this, and see the redesigned Wiki soon.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (6)

Thursday, August 08, 2019

How Knox Lied About “The Media” Which Long Lied Profusely For Her

Posted by Peter Quennell

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments.


1. How Knox Demonizes “The Media”

Here we go again, with three pro-Knox lackeys of the US and UK media.

Click for Post:  Amanda Knox blasts media coverage of trial

Click for Post:  Knox accuses media of depicting her falsely as ‘man-eating murderer’

Click for Post:  Amanda Knox accuses media of portraying her as guilty over 2007 death.

Amazingly, they are quite incuriously reporting a Knox rant against themselves this time (actually a standard inclusion in all her paid talks). Not even that provoked any actual checking of her “facts”.

Not so reported (or ever even much questioned) is that Knox and her shadow writers took shots in her 2013-15 book at “the media” approximately every ten pages.

Media frenzy… dishonest and unprofessional… horrible things… awful things… misread my rape story… prosecution leaked… sex charged… evil media… Meredith a saint and myself a monster… whore… liar… convicted in media… incomprehensible… prosecution leaked… too simple [on blood evidence]... misread my Beatles t-shirt… purposely did not report this… prosecution leaked… just let false claims hang out… no attention to Raffaele.

All imaginary, and as good reporters who were in court will tell you, it was the defenses, not the prosecutions, that prolifically leaked. This strident I’m-the-real-victim rant is part of the scams that are paying Knox’s bills, and up to now plenty of suckers still bite. 

2. The Specific Context Addressed Here

We’ll concentrate here on exposing the biased print media and online news sources, and in the next post on exposing individual reporters and commentators who blatantly pushed a pro-Knox, anti-Italy bias.

Print media may represent half of all the case sources for Brits and Americans, the other sources being TV and YouTube, books, blogs and forums - typically more tilted Knox-wise, though there were some excellent neutral books (James Raper) and TV reports (BBC and NBC Dateline).

Knox herself never names any of the print media that she claims were relentlessly against her, and in fact there were none. No mention of her massive and brutal PR. No proof that “the media” twisted even one judge’s or jury member’s minds. The big turn against her was this, and Knox caused it, all by herself:

Click for Post:  Knox Testimony Does Not Seem To Have Gained Much Traction Here In Italy

Click for Post:  Italy Shrugs: Why Amanda Knox’s Testimony Seems To Have Been A Real Flop

As our lists in Part 4 below show, print media and online news sources tilted thus: roughly 1/3 always pro-Knox, another 1/3 often pro-Knox, and another 1/3 neutral, professional, and objective.

Our Wiki remains vastly better than any media for original official documents, and the only source for accurate translations, many of them professional. They overwhelmingly reflect a careful, cut-and-dried case for the guilt of all three, with Knox as the instigator with strong motives. The Wiki’s readership has been growing consistently. 

3. Pro-Guilt Bias In The Italian Reporting?

Actually there was zero bias that we could see. This did not remotely resemble all too many US trials where suspects really can be demonized nation-wide with impunity.

Italian media in contrast were cool, dispassionate, and even-handed. They have strong anti-libel laws to worry about. Mostly they reported court events which Italians could see played out live on their TVs in any case.

We took note of that in for example these posts.

Click for Post:  Trial: Italian-Language Reporting Now Faster And More Objective Than English-Language

Click for Post:  Italian Media Reporting Impartially On Prosecution Appeal Filed For Increased Sentences

Click for Post:  Tenth Appeal Court Session: Italian Reporting So Far Good, First English-Language Reports Misleading

There was little or no difference between the Knox reporting and the Sollecito reporting - how does Knox explain THAT one? Both wanted the media to notice them. Both they and their families worked hard at that and it became pretty competitive. You can see that brought out strongly in this couple of posts.

Click for Post:  Seeds Of Betrayal: Multiple Examples Of How RS And AK Have Stabbed Each Other In The Back

Click for Post:  How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire

Only two Italian outlets tried a strong pro-Knox pro-RS anti-justice bias. They were the weekly pro-mafia Oggi, and a TV station in the Sollecito hometown of Bari.  Both have unsavory anti-justice links, and both were charged with diffamazione.

4. Pro-Guilt Bias In The US & UK Reporting?

With one big qualifier, this is how we see the US and UK print media positioned themselves for much or most of the time from 2007 to the end of 2015 (after which we had the pro-Knox Netflix, VICE Media, Innocence Project, and other propagandists).

The qualifier is that the Associated Press is not merely another outlet on a par with the others; it is a New-York-based news co-operative which channels reports from Italy to its 2000 or so owner/clients. So a single biased AP report (and there were many) could reach Americans up in the many millions.

So, quite contrary to the Knox claims, the pro-Knox-bias across US print media outlets was really enormous. Part 7 below highlights the bias of a dozen major outlets.

5. Did Italy React To The US/UK Media Bias?

Well, the Knox-Marriott PR campaign (which was aimed specifically at poisoning US and UK politics) went to great lengths to ensure that the biased pro-Knox reporting and commentary (and her book) remained only in English and under the Italian radar.

But yes, quite a few Italians did realize and take notice, usually with understandable anger. We posted on many of the negative reactions on these lines. 

Click for Post:  “Million Dollar Campaign” To Try To Influence The Jury Is Being Widely Reported To A Startled Italy

Click for Post:  Amazingly, Wrong Facts And Defamations Of Italian Officialdom Show NO Sign Of Being Reigned In

Click for Post:  Demonizations By Knox: OGGI Charged For Article Conveying False Claims To Italy #1

Click for Post:  Epidemic Of Anti-Italy Fake News She Generates Bites Knox In The Tail

Click for Post:  Prominent Political Commentator Takes Strong Exception To American Reporting

Click for Post:  Most Important Italian Paper Balks At The Attempts In US At Intimidation

6. Our Generic Exposures Of Biased Media

This is bait-and-switch on an extreme scale. Both the Knox PR campaign and Knox herself, and thus the beholden part of the US and UK media, focus fiercely on a very few points, such as the DNA and the “interrogation hoax”, and then misrepresent them.

They purposely omit maybe 95% of the damning hard facts, such as (1) the 2007-08 appeal failures, (2) the huge body of evidence at trial, (2) the prosecution’s major success resulting in a unanimous verdict, (3) the defense’s very obvious failures such as Knox’s disastrous stint on the witness stand, and (4) the demolished interrogation hoax and 34 other hoaxes.

Also (5) the bending and then annulling of the Hellman appeal court, (6) Knox being found guilty of criminal defamation by ALL courts, (7) even a bent Supreme Court chamber confirming strong proof of Knox at the murder scene, and (8) Knox not being exonerated - though she claimed in Modena that she was.

These are some of our takes on overall US and UK media performance “complete with omissions” starting from when the strong bias was first becoming blatant.

Click for Post:  How The Media Should Approach The Case If Justice Is To Be Done And SEEN To Be Done

Click for Post:  How The Strongarm Public Relations Resulted in Most Of The Media Getting It Wrong

Click for Post:  Why UK Media Deniers Like The Independent’s Amy Jenkins Come Across As Bigoted And Nasty

Click for Post:  Why The Media Are Wrong To Rely On Amanda Knox’s Family For Impartial and Accurate Information

Click for Post:  The Toxic Pro-Knox PR Campaign And Media Circus That John Kercher So Rightly Complained About

Click for Post:  Why Much Of US Main Media Is Disbelieved And Ignored Now

Click for Post:  Now France Is Ticked At The American Main Media For Mindless Assumptions About Another Case

Click for Post:  Million Dollar Campaign And American Media Come Under Intense Ridicule By An Influential Italian

Click for Post:  US And UK Media: Make RS & AK Answer The HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS Of Open Questions

Click for Post:  Tip For The Media: Getting Up To Speed With The Hard Facts Of This Complex Case

Click for Post:  The Defenses’ Dishonest, Distinctly Ill-Conceived War Of Aggression Against Perugia

Click for Post:  Admired Feminist On Knox As Ice-Cold And Media’s Hit & Miss Performance On The Case

Click for Post:  Why Did The Mainstream Media Enable A Takeover By The Conspiracy Nuts?

Click for Post:  Knox’s War Of Aggression Against Italy: Questions For Media To Nail Her Once And For All

7. Our Pinpointed Exposures Of Biased Outlets

These are our posts on a dozen of the main US and UK media outlets. Some carried very good reports; but all twelve carried bad reports which the posts took to task. 

1. Associated Press

Reporting by Trisha Thomas was excellent back in 2009 but all the other AP reporters and especially Colleen Barry were wildly pro-Knox. The damage Colleen Barry caused with her huge platform as described in Part 4 above was enormous. 

Click for Post:  Slanted Associated Press Paroting Of Knox PR Campaign Release Achieves Over 800 Google Hits

Click for Post:  Perhaps Associated Press Should Try Reporting The Odds?!

Click for Post:  Inaccurate Report By The Associated Press Carried By Over 2,000 Media Sites

Click for Post:  Dear CEO Gary Pruitt: Could The Associated Press Please Report Much More Accurately?

Click for Post:  Another Highly Misleading Associated Press Report By Colleen Barry Shows Up On 700 Media Websites

2. CBS News/48 Hours

This group aired some of the worst reports and featured a very self-serving Doug Preston. The producer headed off to prison for a blackmail attempt, which is pretty telling.

Click for Post:  Why CBS Should Report Better - Way Better - On This Case

Click for Post:  Rumors In Manhattan About Ludicrously Bad CBS Report

Click for Post:  CBS Reporter’s Bizarre Claims About Prosecutor And Reporters

Click for Post:  CBS Report Sets New Record For Trashing Of Meredith, Xenophobia, Multi-Inaccuracies, Libels

Click for Post:  Producer Of CBS Reports On The Case “Crazy, Desperate, Stupid, And/Or Unscrupulous” ?

3. CNN News

Paul Callan, Nancy Grace, Wendy Murphy, Andrew Cuomo, Lisa Bloom, and Hada Messia were all well-informed and impartial. But Jane Velez-Mitchell, Ann Bremner, Joey Jackson, and Drew Griffen were truly terrible.

Click for Post:  Now CNN Gets It All Wrong - What Will They Make of THIS In Italy?

Click for Post:  The Summations: Perenially Fact-Challenged CNN Reports Correctly For Once

Click for Post:  Drew Griffin Report This Sunday At 8:00 Intent On Sustaining CNN’s Extreme Bias

Click for Post:  Explaining Why CNN Is So Desperate For A Hit And Quaint Niceties Like “Truth” Be Damned

Click for Post:  Questions For Knox: 15 Questions That Drew Griffin On CNN Tonight SHOULD Have Asked

Click for Post:  Open Letter To CNN Head Ken Jautz: Reports As Terrible As Drew Griffin’s Risks All CNN’s Credibility

Click for Post:  Knox-Mellases And Candace Dempsey Display Extreme Contempt Of Court On CNN

4. Daily Express

The Express did little of its own reporting, but it ran a sleazy, abusive and dishonest “gotcha” interview by Bob Graham with Dr Mignini.

Click for Post:  Report By Bob Graham In The Daily Express Close To Breaking New Record For Inaccuracy

5. Fox News

Business reporter Lis Wiehl made some callous remarks, and after we posted she next showed up nervous. Geraldo Rivera was deeply in the tank for Knox and in many segments came across as stridently anti-Italy. 

Click for Post:  Fox News Analyst Lis Wiehl Seems to Think Meredith’s Murder Is One Terrific Great Joke

Click for Post:  Respected Journalist Carl Bernstein Criticizes “Murdochism” For Debasing News Reporting

6. The Guardian

Perugia reporter Tom Kington could be okay but…  Simon Hattenstone??? It seems David Marriott had a very strong connection to the editor there and for year the Guardian stridently bashed Italy and its justice officials.

Click for Post:  Did The State Department Offer Assurances To Knox She Never Would Be Extradited?

Click for Post:  Did The Bungling Guardian Check Sollecito Enabler Andrew Gumbel’s Myriad False Claims?

Click for Post:  Obstruction Of Justice? How The Guardian Poisons Public Opinion Against The Italian Courts

Click for Post:  The Guardian Publishes A Negative Take On Italian Justice Rather Poorly Researched

7. Huffpost

The Huffpost ran the ludicrous takes of the crackpot feminist Linda Marie Basile who seemed unaware that Sollecito even existed.

Click for Post:  Explaining Why Smart Feminists Have Rightly Been Extremely Wary Of Amanda Knox

Click for Post:  Why Smart Feminists Much Prefer To Keep Amanda Knox At Arms Length

8. The Independent

Rome-based reporter Peter Popham had an enormous chip on his shoulder about Italy. So apparently did Amy Jenkins. 

Click for Post:  Peter Popham Of The UK “Independent” Sure Has Drunk The Knox PR Kool-Aid

Click for Post:  Why UK Media Deniers Like The Independent’s Amy Jenkins Come Across As Bigoted And Nasty

9. New York Times

The New York Times was actually chastised by Italian media for some stridently anti-prosecution reporting. It never once did a good report on any aspect of the case. A reviewer burbled about Knox’s book. Unrelated takes on Italian justice though were some of the best.

Click for Post:  The New York Times FINALLY Awakes To The Case

Click for Post:  How The New York Times Caused Unneccesary And Unhelpful Anger In Italy

Click for Post:  The Second Misleading New York Times Commentary On The Case

Click for Post:  Today’s New York Times Headline: Why Much Of US Main Media Is Disbelieved And Ignored Now

Click for Post:  Italy’s Advanced, Effective, Humane Law & Order System Also Adopted By City Of New York

Click for Post:  NY Times Describes How Italy Leads The World In Rehabilitation

10. Rolling Stone

Rolling Stone twice carried seething anti-Italy commentary by Nathaniel Rich. Later its reputation crashed when it very damagingly reported a fake rape claim as genuine.

Click for Post:  A Deeply Ugly, Inaccurate And Callous Piece Of Junk By Nathaniel Rich In “Rolling Stone”

11. Seattle PI

The extensive reporting by Andrea Vogt was the very best. We quoted from it dozens of times. But it also carried inflammatory prejudice in an unpaid blog by the dumb-as-a-rock amateur Candace Dempsey. 

Click for Post:  Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Is The Editor Banning Truthseekers From Website?

Click for Post:  Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Now On The Defensive?

Click for Post:  Looks Like Seattle Post Intelligencer Could Be On The Rocks

Click for Post:  Is Seattle Case Coverage STILL In Cloud-Cuckooland?

12. Time Weekly

“Reporter” Nine Burleigh’s posts from Italy (she spoke no Italian and had zero expertise) became pure poison against Italy, the prosecution, and the Catholic church, as she fell for Knox and sought to wedge Edda Mellas away.

Click for Post:  Knox Groupie Nina Burleigh Posting The Nastiest And Least Accurate Reports

Click for Post:  Nina Burleigh: View From A Broad Who Doesn’t Seem To Like Broads Or Being Abroad

Click for Post:  Media Starting To Take A Closer Look At The Knox PR Shills With Nina Burleigh Exhibit One

Click for Post:  What’s Nina Burleigh Got Against Women? A Bizarre Time Report Suggests Deep Problems In Her Psyche

Click for Post:  How With Myriad False Claims Nina Burleigh Pushes To Forefront Of Pro-Knox Crackpots

8. Finally In This Series On Knox’s Lie-A-Thon

A couple more posts should do it, as two of Knox’s scams - the Modena scam and wedding scam - are in the news and driving our audience.

The posts will cover how Knox was dishonest to her audience about some of the best reporters, she smeared the prosecution and police repeatedly, and she blamed Meredith’s death solely on Rudy Guede.

Nothing suggests such a lone-wolf attack was feasible - even the defense lawyers turned to other theories.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (7)

Friday, July 26, 2019

Knox’s Fake Wedding Exposed, Her Tenth Fraudulent Scam To Net More Bloodmoney

Posted by KrissyG

Long Post. Click here to go straight to Comments


1. Previous Nine Knox Scams

As far as we can tell, these scams have represented the unemployable Knox’s sole income streams. 

    1. 2008 onward, incessant fundraising by Knox-Mellas family in Seattle, on provably false grounds.

    2. 2008 onward, fraud of various US media entities for exclusive access, on provably false grounds.

    3. 2009-11-13-15 $100,000 award to Patrick still not paid despite guilt finding by all courts

    4. 2012 HarperCollins publishers paid Knox up to $4 million for her remarkably dishonest book.

    5. 2012 Robert Barnett paid est $400,000 for marketing Knox’s book understanding Knox told the truth.

    6. 2013 onward fees and costs paid by US Innocence Project for annual talks on provably false grounds.

    7. 2013 onward: hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, who trustingly bought Knox’s dishonest book.

    8. 2013-2019: All groups on this list and some others which paid $10,000 per provably false talk.

    9. 2019 Italian Innocence Project pays fee & travel for dishonest and defamatory talk by Knox.


2. Scam Ten: The Million Dollar Fake Wedding

Gram Parsons and Emmylou Harris once famously sang:

‘Was a thousand dollar wedding
Supposed to be held, the other day’

Thousand Dollar Wedding on the gorgeous Grievous Angel album.

Resonant of a typical news headline over recent days, focussed on Knox’ wedding party crowdfunding page, in which she asks the public to donate sums between $10 up to $10,000, themed around space-age food, entertainment, child care, wedding dress and music. For example German newspaper Gala subheader screams:

Amanda Knox wants to get married, but the “angel with the ice-eyes” is missing the necessary cash for it. That’s why she and her fiancé are asking for donations.

Several newspapers quote Knox’ crowdfunding site as explaining that she and her partner, Chris Robinson recently attended the Modena Innocence Project Conference in Italy, and they claim to have used up their wedding funds on that.  Gala writes:

The couple explains that their savings have been used up when traveling to Italy. There Amanda Knox was the guest of the “festivalgiustiziapenale” in Modena, with which the city’s judicial authorities and the “Italy Innocence Project” of the University of Rome want to help innocent convicts. Despite lack of money, they do not want to wait with their wedding.

After criticism for demanding money for their own wedding party, Modena Innocence Project were forced to issue a statement that it paid Knox’ travel, accommodation and other expenses in full as its guest.

Whilst the Innocence Projects have to suspend credulity when persons convicted of serious crimes claim innocence, and take their word largely on trust but maybe backed up with DNA evidence if possible, it must surely cut to the quick to discover that they themselves have been hoaxed by their own ‘innocence guest’.

And it wasn’t Knox herself who came clean.  Barbie Nadeau writing in the Daily Beast  states it was solely her initiative to contact the Modena Innocence Project for their comment.

...with scant time to plan, and no financial backing, we had to spend our wedding funds on this challenging and important journey.” [Knox] The Italy Innocence Project has since confirmed to The Daily Beast and others that they did pay Knox’s airfare and lodging for the conference, as they did for all the guest speakers.

So Knox initially made zero effort to correct the record. Knox has hastily removed the Modena lie from the website. But Knox’s scam actually consists of FOUR new hoaxes.

Hoax #1

Knox had to use their wedding money to go to Modena, Italy.

Knox’s victim, Modena Innocence Project, has now issued a statement denying they made their own guest pay their own way.

Not to mention ‘supporters’ who felt sorry for her and may have forked out to get the trio there.

Hoax #2

There is no wedding pending. AMANDA KNOX AND CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON ARE ALREADY MARRIED.





Online public records from King County, Washington USA shows Knox and Robinson made an application for marriage 21 November 2018, married 1st December 2018 and the marriage certificate issued 7th December 2018.

This is a public legal document.  So why did Knox lie that the wedding would not be ‘until 29 February in leap year 2020’ and even cheekily gave a number countdown of the days?

This makes the appeal for wedding donations and a failure to mention they were already married worse. 

But wait!  It gets even worser…

Hoax #3

Knox claims on the crowdfund page to have been left broke by her trip to Italy, kindly paid for by the Modena Innocence Project.

But how hard up are they really? 

In March this year, Knox and ‘Party Rock’ moved into a $700K property on Vashon Island in Wa. USA.





Nice, huh?  According to public tax records it has been bought under a trust of deed together with Christopher Robinson’s co-author, Gavin Kovite and his wife, Molly.  Interestingly, in the Warranty Deed Robinson and Knox are described as ‘a married couple’.





The records show the details of the Deed of Trust between the two couples:





A Deed of Trust is commonly brought out when persons share a property or one party pays a different share than the others.  It means in the event of a sale or bankruptcy, the other parties’ fiscal share is protected.

However, some have less than honest intention and it is a popular way for persons who want to hide their assets from creditors to ‘ring fence’ their property in a deed of trust.

And of course, the Kovites are protecting themselves.

Knox might believe having a deed of trust instead of a straight mortgage will protect her from Patrick Lumumba issuing her with a bankruptcy petition for failing to pay his damages, as ordered by a court of law.

However, if a trust is taken out with this purpose in mind, courts are able to declare the deed of trust a sham.





This is a list of what’s on the public records.  Normally this would be of no interest to anybody.  However, it is surely in the public interest if a person is claiming to be in need of financial help when, in fact, public records appear to indicate otherwise.

Hoax #4

Amanda Knox lists in one of her webpages all of the places the couple have extensively traveled to:  France, Sweden, Germany, Italy, etcetera, etcetera.

Karen Matthews famously spent a few years in jail for claiming her young daughter Shannon had been kidnapped in order to claim a £50K reward for her return.

How different is Knox’ begging for financial support based on misleading claims of being out of pocket, yet buys a share in a $718K house? Yet fails to mention she married eight months ago and the ‘countdown’ to the big wedding on 29 Feb 2020?

In Conclusion

This is without question just another of Knox’s money-making scams. Most people would expect to have their collar seized by the fraud squad.

In The Stranger Knox as usual doesn’t take responsibility for her own actions in misleading readers. She tells the Seattle newspaper:

Since this story started making the rounds, both Knox and Robinson say they’ve received a flood of hatemail, including from people telling Knox she deserves to die.

According to Knox, anyone who disagrees with her behaviour is a ‘hater’ or a dupe of the ‘outrage machine’. Really.

Of course, the very dangerous Knox has stirred massive hate toward Italy and Italians, and there have been a number of incidents in Perugia.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (53)

Saturday, July 20, 2019

Wedding Of The Ghouls

Posted by Hopeful




The gruesome news in the online Daily Mail for July 22 2019:

Amanda Knox and her fiance launch crowd-funding appeal to make their wedding the “best party ever”—and promise donors a book of love poems in return

Knox, 32 and Christopher Robinson, 37 have asked for donations towards their wedding. AK said she had to use her wedding funds to pay for the trip to Modena in June.

Donations may cover food, decor and puzzles. The wedding will be space themed.

Galactic donors ($1,000) and temporal patrons ($2,000-$10,000) will receive a special video from the future, with reading of an excerpt from the Encyclopedia Galactica.

Other donors $25 and up will receive a copy of love poems entitled, “The Cardio Tesseract”.

Stellar patrons who donate $500 will get a shout out on the dance floor “when Madonna’s ‘Lucky Star’ comes on.”

Knox said, “I am getting married! How? Oh so weirdly! Time travel and so forth. Check out our wedding story at knoxrobinson.com/coalescence.

The Daily Mail story includes a photo of Knox in light pink dress leaning sadly on her mother’s shoulder as Edda puts an arm around her daughter in the seating at the Criminal Justice Festival of University of Modena.

Seems Edda was there, along with Chris, to support the fragile Knox who seemed to have a very very hard time coping with a return to Italy now that she has wised up.

At the Modena Justice event, Knox said she still fears further criminal charges against her despite the 2015 acquittal.

I’m afraid today, now, I’m afraid of being harassed, mocked, stuck and I’m afraid that new accusations will be addressed to me just because I come here (Modena) to say my version of the facts. But above all, I fear I will lack the courage.

I know that despite my acquittal by Court of Cassation I remain a controversial figure…above all and especially here in Italy.

Knox’s fiance Chris Robinson was in evidence at the Modena conference wearing a loud patterned shirt of yellow and black, and in one photo with his beloved Knox, wearing a grey felt hat, large sunglasses, and displaying a tattoo of a sword along what appears to be his left forearm, from elbow to wrist, an arm he has wrapped warmly around his fiancee Amanda.

On her June 13, 2019 arrival in Milan, Knox was swarmed by media, held her head down and wore an off-white jacket and hair in topknot bun.

Story in Mail says “Earlier this year a European court awarded Knox $20,000 in damages after finding that Italy had “violated her human rights.”

Photos of her at the justice conference where she represented the Innocence Project, show Knox dismal and unnerved, in my opinion.

Whether the tormented waif appearance was all a cunning act, or real, one can only guess, with the known liar and consummate actress and mask wearer.

It seems there will also be “costumes” at the wedding—no doubt a wild Mardi Gras affair. Let’s hope the confetti is not rocks or broken glass.

Frankly, Knox is looking unhinged these days and under the sway of the strange Mr. Robinson who appears quite kooky to say the least. imho….

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (12)

Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Italy Is Once Again Justice Forerunner In Case With Poss Future Global Implications

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


From 1975 to 1980 six dictatorships in South American killed at least 23 Italian citizens.

The Italians were political opponents of the dictatorships in Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, Bolivia and Argentina.

Those dictatorships had created a joint operation, Operation Condor, to disappear or openly kill such “nuisance elements”.

As the video hints, the CIA had a murky role.

Despite that, some 24 surviving organizers of Operation Condor have just been sentenced to life by an Italian court.

They include several of the former dictators.

If extradition laws are correctly observed, and the US finds a way to not intervene, Italy will need to make ready some presidential cells.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Friday, June 28, 2019

Meredith’s Perugia #39: Even More Moving Than The Playing Here Is That…

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



When this amazing Vivaldi was first played… all ten of the players would have been women.

Italy had reputedly the best orchestras and chamber groups in the world at the time, and music lovers would travel from all over Europe to see them.

Well, to hear them, if maybe not to see them, for they would generally be up on a balcony and sometimes hidden by some kind of frieze.

Italian nobles did not want to break up their great family estates, sources of their wealth and powers, and so the firstborn male inherited everything, and all the other kids were established elsewhere.

Many or most of the girls, often well funded, ended up in “secular convents” where they practiced music all day every day of the week.

Composers like Vivaldi, himself a non-inheritor, trained these girls further, bought them the best instruments… and lo and behold.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (7)

Thursday, June 20, 2019

Knox’s Italy Catastrophe #2: Explaining Some Major Threats That Knox’s Foolish Rant Has Fired Up

Posted by KrissyG


Sarcastic graphic; Italian media is now negative toward Knox

Long Post. Click here to go straight to Comments


1. How Knox “Onshored” The PR’s Greatest Lies

David Marriott must be rolling over in his grave.

Remember what we said about his barbaric “public relations” in Post #1 below?

This case is riddled with dogs-that-didnt-bark examples. It was the core modus operandi of the scorched-earth public relations campaign run by Curt Knox and David Marriott. Ignore the damning 95 percent of the facts that can’t easily be explained away. Instead concentrate on misrepresenting the other 5 percent.

Given what we explained about live TV and documents in the first part, this would not have worked at all in Italy.

But it was never meant to. It was not beamed at Italy - it was beamed at British and Americans who (1) could not observe Knox for days and days on TV and (2) could not read court documents readily available online in Italian. Then hopefully they would react politically, as in the US they did of course.

So to Marriott it was vital to success that the PR’s myriad lies and defamations beamed at Americans and Brits REMAIN OFFSHORE!

The last thing Knox or anyone was meant to do was go half way round the world to Italy and ONSHORE the attacks.

But this is what Knox just did.

And she attacked two of Italy’s most liked and trusted institutions: (1) the world-class law-enforcement and justice system, and (2) the mostly restrained, quite elegant media.

Why Knox did this is not (or not only) the me-me-me obsession of a pathological narcissist at work. We’ll explain why in Post #3.

Here we explain which major risks for herself Knox may have set in motion, which to any smart mind would say at minimum “Imperious trips to Italy are at an end.”

2. Ten Of The Many Threats Knox May Have Fired Up

1. Guede Could Rebut Her All Over Italian Media

Guede is due to be released any day now. He will be free to give interviews, write his memoirs, point the finger at Sollecito or (more likely now) Knox. Knox obviously will not be in Italy and unable to respond.

In his televised interview with RAI in April 2017 and described by the DAILY BEAST as presenting himself as ‘extremely cultured if not intellectual’ he:

“[Guede] maintained his innocence, pointed the finger at Seattle native Amanda Knox, and refused to name her Italian boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito.”

This could be read as either he didn’t know or recognise Sollecito well enough to name him; or that as a captive prisoner he was afraid of retribution by Sollecito’s unsavory clan.

In his description of the ‘man in the doorway’ of Meredith’s room as of the time of his arrest he claims the hall light had been switched off and the intruder’s face was backlit (in other words in the dark), but that he had light brown hair, was shorter than him and spoke native fluent Italian.

In addition, he wore a Napapirri type jacket, a white beanie, with a red band, and held a stiletto blade in his left hand.

This would certainly count out an Albanian as suggested by Sollecito’s star witness Alessi whom nobody took seriously, anyway.

However, Knox does give Alessi great credence, at p 418, Waiting to be Heard speculating that she wondered who Guede’s friend was in Alessi’s version of events, which involved a graphic threesome.

In WTBH p 220 Knox claims when she saw Guede’s photo on tv for the first time after he was arrested she thought, ‘Oh my God, it’s him.’  She goes on to claim this was the guy she was referring to when she told police of a South African ’who played basketball with the guys downstairs’.

She claims she had only seen him one time after that, at Le Chic when she had ‘taken his drink order’.  She omits to mention joining him for a joint with the guys in the downstairs house.

Guede himself claims he referred to himself as South African when chatting to Meredith during the England vs South Africa rugby cup final.

So, how did Knox ‘know’ he was ‘South African’ if she had never spoken to him, bearing in mind South Africans in Europe aren’t generally assumed to be black?

Guede, in his Prison Diary, claimed there had been a spark between him and Knox when they were smoking a joint (there are solid witnesses to the fact this gathering did take place).

Given Knox’s multiple falsely claims in her book WTBH, which she would have had a chance to review and edit, that she only met Guede ‘vaguely’ twice and we know that to be factually untrue. We have to suspect that actually she did know him as an acquaintance at least.

With Sollecito and Knox both ganging up on Guede, not to mention the widespread PR naming him as the ‘local burglar’ who left his DNA ‘all over the murder scene’, we can expect Guede to be keen to set the story straight from his POV once he is released.

2. Police Forensic Scientists Knox PR Abused

They know objective scientific tests do not lie: they know what the luminol, shoeprints and DNA means.

According to Nick Richardson of the London Review Of Books (LROB) in an excellent review of WTBH which I shall quote a lot (there are also numerous posts on TJMK which correspond):

“The Esperti Ricerca Tracce – the state police’s crime scene investigation unit – found bloody shoe prints and a handprint on a pillow that had been placed under Kercher’s hips.

On the sheet on her bed they found the outline of a knife.

One of the ERT’s scientists, Patrizia Stefanoni, examined Kercher’s vagina and found a long blonde hair.

They swabbed the bathroom, sprayed the apartment with luminol, a chemical used to reveal traces of blood that has been wiped away, and found footprints the size of Knox’s and Sollecito’s feet in the corridor outside Kercher’s room.

Also a drop of blood in Romanelli’s room that was later shown, as was the blood on the tap, to contain both Knox’s and Kercher’s DNA.”

The invisible bloody footprint directly facing Meredith’s door has been identified by forensic experts as Sollecito’s.

Add to the mixes of Knox’s and Meredith’s blood and/or DNA in the bathroom sink, bidet, cotton bud box and light switch, it is hardly accurate to say ‘there is no sign of Knox (or Sollecito) at the crime scene’, especially if one considers that the footprint/shoeprint expert further positively identified a ladies size 37 trainer shoe print underneath the body.

There was also shards of glass trailed in from Filomena’s room, where there is no sign of Guede at all, bearing in mind he is supposed to be the burglar who entered that way.

A quote from LROB:

The investigators never believed that Guede was Kercher’s sole killer. The state autopsy results suggested that there had been more than one assailant.

She had dozens of cuts and bruises: finger bruises round her neck, a bruise on her chin and over her mouth, identical bruises on her inner elbows compatible with her being held back.

It would have been extremely difficult to pin her down and inflict so much damage without being wounded too, especially as Kercher practised karate – but Guede only had the cuts on his hand.

Plus there were the bloody footprints shown up by the luminol and the mixed-DNA bloodstains in Romanelli’s room and the bathroom.

At Guede’s trial Judge Micheli declared that he believed Guede had acted with Knox and Sollecito.

His confidence was shored up by two pieces of DNA evidence that the prosecution would rely on heavily in court.

In November 2007 investigators found a knife at Sollecito’s apartment with Knox’s DNA on the handle and Kercher’s on the blade.’

3. Police Telecomms Experts The PR Abused

technical forensic experts: they know the truth about Sollecito’s claim he didn’t turn off his phone, he just didn’t have a signal.

Sollecito’s phone providers gave the forensic communications technicians clear evidence there had not been anything wrong with the phone signals hat night, nor were the walls ‘too thick’ and nor was Raff’s apartment in a blind area for signals.

Residents in the neighbouring apartments and buildings experienced no problems with their phone signals.

Yet Sollecito denies he switched off his phone just before 21:00.

So the communications guys know for definite Knox and Sollecito both switched off their phones within minutes of each other, between 20:45 and 21:00.

After 21:20 there is no further recorded electronic activity in the flat for the rest of the night.

4. Police Telecomms Experts The PR Abused (2)

They know the truth about the trashed laptops.

Sollecito and Knox’ lawyers claim his was fried by the police via the wrong current plugged in.

Notwithstanding power portals are designed to only allow fit of the right size cable, this argument doesn’t work because it was only the cottage laptops that ‘fried’, and not Patrick Lumumba’s, which was tested at the same time.

CDV: Are you aware of the possibility of an electric shock?

MG: We are aware of the possibility of an electric shock [power surge], I can not exclude it with certainty, but at the same time the fact that it has worked in other hard disks always with the same instrument, always in that same place connected to the same electric network, is however an indicator that it cannot be that in one moment it worked and in another, not.’

‘CDV: However, are you aware that there is a different voltage between a portable PC and a desktop?
MG: Yes.’

In other words, the laptops were fried before the police sequestered them.

Filomena Romanelli rescued her laptop at the scene.  When she attended the Questura the next day to hand it in, it would not start.

Sure proof together with the dead laptops of Knox, Kercher and Sollecito that it was not the police who ‘fried’ them.

Sollecito claims in Honor Bound that his laptop was damaged by the police pulling the socket out of the wall before logging out.

Non-IT folk might be dumb, but not so dumb to believe it is a coincidence that all four laptops were kaput, whereas Patrick’s was not, and which was never anywhere near IT-boffin Sollecito, and all tested by the police at the same time.

5. Investigators Can Prove Knox Was Not Abused

The police know the truth about Knox’ claims of having been unethically treated. Knox claims in WTBH according to the LROB:

“ They gave her a confession to sign.  It said that she’d met up with Lumumba after leaving Sollecito’s flat at 8.30 p.m. and that they’d gone to the villa together; that Patrick had had sex with Meredith; and that she remembered ‘confusedly’ – confusedly because she’d earlier smoked a joint with Sollecito – that he killed her.

Once she’d signed it, Knox says, the police officers ‘whooped and high-fived each other’.

The public prosecutor later bullied her into making a second ‘spontaneous declaration’ in which she added that she had been in the kitchen when the murder took place, and that ‘at one point I heard Meredith screaming and I was scared and covered my ears.’

A classic case of ‘shoot the messenger’. It was Mignini what done it, according to Knox (see Point 10 below) as he made her blurt this out by some kind of special psychic power.

We proved this was not so.

6. Prison Officers Abused By PR Know Prison Truths

They know the truth about Knox’ claims of being suicidal in prison: by all accounts she fit in well and was as happy as a lark, performing, writing stories and scripting videos.

In her application to the ECHR, Knox claims she was tricked into revealing her list of sexual partners, which she listed in her Prison Diary and which was then leaked to the press.

We proved this was not so. Also the ECHR recently did not find Knox had been mistreated by the prison doctors or staff, nor was she abused by the police as she claims.

Fact is, Knox won a prize for essay writing (about a man at a party who finds his half-naked girlfriend lying on the floor at a party with stab wounds [‘piercings’]) and scripting a video featuring a young girl strapped to a chair being tortured by three people including Knox as the star character and the three seen running down a stairwell fleeing.

The Knox character is pictured in prison writing at a table and in the next she is seen raving at a prison party waving her arms in the air.

The message does not escape anybody. There are photos of her just like that.

7. What The Judges The PR Abused Saw

Some thirty-five to forty judges - both presiding or as in a jurors’ panel - all could not help but conclude the pair were guilty as charged (Marasca-Bruno never had the pair before them)

Whilst the criminal courts were dealing in criminal law:

“Meanwhile, Knox’s mother was appearing regularly on American TV shows, proclaiming her daughter’s innocence over home video footage of Knox as a child.

A Seattle-based group called Friends of Amanda was formed by Anne Bremner, a criminal lawyer who set herself up as a spokesperson for the Knox family.

The Knoxes also hired a PR guru called David Marriott to prepare press releases for the American media.

An American author called Douglas Preston, who had written a book about the serial killer known as the Monster of Florence – a case that had also been investigated by Justice Mignini, the chief prosecutor in Knox and Sollecito’s trial – discovered that Mignini had once wire-tapped a journalist.

This served to back up the Knox camp’s claim that improper interrogation techniques had been used (even though Mignini had hardly been present at the interrogation).

It also came out that when Mignini was investigating the Monster of Florence case he had called in a ‘witch’ to advise him on satanism.”

LROB

In other words, there was a concerted US campaign to outwit the courts, battling a ‘persuasion techniques’ advertising campaign, their motto being,  ‘attack is the best form of defence’, trying to dig up the dirt on the Italian Roman Catholic prosecutor with his ‘medieval religious beliefs’ whilst exaggerating Knox as Miss American Pie.

On their side was journalist and failing crime novelist Douglas Preston, with a score to settle against Italy and Mignini, having been forced to get out of the country or face prosecution for trying to pervert the course of justice in the MOF case.

‘The American novelist Nathaniel Rich wrote a long piece for Rolling Stone in June 2011 entitled: ‘The Never-Ending Nightmare of Amanda Knox’. [See our post here.]

It opened with a gory re-enactment of Kercher’s murder: ‘On the third try, the killer found a soft spot …’ The killer; one killer.’

LROB

We know that Nathaniel Rich was fed this story by Knox’s best friend of the time, Madison Paxton, on whom he had a crush.

Paxton was busy sending out PR and writing her own copy starting off the popular story ‘Knox was railroaded by the police’.

It was Nina Burleigh who started the ‘Guede was a drifter’ meme.

Whilst the PR has been very successful in the USA, the UK and Italian press focused more on the facts of the trial, with libel laws being much stricter and reporting standards high, although they nearly all describe Guede as the ‘drifter’

‘Rich followed his piece with a review of Waiting to Be Heard in the New York Review in which not only are the Italian police bungling idiots, the Italian journalists immoral dogs, the Italian legal professionals superstitious fools, but Perugia itself is portrayed as a vortex of evil and chicanery’

LROB

‘The managers of Knox’s downfall came in for savage caricature, though they were respected professionals with long careers behind them: Mignini was a senile fuddy-duddy, Napoleoni a vindictive bully; Stefanoni incompetent, though she was an internationally reputed forensics expert who had been entrusted with the identification of bodies after the 2004 tsunami.

[Senator] Cantwell stated that she had ‘serious questions about the Italian justice system’; the state for which she is senator, Washington, currently has eight people on death row.

In The Fatal Gift of Beauty, Burleigh, one of the most vocal Italy-haters, wrote that at the trial Knox’s family radiated ‘that quality that so differentiates the American from the European – enthusiasm’. ‘

LROB

The PR which Knox touts to this day makes out Knox to be the victim of a sexist salacious press determined to paint her as the drug-taking ‘slut’ and this is the story-telling Knox took to Modena.

No questions are allowed of her ever about the evidence at the trial itself.

8.  What DNA Expert Dr Francesco Vinci Saw In The DNA

Dr Vinci saw data that made him back off the case. Vinci was one of the defence forensic DNA experts.

He discovered DNA fragments of both Knox and Guede on Meredith’s bra fabric. These, however, were below the legal standard of needing at least ten alleles.

He walked off the case or was pushed, nonetheless.

What does Vinci know that made him no longer able to continue defending the pair on the DNA?

9. What Goods Sollecito Has On Knox (A Lot)

‘A short story by Knox surfaced, in which one of the male characters tells his friend: ‘A thing you have to know about chicks is that they don’t know what they want … You have to show it to them.’ This was taken by the colpevolisti as evidence that she had fantasised about rape.

In another story fragment that Knox posted on her Myspace page a couple of weeks before the murder the narrator has an obsessive crush on her female housemate.

Sollecito, the son of a wealthy Pugliese doctor, also had his character picked over.

He’d been into drugs when he was younger, and still smoked copious amounts of hash: in one post on a social networking site he bragged about spending ‘80 per cent of my waking hours high’.

He was a porn addict, and owned a collection of swords and knives. He liked vampire comics. He had written on his blog that he craved ‘new sensations’.

Perhaps the most damaging thing to turn up was a picture he once posted of himself wearing surgical bandages and posing with a meat cleaver and a jug of cleaning fluid.’

LROB

So, the American PR campaign that ensured Guede was constantly referred to as a ‘drifter’, ‘petty thief’, burglar’ and ‘drug dealer’ didn’t translate into Knox or Sollecito being similarly branded.

This was despite Knox getting a police caution and fine for riotous behavior at a party and Sollecito likewise in possession of drugs, both before the Kercher murder.

Guede was just as middle-class as either of them and had no police record at all.

The PR relies on racist stereotyping based on the US version of the ‘poor unemployable Black on welfare and in and out of prison’.

‘Sollecito told the police that she had left him in town, saying she was going to meet friends at Le Chic at 9 p.m., and he had gone home alone and surfed the internet until she came back at one.

(In Honour Bound, Sollecito’s new book, he says he was so stoned that he can’t be sure Knox didn’t leave him alone for some time that night.1) Computer experts who testified at the trial said that Sollecito’s laptop had not been used between 9.30 p.m. and 5.30 a.m. on the morning after the murder.

Knox and Sollecito said that they had slept in on the morning of 2 November, but phone records showed that they had both switched their mobiles on at six, having turned them off for the night.’

LROB

Forensic IT experts very clearly testified that there had been no computer activity on Sollecito’s laptop after 21:20, when the film Amelie finished until next day.

This was backed up by unequivocal data from Raff’s IT provider.

Sollecito in effect like Baby Jane knows ‘secrets about you’.

10. What Mignini knows but hasn’t revealed.

Dr Mignini has an enormous choice of means to clear his name and punish Knox and the mafia poodles when he takes retirement early next year.

He will really be liberated then and he does excellent speeches and TV. He will be in enormous demand for sure. He will come to the United States.

Our Italian lawyers tell us this malicious invention below in Knox’s 2013 book WTBH is diffamazione (criminal slander) for sure.

Knox was clearly trying to end Dr Mignini’s career, and see him sent to prison as well. The statute of limitations on this has years to go before it tuns out.

In other words he CAN sue in Italy and the UK and maybe even the US.

Amazingly, it is very much along the lines of the calunnia against Patrick Lumumba for which Knox served three years and it was without any provocation or pressure at all, as she was sitting in Seattle when she wrote her book.

The big problem for Knox? When this lurid claim of an illegal interrogation took place Dr Mignini was not even there.

He was asleep in bed.

[From pages 90-92 of the weirdly titled “Waiting To Be Heard”. The date is 7 November 2007. This is the 1.45 am session with Rita Ficarra which in fact was devoted merely to building a list of visitors to the house.]

Eventually they told me the pubblico ministero [prosecutor] would be coming in.

I didn’t know this translated as prosecutor, or that this was the magistrate that Rita Ficarra had been referring to a few days earlier when she said they’d have to wait to see what he said, to see if I could go to Germany.

I thought the “public minister” was the mayor or someone in a similarly high “public” position in the town and that somehow he would help me.

[One of numerous lies in the book. Knox had been with Dr Mignini three times already: on the morning after Meredith was killed and when he twice took her back to her house.]

They said, “You need to talk to the pubblico ministero about what you remember.”

I told them, “I don’t feel like this is remembering. I’m really confused right now.” I even told them, “I don’t remember this. I can imagine this happening, and I’m not sure if it’s a memory or if I’m making this up, but this is what’s coming to mind and I don’t know. I just don’t know.”

They said, “Your memories will come back. It’s the truth. Just wait and your memories will come back.”

The pubblico ministero [Dr Mignini] came in.

Before he started questioning me, I said, “Look, I’m really confused, and I don’t know what I’m remembering, and it doesn’t seem right.”

One of the other police officers said, “We’ll work through it.”

Despite the emotional sieve I’d just been squeezed through, it occurred to me that I was a witness and this was official testimony, that maybe I should have a lawyer. “Do I need a lawyer?” I asked.

He said, “No, no, that will only make it worse. It will make it seem like you don’t want to help us.”

It was a much more solemn, official affair than my earlier questioning had been, though the pubblico ministero was asking me the same questions as before: “What happened? What did you see?”

    I said, “I didn’t see anything.”

    “What do you mean you didn’t see anything? When did you meet him?”

    “I don’t know,” I said.

    “Where did you meet him?”

    “I think by the basketball court.” I had imagined the basketball court in Piazza Grimana, just across the street from the University for Foreigners.

    “I have an image of the basketball court in Piazza Grimana near my house.”

    “What was he wearing?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “Was he wearing a jacket?”

    “I think so.”

    “What color was it?”

    “I think it was brown.”

    “What did he do?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “What do you mean you don’t know?”

    “I’m confused!”

    “Are you scared of him?”

    “I guess.”

I felt as if I were almost in a trance. The pubblico ministero led me through the scenario, and I meekly agreed to his suggestions.

    “This is what happened, right? You met him?”

    “I guess so.”

    “Where did you meet?”

    “I don’t know. I guess at the basketball court.”

    “You went to the house?”

    “I guess so.”

    “Was Meredith in the house?”

    “I don’t remember.”

    “Did Patrick go in there?”

    “I don’t know, I guess so.”

    “Where were you?”

    “I don’t know. I guess in the kitchen.”

    “Did you hear Meredith screaming?”

    “I don’t know.”

    “How could you not hear Meredith screaming?”

    “I don’t know. Maybe I covered my ears. I don’t know, I don’t know if I’m just imagining this. I’m trying to remember, and you’re telling me I need to remember, but I don’t know. This doesn’t feel right.”

    He said, “No, remember. Remember what happened.”

    “I don’t know.”

At that moment, with the pubblico ministero raining questions down on me, I covered my ears so I could drown him out.

    He said, “Did you hear her scream?”

    I said, “I think so.”

My account was written up in Italian and he said, “This is what we wrote down. Sign it.”

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (11)

Tuesday, June 18, 2019

Knox’s Italy Catastrophe #1: Explaining Her Very Telling Non-Mention Of Sollecito

Posted by Peter Quennell


Knox in 2009 seeking to warm up a cold-shouldering Sollecito; see Part 4

Long Post. Click here to go straight to Comments


1. Negative Swing In Italian Public Opinion

Reports we are getting suggest that Knox herself has turned more millions against her.

Not surprising. We need to understand (as Knox “forgets”) how almost all informed Italians back in trial and appeal days developed their knowledge of the case and their takes on Knox.

It was not from a demonizing media (there actually was none, as we’ll explain in another post) or self-serving police and prosecutors (there were also none as we’ll explain).

It was in fact from LIVE TV and COURT DOCUMENTS ONLINE.

Most of the 2009 trial and 2011 and 2013 appeals were beamed to all Italy live with no simultaneous commentary. If you live in the United States, the experience was identical to C-Span.

Despite extensive training to in part make her hate Dr Mignini (really), as even described in her book, Knox still came across appallingly.

At trial (before she was remodeled) Knox was already a known junkie, and she was seen acting cuckoo in the courtroom, desperately trying to warm up Sollecito, rising to defend the display of her vibrator when just minutes before there was damning testimony she could have challenged.

She came across in July 2009 on the witness stand for two days as arrogant, callous, inconsistent, dishonest, and demonizing.

It’s hard to think of any UK or US parallel to that last one. A real disaster. It led directly to every court from then on (including the Supreme Court twice) ratifying her guilty verdict for framing Patrick, starting with a unanimous trial jury (they dont have to be unanimous in Italy so Knox persuaded none of them).

So Knox quite rightly served three years in prison, and was fined E100,000 in damages to Patrick (unpaid) for that felony. 

Who molded the narrative from the prosecution side? Nobody. The main prosecutor, Dr Mignini, was famous for saying nothing, whether surrounded by microphones or emailed for comments. But he really did not need to. The TV cameras and documents were doing a fine job without him.

Who else might gain by falsely representing Knox? Really only those mafia poodles in the Knox camp, and their massive effort was in the other direction: to sanctify her and bring Italian justice to its knees.

So what did Italy just see in Modena? Another attempt (remarkably on failed July 2009 lines) to persuade Italians not to believe their lying eyes, and instead to buy her snake-oil.

2. The Dog That Didn’t Bark

This was perhaps the most famous phrase ever uttered by the fictional detective Sherlock Holmes.

He had nailed a murderer because of something that DIDN’T happen - a dog didn’t bark and so the dog knew the murderer. Elementary, my dear Watson.

This case is riddled with dogs-that-didnt-bark examples.

It was the core modus operandi of the scorched-earth public relations campaign run by Curt Knox and David Marriott. Ignore the damning 95 percent of the facts that can’t easily be explained away. Instead concentrate on misrepresenting the other 5 percent.

Given what we explained about live TV and documents in the first part, this would not have worked at all in Italy.

But it was never meant to. It was not beamed at Italy - it was beamed at British and Americans who (1) could not observe Knox for days and days on TV and (2) could not read court documents readily available online in Italian. Then hopefully they would react politically, as in the US they did of course.

We will be posting numerous dogs-that-didnt-bark examples. One was posted just a few days ago: Knox was not exonerated. Don’t hold your breath - you will not hear that from Knox’s lips any time soon.

Now here’s the damning new one. The dog that did not bark in Modena.

3. Sollecito’s Non-Mention In Modena

Knox’s speech was all about the tribulations of herself and Sollecito, right?

Oh, no, of course. It wasn’t. Sollecito barely got a single mention. She tiptoed past that one. Effectively he was made a non-person.  And to make sure he stayed a non-person he was not even invited. In fact he has been publicly complaining about it so Knox will presumably try damage control.

So WHY did Knox and her increasingly ghoulish enabling mother Edda really not want the looming presence of Sollecito?

We can think of three quite valid and fact-based reasons.

    Reason 1. Knox’s speech makes not the slightest sense in light of the fact that Sollecito throughout was treated absolutely identically, and in the Perugia and Florence courts was awarded almost identical sentences.

    Read all the daily court reports here, and all the evidence and sentencing documents on the Wiki, and you will see not a millimeter of daylight between the take on Knox and the take on Sollecito. Sollecito is not a woman? That did not matter. Sollecito is not an American? That did not matter. Sollecito behaved himself in court? That did not matter.

    Sollecito is the son of a quite rich and quite powerful father with extensive political connections in Rome? No, rather amazingly, even that did not matter. 

    Reason 2. Sollecito’s family is quite publicly known to be connected to the mafias, no surprise there. His uncle at the time was possibly the most powerful mafioso in the world, having shot his way to the top of the (then) huge Canadian mafia working out of Montreal.

    Italian media reported on Sollecito’s trip (which he really tried to keep secret) to huddle with that uncle in the Dominican Republic - right in the middle of the Nencini appeal where his chances were looking downright negative.

    Thereafter a number of things happening, including an ebullient Sollecito and Bongiorno through 2014, the mystery referral of the final appeal to the FIFTH Chambers of the Supreme Court (the minor domestic crimes chamber), and an outcome which clearly broke Italian law by among other things not referring questions of evidence back down to the Nencini court.

    Does Knox really want the public spotlight to be on this? Surely not.

    Reason 3. From the day he was arrested in November 2007 to March 2015 when the Fifth Chambers ended all proceedings, Sollecito pretty well always gave Knox the cold shoulder. In recent years the atmosphere between them has almost always remained fraught.

    This started on the very night they were arrested, when Sollecito destroyed Knox’s latest alibi (that she was with him at home on the night) and only two days later wrote: “I never want to see Amanda again. Above all, it is her fault we are here.”

    That was the firm position of himself and his family and lawyers for years: without actually confessing to the crime, that Knox had dropped him in it. Never once in all those years did Sollecito say or do anything to back up Knox’s final alibi, though she pleaded again and again that he do. In court throughout, he silently hung her out to dry. 

    Once or twice they met briefly after their release, and then one or other showed some warmth, but mostly they were hammers-and-tongs at one another full-time.

Did all Italy observe this? Of course they did. The nation-wide take? Knox was the Meredith-hater, the attack instigator, and the wielder of the knife that killed Meredith, to the sustained shock of Sollecito and Guede who never signed up for this. 

Reason 3 was surely Knox’s greatest threat in going to Modena, because it so blatantly points to her guilt.

4. Instances Sollecito Brushed Knox Off

Here is the SHORT VERSION of instances of the Knox v. Sollecito blame-game.

1. The year 2007

Our emerging Interrogation Hoax series quotes multiple witnesses testifying how quickly and decisively Knox and Sollecito got off to a fast start in dropping the other in the drink. Too many posts of relevance to include all here, but see this.

From 6 November 2007 Knox and Sollecito were kept separated, and were not allowed to talk. (That continued to late 2011.) Sollecito was pretty easy to read: he had little interest in talk. A sulky silence was his norm.

1 Click for Post:  Officer Moscatelli’s Recap/Summary Session With Sollecito 5-6 No

On 6 November Sollecito’s statement to Inspectors Moscatelli and Napoleoni included this about Knox :

I know Amanda for two weeks. From the evening I first met her she started sleeping at my house.

The first of November I woke up about 11.00, I had breakfast with Amanda, then she went out and I went back to bed. I then met up with her at her house around 13.00-14.00. In there was Meredith who left in a hurry about 16.00 without saying where she was going.

Amanda and I went to the [town] centre about 18.00 but I don’t remember what we did. We remained in the centre till 20.30 or 21.00.

I went to my house alone at 21.00, while Amanda said that she was going to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet with her friends.

At this point we said goodbye. I went home, I made a joint. Had dinner, but I don’t remember what I ate. About 23.00 my father called me on my house phone line.

I recall Amanda was not back yet.

I web surfed on the computer for two more hours after my father’s phone call and I only stopped when Amanda came back in, presumably about 01.00…

In my previous statement I told a load of rubbish because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I didn’t think about the inconsistencies.

Yikes. Knox finds her best alibi yanked.

2 Click for Post:  Summarised AK And RS Signed Statements 2-5 November 2007 

Not so long after, possibly knowing about this, Knox comes out with a statement which points at Sollecito in turn.

I don’t know for sure if Raffaele was there that night [during the attack on Meredith] but I do remember very well waking up at my boyfriend’s house, in his bed, and I went back to my house in the morning where I found the door open.

3. [Source to come] Then on 8 November 2007 Sollecito submitted a statement to Judge Matteini which began:

I never want to see Amanda again. Above all, it is her fault we are here.

4. [Source to come] There were multiple further instances throughout the rest of 2007, quotes of which will be included soon in the Knox Interrogation Hoax series.

2. The Year 2008

5. [Source to come] Knox and Sollecito each appealed Judge Matteini’s ruling to the Supreme Court. Neither helped the other at all. Both appeals failed in April and they were each kept locked up.

6. Click for Post: Sollecito Turns On Knox? This Is Extraordinary”¦

In October toward the end of Guede’s trial and RS’s and AK’s remand for trial Sollecito’s DNA expert testifies to Judge Micheli that he found Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra and bra-clasp.

7. Click for Post:  Sollecito Family Trial: On The Component About Their Alleged Attempt At Political Interference

Francesco Sollecito phone conversation in March 2008 with Vanessa captured by the Carabinieri in which he shows his extreme distrust and dislike of Knox who he blames for RS’s plight.

3. The Year 2009

8. Click for Post  The Letters Between The Women’s And Men’s Wings In Capanne

Letters sent from Knox to Sollecito in February are published, showing an eagerness to get together, suggesting she really needs Sollecito to speak up and confirm her latest alibi.

9. Click for Post  Trial: Defendant Noticeably Bubblier Than Meredith’s Sad Friends

This kind of callous, flippant behavior by Knox had the entire court backed off, not least the Sollecito team which had no desire to be chained to this seeming dangerous nut.

10. Click for Post  Sollecito Not To Be Trumped By Knox Antics In The Female Wing Of Capanne

While RS and AK didnt have access to one another they sure had access to the media and in the Italian media a competitive Sollecito posted a steady stream of stories

11. Click for Post  Trial: Knox Claimed Not To Have Been At The House On The Night

Knox suddenly claims this, despite contrary 2007 claims by both Knox & Sollecito, which messes with Sollecito’s alibi that he was at home alone on the computer.

12. Click for Post  Seems Sollecito Is Feeling Really Sorry - For Himself (So What’s New?)

Sollecito tries to give himself an edge over AK by being extra-whiny about how awful he finds prison, and the distasteful little people he was being made to mix with.

4. The Year 2010

13 Click for Post  How Each of The Three Subtly But Surely Pushed The Other Two Closer to The Fire

The Knox team avoided this popular Porta a Porta TV series, maybe too scared of hard questions, while the Sollecito lawyers and family used it to promote suspicion of AK and Guede.

14. Click for Post  Newsweek Report From Italy On Damage Shrill Campaign Is Doing To Knox’s Interests & America’s Image

The shrill Knox campaign was irritating Italians and so hurting Sollecito’s image and prospects and it was not shoring up his own story. Bongiorno especially disliked the campaign. 

15. Click for Post  Rocco Girlanda’s Strutting Manic Grinning Intrusion Seems A Major Danger To Sollecito/Knox Harmony

The strangely kinky Member of Parliament (now voted out) paid numerous visits to Knox (“monitoring conditions”) and tried some nasty (though ineffective) political tricks - but not for Sollecito.

16. Click for Post  The Knox Movie: Sollecito Reported Angry - Real Risk That His Defense Could Break Away From Knox’s

The Sollecito camp had a strong belief that the Knox camp was behind this TV movie and so they fought it, though it turned out quite even-handed and the RS role was minor.

5. The Year 2011

17. Click for Post  Sollecito Defense Team Breaking From Knox Defense Team On Legal Measures To Stop Lifetime Movie

Further differences reported here between the two camps on the Lifetime movie which until it was aired was believed to favor Knox and build a case for her innocence.

18. Click for Post  Tenth Appeal Court Session: Might Today’s Testimony Give Sollecito More Of An Advantage Than Knox?

After his team’s (attempted) discounting of the main evidence at Meredith’s house against Sollecito, Knox’s position looks way worse, as she has motives both for killing and cover-up.

19. Click for Post  Is The Raffaele Sollecito Defense Team About To Separate Him From A Radioactive Amanda Knox?

Final days. Sollecito has at least five advantages over Knox. Better lead lawyer, better family in Italian eyes with smarter campaign, not much physical evidence at the house, no obvious motive unlike Knox, and a weak and washy personality Bongiorno plays up.

6. The Year 2012

20. Click for Post  In Desperation A Council Of War? All Of The Sollecito Family Suddenly Hop On Flights To Seattle

Sollecito is the one now in puppy-dog mode, though his father has said publicly that the relationship with Knox is at an end; here the RS family sets out for Seattle to try to make it so. 

21. Click for Post  Sollecito’s Book Honor Bound Hits Italy And Already Scathing Reactions And Legal Trouble

Sollecito’s book, which subtly promotes Knox’s guilt, runs into legal trouble for false claims, which could also impact Knox’s claims and legal future. His seeming sticking with Knox damages Bongiorno’s defense strategy.

22. Click for Post  Will Sollecito Drop Amanda Knox In It Further In A Public Seattle Interview At 7:00 PM Tonight?

Sollecito’s American book promotion tour often went badly and he seemed unaware of what was in his own book; though once again he was making out Knox was guiltier. His defense team despise the book.

7. The Year 2013

23. Click for Post  Knox & Sollecito Meet - To Attempt To Bury The Hatchet Other Than In Each Other?

The second public Sollecito attempt to end up with Knox, who already had chips on her shoulders about him but went through this charade. Soon, they were back to whacking one another.

24. Click for Post  Seeds Of Betrayal: Sollecito Twice More Implies Evidence Against Knox Much Stronger Than Against Him

Sollecito sustains this steady drum-beat of putting Knox down, highlighting the evidence against her, repeatedly saying he stuck with her despite no evidence against him (no deal helping RS was ever offered).

25. Click for Post  Seeds Of Betrayal: In Interview Knox Reveals To Italy Her Considerable Irritation With Sollecito

Knox does an extended interview with Oggi (for which she and Oggi are being charged) lying about officials and the evidence, but also uttering her angriest blast yet against Sollecito.

8. The Year 2014

26. Click for Post  Rejected Yet Again By Knox, Sollecito Seems Frantic To Avoid What Might Be A Final Return To Italy

Sollecito (like Sforza) was desperately looking for someone to marry him, to keep him in the US. Kelsey Kay was briefly interested, but he dumped her; he had told her Knox had recently turned him down.

27. Click for Post  What We Might Read Into Sollecito Lawyer Giulia Bongiornos Final Arguments To The Appeal Judges

Bongiorno shows contempt for Knox; she effectively conveys the sense of the RS family that a crazed Knox dragged RS into this. She see the RS book as a pro-Knox con job by her team.

28. Click for Post  As Knox & Sollecito Try To Separate Themselves, Each Is Digging The Other In Deeper

Sollecito is clearly trying to distance himself from Knox now, claiming that there is far more evidence against her than against him. Knox’s irritation with him is growing.

29. Click for Post  Sollecito Suddenly Remembers He Wasnt There But Cannot Speak For Knox Who (As She Said) Went Out

Members of Sollecito’s family are believed to be taking their anger at Knox to Twitter and making numerous taunts while emphasizing how they believe Sollecito was dropped in it by Knox and is less to blame.

30. Click for Post  Spitting In the Wind: Sollecito News Conference Backfires On Him AND Knox - What The Media Missed

Really irritated at the US-written RS book, Bongiorno goes a long way to separating the two perps in the minds of Italians; however RS hedges a little though, after having said the evidence points only to Knox.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (12)

Saturday, June 15, 2019

The World Isnt Short Of Suckers - Lupária, Sola & Cagossi Present “The Traveling Innocence Gang Show”

Posted by KrissyG


“Pssst! Turn it all on, we are being paid to put on a good show”

1. The Moneygrubbing Gang Arrives

See that headline above? The Modena Organizers were so short of imprisoned Italian innocents, they had to import a few

They all make big bucks out of this kind of event, each misconstruing their case. Read here how the moneygrubbing works, and how many get to gain.

At the Milan airport Thursday, press photos revealed Knox making a great show of bowing her head and looking fragile. “I feel frayed” she wrote, on social media, with boyfriend Christopher Robinson looking on from behind. Mom Edda was also there but wasnt featured in news reports.

Once again, the world got a glimpse of Amanda Knox the consummate actress who can never resist hamming it up, a manipulator of gestures and body language to convey drama.

Remember her clutching her chest, cross-armed, in a gesture of faux gratitude when news came her conviction had been annulled, for the benefit of the photographers on her doorstep? 

Or the time she pressed her hands together in front of her as a gesture of humble thanks at the conference in Seattle when she was released in 2011 by Judge Hellman (an appeal verdict which was shortly to be overturned)? 

Was there really anything humble about it, when just hours earlier as she changed at Heathrow, she was seen laughing happily and defiantly? 

Or the most famous occasion of all, when she gesticulated wildly and dramatically from the dock, as she made her final submissions to the court after her 2009 trial enunciating each word in Italian?  She was convicted, anyway.

Even earlier than that she was pictured outside the cottage on the day after the murder waving her hands about as a gaggle of reporters eagerly leant forward to discover what had happened.  She wore a pristine white skirt.

So we get it, image is all to Amanda Knox and this visit to Modena is no exception.

Newspapers reports Friday said she appeared to be visibly emotional, wiping away a tear, as old friend Peter Pringle gave his “testimony” of his time on “Death Row for 14 years” and an Italian innocence claimer.

Also Angelo Massaro, little known in the English-speaking world, described by the Italian news agency ANSA as “a Tarantino acquitted - and released from prison - after a conviction for murder”. So presumably he is not “exonerated”, either? Just released. 

(ANSA has to be restrained how it chooses its words in its home country, as a reputable good quality news agency on a par with Reuters or AP.)

So, once again, attention was on Knox, who knows how to play the press.  Good show by Amanda wiping away a dry tear.

2. The Pringle Connection Explained

As part of her “Innocence” campaign, you may recall Knox travelled early last year, February 2018, to the Republic of Ireland to appear in the Raymond D’Arcy Show.

Her connection to Ireland stemmed from her earlier connection to “innocence” campaigners Peter Pringle and Sunny Jacobs.

Surprise, surprise, the link continues now.

Peter Pringle pops up in Modena for the very same “Justice Festival”.  (Festival?  What IS it they are celebrating exactly?)

A brief history of their past:
 
(1) Knox appeared on US TV with Irish ex-murder defendant and ex-death row wife

Knox appeared on US TV with controversial ex-death row defendants, Peter Pringle, who was once jailed in Ireland for the alleged murder of two Irish police officers, after a bungled robbery by a political gang, and Sunny Jacobs, once on death row in the USA for supplying a gun to a man who then shot dead a two young policemen.

Pringle is Dublin born and spent 17 years in prison, the death penalty having been stayed by an Act of Irish parliament since 1954, for the murder of two young policemen after a botched robbery in Roscommon. He has always claimed innocence of the crime.

They were both acquitted - in Sunny’s case, without any certificate of exoneration - and now, like Knox tour the country and fundraise for “Innocence Projects” claiming ‘wrongful conviction’.

(2) Amanda Knox appeared with Sunny Jacobs and William Pringle on K5News channel in May 2017.

Knox shared a sofa with the pair expressing solidarity.  Knox said that she and Sunny were “women together” fighting injustice.

However, there is still much controversy in the Irish Republic as to Pringle’s innocence and emotions run high, as five young children lost their fathers in the murder of the police officers in 1980.

In addition, some say Jacobs was freed from death row for compassionate reasons, not because she was innocent, as she now claims.

(3) Knox’s appearance on Irish TV was controversial

William Pringle lived in the USA for many years after his release, and has in 2016 settled in Connemara in Ireland,

Because of Knox’s connection, the interview was bound to cause a lot of media interest, as it did when she sang a round of an IRA rebel song to a stunned D’Arcy, who was not impressed.

Many in the UK and the mainland of Ireland are not convinced by Knox’s claim to have been “exonerated”.

It could well be that Knox was invited to Ireland via contacts William Pringle and Sunny Jacobs.

Sunny Jacobs is now 70. Her husband, Jesse Tafero was executed at age 43. Sunny Jacobs is alleged to have supplied the gun by which he shot dead two police officers from their car, in Florida.

Both were condemned to the electric chair.

The robbery for which Pringle was jailed, which led to the killing of the police officers in Roscommon, was allegedly connected to the INLA, an Irish “liberation” terrorist group of the day.

So there has been hostility towards Pringle resettling in Ireland.

Pringle made a new bid for compensation from Ireland in January 2018.  The judge “reserved” the judgment and we have heard nothing more since. So presumably his application has failed.

Peter, Sunny and Amanda certainly seem to have the “Innocence Gang Tour” sewn up, as they make their way from country after country.  Dabbing an eye and giving their moving “testimonies” and moneygrubbing away.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (2)

Thursday, June 13, 2019

The Hard Truths About Knox Lupária, Sola, Cagossi, Etc Should Have Known Before Betraying Italy

Posted by Machiavelli


Organizer and Modena lawyer Guido Sola, who also did no due diligence

Long post. Click here to go straight to Comments

Heads-up. Read “Un preavviso per i partecipanti al progetto di Innocenza Italia” here and “Heads-up to Innocence Project Attendees In Modena Italy” here.

1. What Were Lupária, Sola, And Cagossi THINKING In Inviting Knox?

Consider all of these red flags they ignored.

1. They could have read the many pieces like this about Knox’s disastrous 2009 stint on the stand.

Click for Post:  Italy Shrugs: Why Amanda Knox’s Testimony Seems To Have Been A Real Flop

She had repeatedly failed opportunties made available to free her in the 20 months before that.

2. Knox emerged from court in 2009 with a criminal-libel prison sentence that eventually amounted to three years. She is a felon for life.

NOT ONE COURT ever believed she was forced to finger Patrick - and by the way, she did NOT confess, she blamed another, so the ECHR was wrong (and Italy is appealing Knox’s award) it was not a “must” she have a lawyer.

3. The real case against Knox was enormous as the dummies should have found out. Watch this.

Click for Post:  Why The Totality of Evidence Suggests Knox And Sollecito Are Guilty Just As Charged

4. There’s probably nobody alive in the whole world who has done Italy’s image more harm. She works at it full-time.

Thus American tourism has dropped and American exchange students have dropped more.  Addicted to stalking and blood-money, Knox has worked to make everybody scared. Encouraging her act comes at a real cost.

5. Google “amanda knox” and “kangaroo court” and see what shows up. Try “amanda knox” and anything “medieval” or “third world” and you will get some hits.

Click for Post:  Amanda Knox Case Prompts U.S. Students To Shy Away From Italian Study Abroad Programs

6. There’s much evidence they could have found that Americans, not Italians, were at fault.

In fact American universities took a wave of actions in light of this case - to protect themselves from lawsuits and make their exchange students behave.

Click for Post:  In Perugia Why Some Students Tend To Run Wild

Click for Post:  Report Students Studying Abroad on Average Double Or Triple Their Alcoholic Intake

Click for Post:  Could One Good Outcome Of This Sad Case Be That Italy Sees Less Foreign Student Druggies?

Click for Post:  An Excellent Report By Andrea Vogt On The University Of Washington Reforms

2. Knox Is NOT “An Exoneree” As She Lyingly Claims

Above all this is one thing the dummies absolutely should have known. Professor Luparia has claimed to reporters to have read the entire report and that Knox came out fine.

In fact, Luparia lies.

Knox rightly served three years. And even the bent Fifth Chambers of the Supreme Court managed to get in a whole lot of digs against Knox. See below.

Knox again and again claims “exoneration” and blames the media for getting it wrong.

But few in the US and UK realise the final written Supreme Court judgment left a huge black cloud over her head.

Commendably Modena’s paper “La Pressa” has today tried to at least set some Italians right.

We have translated and now post in full their excellent report.

La Pressa, Modena

Knox returns as ‘heroine’ to Italy

But here’s what the Marasca/Bruno motivation report says
Date: 12 June 2019 - 22:38 / Category: La Nera
Author: Editorial La Pressa

This is the first time that Amanda returns to Italy after being acquitted for the murder of Meredith. We report controversial passages of the 2015 sentence

Tomorrow the long-awaited Criminal Justice Festival begins in Modena. A festival promoted by the Criminal Chamber of Modena together with the Italy Innocence Project and which has had national and international importance for the Saturday presence of Amanda Knox who will address the topic of the ‘Media And Criminal Trials’ together with the lawyer Guido Sola, Raffaella Calandra, Andrea Mascherin, Vinicio Nardo and Martina Cogossi.

This is the first time after 8 years that Amanda Knox returns to Italy after being acquitted in 2015 for the murder of Meredith Kercher with the sentence of the Fifth Criminal Chambers of Cassation signed by the Court president Gennaro Marasca and by the rapporteur Paolo Antonio Bruno. With that declaration the sentences of Raffaele Sollecito and Knox were canceled without referral [back down to Florence, the correct legal path], absolving them for not having committed the crime due to a lack of certain evidence and the presence of numerous errors in the investigations.

As an acquittal sentence that closed the case, so, on the eve of Knox’s return to Italy, we wanted to reread in its entirety and it deserves to be included in the conversation,  however controversial the 52 pages of motivation are. Here are seven passages that we want to reproduce in full with the original pages of the sentence, perhaps never published in its entirety before.

1. It is an established fact, in the [2010] trial motivation report, that Knox was in Meredith’s home at the time of the murder.

9.4.1 Given this, we now note, with respect to Amanda Knox, that her presence inside the house, the location of the murder, is a proven fact in the trial, in accord with her own admissions, also contained in the memoriale with her signature, in the part where she tells that, as she was in the kitchen, while the young English woman had retired inside the room of same Ms. Kercher together with another person for a sexual intercourse, she heard a harrowing scream from her friend, so piercing and unbearable that she let herself down squatting on the floor, covering her ears tight with her hands in order not to hear more of it. About this, the judgment of reliability expressed by the lower [a quo] judge [Nencini, ed.] with reference to this part of the suspect’s narrative, [and] about the plausible implication from the fact herself was the first person mentioning for the first time a possible sexual motive for the murder,

2. Knox was present, because she was aware of details of the murder that the police did not yet know, and she was also aware of the non-presence of Lumumba.

[continues] a possible sexual motive for the murder, at the time when the detectives still did not have the results from the cadaver examination, nor the autopsy report, nor the witnesses’ information, which was collected only subsequently, about the victim’s terrible scream and about the time when it was heard (witnesses Nara Capezzali, Antonella Monacchia and others), is certainly to be subscribed to. We make reference in particular to those declarations that the current appellant [Knox] produced on 11. 6. 2007 (p.96) inside the State Police headquarters. On the other hand, in the slanderous declarations against Lumumba, which earned her a conviction, the status of which is now protected as final judgement [giudicato], [they] had themselves exactly that premise in the narrative, that is: the presence of the young American woman inside the house in via della Pergola, a circumstance which nobody at that time – except obviously the other people present inside the house – could have known (quote p. 96). 

According to the slanderous statements of Ms. Knox, she had returned home in the company of Lumumba, who she had met by chance in Piazza Grimana, and when Ms. Kercher arrived in the house, Knox’s companion directed sexual attentions toward the young English woman, then he went together with her in her room, from which the harrowing scream came. So, it was Lumumba who killed Meredith and she could affirm this since she was on the scene of crime herself, albeit in another room. 

Another element against her is the mixed DNA traces, her and the victim’s one, in the “small bathroom”, an eloquent proof that anyway she had come into contact with the blood of the latter, which she tried to wash away from herself (it was, it seems, diluted blood, while the biological traces belonging to her would be the consequence of epithelial rubbing). 

The fact is very suspicious, but it’s not decisive, besides the known considerations about the sure nature and attribution of the traces in question. 

Nonetheless, even if we deem the attribution certain, the trial element would not be unequivocal, since it may show also a posthumous touching of that blood, during the probable attempt of removing the most visible traces of what had happened, maybe to help cover up for someone or to steer away suspicion from herself, but not contributing to full certainty about her direct involvement in the murderous action. Any further and more pertaining interpretation in fact would be anyway resisted by the circumstance – this is decisive indeed – that no trace linkable to her was found on the scene of crime or on the victim’s body, so it follows – if we concede everything – that her contact with the victim’s blood happened in a subsequent moment and in another room of the house. 

Another element against her is certainly constituted by the false accusations [calunnia] against Mr. Lumumba, afore-mentioned above. 

It is not understandable, in fact, what reason could have driven the young woman to produce such serious accusations. The theory that she did so in order to escape psychological pressure from detectives seems extremely fragile, given that the woman…

3. In the [2010] trial motivation it is ‘incontrovertible’ that other people participated in the murder besides Guede (we recollect the condemned man with the abbreviated trial route). And this derives not only from the final judgment on Guede but from ‘other evidence that confirms its reliability’.

Based on such provision “(…) the verdicts [p. 26] that have become irrevocable can be accepted [acquired] by courts as pieces of evidence of facts that were ascertained within them and evaluated based on articles 187 and 192 par 3”. 

Well, so the “fact” that was ascertained within that verdict, indisputably, is Guede’s participation in the murder “concurring with other people, who remain unknown”. The invoking of the procedural norms indicated means that the usability of such fact-finding is subordinate to [depends on] the double conditions [possibility] to reconcile such fact within the scope of the “object of proof” which is relevant to the current judgement, and on the existence of further pieces of evidence to confirm its reliability. 

Such double verification, in the current case, has an abundantly positive outcome. In fact it is manifestly evident that such fact, which was ascertained elsewhere [aliunde], relates to the object of cognition of the current judgement. The [court’s] assessment of it, in accord with other trial findings which are valuable to confirm its reliability, is equally correct. We refer to the multiple elements, linked to the overall reconstruction of events, which rule out that Guede could have acted alone. Firstly, testifying in this direction are the two main wounds (actually three) observed on the victim’s neck, on each side, with a diversified path and features, attributable most likely (even if the data is contested by the defense) to two different cutting weapons. And also, the lack of signs of resistance by the young woman, since no traces of the assailant were found under her nails, and there is no evidence elsewhere [aliunde] of any desperate attempt to oppose the aggressor; the bruises on her upper limbs and those on mandibular area and lips (likely the result of forcible hand action of constraint meant to keep the victim’s mouth shut) found during the cadaver examination, and above all, the appalling modalities of the murder, which were not adequately pointed out in the appealed ruling. 

And in fact, the same ruling (p. 323 and 325) reports of abundant blood spatters found on the right door of the wardrobe located inside Kercher’s room, about 50 cm above the floor. Such occurrence, given the location and direction of the drops, could probably lead to the conclusion that the young woman had her throat literally “slashed” likely as she was kneeling, while her head was being forcibly held [hold] tilted towards the floor, at a close distance from the wardrobe, when she was hit by multiple stab wounds at her neck, one of which – the one inflicted on the left side of her neck – caused her death, due to asphyxia following [to] the massive bleeding, which also filled the breathing ways preventing breathing activity, a situation aggravated by the rupture of the hyoid bone – this also linkable to the blade action – with consequent dyspnoea” (p. 48).

Such a mechanical action is hardly attributable to the conduct of one person alone.

On the other hand such factual finding, when adequately valued, could have been not devoid of meaning as for researching the motive, given that [27] the extreme violence of the criminal action could have been seen…

The motivation certifies that the alleged burglary in the home is in fact a “staging”.  It should therefore be noted that these are judicial truths present in the motivations of the final sentence of acquittal: that is, the fact that Knox was certainly present and that Meredith was physically killed by other people besides Guede.

4. The sentence certifies that Knox has washed her hands of the victim’s blood, which is called an “eloquent proof”; for this reason the Court envisages only two possibilities: either Knox was directly involved in the homicidal action, or the contact with the blood occurred at a later time in the ‘probable attempt to remove the traces’ in order to ‘cover someone’ and “Remove suspicion from oneself”. The Fifth Section says this.

And moreover, the staging of a theft in Romanelli’s room, which she is accused of, is also a relevant point within an incriminating picture, considering the elements of strong suspicion (location of glass shards – apparently resulting from the breaking of a glass window pane caused by the throwing of a rock from the outside – on top of, but also under clothes and furniture), a staging, which can be linked to someone who – as an author of the murder and a flatmate [titolare] with a formal [“qualified”] connection to the dwelling – had an interest to steer suspicion away from himself/herself, while a third murderer in contrast would be motivated by a very different urge after the killing, that is to leave the apartment as quickly as possible. But also this element is substantially ambiguous, especially if we consider the fact that when the postal police arrived – they arrived in Via della Pergola for another reason: to search for Ms. Romanelli, the owner of the telephone SIM card found inside one of the phones retrieved in via Sperandio – the current appellants themselves, Sollecito specifically, were the ones who pointed out the anomalous situation to the officers, as nothing appeared to be stolen from Ms. Romanelli’s room.

5. The motivation certifies that Knox washed her hands of the victim’s blood, which is called an “eloquent proof”; for this reason the Court envisages only two possibilities: either Knox was directly involved in the homicidal action, or the contact with the blood occurred at a later time in the ‘probable attempt to remove the traces’ in order to ‘cover someone’ and “remove suspicion from oneself”. The Fifth Section says this.

Another element against her is the mixed DNA traces, her and the victim’s one, in the “small bathroom”, an eloquent proof that anyway she had come into contact with the blood of the latter, which she tried to wash away from herself (it was, it seems, diluted blood, while the biological traces belonging to her would be the consequence of epithelial rubbing). The fact is very suspicious, but it’s not decisive, besides the known considerations about the sure nature and attribution of the traces in question. Nonetheless, even if we deem the attribution certain, the trial element would not be unequivocal, since it may show also a posthumous touching of that blood, during the probable attempt of removing the most visible traces of what had happened, maybe to help cover up for someone or to steer away suspicion from herself, but not contributing to full certainty about her direct involvement in the murderous action. Any further and more pertaining interpretation in fact would be anyway resisted by the circumstance – this is decisive indeed – that no trace linkable to her was found on the scene of crime or on the victim’s body, so it follows – if we concede everything – that her contact with the victim’s blood happened in a subsequent moment and in another room of the house.

6. During the interrogation [it wasnt but however] of 6 November 2007 to Knox, who did not speak Italian well, an interpreter or lawyer was not made present. This is why in January of this year the Court of Strasbourg (ECHR) condemned Italy to compensate her. [Italy has appealed.] Well, stated in the 2015 motivation report is that a possible ruling in favor of Knox by the European Court could not ‘in any way tarnish’ Knox’s conviction of guilt for criminal slander for her false accusations against Lumumba.

And also, a possible decision of the European Court in favor of Ms. Knox, in the sense of a desired recognition of non-orthodox treatment of her by investigators, could not in any way affect the final verdict, not even in the event of a possible review of the verdict, considering the slanderous accusations that the accused produced against Lumumba consequent to the asserted coercions, and confirmed by her before the Public Prosecutor during the subsequent session, in a context which, institutionally, is immune from anomalous psychological pressures; and also confirmed in her memoriale, at a moment when the same accuser was alone with herself and her conscience in conditions of objective peacefulness, sheltered from environmental influence; and were even restated, after some time, during the validation of the arrest of Lumumba, before the investigating judge in charge.

7. The motivation report defines as ‘simply not credible’ the idea that Sollecito was not also present. As mentioned, the presence of Knox is quite certain.

9.4.2 Also the evidential picture about Mr. Sollecito, emerging from the impugned verdict, appears marked by intrinsic and irreducible contradictions.

His presence on the murder scene, and specifically inside the room where the murder was committed, is linked to only the biological trace found on the bra fastener hook (item 165/b), the attribution of which, however, cannot have any certainty, since such trace is insusceptible of a second amplification, given its scarce amount, for that it is – as we said – an element lacking of circumstantial evidentiary value.

It remains anyway strong the suspicion that he was actually in the Via della Pergola house the night of the murder, in a moment that, however, it was impossible to determine.

On the other hand, since the presence of Ms. Knox inside the house is sure, it is hardly credible that he was not with her.

And even following one of the versions released by the woman, that is the one in accord to which, returning home in the morning of November 2. after a night spent at her boyfriend’s place, she reports of having immediately noticed that something strange had happened (open door, blood traces everywhere); or even the other one, that she reports in her memorial, in accord to which she was present in the house at the time of the murder, but in a different room, not the one in which the violent aggression on Ms. Kercher was being committed, it is very strange that she did not call her boyfriend, since there is no record about a phone call from her, based on the phone records within the file.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (14)

Monday, June 10, 2019

Modena IP: How Cowardly Knox Demonized Many Fine Italians Only In English-Language Media

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


The IP director, mafia poodle Luca Luparia, obviously did no due diligence.

1. Why Italians Dont Know The Real Barbaric Knox

Amanda Knox is surely one of the most dangerous demonizers and prolific liars on the planet.

On a daily basis she puts others down and elevates herself up. Stirring bigotry is her whole career now. She is making big blood-money bucks out of damaging others.

This is how the virulent million-dollar Knox public relations campaign labored mightily to stop Italy and Italians from ever finding out what the addled and bribed US and UK media were saying about them day-to-day.

Click for Post:  How The Strongarm Public Relations Resulted in Most Of The Media Getting It Wrong

Click for Post:  “Million Dollar Campaign” To Try To Influence The Jury Is Being Widely Reported To A Startled Italy

Click for Post:  Knox Public Relations Manager Starts Premature Crowing Years Before Legal Process Ends

Click for Post:  Tomorrow Could See The Beginning Of The End Of The Rampaging “Public Relations” Campaign

Much of the virulent Knox PR output could be prosecuted as diffamazione of course.

2. Knox’s Massive Demonization Rampage

Knox’s English-only book (read it here in Italian now) contained AT LEAST 500 LIES as our indomitable legal reseacher Chimera highlighted here.

Knox never, never, never admits that she rightly served three years for accusing her kindly boss of murder. And in continued defiance of the Italian Supreme Court, Knox refuses to pay Patrick the E100,000 awarded for destroying his life.

But Knox very freely accuses others of terrible behavior and actual crimes.

In Knox’s book she accuses Sollecito, her defense lawyers, her flatmates, police officers and analysts, witnesses, prosecutors, judges, prison staff, on and on. Examples here:

(1) “Mayor” Prosecutor Mignini—framed her, (2) Prosecutor Comodi—framed her, (3) Officer Ficarra—abuser, hitter, (4) Officer Napoleoni—accused of perjury, (5) Interpreter Donnino—duplicitous double agent, (6) Court interpreter—useless, (7) Officer Chiacicelli—framed her via the knife he found, (8) DNA analyst Stefanoni—accused of withholding data, and incompetence, (9) Other CSI people (though not Guede evidence), (10) Dozen of unnamed police Nov 6, (11) defense lawyers Dalla Vedova and Ghirga—alleges they ignored complaints, (12) Witness neighbor Nina—who heard screams, (13) Witness Quintavalle—lying shop owner, (14) Witness Curatolo—lying drug addict, (15) Judge Matteini—jumping to conclusions, (16) Employer Patrick—kind of deserved what happened to him, (17) Prison guards—sexual harassment (Agiro is the only one named), (18) Prison medical staff—commit sexual assault and leak private information, (19) Flatmate Filomena—drug use at home, (20) Flatmate Laura R—drug use at home, (21) Judge Micheli—incompetent pre-trial judge who runs a “farce” of a court, (22) Judge Massei and his panel—idiot trial jury, (23) Witness Kokomani—deranged drug dealer, (24) Spiderman Guede—committed attack alone, (25) Co-defendant Sollecito—the doofus boyfriend, (26) Postal Police—clueless and incompetent, (27) Reporters, in fact virtually everyone in the media, (28) Lawyer Biscotti—Guede lawyer an opportunist, (29) Kercher family—cold and unforgiving, and whatever else, (30) Officer Battistelli, framed her, (31) Officer Finzi, framed her, (32) Officer Profazio, framed her, (33) Donald Trump, wrong politics.

Most of these could be prosecuted as diffamazione of course.

3. How Knox Falsely Accuses Italian Officials Of Crimes

In early days Dr Mignini went to great lengths to give Knox a break as he believed she was mental or on a cocaine high.

Inventing a crime he could have been fired for or imprisoned was Knox’s way of paying him back

Click for Post:  How Amanda Knox Falsely Accused Dr Mignini Of A Felony

Prison staff treated Knox very well. Accusing them of crimes is how she and her team paid them back. 

Click for Post:  Serious Felony Charge Of Deliberate HIV Leak Was In Fact A Knox Defense-Team Hoax

And Knox lied on a grand scale to the Nencini appeal court, accusing the police who were actually very kind of TORTURING her.

Click for Post:  Demonizations By Knox: Multiple Ways In Which Her Email To Judge Nencini Is Misleading

These and many others could be prosecuted as diffamazione of course.

4. Examples Of The UK And US Media Facilitating Knox

Click for Post:  Slanted Associated Press Parroting Of Knox PR Campaign Release Achieves Over 800 Google Hits

Click for Post:  Inaccurate Report By The Associated Press Carried By Over 2,000 Media Sites

Click for Post:  Another Highly Misleading Associated Press Report By Colleen Barry Appears on 700 Media Websites

Click for Post:  Demonizations By Knox: OGGI Charged For Article Conveying False Claims To Italy

Click for Post:  Demonizations By Knox: How A Mismanaged VICE Media Failed To Check Out The Facts

Click for Post:  Obstruction Of Justice? How The Guardian Poisons Public Opinion Against The Italian Courts

Click for Post:  Knox’s War Of Aggression Against Italy: Questions For Media To Nail Her Once And For All

These and many others could be prosecuted as diffamazione of course.

5. A Couple Of The Too-Few Objections From Italy

Click for Post:  Million Dollar Campaign And American Media Come Under Intense Ridicule By An Influential Italian

Click for Post:  It Seems Italy’s Anger Only Grows: Read La Nazione’s Editorial Today

Note for Modena readers: more to come
Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (7)

Friday, June 07, 2019

WHY Are The Corrupt Innocence Project & The Serial Italy Defamer Knox Associating? Explained.

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


The organizer mafia poodle Martina Cagossi seems to be in love with a false Knox

1. The Corrupt US Innocence Project

Watch out, Italy. In the US the Innocence Project (IP) has long been controversial.

It costs taxpayers many millions of dollars, it has been involved in a number of scandals, it undermines correct public perceptions of justice, it lowers law enforcement morale, and so naturally it is the mafias’ dream puppet.

The American IP has really become a huge and greedy cash-cow. Innocence and justice and other noble aims (except for its deliberately addled donors) are not really what it is about. 

We looked at the IP deeply last year (see Part 4 below) because for the fourth or fifth time Amanda Knox was made a main keynote speaker and a big draw at the annual meeting.

Knox is in fact brought in to lie about Italy and her case, to generate a lot of heat, and to addle the IP donors into contributing big-time.

Are American pro-justice donors being asked by the IP to do the best for the US prison population as a whole? It seems quite the opposite. 

We have long shown here that, contrary to Italy’s, the US’s justice system really is quite broken. One appalling result is that its prison population is proportionally six times that of Italy.

There are many aspects to why this is so, including the elections or political appointments of most judges and prosecutors (Italy’s are almost all career-path) which tends “justice” toward a very hard line for the accused in police handling, plea-bargains, and court (very few cases even make it to court).

Get this. There are an estimated 200,000 innocents now in American prisons who are there because they had the living daylights scared out of them by police and prosecutors. And so they accepted a plea bargain (meaning no expensive trial) in exchange for a lighter sentence than was threatened.

Some effort now goes into winding this back, but it is a long slow job - and the controversial Innocence Project (IP) is of no help at all. Instead the IP concentrates on freeing prisoners whose innocence can now be proved via modern methods for analysing DNA.

In 25 or so years the Innocence Project has freed a mere 360 or so prisoners! This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 200,000 prisoners we mentioned above.

The IP teams then go on to sue the government (meaning taxpayers) for false imprisonment. These suits often result in huge payouts (usually millions of dollars) out of which the lawyers and DNA experts associated with the Innocence Project take large cuts.

This shakedown is very, very expensive for American taxpayers - who instead could be given a huge financial benefit and vastly better justice if the costly prison system could be made to release those 200,000.

Could Italy, with its extremely careful justice system and humane prisons, really need this giant shakedown system at all?

Forever putting a black cloud over Italian police and prosecutors and judges and making their tough work even more-so?

Do think about it, Italy!

2. Overviews Of Italian Justice

1. Click for Post:  How Italian Justice REALLY Works

2. Click for Post:  Italian Judiciary’s Probably Less Prone to Pressure Than Any In World

3. Click for Post:  Italy’s Advanced, Humane Law & Order System Adopted By New York

4. Click for Post:  Unpopular Politicians & Mafia Poodles Versus Popular Justice System

5. Click for Post:  Why Italy Doesnt Look For Guidance On Justice From Smartasses Abroad

3. Overviews Of American Justice

1. Click for Post:  Compared To Italy, Say, Precisely How Wicked Is The United States?

2. Click for Post:  Why Numerous American JUDGES Favor Italy’s Kind Of System

3. Click for Post:  US Justice System Reform Is Suddenly Everywhere On The Front Burner

4. Click for Post:  Where Are Heavey, Moore & Fischer When US Justice Has REAL Issues?

5. Click for Post:  So Where Would YOU Want To Go On Trial? In Italy Or In The U.S.?

4. The Corrupt American IP and Knox

1. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #1

2. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #2

3. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #3

4. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #4

5. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #5

6. Click for Post:  Seven Years Of IP Trashing Italian Justice To Joy Of Mafias #6

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Thursday, June 06, 2019

Un preavviso per i partecipanti al progetto di Innocenza Italia

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters

Siate consapevoli che la Knox

(1) fa danni immensi infiammando il bigottismo contro l’Italia,

(2) è condannata per reato di calunnia criminale, giustamente incarcerato 3 anni,

(3) non è stata esonerata dalla Cassazione per omicidio,

(4) ha mentita su larga scala ai media , che si è rigirata per lei,

(5) può essere arrestata per oltraggio alla Cassazione poiché non sono ancora stati pagati 10000 danni a Lumumba.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (0)

Heads-up to Innocence Project Attendees In Modena Italy

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters

Please be aware that Amanda Knox

(1) does immense damage INFLAMING BIGOTRY against Italy,

(2) is a CONVICTED FELON for criminal slander, and was rightly imprisoned for 3 years,

(3) was NOT EXONERATED by Cassazione for murder,

(4) LIED ON GRAND SCALE to media, who ROLLED OVER for her,

(5) may be ARRESTED for contempt of Cassazione as E100,000 damages to Lumumba is STILL NOT PAID.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (0)

Tuesday, June 04, 2019

The Italian Venue (Really) Where Knox Will Feature On A Media Panel Next Week

Posted by Peter Quennell




Really? Here? Behind those garbage skips?!

We had to laugh. This really is the main entrance to the Open Laboratory space in Modena which that northern city now makes available for happening events.

The image below shows the main interior. It looks rather prison-like, to us appropriately so.

Here is the program in Italian for the first-ever conference of the Innocence Project’s Italian arm.

Knox’s media panel is shown as being next saturday there. 

As there are no known innocents in Italian prisons, given how careful the justice process is, importing Knox was apparently the best they could do to get anyone to come.

We’ve held back posting on this up to now, as we really do want to see how Knox is received there.

But expect some posts intended to open Italian eyes to Knox in the next several days.

No word yet on whether Sollecito will be there.


Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (3)

Friday, May 10, 2019

Major Surprise And Setback For Knox: Italy Now Challenges Knox’s “No Lawyer” ECHR Award #2

Posted by KrissyG


Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, from 1 April the ECHR’s chief judge

Legal Context Of Italy’s Appeal

The Italian government has lodged an appeal against the ECHR ruling in January 2019 upholding that Amanda Knox’ right to a fair trial (Article 6 of the Human Rights Convention) had been breached in that the translator had not been impartial and that as a suspect, Knox should have been given a lawyer earlier than she had.

From the newspaper UMBRIA 24

The ruling by which the European Court of Human Rights has argued that Italy has violated Amanda Knox’s right of defense during the investigation of the murder of Meredith Kercher is contested before the Grande Chambre in Strasbourg. The decision by which last January Italy had been condemned to pay 10,400 euros for moral damages to the American student, definitively acquitted by the accusation of murdering her English roommate on November 1, 2017 in Via della Pergola in Perugia, is was challenged by the Italian government. La Grande Chambre, which represents a sort of Cassation of the European Court, is composed of 17 judges. In the recent past, Silvio Berlusconi has also passed through the Grande Chambre bringing to the judges’ attention a question concerning its reliability.

Interrogation Last January, the Court recognized Italy’s violation of Knox’s right to defense during the November 6, 2007 interrogation without receiving evidence confirming police complaints during the same interrogation . Amanda had asked for half a million euros.

In my article here I summarise – from my point of view – the findings of the ECHR in the original deliberations are as follows:

Summary:  The main issues revolve around the question of admissibility.  I have identified two or three possible grounds of appeal on points of law.  They are:

• Italy submitted that date-wise, the application by Knox had been submitted too early as the hearings had not yet been finalized.  ECHR rejects this saying that the hearings finalized very shortly after.  As far as I can see, this is not so.

• The ECHR relies on comments by Hellmann Appeal Court, which was largely superseded and outranked by Chieffi Supreme Court, to argue factors of free will.

• The ECHR relies heavily on police minutes and the fact interpreter Donnino and a police office, RI, fail to record details of their expressions of familiarity with Knox, or make a note that (i) Knox was asked if she wanted a lawyer and declined, (ii) that start and end times are not recorded, and that (iii) hours are condensed into minutes. Is it an error of law to assume these police minutes represented a failure of procedure?

That’s not to say that these are the grounds Italy have set out. We don’t know those yet.

The rules for such an appeal are set out under Article 43 which states the following:

ARTICLE 43

Referral to the Grand Chamber

1. Within a period of three months from the date of the judgment of the Chamber, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber.

2. A panel of five judges of the Grand Chamber shall accept the request if the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, or a serious issue of general importance.

3. If the panel accepts the request, the Grand Chamber shall decide the case by means of a judgment.

From another newspaper citing the ECHR in Strasburg:

STRASBOURG (France) - The Government has challenged in front of the Grand Chamber the decision with which the European Court in Strasbourg claimed that Italy violated Amanda Knox’s right to defense in the investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher, carried out at Perugia the evening of 1 November 2007, for which it has already been definitively acquitted by the Italian justice. The act - as learned by ANSA - was notified to the American’s lawyers, Carlo Dalla Vedova and Luciano Ghirga.

The Grand Chamber is a sort of Cassation of the European Court. “This - the lawyer Dalla Vedova explained - is a judge only of legitimacy. The Grand Chamber {Panel} will now have to rule on the admissibility of the Government’s request to transmit the case to be decided {by the Grand Chamber} of the European Court. Decision on which it has reserved. The request will pass to the discussion {of the Grand Chamber Panel}.”

It has to said that it is relatively rare for a case to be referred back to the Grand Chamber after the appeal is assessed for permissibility.  ECHR is predicated on case law, so I would expect Italy will be demonstrating an error of interpretation based on a previous case or cases. 

Case law generally refers to cases that have set a legal precedence.  For example, Salduz, which was to do with the rights of a person suspected of terrorist acts.

In my article I argued that the original ECHR claim by Knox was ‘out of time’ – in this case presented too early - as internal procedure had not been exhausted, and a heavy reliance on Hellmann (Appeal Court) and Boninsegna (which was not appealed against) instead of the higher Supreme Court (Chieffi) which overrides that of Hellmann.

Indeed, Hellmann was largely struck out and came in for stern criticism by Chieffi.  In effect, Dalla Vedova for his client, Knox, resuscitates the appeal lodged with Hellmann when Chieffi’s was the Res Judicata verdict. 

A principle in law is that you cannot have your case heard twice unless a higher court directs it back to the lower court.

It should be kept in mind that a referral to the ECHR Grand Chamber is statistically remote as the issue of admissibility has to be surmounted first.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (14)

Thursday, May 09, 2019

Major Surprise And Setback For Knox: Italy Now Challenges Knox’s “No Lawyer” ECHR Award #1

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters


Dr Alfonso Bonafede the Italian Minister of Justice

1. New Setback

More to come. This is what we know so far.

Knox’s suggested award last February was simply for questions having been asked of Knox when her lawyer was not there

But the ECHR was in fact parroting two corrupted courts (Hellman and Boninsegna) and so very clearly did not understand what other courts including the Supreme Court had already definitively found:

(1) Knox specifically refused a lawyer several times; and

(2) Once Knox falsely fingered Patrick no questions were asked.

The Italian Justice Ministry has just announced it is refusing for now to make the ECHR’s suggested award, and will soon be making (1) and (2) clear to the Strasbourg Court.

2. Previous Setback

ECHR Strasbourg had already handed Knox numerous setbacks in not accepting various grounds of her “appeal” although her team tried to paint the tiny suggested lawyer-related award as a win.

Knox’s biggest setback was that ECHR went along, not with her, but with the Supreme Court in refusing to find that Knox had been tortured and abused.

That forever-repeated and defamatory false claim is STILL at the very heart of Knox’s wailing-victimhood book, paid presentations, and TV appearances and magazine interviews.

Knox is again threatening to return to Italy to yet again repeat her defamatory claims. She could find a whole lot of legal action awaiting her.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (0)

Friday, April 26, 2019

Finally!! Netflix Is To Lionize Someone In Its “True Crime” Reports Who DIDNT Kill A Woman

Posted by Peter Quennell

Netflix spent big on tainted reports about woman-killers Steven Avery, Adnan Syed and Amanda Knox.

The first two still remain in prison, despite those reports, and many more are finally seeing guilt in Knox.

Now Netflix has bought the rights to an expose of Russian-born Anna Sorokin, a mere fake heiress this time.

Just-convicted Sorokin led gullible New York socialites a merry dance, and does have her share of amused fans.

It seems Sorokin herself sold Netflix her rights. One trick Knox missed (we presume).

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (7)

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

If You Are Going To Offshore A Fraud, Maybe It’d Be Smart To Not Pick Italy

Posted by Peter Quennell


Scarlet curve BT stock, purple curve Dow stockmarket index

When BREXIT Arrives…

The UK is going to need a few world-beating companies. Relentless prods by Italy suggest British Telecom is not one of them.

Back in the day, BT was perhaps the world’s most revered national telephone provider. It fielded teams to numerous developing countries to help with the planning and training needed to develop their national infrastructures.

BT was privatized by the British government in the mid 1980s, and if you had sold its stock around 2000 you would have done very nicely.

But since then BT has steadily headed down the tubes, and its stock now is actually worth less than on its very first day on the market.

Giving BT a hard time for several years have been the formidable fraud investigators of the Italian police.

Now a damning report has been issued by them.

Prosecutors in Milan allege that three former senior BT executives, Luis Alvarez, Richard Cameron and Corrado Sciolla, set unrealistically high business targets and were complicit in false accounting at BT Italy.

Alvarez and Cameron were respectively the former chief executive and former chief financial officer of BT Global Services, and Sciolla was the former head of continental Europe for BT. The three men, two of whom were based in London, left the company in 2017.

Allegations of fraudulent bookkeeping are part of a range of suspected wrongdoing at BT Italy. Italian prosecutors allege that a network of people at the unit exaggerated revenues, faked contract renewals and invoices and invented bogus supplier transactions to meet bonus targets and disguise the unit’s true financial performance.

The company has publicly disclosed that it uncovered a complex set of improper sales, leasing transactions and factoring at the division. Factoring is a way in which firms sell future income to financiers for cash…

Italy’s financial police found an email dated 5 August 2016, from O’Ferrall in which he says that Cameron wanted operating profit to increase by 700,000 euros and suggests to Luca Sebastiani, then CFO at BT Italy, along with other colleagues across Europe, that they capitalise labour costs as a solution.

“All, I have an urgent request from Richard to find another €700K,” O’Ferrall wrote to Sebastiani and his counterparts in Germany, Benelux, France, Spain, Hungary as well as Simon Whittle, then finance manager, reporting and consolidation, at Global Services Europe.

“Please, can you look at all opportunities and come back to Simon and me asap. Labour capitalization? Regards Brian,” says the email, whose subject line reads “Another €700K EBITDA needed in [July].”

Sad business. Italy and the UK have been special friends.

Permalink for this post • Archived in • Comments here (5)

Page 1 of 59 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›