Heads-up: Netflix's "Amanda Knox" is in possible line for a TV Emmy award in category 28. Via hundreds of key facts omitted that production, by longtime Knox PR flunkies (which Netflix kept secret), convinced millions globally that Italian justice sucks, and that Knox had zero role in Meredith's death - not even the Italian Supreme Court said that.

Collection: Overviews Powerpoint

Friday, January 06, 2017

Netflixhoax 18: Omitted - Any Mention Of The Toxic Public Relations Assaults On Italian Justice

Posted by The TJMK Main Posters



Paul Ciolino and David Marriott in Kermit’s extensive debunking of the PR, link below

1. Nature Of The Excess

The huge public relations effort on behalf of Sollecito and especially Knox is entirely omitted from the film.

Perhaps because Netflix’s “Amanda Knox” was itself a toxic assault on Italian justice? Perhaps because the producers had themselves for five years acted as a nasty sharp end of that same PR?

Amazing omission, any way you look at it, as complete movies and books could dwell on this brutal attempt by non-legal means to set Knox and Sollecito free. The pro-Knox PR in particular, mostly in English in the US making it hard for Italians to know about, let alone respond, was taken to unique extremes.

Look at the giant scope of the PR as presented in Kermit’s masterful Powerpoint. That was created even before the 2009 trial was done, before the worst of the PR was set loose. 

Note the number of strongarming threats and false talking point and outright lies. The dishonest TV appearances and misleading books. The threats and personal abuse of officials and reporters who had no easy way to hit back. The myriad hapless professionals roped in as glovepuppets, many of which we will quote in the next two posts.

And the staggering moneygrubbing, surely a world record in itself.

2. Initiation of the Sollecito PR

It is pretty well impossible to affect court outcomes in Italy with PR. Contempt of court and defamation laws are too strong. Papa Doc Sollecito and his family tried a few things, but they ended up in court in Bari, and Vanessa Sollecito was fired from her job.

Giulia Bongiorno was then the head of the powerful justice committee in the parliament. She was hired as lead counsel and acted as the spokesman for Sollecito’s cause, often (like Sollecito) dropping Amanda Knox in the drink. Other actions moved underground.

3. Initiation Of The Knox PR

The Knox PR beamed at Americans was initiated by Curt Knox before he and Edda Mellas ever left West Seattle for Perugia. Before any lawyers had even been consulted, let alone employed.

Why so fast? Well one good hunch is that Curt Knox already KNEW with his family history of dangerous volatility that Knox really could have exploded and led a pack attack that left Meredith dead.

Here is a great book on how aggressive American PR too often helps clients with financial means to win while trampling on the law. 

Here is a good roadmap for what is known in the PR world as astroturfing, the techniques of which the ever-expanding Knox/Marriott public relations effort followed almost to a tee.

Prior to the start of the trial, the PR was becoming extremely shrill. Deathfish posted this. The Machine posted this.   After a crazed PR event in West Seattle was reported upon, even Knox’s lawyers wanted it toned down.

In April 2010 we were hearing things similar to this description of the PR from everyone who had tried to file honest reports.

Coverage of the crime began to diverge on the two sides of the Atlantic. From the vantage point of Perugia, it seemed as though the Knox family’s American supporters were simply choosing to ignore the facts that were coming to light in Italy….

The American press hung back, at first, objective and somewhat disbelieving that such a wholesome-seeming girl could have any connection to such a sordid foreign crime, and then, as the family stepped up its defense, increasingly divided between two camps that would become simply the innocentisti—those who believed she was blameless—and the colpevolisti, those who did not. In Perugia, these labels governed access…

Of the handful of American journalists in Perugia in late 2007 and early 2008, none got access to the Knox family without certain guarantees about positive coverage. Within months, the family decided to speak on the record primarily to the American TV networks, often in exchange for airfare and hotel bills. Most of the print press was shut out. And the TV producers learned to be very cautious about being seen with people like me, lest the Knox family should cut them off.

But as interest in the case grew, an odd assortment of American talking heads attached their reputations to Amanda’s innocence. An aggressive support group called Friends of Amanda formed in Seattle, headed by Anne Bremner, a media-savvy criminal lawyer who had cut her teeth as a tough prosecutor in Seattle’s King County Court…

Very quickly, [PR manager David] Marriott lost control of the situation. As he spoon-fed the Knox-approved message to American outlets that couldn’t afford to send correspondents to Italy, those of us on the ground in Perugia began passing his contradictory e-mails around as entertainment during the long days in the court.

[We reporters in Rome] began what would be a two-year battle against the Seattle message machine, incurring personal attacks and outright threats.

Newsweek said that the PR campaign was winning over nobody in Italy and doing some real harm.

More negative reports began to appear. See this on one PR shill. See another example here.

A media expert rated the PR counter-functional and likely to fail at least in part. There was soon the first hard proof of this when the PR landed Oggi in court.

The talking points became so extreme that you’d think they would be impossible to spoof. However Chimera did the impossible here.

4. Overview Of Where Next

This brings us to a halfway point with the Hellmann appeal court, first chambers of the Supreme Court, the Nencini appeal court and the fifth chambers of the Supreme Court still ahead. The first and fourth of those courts were bent and in each case the PR played some role.

But the outcome is not cast in stone.  Guede could spark a retrial for himself (we will know in a few days) in which the Knox and Sollecito teams will not even be present. A lot could be said that will set them back.

A dozen main media outlets and several hundred professional writers and TV commentators and so on came to swallow the PR bait without any checking of the truth. We will quote them at length. Netflix itself has clearly done this - it swallowed the assurances of thee cranks with axes to grind and did no due diligence in Italy before guying and airing a very unsafe product. 

Both Curt Knox and David Marriott have declared the PR to have been a success. We will asses that. The PR departed so wildly from the truth and did so much harm to those it lied about that it is easy to shoot down. Look at the comments on the media threads about the Netflix movie and you will generally see a majority denying that Knox did no harm or was framed. One of various signs of a huge fail?


Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Powerpoints #21: Diane Sawyer’s Very Tough Interview With Amanda Knox: ABC’s Sneak Preview!

Posted by Kermit





Skilled reporter Diane Sawyer does a great job here in negotiating the Knox PR minefield and eliciting a telling response. 

No wonder Amanda Knox seems so set on not heading for the appeal court in Florence. There she might face immense pressure to answer the hundreds of open questions on the witness stand.

This time under full cross examination, which was so strenuously avoided in mid 2009.

For this sneak preview courtesy of ABC please click here. The Powerpoints should take maybe a minute to load. I recommend that you use the Page Down key to advance.

if you don’t have the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded there is a download here. Interesting viewing. Thanks ABC.

Some further reading?

Click here for more


Thursday, October 25, 2012

Powerpoints #20: On Contradictions, Here Preston Contradicts Preston

Posted by Kermit



[James Frey, Stephen Glass and Clifford Irving; writers caught playing fast-and-loose with the truth]


This is the second in a new Powerpoint series. Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

In the first question that we posed to fiction thriller writer (and now, self-described “point-of-view journalist”, whatever that euphemism means) Douglas Preston a few days ago, we asked him about his and Spezi’s Afterword to their book The Monster of Florence.

It appears to be full of errors and insinuations in linking the MoF to the Meredith Kercher murder case. A book that is based on a “True Story” should not be found to be derelict in presenting errors or fiction as true fact, neither at its end, nor in its beginning, nor in any other point between.

In this, the second question that we pose to Preston (and Spezi, if he’s available for replies), we go to the start of the story, where Preston recalls how he met Spezi, in the smoky haze of a backroom of the Caffè Ricchi in the centre of Florence and first learned of the existence of the monster … or did he? 

The problem is that in equally emphatic terms, you can also hear Preston on an NBC Dateline documentary describe how a few months earlier (I calculate) than the Caffè Ricchi tête-a-tête, he describes hearing about the Monster of Florence for the first time from his neighbours in the town he lived in in Italy.

And this, in an interview with Stone Philips of NBC with a camera crew and their equipment on-site in Italy in front of his old rented house. At a time when Preston was already telling the rest of the world that he couldn’t return to Italy, banned by Mignini! In my opinion, things can’t get much more cynical than that.

The contrast between Preston’s two clear, explicit and totally mutually-exclusive descriptions of how he learned of the Monster of Florence may seem like a trivial point, but it really is not.

Every writer knows that the key factor at the start of a book is engaging and maintaining the reader’s interest so that it lasts to the very end. A fiction writer is free to use whatever mechanism he may need to make that engagement. However, authors who describe their tale as a “True Story” as do Preston and Spezi should realize that reader trust is – poof! – lost if you load the start of the True Story with something that isn’t so.

Recent history has seen a number of writers who push and cross the limit of the Truth and rush headstrong into Truthiness, Mistruth, or Lies, peddling stories that attract our interest and are human, daring .... yet end up being exposed as blends of truths and half-truths.  Together with insinuations and a lot of out and out fibs:

  • Clifford Irving went to jail for his unauthorised and totally false “autobiography” of Howard Hughes, see the Richard Gere movie poster below..
  • The New Republic magazine fired Stephen Glass after determining that at least 27 of 41 stories written by Glass for the magazine contained fabricated material.
  • James Frey’s publisher has had to reimburse those purchasers of “A Million Little Pieces” who bought it believing it true (it was commercialized as such).

Where will Spezi and Preston take us with The Monster of Florence? All it takes is for one reader to question: could this really have happened as they are making us think it happened? Why when I read the Italian version of the book do I understand something completely different? Why in Italy is Il Mostro considered the better, much more accurate book?

From there the truth in the story starts to unravel. As we already see in the Powerpoint presentations, the start and end of the English-langage MoF book don’t exactly encourage us to take any of its contents at face value.

Now that the Meredith Kercher murder case approaches its final appeal, it looks like Preston and Spezi are moving to develop some sort of MoF sequel that could be titled The Monster of Florence: The New Generation starring Amanda Knox and of course Preston and Spezi. And including fresh new “True Stories” by the pair. 

Personally, I feel that they could spare both us and Amanda’s cause their “truth” – Amanda and her legal team have more than enough to think about right now, with the Supreme Court appeal and the mess the Raffaele Sollecito book dams them in.

I believe that the shrillness of Preston’s and Spezi’s tales of “truth” will increase its pitch as we approach the March final appeal of Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as suspects in the murder of Meredith (Knox has already been found guilty of one crime and has served her prison sentence for falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba of murdering Meredith). 

This is going to be a very tough appeal – I urge readers to take a look at the English translation of Prosecutor Galati’s request for the appeal. It is surprising in its strength and balance. The Knox and Sollecito legal teams must be busy (will either defendant dare to be in Italy at that time?) and they know they are going to have a rough time of it in March.

How nice for all concerned if all the fictions now drop dead.



Posted on 10/25/12 at 04:11 PM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesNews media & moviesTerrible reportingThe wider contextsFlorence MOF hoax
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (12)

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Powerpoints #19: Placing The Noisy Claimant Doug Preston In The Hot Seat

Posted by Kermit





This is the first in a new Powerpoint series. Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

This curious incident instigated this series:

A week or two ago I received an unexpected email from Douglas Preston, co-author with Mario Spezi of The Monster of Florence (Spezi also wrote an Italian version that seems to conflict at points with the English version) and a heated champion of the attempt to free Amanda Knox, who is stlll accused pending Supreme Court appeal of the murder of her housemate, Meredith Kercher, in Perugia on 1 November 2007.

Preston explained that he wanted to write a “piece” about the “Knox case” and that he would like to do a 10 question email interview with me.  I got the hunch that Preston and Spezi are going to be active over the next few months in the media as their cause is increasingly thrown in disarray. Along with, I presume, their possible movie based on the Monster of Florence book.

I was surprised that Preston said he would “quote you accurately, honestly, and in context, and represent your views respectfully and accurately”. 

Hmmm. We all have in our memory Preston accusing me (see his comment April 28 2011 at 6:57 pm) of “distortions, falsehoods, and crackpot opinion presented as settled fact. Kermit’s open letter contains many out and out lies”.

He also claimed, erroneously, that I hide behind a “screen of false IP addresses and various other hacker tricks” (what, has Preston tried to hack me?) and that I had “demonstrated a long history of falsehood and dishonesty” (I have?!).

Given that past experience, would you trust Preston? Silly me, I’m ready to give anyone another chance.

In return I proposed that the interview be two-way, and that we each proceed question by question on the issues that we wanted to clarify for us to publish in due course. I included a first question on seeming significant errors and mistruths in the “Afterword” or epilogue chapter of his and Spezi’s Monster of Florence book.

Very disappointingly, he didnt respond in kind. Nothing useful came back. He concluded “as for my (Preston’s) ‘objectivity,’ I am a point-of-view journalist in this case. People know where I stand and they know my bad history with Mignini. I don’t pretend to be objective”.

Should Preston really call himself a journalist or an opinion maker, or a lobbyist?  Why can’t people just respect the Italian legal process, which right now is not (and never was) firmly in the hands of Prosecutor Mignini, Preston’s perceived nemesis?

As we seem set to be subjected once again to seeing Preston and/or Spezi regularly sharing their rancid opinion of Prosecutor Mignini and Italians officials on the case with the public, I decided to get out in front, with this series pre-emptively checking their versions of the “truths”.

The Monster of Florence book is labeled (see above) a “True Story”, and while it does include historical facts related to the MoF murders in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s,  the two authors also personally intrude themselves into events.

This series should help the public to decide how seriously (if at all) they should accept Preston’s and Spezi’s opinions expressed in their media appearances where they interject themselves into Meredith Kercher’s murder case.

And to see if any of Preston’s self-described “point-of-view journalism” truths he shares with Spezi really stand up.

Please check back to TJMK every few days as we pose new questions to Preston and his co-author Spezi.

Posted on 10/21/12 at 05:23 PM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesNews media & moviesTerrible reportingThe wider contextsItalian contextN America contextFlorence MOF hoax
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (15)

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Powerpoints #18: Katie Couric Interviews Raffaele Sollecito! We Already Have A Sneak Preview!!

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is Powerpoint Viewer.

We are not really too surprised that Sollecito caves, as we observe the Sollecito camp increasingly panicked now by the appeal of Dr Galati, Still, thanks a lot Katie insiders! Thanks a lot Sollecito-camp insiders! 

And a great job on the couch, Katie Couric. You managed to winkle out the truth and respect the REAL victim even if Raffaele seemed a little tongue-tied…


Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Powerpoints #17: Why The Totality of Evidence Suggests Knox And Sollecito Are Guilty Just As Charged

Posted by James Raper With Kermit





Please load Powerpoint Viewer if not on your system, and click here for the slides. The Powerpoints consist of 150 slides, the outcome of many hours of work, and should open in 30 to 60 seconds. 

Impartial lawyers like myself tend to look at a tough case like this and think, “Now what would I have done differently?” The problem for the defences here is that there are literally hundreds of evidence points, many created by the appellants themselves as they behaved erratically both on the night Meredith died and subsequently.

The Knox family legal advisor Ted Simon (who in our view was brought in far too late to be of real help after all the bull-in-a-china-shop damage of the PR) himself recognized this, on Dateline NBC late in 2008, when he said that a whack-a-mole approach to creating reasonable doubt would fall short in this case. (Whack-a-mole is a popular fairground game where “moles” keep popping up out of various holes, and you win if you can whack them all.)

Judge Micheli set out a big picture for the conviction of Rudy Guede in October 2008 and the remitting of Knox and Sollecito to stand trial. Judge Massei clearly created a big picture in all of the fine detail he neatly tied together in his 425-page report. The Supreme Court of Cassation understood the big picture in declining Guede’s final appeal.

The defences have never really managed to respond with their own big-picture approach. Nitpicking of a few evidence points, which is really all the defence and the campaign have done, will only very rarely destroy such an edifice. At the end of the DNA rebuttal this September, the DNA collection and analysis is unlikely to be fully discounted, and already it seems that more ethical and competence question marks hang over the independent consultants than over Dr Stefanoni and her team.

This for your consideration is an overview of all of the main evidence. Check it out as you go through and you will see that after the nine long months of the appeal process it is all almost entirely left standing. If they really want to see Knox and Sollecito released, the defence lawyers now need to bite the bullet and prepare their clients properly and let them try to explain from the stand.


Thursday, November 26, 2009

Powerpoints #16: We Now Examine The Compelling Evidence For The REAL Railroading From Hell

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

Rudy Guede has already been sentenced for the maximum allowed (30 years) under “abbreviated” form of trial which he chose. And in ten days or so, Amanda Knox and Raffaele may be found guilty and be sentenced to the maximum punishment allowed (life in prison) under their own form of trial.

Rudy Guede did not show the slightest true repentance, contribute anything respectful to the memory of Meredith, or provide anything close to a credible explanation for the night of Meredith’s attack.

Raffael Sollecito and Amanda Knox seem to have managed only to muddy the waters, insult the memory of Meredith, and do themselves much harm with their own various widely differing explanations.

I believe that all three have shown an attitude which approaches arrogance at times. And in the case of Amanda Knox, in the days after Meredith’s murder and in her second day on the stand, she seemed at times almost gleeful.

Had Knox not felt so egged-on and overly-confident, she might never have taken the stand - which was possibly when she cooked her own goose.  Who actually encouraged Knox and Sollecito to take these seemingly disastrous positions?

I find it hard to believe that their Italian lawyers did. All I have ever heard about the lawyers for Knox and Sollecito (and for that matter about the prosecutors) is that they despise the antics engineered from the US. 

The impression gaining ground now amongst court observers is that the main factor in Knox’s attitude has been the many participants - some there as part of a plan and some seemingly self-appointed - in one of the most disastrous defense-support campaigns in legal history.

The concentric rings of participants that seem to have been busy appear to me to be these four following:

  • The immediate families. The Sollecitos did less than the Knoxes and Mellases to raise a storm, but they have already received negative payback in three ways: investigation of the whole family for releasing a video showing an uncovered Meredith to a Bari TV station; Sollecito’s sister losing her job as a carabinieri, and Sollecito distinctly no better off.
  • Gogerty Marriott, Inc. The Seattle public relations outfit hired by Knox’s family, which seems to have allowed or at least not stopped continued denigration of the prosecutor, the investigators and Italian justice generally, and repeated mis-statements and severe under-statements of the small mountain of evidence against Knox. Believed not to get along well with the group below.
  • The Friends of Amanda. A semi-formalized and shadowy group of supposed well-wishers and supporters organized with spokeswomen Anne Bremner, most of whom are in what seems a cowardly manner still unnamed and lurking in the shadows. Believed not to get along well with the prior group.
  • Finally, a group know on the discussion boards as The Entourage. A larger cloud of supposed supporters who aren’t necessarily part of the Knox Mellas family or the Friends of Amanda, and whose motives for supporting Amanda are wide and varied but often seem to revolve around money.

The outer circles of meddlers have seemed to want to prevent normal Italian processes to provide true justice for Meredith from ever playing out. Even very recently, one loudly threatened to take a guilty verdict straight to the top ranks of the US State Department (good luck with that one).

They seem to have antagonized just about every case-watcher in Italy, definitely the prosecution and police services in the case, and quite possibly the judges and jury. In fact, they seem to want to prevent the judges and jury from watching the media, presumably so that they don’t get affected by this train-wreck of a campaign.

These circles of advice may now be making it impossible for Amanda Knox if guilty to show any penitence or remorse, or to plead psychological impairment, or even come out with a truthful story that, if guilty, might actually get her some time off.

For a long time Knox has seemed to be pushed, guided and chaperoned along an inflexible path of limited options in which she seems to have no direct control herself or over the legal process playing out around her.

  • Why does an American woman on trial for murder in Italy need an expensive public pelations campaign aimed principally at an American audience?
  • Having decided to go ahead with this expensive PR campaign, why does Amanda’s family then complain about their financial woes on prime time television?
  • Why is this expensive PR campaign maintained when Amanda’s Italian legal team has stated that it is counterproductive?
  • Has the expensive PR campaign produced “positive” personal results for some of its participants in such a way that they may carry out actions or make statements which are neither here nor there for Amanda’s cause, but which benefit them?
  • Has the expensive PR campaign made it impossible (or too late) for Amanda to open up, contribute further information to the body of knowledge of what happened on the night of 1 November 2007, provide some closure to the Kercher family, and possibly ensure some leniency in any guilty verdicts which she may possibly receive for any of the charges against her?

One of the fervent supporters of Amanda, Chicago Private Eye Paul Ciolino, coined the expression that Amanda is being “railroaded”.

The true railroading to Hell of Amanda Knox seems to have been done by her own supposed supporters.

Posted on 11/26/09 at 10:31 AM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesHoaxes By Knox & teamKnox no-PR hoax
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (28)

Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Powerpoints #15: Justice For Meredith - The Thoughts Inspired By Two Mountains

Posted by Fly By Night

Click above for the powerpoints, which should open in less than a minute.

And here, first, is what inspired them.

I was recently in the little town of Lone Pine just east of California’s Sierra Nevada Mountains .If you’re not familiar with this area, the vistas along the Owens Valley and up into the huge mountains - which at that point rise 10,000-plus feet almost vertically from the plain - are absolutely stunning. 

This is where the rock legends U2 found the inspiration for and shot the cover art for their Joshua Tree recording and, like just about everyone else who ever visits, I found myself in reflective mood.

I was lucky to secure a last minute permit for hiking and climbing in the popular and highly regulated Sierras, in an area that included the magnificent Mount Whitney (14,505 feet) which is the highest mountain peak of the lower 48 states - only Mount McKinley in Alaska (20320 feet) is higher.

My goal for this trip, however, was not to climb Mount Whitney which I’d previously climbed. It was instead to head up nearby Mount Russell (14,094 feet) which is one of the more difficult California peaks.

I hiked in and established a base camp at 11,200 feet, at Upper Boy Scout Lake, where I had a fine view of both Mount Whitney and Mount Russell. I was greatly impressed by the silhouettes of these two imposing and similar-appearing pyramids of granite in the soft light. 

But as I continued to observe them I found myself considering just how different these peaks really are upon closer examination. 

That night I dreamed, as many people do, camped very high up in the mountains.

My own strange dream was of Meredith Kercher as Mount Whitney, and of Amanda Knox as Mount Russell. The two were surrounded by the odd and shadowy characters you might encounter in a mountainous dream world.

This is how this tale of two peaks came to be, and I wrote it down later as a summer-break companion for reflection. 

The one thing I find myself reflecting on most is this:  Was it really just a dream? You tell me.

Posted on 09/02/09 at 12:29 PM by Fly By NightClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypotheses
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (1)

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Powerpoints #14: The Telling Case Of The Doctored Footprint

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

At a guess maybe half of the defense-campaign resources have gone into public relations. Money well spent? We rather doubt it. P-R and legal watchers of the case we consider impartial have noted three problems with the campaign:

  • It seems to be addressed to the wrong country, and the only one, Italy, that really matters, now seems totally lost.
  • It seems to have started with a very raw-knuckle message which was bound to polarize, and only got harder ever since.
  • It doesn’t seem to be particularly competent with the evidence, taking potshots, but never really shaking the whole.

And this unprecedented campaign may have buoyed Amanda Knox herself into taking the stand, where neither her demeanor nor her claims seem to have done her any good (see here and here).

This Powerpoint analyzes a new claim on the FOA campaign website about a key piece of evidence (footprint evidence against Sollecito, not against Knox) which seems straight out of cloud-cuckoo land.

The size of the footprint had been doctored to make a footprint that is clearly the same size and shape as Sollecito’s NOT into Guede’s as intended - but into Knox’s!

Hmmm. An unusual way to help Knox, that is for sure!

Posted on 06/24/09 at 06:53 AM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesThose Italy chargedRaff SollecitoThose officially involvedEvidence & witnessesDNA and luminol
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (10)

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Powerpoints #13: 150 Questions For The Defendants They Have Incessantly Avoided

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

We who offer this site in memory of Meredith want above all for the truth and the whole truth to come out.  The full story behind this horrific crime of great violence in Italy, and why such a wonderful girl had to die.

Meredith’s terribly suffering family in London have repeatedly said, to them it’s the truth that matters most. They want to know why their daughter and sister was deprived of a lifetime of promise, and why the violence to her had to be so great.

Meredith’s many sad friends in London and Leeds, and in other places in England and around the world - many of whom may now have a life-time of loss and adjustment - also absolutely deserve to get to know.

And millions of decent people in Italy and in England and throughout Europe and increasingly the US are now also seriously asking: why? Exactly what happened that night in Perugia, and need it ever happen again?

These 150 questions, truthfully answered, should bring out all there is to know about this case. They may or may not mirror what the prosecutor has in mind, but we think they would provide all of the picture.

Please go for it, Amanda? For Meredith’s sake. And for her ever-deprived family. And for all those others sadly affected. Whether or not you were actually involved, truthfully tell us now all that you know.


Monday, June 08, 2009

Powerpoints #12: Telling Evidence Against Sollecito The Experts Seem To Have Got Absolutely Right

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

Previously in the Powerpoint series we presented visually some of the evidence that helped Judge Micheli to conclude that there was more than one perpetrator.

During most of the court sessions in May 2009, Lorenzo Rinaldi and Patrizia Stefanoni and their formidable evidence-processing teams from Rome added a lot to what we know about the forensic evidence found in the house.

Many of the images and diagrams they used appeared in the media, particularly the Italian media. It is now possible to examine even more closely what the evidence suggests about the perpetrators.

Sollecito has tough evidence against him in a number of dimensions. Added now to the woes of his defense team is the analysis of a bloody footprint that was found on a bathmat in the bathroom of Meredith and Amanda Knox.

The Powerpoint title refers to a barren tree. This reference is explained in the conclusion of the presentation. In essence, it refers to a marked tendency of perpetrators to NOT add enough incidental detail to their stories to be really convincing.

Sollecito has so far come up with many barren trees - minimalist stories in which none of them have enough incidental detail to convincingly explain evidence like this.


Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Powerpoints #11: Countering The Spin By The Defenses On The Recent Cottage Break-in

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

TJMK is getting a reputation for cool, precise, painstaking, and illuminating examination of the evidence made available.  We have frequently wanned others not to jump the gun or to mischaracterize known evidence when so very much of it is not yet in the open.

Just over two weeks ago, on 18 February, the Italian police discovered that in recent days intruders had broken their way into the girls’ apartment in the house on Via della Pergola.  The intruders had entered through the kitchen window to the north, opening onto the balcony.

This strange happening sparked many concerned questions, especially in Italy. For example, was the break-in perhaps related to the crime of 1 November 2007 and the trial now underway?

Nobody knows as yet. Police investigations continue. But it is just possible that it WAS related to the case. And if it was, there seem to be several possibilities as to why:

1) Proof of easy access for burglars?

The break-in could have been a demonstration of how a thief could very easily make his way into the cottage, similar to the notional “lone wolf” attacker that Raffaele Sollecito’s lawyer Ms Bongiorno has been promoting as the real perpetrator of the crime.

2) Proof of contamination of DNA evidence?

If an undetected thief could have entered the cottage between 2 November 2007 and the date when the bra clasp with Raffaele’s DNA was collected in mid-December, that could be an explanation for the unlikely DNA contamination which the defence teams claim might have occurred.

3) Modification or removal of remaining evidence?

The break-in could have taken place with the object of modifying or removing some remaining evidence which the police have not yet collected, evidence which may soon become significant for example in the course of a confession by one of the defendants or Rudy Guede..

4) A threat or message to the police?

The fact that during the break-in some knives in the cottage were arranged in a suggestive manner, and one was placed on a police envelope (apparently brought in by the intruders and unrelated to the previous evidence gathering) might point towards the intruders making some threat to the police, or trying to send some message to them.  This possibility becomes a bit more significant when one considers that the break-in occurred just before the resumption of the trial, when the 12 police investigators who were involved in the crime-scene investigation were all just about to give their testimonies before the court.

5) Unrelated possibilities to explain the break-in?

Perhaps it really was some sort of satanic rite. Or a prank or a hoax. Or it might simply have been some itinerants getting in to spend a night out of the extreme cold.

Defense spin has been attempted along most of these lines, to suggest that the prosecutors and crime scene investigators really did botch the investigation.

The most outlandish of all claims was in the blog section of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. That, because the perpetrators of this break-in quite easily got in through the KITCHEN window it proves they easily could have got in through a BEDROOM window. And this despite the facts that:

These Powerpoints here set out to demonstrate that there is no possible parallel between this THEORETICAL break-in through Filomena’s bedroom and the ACTUAL break-in through the kitchen window.


Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Powerpoints #10: The DNA Evidence May Be A Tough Mole To Whack

Posted by Nicki


We now show in this second Powerpoint presentation what a tough mole to whack that one might be.

We have already covered here the basics of DNA evidence.

That presentation covers the definitions of valid and invalid DNA samples, how contamination might occur, who collected and analyzed the Perugia samples, and how the samples will have been stored.

DNA analysis has been done on the various luminol-enhanced footprints in the house that Kermit analyzed for us.

Also on the knife found hidden in Sollecito’s apartment, and on some items of clothing, and on some fittings and fixtures in Meredith’s house.

And quite possibly on other items, too.

Here’s defense lawyer Theodore Simon in the recent NBC Dateline documentary:

Theodore Simon thinks the prosecutors evidence made public so far is daunting. The defense could argue a faked robbery, and a moved body, and contamination, but eventually it could become like whack-a-mole and all of their arguments could lose force.

Theodore ain’t the only one. New York lawyers following the case reckon the odds of defense arguments losing traction because there are just too many evidentiary moles to be whacked down are already high.

The defenses seem to be indicating that they will argue at trial that all of the many DNA samples might be too small, or too contaminated, or less than 100 percent of a match.

 


Nothing seems to stand out in the Perugia DNA process to suggest a major failing at any point. And if there was one, only scientific evidence in proof of this will influence the court, and innuendo will really go nowhere.

Further presentations will build on this one when the precise DNA samples being challenged become known.

All of the evidence Powerpoints can be observed here and here.

Posted on 01/06/09 at 04:59 PM by NickiClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesDNA and luminol
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (6)

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Powerpoints #9: Defense Claim That AK And RS Couldn’t Have Disposed Of Meredith’s Phones Is Wrong

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

It looks like justice for Meredith will get a very strong push from what the mobile phones tell the court.

We don’t know all of this evidence. Possibly not by a long shot. The huge majority of assembled evidence remains sealed until trial, starting just over two weeks away.

A police wiretap on Amanda Knox’s mobile picked up her words “I cannot do it any more” to Raffaele Solecito, which resulted in her being taken in for questioning. The investigation was almost foreshortened right about then.

Triangulation of phone whereabouts seemed to confirm that her employer who Amanda Knox fingered as the perp, Patrick, was actually there near the house. That defense strategy soon fell through.

The mobiles of Meredith, Knox, and Sollecito (Guede did not have one) all seem to have experienced some strange atypical usage and some suspicious switchings-off-and-on on the night in question.

And that formidable national police force, the Polizia delle comunicazioni, first started investigating when two mobiles surprisingly started ringing in a garden the morning after the crime.

That garden - that house -  is about one kilometer from Meredith’s house (you can just see it between trees near top-left above). And less than 100 meters from Guede’s apartment and 200 meters from Sollecito’s apartment (in the center house below), by way of a small city gate.

The Sollecito and Guede defenses maintained that, because that gate is locked at night, there’s no way their clients could have tossed the phones in the garden.  So. Someone else must have done it. Both that and the crime.

Once again we use Powerpoints to examine the possibilities here.


Posted on 11/18/08 at 08:46 AM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesCellphone activity
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (2)

Friday, November 14, 2008

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

Posted by Kermit





One of the more bizarre defense dog-and-pony shows of the past few months was a defense attempt to show that a burglar may have entered by the window.

Please click here for the Powerpoint presentation.

Also click on the images below for larger versions. The first is of the window of Filomena’s room. Broken on the night with a huge rock, found lying inside. (The prosecutors think it was all staged from the inside.)

If you ever see that window for yourself, you might find yourself giggling in disbelief. First, even a gymnast from the Cirque du Soleil would find it tough to climb up via the (normally closed) window far below.

And then reach up, open the window through a small opening in the broken glass (without cutting themselves) and so pull themselves up and inside. Leaving zero scuff marks and zero DNA and zero broken glass below.

And second, there is a total of FIVE much easier points from which to break in. 

You can see two of them in the second image below: a bathroom window and a bedroom window. Both would have been in the dark. A third - a very dark balcony easy to climb up onto at night - is behind those olive trees to the right.

And there are two more ways in out the front: the front door, and the laundry-room window. A break-in via Filomena’s window is BY FAR the most difficult. Nobody - nobody - has come close to showing how it is done that way.

In this Powerpoint we examine the window from the inside. From that angle this is an especially hard sell. To open it requires a major contortion, made very dangerous by the glass still in the window.

(if you don’t have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded, here is the Viewer download.)








Thursday, November 13, 2008

Powerpoints #7: DNA Evidence - A Very Clear Intro To A Vital Subject Here

Posted by Nicki




If you can’t see the Powerpoints as intended, please install the latest version of the Powerpoint Viewer which is downloadable here

This is a short sharp presentation of how criminal DNA analysis works.

It is widely known that DNA analysis has been done on the luminol-enhanced footprints that Kermit analyzed for us yesterday.

Also on the knife found in Sollecito’s apartment, on some items of clothing, and on some fittings and fixtures in Meredith’s house. And possibly on other items too.

The defenses seem to be indicating that they will argue at trial in December that the DNA samples might be too small, or might be too contaminated, or might be less than 100 percent of a match.

In two respects, this may not change matters very much.

  • First, there will be many other areas of evidence to be considered at the trial. Alibis, eye-witness accounts, the autopsy, defendant behavior and psychology, computers, and cell-phones, all will factor in.
  • And second, DNA analysis is hard to challenge on the grounds the defenses seem to be suggesting. DNA analysis is a pretty precise science. It does not result in percentages of match of the samples - either they match or they don’t match.

And the provisional perception is this: many DO match.

Posted on 11/13/08 at 12:16 PM by NickiClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesDNA and luminol
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (2)

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Powerpoints #6: Trace Evidence Seems To Confirm More Than One Perpetrator At Scene

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

This is Judge Paolo Micheli explaining his sentencing of Rudy Guede on 28 October:

[Judge] Micheli agreed with prosecutors that more than one person took part in the sexual assault and murder, dismissing claims that the 47 bruises and knife wounds on Kercher’s body could have been made by a single attacker….  adding that while footprints there [in the house] might not definitely belong to Knox and Sollecito, they did indicate more than one attacker.

Will the judges and jury in the Knox and Sollecito trial early next year reach the same conclusion? It does look probable.

This Powerpoint is a hypothesis about six of those footprints. There seems to have been some sort of clean-up to try to hide them.

But they were revealed by luminol on the floor of the house. An analysis of evidence already in the public domain (there may be more) does point to the presence of three pairs of feet.

A sole-perpetrator theory of the crime might just be viable with two pairs of feet. But it is hard to see how a lone-perpetrator theory can hold up if there were three pairs of feet.


Monday, November 10, 2008

Powerpoints #5: A Graphical Tour Of The Crime Scene Itself

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

Now this is a walk-through of the inside of the fateful house.  This tour of the scene of the crime includes shots of each room of the house, and the police investigators’ evidence markers, with some explanations of what they refer to.

Items seen here and the autopsy and luminol evidence left Judge Paolo Micheli very convinced that this crime involved several perpetrators, and not just the one.

Posted on 11/10/08 at 04:59 PM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesDNA and luminolOther physical
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (1)

Saturday, November 08, 2008

Powerpoints #4: A Very Odd House, In A Very Odd Location

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

This is a presentation on the house and its neighborhood, and why they evolved in the strange way they did.

As a point of departure, take a look at this shot below of the English girls’ house. This is where Meredith spent her last evening.

There must be a dozen apartments in that place.  Hard to imagine any prolonged violence ever taking place in there. Sounds of torture and depravity would travel very easily. Neighbors would be banging on the door in five seconds flat.


In contrast, Meredith’s house was really quite isolated. Arrive from any of three directions - east, west, and down from the walled city - and you chance upon it suddenly and quite counter-intuitively.

Its location below the street and the parking facility, and its almost fort-like, semi-soundproof construction, seem like facilitating factors of the crime - even though we do believe Madame Nara heard something.

Posted on 11/08/08 at 09:41 PM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesOther physical
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (1)

Friday, November 07, 2008

Powerpoints #3: A Minute By Minute Visual Guide To The Events On The Night

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

This is a visual hypothesis of the events in Perugia that culminated in Meredith’s violent death.

Every media outfit covering the case might benefit enormously if they were to use such a recreation as their point of departure. Some have long been out of the starter box, of course, and some, especially in the US, have taken off in misleading directions.

But our take on the media now is that they are becoming notably more cautious in face of 10,000 pages of still-sealed evidence and Rudy Guede’s conviction.


Thursday, November 06, 2008

Powerpoints #2: A Comprehensive Guide To The Relevant Locations

Posted by Kermit





Perhaps nothing will ever beat walking Perugia to understand where and how this utterly incongruous crime took place. But here is a great second best.

Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

Posted on 11/06/08 at 02:29 PM by KermitClick here to view all my past posts, via link at top left.
Archived in Overviews PowerpointCrime hypothesesEvidence & witnessesThe locationsOther witnessesOther physical
Permalink for this postTell-a-FriendCase WikiPMF Org ForumPMF Net ForumComments here (3)

Friday, October 24, 2008

Powerpoints #1: A Witness Trashed By Paul Ciolino For CBS In Fact Looks Very Credible

Posted by Kermit





Click here if you have Powerpoint or the Powerpoint Viewer program loaded. If not here is the Viewer download.

The CBS Network is right now at Number One in the American TV network audience wars.

CBS is one of the very best parts of the Viacom brand. It has come to be so liked, watched and respected in the US in part because it has long been dominant in the area of fine investigative reporting.

So why has CBS’s 48 Hours coverage of the Meredith Kercher case been so uniformly appalling? So biased, so emotional, so full of hyperbole and so FACTUALLY FLAT-OUT WRONG?

We frankly don’t know. But we continue our series examining past CBS reporting of the case, and revealing it for the almost consistent junk it has been.

[ADDED: CBS HAS REMOVED THE VIDEO, POSSIBLY BECAUSE IT MADE WILD CLAIMS AGAINST THE POLICE WHICH COULD SEE CBS IN COURT]


Page 1 of 1 pages