Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Italian Lawyers Strategically Timed Strike This Week Causes Postponement Of Knox Calunnia Case

Posted by Peter Quennell





The legal action for criminal slander against Amanda Knox brought by those she claimed maltreated her at an interrogation (not by Mignini) is postponed to mid-May 2012.

This has the effect of putting the court dates past the release of the Hellman sentencing report due latest at year’s end and the filing of the grounds for appeal before the Supreme Court of Cassation due six weeks later.

The main lawyers union in Italy has chosen this week for their industrial action to protest the recent history of extreme political pressure by ex-PM Berlusconi’s party on the justice system, resulting in among other things the underfunding of the police’s forensic operations.

The lawyers’ union also has a long list of requested legal reforms which has long been stalled in the parliament. Lawyers are not expected to be alone in making their bids forcefully in this period as the Italian public sector budgets shrink.

Amanda Knox’s position on the calunnia charge seems weak as she herself at other times said she was treated well, she cannot identify who she claims hit her, and she has no witnesses corroborating her story and up to a dozen denying it.

Her own lawyers filed no mistreatment complaint and very publicly in a media crowd said no hitting ever happened. Knox has already served a three year sentence for criminal slander against Patrick Lumumba.

Most trials for calunnia, a serious charge due to the personal damage inflicted, result in conviction.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/15/11 at 10:18 PM in The wider contextsItalian contextKnox-Mellas team

Comments

Hi Peter,

I really have difficulty reading your postings. Please, give me one reason why Rudy did not act alone? I do believe “Amanda knox” was hit during her interrogation! Not recorded among a dozen interrogators who said it did not happen, Hum! Even “Patrick Lumumba”, said he was mistreated. He did not get a slander charge, why not? How did the police know that there was a Blackman in Meredith’s room? Was it the Blackman’s hair in her bloody hand?

In my opinion, Patrick should get more money from the police! They are the ones who jumped the gun! Why would AK give his name unless it was pressed on her? Remember, she never gave a hand written confession in English, but two over a three hour period in perfect Italian, written on a typewriter. Makes one really wonder who is guilty for implicating Patrick?

We really must wait for the “Hellman Report” in December/ January. This case has had too many lies circulated.

The truth is with Rudy. Give him four years lesser time to tell the Truth. Secondly, AK & RS should hit him for an additional 12 years for slander and lying.  He should not have only gotten 16 years, but 30 years and more.

The only lie I see AK doing was that of the police did not hit her! Please, how would you prove this under Italian Law?

MK, PL, AK, and RS were all victims of the “Perugia Police” (and the DA). Meredith’s family paid the highest price with this injustice. 

Why, is the question?

Best regards,

Michael

Posted by Stuttgart on 11/16/11 at 12:21 AM | #

Michael - I agree.

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 12:59 AM | #

11/15/11
Yay! My copy of John Follain’s “Death in Perugia” arrived at p.o. box today, shipped from Book Desire 244 Madison Ave, New York. The weeping picture of Amanda on cover is so distressing I almost had to stuff it back in the padded manila envelope.

With calumnia trial delayed and the lawyers on strike, guess I’ll have plenty of time to read it.

Inside very first page, “John Follain was born in 1966. He studied at Oxford before joining Reuters….”

He has some very good color photos in book, a really pretty one of Meredith (isn’t she always!) smiling in profile with Amy Frost. My goodness Meredith looks like an Italian or Greek beauty queen with the whitest teeth. She’s caught in mid-laughter yet still dignified, a beautiful blend.

Posted by Hopeful on 11/16/11 at 01:21 AM | #

Michael,

The more interesting question is how could Guede have acted alone? Lay out your scenario.

Lumumba testified he was not mistreated, and he affirmed this in his most recent interviews. It seems like only when he talks to a pro-Knox “reporter” (like Katie Crouch) he is quoted as saying he was hit or beaten. Very strange.

We don’t have access to all AK and RS’s witness statements and surveillance recordings, but we know the police suspected from the beginning they were covering for someone. There is the police station recording that suggests AK and RS considered implicating “Shaky” before Lumumba’s name came up. Regardless, every court (including Hellmann) has agreed with the calunnia charge. Knox is not getting out of this one.

Posted by brmull on 11/16/11 at 01:21 AM | #

Hi Stuttgart,

If you want to be taken seriously on TJMK, I politely suggest that you get your facts straight before posting.

Diya Lumumba has repeatedly denied that he was mistreated by the police in the Italian media.

All the witnesses who were present when Amanda Knox was questioned, including her interpreter, testified under oath that she was treated well and wasn’t hit. The judges and jury at the first trial had to decide whether to believe the corroborative testimony of numerous upstanding witnesses or the word of a compulsive liar who has lied repeatedly. It would have been a very easy decision to make.

There was no hair from a black man in Meredith’s hand. The police did not know that there had been an African man in Meredith’s room. Amanda Knox told them that an African man had sexually assaulted and killed Meredith. How could she have possibly known this?

Amanda Knox voluntarily admitted that she was involved in Meredith’s murder in her handwritten note to the police on 6 November 2007. Please note that this confession was written in English. She testified that she had asked for a pen and paper to write it and nobody had suggested its content. After she was informed that Sollecito was no longer providing her with an alibi, she stated on at least four separate occasions that she was at the cottage when Meredith was killed. At the first trial, Sollecito refused to corroborate Knox’s alibi that she was at his apartment. Sollecito admitted in his witness statement that he had lied to the police and said Amanda Knox had asked him to lie for her. 

If you are going to claim there was a dastardly plot to frame Knox and Sollecito, please provide some actual evidence to support your opinion otherwise the posters on TJMK will think you are a hysterical conspiracy nut.

Posted by The Machine on 11/16/11 at 01:25 AM | #

...starting with me!

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 01:58 AM | #

It is irrelevant what AK said to police, there simply is no forensic record of her or RS being part of a grisly murder.  Further, luminol would have revealed cleaning activity, esp. with bleach.  No such activity was seen.

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 02:10 AM | #

Bill - So what. biological evidence is available in only 4.5% of cases that go to court. i.e. convictions are usually, by a mile and then some, not made on biological evidence.

As for you saying “It is irrelevant what AK said to police” - that is just absurd…and ultra absurd in light of that 4.5% figure. As for the rest of what you say…i await others’ responses.

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 02:34 AM | #

@Bill

it is not at all irrelevant what AK said to the police. I would recommend to read the article here on the CSI effect, it is not only about forensic evidence.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/the_casey_anthony_and_sollecito_knox_outcomes_spark_a_new_discussion/

Posted by Isa01 on 11/16/11 at 02:44 AM | #

@Bill

We’ve had several hundred years of convictions that were based upon what was said, and without certain forensic evidence such as DNA.  DNA is not necessarily necessary to convict.  It does, however tend to convince juries that a certain person was involved.

Posted by sherrel on 11/16/11 at 02:53 AM | #

With all the debates about evidence in this case, nothing stands out more to me than the email that Amanda Knox wrote of her own freewill to a broad list (25?) of friends and family on November 4, 2007 – 3 days following the brutal murder of her ‘good friend’ Meredith and 1 day before the infamous ‘police brutality’ during her interrogation. 

I have read Amanda’s email over and over again looking for some sign of fear, anger, sadness or even humility after the brutal murder of her friend or, if not a friend a roommate or acquaintance. Of course we all react differently, some might be silent some might need to talk but email is not talking and the detail offered so callously does not make sense. e.g. 3 girls are accounted for but their rooms are checked before Meredith’s…; why the big focus on the ‘shit’ and then the loss of ‘shit’ in the toilet? - scream your anger and your frustration, your fear of the unknown attacker, but minute details, no fear, no anger or sadness? What is that about?

I think Amanda’s statement to the police of cowering in the kitchen seems probable – however it started, however it escalated, in the end, Amanda was in the kitchen covering her ears (she even made mention in her email that when the body was discovered she was in the kitchen).  A night of drugs that got way out of control – later she held the cards saying she would ‘clean/cover’ it up thus having total control over RG and RS.

I’ve heard that it is important to listen to the first response of a person to know the truth. Even someone that is guilty will instinctively respond with the truth only changing the facts that incriminate them directly. There are 2 documents that Amanda wrote prior to the influence of her family and lawyers – the below email and, her statement in the police station. I don’t think there has been a detailed analysis of the contradictions of these early documents (they have no media spin, they are black and white in writing) to what was presented in court.

Below is the email written by Amanda Knox on November 4, 2007, (before she was arrested):

*******

This is an email for everyone, because id like to get it all out and
not have to repeat myself a hundred times like ive been having to do
at the police station. some of you already know some things, some of
you know nothing. what im about to say i cant say to journalists or
newspapers, and i require that of anone receiving this information as
well. this is m account of how i found my roommate murdered the
morning of friday, november 2nd.

The last time i saw meredith, 22, english, beautiful, funny, was when
i came home from spending the night at a friends house. It was the day
after halloween, thursday. I got home and she was still asleep, bu
after i had taken a shower and was fumbling around the kitchen she
emerged from her room with the blood of her costume (vampire) still
dripping down her chin. We talked for a while in the kitchen, how the
night went, what our plans were for the day. Nothing out of the
ordinary. then she went to take a shower and i began to start eating a
little while i waited for my friend (Raffaele-at whose house i stayed
over) to arrive at my house. He came right after i started eating and
he made himself some pasta. as we were eating together meredith came
out of the shower and grabbed some laundry or put some laundry in, one
or the other and returned into her room after saying hi to raffael.
after lunch i began to play guitar with raffael and meredith came out
of her room and went to the door. she said bye and left for the day.
it was the last time i saw her alive.

after a little while of playing guitar me and raffael went to his
house to watch movies and after to eat dinner and generally spend the
evening and night indoors. we didnt go out. the next morning i woke up
around 1030 and after grabbing my few things i left raffael’s
appartment and walked the five minute walk back to my house to once
again take a shower and grab a chane of clothes. i also needed to grab
a mop because after dinner raffael had spilled a lot of water on the
floor of his kitchen by accident and didnt have a mop to clean it up.
so i arrived home and the first abnormal thing i noticed was the door
was wide open. here’s the thingabout the door to our house: its
broken, in such a way that you have to use the keys to keep it closed.
if we dont have the door locked, it is really easy for the wond to
blow the door open, and so, my roommates and i always have the door
locked unless we are running really quickley to bring the garbage out
or to get something from the neighbors who live below us. (another
important piece of imformation: for those who dont know, i inhabit a
house of two stories, of which my three roommates and i share the
second story appartment. there are four italian guys of our age
between 22 and 26 who live below us. we are all wuite good friends and
we talk often. giacomo is especially welcome because he plays guitar
with me and laura, one of my roommates, and is, or was dating
meredith. the other three are marco, stefano, and ricardo.) anyway, so
the door was wide open. strange, yes, but not so strange that i really
thought anything about it. i assumed someone in the house was doing
exactly what i just said, taking out the trash or talking really

uickley to the neighbors downstairs. so i closed the door behind me
but i didnt lock it, assuming that the person who left the door open
would like to come back in. when i entered i called out if anyone was
there, but no one responded and i assumed that if anyone was there,
they were still asleep. lauras door was open which meant she wasnt
home, and filomenas door was also closed. my door was open like always
and meredith door was closed, which to me weant she was sleeping. i
undressed in my room and took a quick shower in one of the two
bathrooms in my house, the one that is right next to meredith and my
bedrooms (situated right next to one another). it was after i stepped
out of the shower and onto the mat that i noticed the blood in the
bathroom. it was on the mat i was using to dry my feet and there were
drops of blood in the sink. at first i thought the blood might have
come from my ears which i had pierced extrensively not too long ago,
but then immediately i know it wasnt mine becaus the stains on the mat
were too big for just droplets form my ear, and when i touched the
blood in the sink it was caked on already. there was also blood
smeered on the faucet. again, however, i thought it was strange,
because my roommates and i are very clean and we wouldnt leave blood
int he bathroom, but i assumed that perhaps meredith was having
menstral issues and hadnt cleaned up yet. ew, but nothing to worry
about.

i left the bathroom and got dressed in my room. after i got
dressed i went to the other bathroom in my house, the one that
filomena dn laura use, and used their hairdryer to obviously dry my
hair and it was after i was putting back the dryer that i noticed the
shit that was left in the toilet, something that definately no one in
out house would do. i started feeling a little uncomfortable and so i
grabbed the mop from out closet and lef the house, closing and locking
the door that no one had come back through while i was in the shower,
and i returned to raffael’s place. after we had used the mop to clean
up the kitchen i told raffael about what i had seen in the house over
breakfast. the strange blood in the bathroom, the door wide open, the
shit left in the toilet. he suggested i call one of my roommates, so i
called filomena. filomena had been at a party the night before with
her boyfriend marco (not the same marco who lives downstairs but we’ll
call him marco-f as in filomena and the other can be marco-n as in
neighbor).

she also told me that laura wasnt at home and hadnt been
because she was on business in rome. which meant the only one who had
spent the night at our house last night was meredith, and she was as
of yet unaccounted for. filomena seemed really worried, so i told her
id call meredith and then call her back. i called both of merediths
phones the english one first and last and the italian one between. the
first time i called the english phone is rang and then sounded as of
there was disturbance, but no one answered. i then calle the italian
phone and it just kept ringing, no answer. i called her english phone
again and this time an english voice told me her phone was out of
service. raffael and i gathered our things and went back to my house.
i unlocked the door and im going to tell this really slowly to get
everything right so just have patience with me. the living
room/kitchen was fine. looked perfectly normal. i was checking for
signs of our things missing, should there have been a burglar in our
house the night before. filomenas room was closed, but when i opned
the door her room and a mess and her window was open and completely
broken, but her computer was still sitting on her desk like it always
was and this confused me. convinced that we had been robbed i went to
lauras room and looked quickley in, but it was spottless, like it
hadnt even been touced. 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 werent. then i knocked on merediths
room.

at first i thought she was alseep so i knocked gently, but when she
didnt respond i knocked louder and louder until i was really banging
on her door and shouting her name. no response. panicing, i ran out
onto our terrace to see if maybe i could see over the ledge into her
room from the window, but i couldnt see in. bad angle. i then went
into the bathroom where i had dried my hair and looked really quickley
into the toilet. in my panic i thought i hadnt seen anything there,
which to me meant whoever was in my house had been there when i had
been there. as it turns out the police told me later that the toilet
was full and that the shit had just fallen to the bottom of the
toilet, so i didnt see it. i ran outside and down to our neighbors
door. the lights were out but i banged ont he door anyway. i wanted to
ask them if they had heard anything the night before, but no one was
home. i ran back into the house. in the living room raffael told me he
wanted to see if he could break down merediths door. he tried, and
cracked the door, but we couldnt open it. it was then that we decided
to call the cops. there are two types of cops in italy, carbanieri
(local, dealing with traffic and domestic calls) and the police
investigaters. he first called his sister for advice and then called
the carbanieri.

i then called filomna who said she would be on her way
home immediately. while we were waiting, two ununiformed police
investigaters came to our house. i showed them what i could and told
them what i knew. gave them ohone 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 houe out,
talked to the polie,a nd in a big they all opened merediths door.
i was in the kitchen stadning aside, having really done my part for
the situation. but when they opened merediths door and i heard
filomena scream “a foot! a foot!” in italian i immedaitely tried to
get to merediths room but raffael grabbed me and took me out of the
house. the police told everyone to get out and not long afterward the
carabinieri arrived and then soon afterward, more police
investigators. they took all of our informaton and asked us the same
questions over and over. at the time i had only what i was wearing and
my badg, which thankfully had my passport in it and my wallet. no
jacket though, and i was freezing.

after sticking around at the housr
for a bit, the police told us to go to the station to give testimony,
which i did. i was in a room for six hours straight after that without
seeing anyone else, answering questions in italian for the first hour
and then they brought in an interpreter and he helped my out with the
details that i didnt know the words for. they asked me of course about
the the morning, the last time i saw her, and because i was the
closest to her, questions about her habits and her relationships.
afterward, when they were taking my fingerprints, i met two of
merediths english friends, two girls she goes out with, including the
lat one who saw her alive that night she was murdered. they also had
their prints taken. after that, this was around 9 at night by this
time, i was taken into the waiting room where there was various other
people who i all knew from varous places who all knew meredith. her
friends from england, my roommates, even the owner of the pub she most
frequented.

after a while my neighbors were taken in too, having just
arived home from a weeklong vacation in their home town, which
eplained why they werent home when i banged on their door. later than
that another guy showed up and was taken in for questioning, a guy i
dont like but who both meredith and i knew from different occasions, a
morracan guy that i only know by his nickname amongst the girls
“shaky”. then i sat around in this waiting room wthout having the
chance to leave or eat anything besides vending maschine food (whcih
gave me a hell of a stomache ache) until 530 in the morning. during
this time i received calls from a lot of different people, family
mostly of course, and i also talked with the rest. especially to find
out what exactly was in merediths room whent hey opened it. apparently
her body was laying under a sheet, and with her foot sticking out and
there was a lot of blood. whoever had did this had slit her throat.
they told me to be back in at 11am. i went home to raffael’s place and
ate something substantial, and passed out.

in the morning raffael drove me bck to the police station but had to
leave me when they said they wantrd to take me back to the house for
quesioning. before i go on, id like to ssay that i was strictly told
not to speak about this, but im speaking with you people who are not
involved and who cant do anything bad except talk to journalists,
which i hope you wont do. i have to get this off my chest because its
pressing down on me and it helps to know that someone besides me knows
something, and that im not the one who knows the most out of everyone.
at the house they asked me very personal questions about meredith’s
life and also about the personalities of our neighbors. how well did i
know them? pretty well, we are friends. was meredith sexually active?
yeah, she borrowed a few of my condoms. does she like anal? wtf? i
dont know. does she use vaseline? for her lips? what kind of person is
stefano? nice guy, has a really pretty girlfriend. hmmm…very
interesting….weìd like to how you something, and tell us if this is
out of normal.

tehy took me into the nieghbors house. the had breaken the door open
to get in, but they told me to ingonore that. the rooms were all open.
giacomo and marco-n’s room was spotless which made since becaus the
guys had thoroughly cleaned the whole house before they left on
vacation. stefano’s room however, well, his bed was strpped of linens,
which was odd, and the comfoter he used was shoved up at the top of
his bed, with blood on it. i obviously told then that the blood was
definatley out of normal and also that he usually has his bed made.
they took note of it and ussred me out. when i left the house to go
back to the police station they told me to put my jacket over my head
and duck down below the window so the reporters wouldnt try to talk to
me. at the station i just had to repeat the answers that i had givne
at the house do they could type them up and after a good 5 and a half
hour day with the police again raffael picked me up and took me out
for some well-deserved pizza. i was starving. i then bought some
underwear because as it turns out i wont be able to leave italy for a
while as well as enter my house. i only had the clothes i was wearing
the day it bagan, so i bought some underwear and borrwed a pair of
pants from raffael.

Spoke with my remaining roommates that night (last night) and it was a
hurricane of emotions and stress but we needed it anyway. What we have
been discussing is bascially what to do next. We are trying to keep
our heads on straight. First things first though, my roommates both
work for lawyers, and they are going to try to send a request through
on monday to retrieve important documents of ours that are still in
the house. Secondly, we are going to talk to the agency that we used
to find our house and obviously request to move out. It kind of sucks
that we have to pay the next months rent, but the owner has protection
within the contract. After that, I guess I’ll go back to class on
monday, although im not sure what im going to do about people asking
me questions, because i really dont want to talk again about what
happened. Ive been talking an awful lot lately and im pretty tired of
it. After that, Its like im trying to remember what i was doing before
all this happened. I still need to figure out who i need to talk to
and what i need to do to continue studying in perugia, because its
what i want to do.

Anyway, thats the update, feeling okay, hope you all are well,
amanda

Posted by Patri on 11/16/11 at 03:54 AM | #

It is about the forensics if the forensics rule out someone’s participation.  There is no way that anyone other than Rudy Guede could have done this crime based on the forensics alone.  Otherwise there would have been a DNA presence of others at the scene, esp. in the room.  How could forensics so complete and pointing to one, be missing for one or more others?  The CSI-effect is a point well taken, but not in this case.  This case is like seeing one set of footprints along a 5 mile beach, but still claiming there were three people walking there… and you are correct, DNA is not needed to convict - but this is a case where a complete forensic profile is there for one person, and missing for everyone else.

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 04:13 AM | #

Patri,

For me, the most interesting thing about Knox’s email home has always been the detail before and after the crime, but just two vague sentences about what happened in between: “after a little while of playing guitar me and raffael went to his house to watch movies and after to eat dinner and generally spend the evening and night indoors. we didnt go out.” It’s a pseudoalibi which is mostly the truth and yet almost totally irrelevant to establishing her activities on the night of November 1.

Posted by brmull on 11/16/11 at 04:44 AM | #

Bill,

You could say the same thing about the other parts of the house where there is DNA of Knox and not for Guede. Shouldn’t Guede’s DNA being in the bathroom if he washed up in there? Why is Knox’s DNA mixed with Meredith’s in a luminol spot in Romanelli’s room? To say the latter is because she lived in the house strains credulity.

Also remember that forensics = biological + physical evidence. Knox’s lamp at the foot of Meredith’s bed is suspicious, as is some of the other evidence in the room. Look at this picture of Meredith’s purse:

Why would Guede rifle through Meredith’s purse, leaving his DNA in the process, yet obviously use a sock to pick it up? Someone else moved the purse in order to pull out the duvet, then put the purse back in its place.

Posted by brmull on 11/16/11 at 04:55 AM | #

@Bill

The argument of “no DNA = Innocent” is a fallacy.  It is quite possible for a person to have entered a room, even interacted with other person(s)/object(s) in that room and still not leave any DNA. 

Also, you need to understand that DNA collection is somewhat of a science in itself.  The technicians look for the most likely spots or areas where they feel that they might find DNA.  It could be blood traces; it could be a visible scrape of some sort; it could be a stain or a spot.  Then a sample is taken.  The technicians don’t scour every inch of the walls and floors with Q-Tips (brand name) for samples.  So there could have been many areas where DNA could have been found but wasn’t.  In fact, I believe they avoided much of Meredith’s blood in that room as they felt it would consistently test for only her DNA, and it would be a waste of time.

It’s my understanding (or recollection) that over 400 samples were taken, and 100 or 200 of those samples tested negative for any DNA at all.  So to a certain extent, collecting DNA is somewhat of a hit or miss exercise.

So lack of forensics does not prove innocence.  You have to take in all the evidence, which includes the acts or actions of the people involved as well as their statements.  And in this case, Amanda’s actions and statement just don’t pass the “smell test”.

Posted by sherrel on 11/16/11 at 06:15 AM | #

@patri

thank you for posting the mail, I had not read it yet before. You are so right, there is no single word that describes her feelings, as if it was hardly touching her.

Her last sentence really shocked me:

” After that, Its like im trying to remember what i was doing before all this happened. I still need to figure out who i need to talk to and what i need to do to continue studying in perugia, because its what i want to do.

Obviously she could not get to her former life fast enough.

Posted by Isa01 on 11/16/11 at 06:31 AM | #

Hi Stuttgart (Michael) and Bill. I would only add to the Machine’s and BRMull’s highly informed responses that the lawyer James Raper and others here (viz sherrel above) have observed that Meredith’s room was not fully tested all over for DNA traces, and that traces collected of Rudy there were more limited than many suppose.

Amanda actually turned on a dime in the impromptu witness interview when she was told Sollecito had just sold her down the river, and no roughing up by interrogators was required for her to desperately clutch at the first straw - Patrick’s name, when she was shown it on her mobile phone.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/claims_amanda_knoxs_confessions_resemble_false_confessions_not_backed/

Thereafter Amanda didnt let Patrick off the hook for several terrifying weeks though she knew all along her claim was false - and nor did her mother, who also knew it was false.

A full scenario showing why and how Rudy did the crime all alone would be a first for sure; even the defenses never argued that. (They brought in several witnesses actually saying that he didn’t.) There was not the slightest trace of him in Filomena’s room or on the windowsill or directly outside.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/explaining_the_massei_report_a_visual_guide_to_the_staged_break-in_via/

And Judges Micheli and Massei both decided that AK alone had reason to so obviously re-arrange the crime scene and so far Judge Hellman has not spoken out otherwise.

http://www.truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/understanding_micheli_4_the_staged_scene_who_returned_to_move_meredith/

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/16/11 at 06:34 AM | #

Let me assume for the sake of argument that there was only one attacker.  Can any one explain why there is no struggle or defensive wounds on the body or any sign an attempt of escape?  Can some one please explain the DNA of Amanda on the bathroom (mixed blood) and in the footprints?  How come RS DNA landed on the bra clasp?  How the lamp went into the other room?  How come Amanda knew the details of the murder (she exclaimed that MK bled to death) well before the details were out?  How the blood of Meredith landed on a knife on RS home? 

Please do not say silly things like “she was living there” and so her DNA was all over the place.  No, her DNA was not all over the place.  Do not just say “contamination” with out reasonable reason and explanation.  There are footprints and shoeprints and clear evidence of a cleanup.  Please take the totality of all the evidences and not “pick and choose” evidences.

Last and not the least, if she were really innocent, why did she engage 2 million dollar PR campaign (barely three days after)?  You have faith in one justice and not on the other?  You can always question judgements but be reasonable.

The “experts” have said in public one thing that they themselves have disputed in their peer reviewed publications.  I find this very strange.

The AK story “baby brother” is vaguely similar (violence with a knife) and her actions are hardly credible.  I understand she never testified under oath.  How many men she had sex with in the two weeks (around the period under consideration) and she complains of a “sexual suggestion” by some one in the prison?  She should have spent the time in an US jail.

Posted by chami on 11/16/11 at 06:58 AM | #

Please correct me if I have this wrong.  A small sample of DNA in Filomena’s room of both Meredith and Amanda is more important than no forensic presence of anyone other than Guede in Meredith’s room.  The is “evidence of a clean-up” but no evidence of bleach which luminol would have detected.  It was also a clean-up which removed two of the three forensic signatures, leaving one intact.  How do you do that?  Did someone have a portable electron microscope and samples of Guedes to make sure you left his?  RS DNA on the bre-clasp is low-copy and more than likely not his… at least Hellmann seems to have concluded that. 

Yes it is possible to enter and leave a room without leaving a DNA trace, but it is impossible to engage in a horrific murder like the one on Nov 1, and not leave a forensic trace, as RG did.  And sherrel, are you really saying that the technicians did not do their jobs?  Anyway, for me the lack of a clean-up is key.  Even Massei in his report (from this webpage) says it was either a sloppy clean, or a very detailed and targeted clean.  The thing that Massei misses, and I bleieve Hellmann got right, was that there was no clean.  Massei posits a clean, mainly to try to explain the lack of bloody footprints from MK’s room to the bathroom.  Again, Luminol would have detected the use of bleach in a clean that comprehensive.  I am not sure what AK’s strange behaviour has to do with anything if neither she nor RS were at the crime scene.

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 07:24 AM | #

I think I may be the only person in both the guilter and innocenter groups who thinks the Hellmann panel came to exactly the right decision.  They concluded that the interference with the crime scene was acquitable on the grounds that the crime did not happen, and that RS and AK were acquited of the murder because they did not participate in it at all, but that AK is covictable on the calunnia charge.  I may be the only person outside of the Hellmann panel who believes those 5 things!

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 07:30 AM | #

Patri, I too often return to that email. The words “that was the last time I saw her alive”, should have read “that was the last time I saw her” unless Amanda had seen her dead. She did not see the body after it was discovered as she was in another room. This points towards her having seen Meredith dead before that ie when she was killed.

“I have to get this off my chest because its pressing down on me and it helps to know that someone besides me knows something, and that im not the one who knows the most out of everyone.” This is most telling. She has something she wants to get off her chest, to unburden herself. She knows more about it than anyone else.

She signs off breezily! That’s the update - see ya!

Posted by pensky on 11/16/11 at 08:42 AM | #

Bill,

They didn’t use luminol in Meredith’s room. They did not check for DNA everywhere—just the places where a thief and sexual attacker would have been expected to leave DNA. Absence of proof does not mean proof of absence.

Sollecito’s DNA on the bra clasp was not low copy number. Even the independent experts agreed his DNA was there. No one has been able to explain how the clasp got contaminated such that Sollecito’s DNA was on it.

I don’t think there was a bleach clean-up at the cottage. I think there was some kind of clean-up and the staged break-in.

If there’s anything in this case that’s indisputable it’s that the break-in was staged. The defense’s attempts to refute this were completely unbelievable. And if Hellmann says it wasn’t staged then in my view he must be incompetent or corrupt.

The reason I think Knox and Sollecito didn’t leave more bloody footprints is that they stabbed Meredith and then ran. I believe the part of Guede’s German statement where he said he stayed behind momentarily. He said he leaned on his left knee and looked at Meredith’s injuries. That could explain why he left only left footprints in blood.

Later Knox and Sollecito returned to the scene, probably took off their shoes and socks, and put down towels so they wouldn’t leave more prints.

Posted by brmull on 11/16/11 at 09:11 AM | #

Hi Bill,

The police and prosecutors didn’t claim that bleach was used to clean the cottage. Please try to stick to the facts rather than the misinformation you have read on other websites. The fact that you used the term “guilter” strongly suggests that you are relying on a certain Bruce Fischer/Fisher “in New York” for your information. His website is absolutely riddled with factual errors and he doesn’t live in New York either.

Posted by The Machine on 11/16/11 at 09:40 AM | #

Hi brmull - re Hellman’s comments on the staged break in “that it didn’t happen” my first thoughts on hearing that statement on October 3rd match yours exactly. How anyone can say that break-in was not staged is beyond my comprehension.

Thanks Patri for the email, I too have read it many times and can’t believe the conversational tone. It’s gossipy and sensationalist, compare and contrast with the reactions of Sophie and Amy [Mez’s English friends] as detailed in Follain’s excellent book.

@Stuttgart - I challenge you to read Follain’s book, it’s not the definitive but it is certainly the most comprehensive to date. Note in particular pages 343 and 344, it is a summary of Mignini’s speech where he articulates the sequence of events leading to Meredith’s death. It is the only version which covers all elements, even explaining how the kitchen knife came to be in the house. It is covered in depth in the Massei report as the ‘most likely’ scenario. With regard to your comment above I prefer to think the best of people,

I’m guessing that you are new to the case as opposed to the FOA. For a comprehensive overview of the case you should access the ‘vital must reads’ of the case located on this page. All of the information you request in your comment are located there.  All the best!!

“They killed her because she was all that they are not” - Arline Kercher October 3rd 2011

Posted by Melanie on 11/16/11 at 11:28 AM | #

One thing is to say they can’t prove her being guilty, and other is, there’s not evidence. I think they proved their guilt, but if someone told me that doesn’t agree with me I can accept that. We all know lawyers are good putting doubt in our mind. But I can’t accept people just say there’s not evidence, a lot. The circumstantial evidence is strong and there’s plenty of holes in AK and RS accounts the morning after the murder of beautiful Meredith, starting with cellphones activities.

And Michael, believe me, I am not on the bus of people who think AK is a psycho as Casey A, but remember she used (sorry if I using an incorrect verb) marijuana, mixed with a possible feud, we all know how bad drugs effects can be. But I give you some credits in mention MK family with respect, some AK supporters unfortunately do not do that. It seems we have to explain again and again that Amanda implicated Patrick after being told Raffaele changed his version. Of course they pushed her to talk (which investigator in any country doesn’t when interrogating) but after all her own lawyer told media she wasn’t hit.

Posted by lulupr on 11/16/11 at 01:43 PM | #

“lauras door was open which meant she wasnt
home, and filomenas door was also closed. my door was open like always
and meredith door was closed, which to me weant she was sleeping.”

Strange sequence in this sentence….why say a door was ‘also closed’ before stating the first one? Looks like she wanted to say Meredith’s door was closed but wanted to distance herself from saying it…...just my thought…but the whole email is so badly written anyway!

Posted by Stan on 11/16/11 at 01:48 PM | #

Stan - statement analysts would have a field day with it. Hope Eyes or Lies and http://seamusoriley.blogspot.com give it a go. They have already dissected some statements by Knox, and painted a very unpretty picture…

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 02:06 PM | #

Ooops, I meant to add this link [see below]. It’s not about statement analysis but it is about how the psychopath’s brain appears to be different to the norm. Would Sollecito and Knox agree to a scan? Ha ha daft question.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15386740

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 02:10 PM | #

OK Bill and others who think there little shining angel is so innocent. Examine paragraph #7 of her email. Why was she so frightened about Meredith when as far as she was concerned Meredith may have just stepped out. But No! Knox banged on her door and screamed out her name. How come she did that? The door was locked. So What! A simple locked door does not elicit panic unless you know something is wrong on the other side. Knox’s statement smells like a week old herring out in the sun. To be honest I am sick to death of these so called defenders of these murderers.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 11/16/11 at 02:50 PM | #

Hi nopassingby. Statement analysis? Sure. Seamus ORiley (Peter Hyatt) did revealingly take apart that email.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/scientific_statement_analysis_analysis_of_amanda_knoxs_email_to_seatt/

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/16/11 at 04:00 PM | #

One reason not mentioned above why the appeal verdict was such a widely disbelieved surprise flows from the very different nature of Italian “juries” versus the common-law juries of the US and UK.

Italian trial juries (more correctly described as panels of judges and lay judges) are expected to immerse themselves very deeply in the facts of the case to the extent that the CSI effect and the kind of disputed outcome we saw in the US for Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson would be well nigh impossible.

Their sentencing reports are required to cover all of the evidence and not weight or isolate out a small part and make a snap judgment or punish the police based on that.

Having said this, it is also the case that Italian appeal juries (the reason for the existence of which is to many of us not at all clear) have the reputation for often being perverse, and one of our Italian lawyers posting here said they do that to justify their existence and prove their superior level of education. A systemic imbalance and endemic nuisance.

The Supreme Court of Cassation in turn tends to correct for this imbalance in siding more with the original trial court and will often make the appeal court revisit the case. Cassation may even demand a new appeal trial.

All this would be ominous enough for RS and AK as it stands. They are already far from home free. But in this case it gets worse.

(1) Judge Hellman himself has muddied the waters in his garbled statement of his appeal verdict and in his peculiar press interview a day later; his sentencing report may tie up all loose ends, but we seriously doubt it.

(2) Cassation is already on record as deciding that three perps must have attacked Meredith - this when there is not one scrap of evidence that anyone other than the three who were tried were at the scene of the crime.

Oh and this was Judge Hellman’s first DNA case. It certainly won’t be Cassation’s.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/16/11 at 04:22 PM | #

Peter, thanks for the link to the rip apart ofd the email. Very revealing.

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 05:09 PM | #

Thank you for the corrections.  The bra-clasp contamination being a key one.  Still, my view is that a clean-up could not have happened, because the existence of a clean-up would itself have been detected and was not.  It is one thing to clean-up a messy crime scene to the precision required in this case - ie. leaving one whole forensic signature intact, while removing almost completely two others.  It is quite another to mask the very existence of a comprehensive clean itself.  All else follows from that.  Massei himself struggles with that point in his attempt to join fots that (as I see it) cannot be joined.  Like all I await Hellmann’s motivations report.  I’m sure posting will pick up after that!

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 05:40 PM | #

@Bill

Your analysis of the forensics in Merediths room must also be applied to Filomenas room and the illegal entrance thereof.

November 1st was a cold wet night. There was no footprints or trampled grass underneath the window. No glass from a window that had a inner shutter against it. Nothing to suggest that the wall had been scaled. No scrapings, and a nail that would have provided support, untouched.

There are no fingerprints on the window ledge which had to be reached. No fingerprints on the window latches nor in the room itself. There were no footprints inside the room despite the wettness outside. No DNA of Guede.

There is absolutely no evdence that Guede was in that room and more damning, no evidence that anyone was outside the window.

Strangely, Guede used a toilet that was ‘hidden’ This tends to suggest that he was directed by someone to use that bathroom.

Posted by starsdad on 11/16/11 at 06:05 PM | #

@Grahame Rhodes - couldn’t agree more re being sick of the “defenders”. Avoiding Amazon now due to trolls.

Peter, All, thanks again for some marvellous clarifications and investigations. like many, I hope that 2012 sees justice and truth prevailing.

Keep up the good work all!

Posted by TruthWillOut on 11/16/11 at 06:57 PM | #

Talking of fake break-ins, as someone was I think [am currently in info overload, so bear with me] this looks useful: http://maundygregory.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/knoxsollecito-how-to-spot-a-fake-burglary/

Posted by nopassingby on 11/16/11 at 07:36 PM | #

Actually, stardad, I defer to my own personal experience on the issue of the break-in and the ability of RG to get in FR’s window in the state you describe.  It has to do with the changing of our windows in our three storey house, and I wondered all those same things you mention - how were they going to scale my walls with window frames, etc.  My experience was one of wonder seeing these young guys go up and down my walls without scaffolding…. I could go on, but the “absence of evidence” as you put it in relation to the break in, is no mystery to me.  For me, then, and thi smay only be me, I am still decided because of the lack of forensics for two alleged participants, when it is conceded by all that a complete forensic signature of RG is at the crime (with the exception of intermediatary footprints connecting the bathroom bathmat to MK’s room.  That was Massei’s mystery, making him believe in a clean-up) despite the fact there was neither evidence of a clean - save for the hypothesized missing prints - and more importantly no evidence that a clean-up itself had been masked.  My friend is a homocide technician who I’m using to bounce these issues off of, and he’s the one who says that with what was printed in the Massei report, there could not have been more than one assailant.  That’s just his opinion, of course, but he knows the lay of the land on this.  I will, however, run by him the condition of FR’s room and the outside.  My guess is he’ll still say, “the lack of a forensic signature for two people, combined with the almost complete presence of one pretty much seals this case.” or words to the effect.  What do I know other than what people like him tell me?

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 07:38 PM | #

Bill and Michael,

Just a couple of things.

One on the break-in, just to add to Starsdad’s excellent analysis. The other thing to remember is that though a break-in via the high window may have been technically possible, from a burglar’s POV it’s the worst option. You can be seen from the road, and you’d have to scramble up and down and back up again to break the window and get in. Far, far simpler and less likely to get caught is to do what actually happened on two subsequent and genuine break-ins, which is to go through one of the ground floor windows.

And as regards the clean-up, ever wondered how that floating footprint got on the bathmat? Even if you greatly stretch credulity (and the footprint) and say it was Guede’s where are the ones leading up up to it and away from it? Why is it a single bare footprint? Guede’s shoeprints from after the murder (shoeprints, not footprints) lead straight out of the door of the cottage.

Posted by flwriter on 11/16/11 at 07:42 PM | #

Bill said: “And sherrel, are you really saying that the technicians did not do their jobs?”

No, not at all.  Since I wasn’t there I couldn’t really pass judgment on how good or how poorly they did their jobs.  I mean, I believe that it was an absolutely daunting task.  It would be impossible to cover every square inch of flooring and walls, as well as every inch of the many other objects within the room; such as furniture, jewelry, nicknacks, etc.  The technicians took samples from the most likely locations.

Just put yourself in their place.  Think of how you would have done the sample collection.  You would have had several boxes of Q-Tips (small â…› to ¼ inch cotton swabs on a stick); where would you go to collect samples?  How many samples would you collect?  How much area would you cover?  My recollection is that they collected some 400 samples.  Was that enough?  I don’t know.  It seems like it might have been enough to me; but then, maybe it wasn’t.

My point is that because it was such a daunting task, it is quite possible (this is the lawyer approach – “In your opinion, isn’t it possible that xxx?”) that Amanda’s and Raffaele’s DNA was there, but simply wasn’t in one of the samples collected.  This goes back to the premise that lack of DNA does not mean innocent.  It just means that there was no DNA found to corroborate the other evidence.

Posted by sherrel on 11/16/11 at 07:48 PM | #

Our posts crossed Bill. But the points stand. I don’t doubt that someone young and agile could scale a wall. But when there are several far easier and safer options? Without leaving a trace of yourself outside, on a cold wet night, on the gorund below or on the wall? Or on the inside of the room you supposedly entered by and ransacked?

Posted by flwriter on 11/16/11 at 07:50 PM | #

I for one was very pro Amanda for a long time.  Hardly followed the first trial because I thought surely she would get off.  So after her conviction is when I truly did my digging, and in a biased way at that.  I was just trying to understand the logic of how she ended up convicted.  And yet it was logic that actually hit me over the head with the facts.

And perhaps because I had no emotional attachment to this stranger, but more of a curiosity from a legal educational standpoint, that I was able to see what IS and accept that yes, Amanda is a liar.  So many of the facts were not reported in the media, no wonder the FOA get their facts wrong ALL THE TIME.  ON youtube the other day I couldn’t believe it.  The facts were so skewed by pro Knox people, I have to wonder if many of them are in fact real people and not just PR shills.  They are that outrageous.  These aren’t debatable facts either, I’m talking the hard stuff, never mind all the conjecture. 

I think this case will go down infamously into the bowels of history because of the success of the PR campaign and “shills”.  I really do.

I hope Hellman’s report is what I think it will be, because the truth will prevail in the presence of obvious lies and logical fallacies.  Lumumba’s point of view and lawsuit will also keep the truth alive as well.  He called her an actress and YES, even in his recent Daily Mail stories he says the police didn’t mistreat him.  Again, he was released when a witness came forward, not when Amanda recanted.  That conviction does stand and the courts are all in agreement she is guilty of that.

Posted by JenE on 11/16/11 at 09:10 PM | #

Thanks all for the civil discussion here.  One last kick at the cat, and I will be off.  As per the burglar using FR’s second storey window, I also defer to the homocide technician’s experience on this, as well as police who say that experienced burglars simply go in the first available window.  If they are at all dexterous, they will even first break an obvious window stay still for minute to see if a light goes on or something like that, and then whoosh they’re through what to an ordinary person looks like a difficult climb.  The possiblity of getting caught is as simple as taking a peek to make sure no one is watching, then they’re in, even through locked windows.  Once again the polie emphasize that what looks difficult to an ordinary person who is using “common sense” is not the way a burglar looks at it.  Even if there is a “safer” entry point, to an experienced person, that’s often a 50-50 assessment at the time, when it lokos to someone like me as a far, far safer option, not “from a burglar’s POV it’s the worst option”.  That’s the point made again and again by police in advising people about which windows to secure in one’s own homes.  If a burglar sees a relatively quick way in, they simply won’t search for another, presumably safer route.  That wastes time, and can tip off a random passerby that the house is being cased.  Far better to pick one, and whoosh, they’re in.  One again, thanks for the civil discussion here.  I’ve enjoyed it.

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 09:15 PM | #

Excellent posts by the machine, patri, and brmull, btw.  I could comment extensively but you’ve said it all pretty much.  That extensive email Amanda wrote her family and friends is such a smoking gun, and again I say her family are in for a world of discomfort as over the months and years they have to let it sink in what a BSer their daughter is and that she was involved with that girls grisly death.  They will coddle her and make excuses for her just like the endless media garble (“Is Amanda Knox Autistic?”).  She is ever the victim, a wolf in sheeps clothing. 

I’d like to state BTW, having been a huge marijuana smoker in the past, that there is no way on earth it was the driving force behind a murder.  Maybe a hazing could take place but you would stil have to be a creep beyond the drugs.  It’s not like alchohol in which a person can black out and become violent.  Only laced marijuana could cause a murder, IMHO. A drug like this would only make a socicopath more paranoid, and likely there was alchohol or other drugs involved here too. 

And Bill, for you it seems that it will always comes back to the forensics instead of the writing on the wall.  Frankly, I don’t agree that all the forensic evidence was ruled out.  I think the defense failed in their overall challenge of the DNA evidence.  But even with that thrown out I don’t see how they weren’t convicted again, and I await Cassation and the Hellman report because I think I’m going to be proven right.

Judge Hellman’s words of doubt and his statement that perhaps the judgement was wrong is going to haunt him.  I think his report will be as full of holes as swiss cheese.

Posted by JenE on 11/16/11 at 09:28 PM | #

Before you go Bill, how about answering some of our points - we answered yours.

And can’t you see you’re undermining your own argument with your last post? Did you actually read what I and others wrote? The obvious entry point is via a ground floor window. That’s what real burglars did - on two separate occasions.
As you say, ‘whoosh they’re in.”

Agsai, you say it yourself: “If a burglar sees a relatively quick way in, they simply won’t search forn another.” The upstairs window was by far the most difficult, most slow and most dangerous. Guede did not break in there (or anywhere else) It was staged. Right from the word go, before suspicion even fell on Knox, it was obvious to onlookers it was staged.

Why not follow your own logic?

Posted by flwriter on 11/16/11 at 10:22 PM | #

Actually flywriter, that’s not my logic.  I’ve just a few minutes ago posed all these questions to my guy who’s a homocide technician, and the good news is that he recommends that no one here consider a life of crime in break and entering.  His actual words, “They’re over-thinking this, and that’s what people who are good at breaking and entering do not do.”  Yes, I actually read the posts - truthfully I have no time to respond to them all - the points about the lack of a clean-up, the real break in are all that need deciding on.  With all due respect - and I expected a lot worse treatment here, so for that I give you thanks - to people in the business, this is a fairly simple story.  RG broke in, without the intent to kill, but found himself in a situation that escalated into that.  Tragically for MK and her whole family.  My guy used the word “compelling” a lot, and for him the forensic signature is the compelling issue.  So, who am I to believe?  Really?  I mean, I am not qualified at all to asses (really) the postings here, or even assess what the guy here is telling me.  It is a matter of who I am going to believe.  He made reference to the JonBenet Ramsay case, and why the Ramsay house was forensically meaningless, except for material in the immediate vicinity or on the body.  Remember that one?  For the first agonising hours it was thought to be a kidnapping, and only when they found it was a murder did the secure it as a murder-scene?  Not really anyone’s fault, but it meant that forensics, except in the immediate vicinity of the crime, were to be used with caution.  In this case, the only room which was secure was MK’s room, and the forensics there are clear.  So for me, someone which no real knowledge of these things, who am I going to believe?  Apologies if this sounds argumentative, I truly do not mean it that way.  If there’s a particular point you think I’ve missed or avoided, please give it to me one at a time!  However, I’m really no expert on any of this.  So be forewarned.  I just need it explained to me SLOWLY how a complete forensic signature for one killer could be so obvious, and further there be no obvious sign of any others, plus no sign of a clean, plus no sign that a clean-up itself had been somehow masked.  That last one was the clincher for my friend, he’s never heard of a clean-up that was masked so well that forensics people couldn’t detect it.  A clean is often easier to detect than the evidence itself.  So, I’ll tell you what, I’ll give that one to you to solve to my guy’s satisfaction, and you give me one of my unanswered issued.  Just give it to me SLOWLY!

Posted by Bill Williams on 11/16/11 at 10:53 PM | #

http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/mondo/articoli/1028128/per-amanda-knox-lamore-puo-aspettare-ho-bisogno-di-aria-e-di-gente.shtml

FOR AMANDA LOVE CAN WAIT

“I need room? and people”

Citing OGGI

Amanda is not living with James Terrano, but just dating him. She is living in the International District of Seattle with a friend. ( amica, girlfriend)  She takes auto defense courses and is starting university in Jan. As for her life behind bars book, there is time.

” I need air, the ocean, people, not to be writing and reading, that is all I did for 4 years”

Posted by Miriam on 11/16/11 at 11:01 PM | #

Hi Bill. Your technician should be told that we have many lawyers and other professionals who are also in “the business” posting and reading who deal with crime scene evidence and perps’ behavior on a daily basis.

Your technician seems too taken with the “forensic signature” for Guede in the room. Commenters responded above that full tests on the room were not conducted, and also that Guede’s own traces were minimal. Please come to grips with the autopsy and other evidence that caused the Supreme Court to rule that three people were indeed there. 

Also please explain to the technician that the full crime scene is defined as the whole of the house and, as commenters also responded above, there was plenty of evidence of forensic signatures pointing to AK and RS elsewhere. In fact, this wasn’t even disputed at the appeal. Here are two more key posts which could give your technician a jolt as they are loaded with actual facts.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/powerpoints_17_why_the_totality_of_evidence_suggests_knox_and_sollecit/

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/beyond_massei_on_the_seemingly_insuperable_mixed_blood_evidence/

Wherever footprints showed up only under luminol, they suggested a cleanup and wherever footprints were missing, as at least one was on the way to the bathmat, they suggested a cleanup. There was evidence that blood was wiped off the face of the door as some was left on the hidden edge. 

Commenters also responded that the defence didnt even try to prove that Guede was alone; or that he entered via Filomena’s window. That window is by far the most difficult of six ways to break into the house, and it is extremely well lit from above. “Simple” here = back balcony.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/16/11 at 11:11 PM | #

Bill, you keep coming back to “no evidence of a cleanup”.  Actually, I think there is evidence.  Amanda’s and Meredith’s mixed DNA in a blood sample on a light switch in the bathroom.  The mixed DNA samples in other areas as well.  (Am I recalling the facts correctly here?)

Posted by sherrel on 11/16/11 at 11:15 PM | #

Bill, I’m not interested in the DNA right now, or the Ramsey case, I haven’t the time. There are lots of posts on the DNA and all the other issues on this site - have a read of them. You might want to start with SomeAlibi’s summing up about reaching the truth in the case.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/an_experienced_trial_lawyer_recommends_how_to_zero_in_on_the_truth/

Just finally, on the break-in, read again what your homicide technician told you. Burglars take the obvious route. He is right.

The upstairs window is not the obvious route. It’s the hardest, slowest, most risky route. The obvious route, viewable at a glance, and the easiest, quickest route - is via the downstairs windows to the balcony. There they are, right in front of you. That’s what two later burglars each took. They didn’t overthink it, did they?

And again, why is there no evidence of Guede in the break-in room or on the ground outside, on a wet night? Why is the nail halfway up undisturbed, despite Guede (in your scenario) having to climb up - twice?

Your guy is right, burglars don’t overthink it. And tired, panicky people trying to stage a burglary don’t overthink it either. Otherwise Knox and Sollecito wouldn’t have made basic mistakes like picking such an unlikely entry point, or leaving glass on top of disturbed belongings, or saying nothing had been stolen (how could they possibly know?).

All they knew was that they had to divert suspicion from Knox, so they made it look like there was an intruder, but without really thinking it through. Just like your technician pointed out, serious thinking didn’t come into it. That’s why it was obvious straightaway to the postal police and the roommate that it was staged.

Posted by flwriter on 11/16/11 at 11:30 PM | #

Why on earth would a burgler take little to nothing?  Meredith’s cell phones were taken, some cash and cards, isn’t that weird that nothing else of value was taken. 

A burgler, assumed to be Guede, climbs like an olympian up to that second story window and breaks in.  Ends up raping AND killing Meredith, but takes nothing but her cell phones and some cash and credit cards (which never got used) after all that trouble? 

Meanwhile he has time to take a dump in the bathroom.  Next time you go number 2 log how long it takes.  And why, if no one was there, would a burgler go into a less obvious bathroom? 

Plenty of evidence of a clean up and of more than one perpetrator.  The issue of whether Guede acted alone is kind of a dead horse by this point.

Posted by JenE on 11/17/11 at 02:00 AM | #

@Hopeful: Thank you for your description of Follain’s book, especially your delightful description (as always) of the portrait of Meredith. You made me want to get a hold of this book even more! Thanks.

Posted by Earthling on 11/17/11 at 03:54 AM | #

I am actually glad that Bill posted some opposing viewpoints on this part of the website as it allowed for those of you more aware of the details of the evidence to summarize it again and highlight the pertinent facts for the rest of us.  So in fact I thank Bill for posting his questions and different take on the situation because he represents those people who really do believe she and Raphael are innocent.

One question I have on the photo linked with the purse.  I was not aware before of the implications of the sock and that was quite telling.  However one awful aspect of that scene was the large smear of blood on the wall, and yet not much other blood around it.  I hate to go into this but what would explain this?  If it was shed in the fight, why would it be alone and so up high?  If one of the assaulters did it, why and why would it be left there?  I thought she was assumed to be assaulted on the floor and was found further from the bed.  And she did not have any large cut on her hands right, and neither did the other three?  Or was she actually against the wall at that point?  I hate to discuss it in this clinical way but it was really quite shocking to see it like that.

Posted by believing on 11/17/11 at 03:56 AM | #

believing,

I should have shown a picture of the purse without the bloody hand print on the wall. I apologize. But in answer to your question the smear was never matched to anybody. Most people seem to assume that it’s Guede’s right hand, which he wiped on the wall before reaching into the purse. He basically admitted the print was his when he claimed he was trying to write the letters “RF” on the wall. As you may remember the DNA testing didn’t come out, probably due specimen handling or something in the paint that interfered with the test.

Posted by brmull on 11/17/11 at 08:22 AM | #

Bill,

There *was* a clean-up in Meredith’s room. Even IJP agrees on that. You can see the streaks on the floor in multiple places.

You asked for one of the following:
(1) How a “complete forensic signature” for one killer could be so obvious, without obvious sign of any others, or
(2) How there could be no sign of a clean, or
(3) How there could be no sign that a clean-up itself had been somehow masked.

If you give your guy bad info of course he’s going to give you wrong answers in return. There was sign of a clean.

Posted by brmull on 11/17/11 at 08:45 AM | #

Question… When did Meredith discover the theft of her rent money?

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 11/17/11 at 05:19 PM | #

Hi brmull

“He basically admitted the print was his when he claimed he was trying to write the letters “RF” on the wall.”  Did Guede really say this in a statement?  If so, do you have the source?

Posted by Lola on 11/17/11 at 05:41 PM | #

I’m nearly finished Follain’s book and one of the most poignant statements I’ve read came from a guy called Christ Mbette - he’s the guy who rented Meredith’s room after her. He said his friends were pulling his leg telling him that Meredith’s ghost would haunt him, his response was that he is not afraid,even if he saw her ghost he knows she wouldn’t harm him “given the type of person she was”. Death in Perugia [John Follain p337]

Posted by Melanie on 11/17/11 at 06:42 PM | #

Excellent discussion here- about 57-1 scoreline to the prosecution here.

On the issue of the knife print, Judge Massei, while excellent in his report findings, believes this to not even be a knife print and doesn’t debate it further .

I believe the print to show some clear markings of a particular shape such as a knife and think the issue of compatibility of one of the knives with this stain should have been more of an issue in the first trial.

If this bed sheet stain is not from one of the knives that what could it be?

Any thoughts!

Posted by rb on 11/17/11 at 07:43 PM | #

Melanie - nice touch.

Posted by nopassingby on 11/17/11 at 08:38 PM | #

@Bill

I list some things I reseached about burglaries which your technician friend may like to comment on.

1) The burglar would almost certainly have knocked at the door with a pretentious excuse to see if anyone was at the house.
2) They would not go ‘tooled up’ with a knife. Very serious offence, armed robbery
3) You take a large screwdriver. Handy for using as a ‘jemmy’ for locked drawers, wardrobes, boxes etc. It can be used as a weapon if need be.
Choose your entrance. Once you have accessed a room by a broken window.
4) You block the incoming door.
5) At night you would draw the curtains so that you could turn on the light. (This means that the windows and inner shutters in Filomenas room should be CLOSED and not open as the photographic evidence show).
6) Look for a sportsbag, rucksack or hold-all. Failing that a suitcase, bin bags, boxes, carrier bags.
7) ‘Jemmy’ locked furniture,
8) Bag all immediate valuable items
9) Ransack rest of room
10) Take bag(s) and leave room. Go straight to the front door. Check that you can open it from the inside for your exit. Bolt or latch it. You do not want anyone coming in. Leave the bags at the front door for your exit.
11) Survey the rest of the property.

None of these points seem to have applied to this burglary.

Posted by starsdad on 11/17/11 at 09:53 PM | #

Trying to do my best with my poor english.Peter knows that as I prefer to ask him questions directly from email.
My question tonight is : Why and maybe for the first time (as it seems is a big liar) the deposition from RG cannot be true?
Since the beginning he never acused RS & AK, as I know this came later… 1) he saw a shadow similar to Ak & a guy same height speaking Italian same as RS.(Why not?)2) Why he don t flush the toilet? Cannot be true that the scream from Meredith alarmed him ? (Why not?)If really he was part of this masacre (crime) how he want to make poo sudendly? (for me it is quiet strange in such stress moment) 3) He doesn t left Italy immediatly.(Why if he is the killer?)4) He left the crime scene without hiding anything (shoeprints, fingerprints, shit…)he is maybe pueril but not so. 5)Why after the freedom of Rs & AK he still saying nothing more…because maybe he have nothing more to say…he was there for sure but he doesn t know what REALLY happened (why not?)
I read the Micheli report (I m half spanish & french and understand very well Italian as it is Latin lenguage) and i m not really convinced that RG is REAL part of the crime, but he left his identity on the scene crime.
I believe RS & Ak knows much more than him on this masacre.

Posted by Beevor on 11/17/11 at 10:01 PM | #

Lola,

Sorry the letters were “AF” not “RF”. Guede’s German diary is the best source (translated by PMF), although he seems to have told the same story to German police (caveat emptor: translated by Dempsey).

Guede’s German diary, see page 3 (6 in PDF) and 21 (24 in PDF): http://perugiamurderfile.org/download/file.php?id=25

Statement to German police: http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/04/28/rudy-guede-amanda-knox-was-not-there/

Posted by brmull on 11/17/11 at 10:52 PM | #

@Beevor

Rudy Guede has already openly named Sollecito & Knox as killers, saying in support of that: I saw what I saw & I know what I know.

He is however trapped in his own stance of pretending that he came to Meredity on invitation, whence his DNA on her sexual parts.  He is too ashamed before his (distant) family to admit to having come in as a rapist, yet it is just such an admission that would bolster his accusation.

Besides the psychological trap, the imprisonment trap.  What guarantee that his sentence would then be shortened (in fairness) to correspond with time that RS & AK have served?

Which leaves me hoping that (as Peter says above) the prosecution case for appeal should reach the supreme court by Valentine’s Day.

Posted by Ernest Werner on 11/17/11 at 10:55 PM | #

rb,

I think you’re right about the knife print, although I haven’t made up my mind 100%. The print looks like a knife to me, and seems to match the approximately 1.5 to 2cm blade that Dr. Lalli said made at least one of the wounds. In fact it looks like a jack-knife, because the most prominent part of the stain corresponds to the the most prominent part of a jack-knife, the hinge.

If you accept, as I do, that the duvet was on the bed during the attack and theft from the purse, then the knife was not laid there by Guede, as many from the pro-Knox camp have imagined.

My guess is it was wiped on the sheet next to the purse on purpose to draw investigators’ attention to theft as a motive for the crime. Alternatively it may have been laid or wiped there for no good reason. These are not rocket scientists we’re dealing with. They did many things that in hindsight make little sense.

Posted by brmull on 11/17/11 at 11:11 PM | #

@Beevor Your points are things I have thought about.  I’m still to this day not sure I’m entirely convinced Rudy raped or killed Meredith.  Part of my problem with Rudy though is that he fled.  That he didn’t name Knox and Sollicito from the beginning is also highly suspicious, yet it might have been a strategie that he abandoned once he realized he was going to take the fall. 

QUESTION: Was Guede’s sperm found anywhere in or on Meredith.  This is a point I’m not clear on.  FOAs constantly say it was.  Yet I haven’t seen any official source for that.  Perhaps someone can elighten me.  For if there was no sperm found, I’m much less likely to believe a rape scenario involving him.  I could believe Meredith made out with Rudy that night.  I don’t believe she would have had sex with him that soon though. 

More likely he’s telling some truth, and Amanda or Rafaelle stabbed Meredith while Rudy was on the toilet.  Wouldn’t surprise me one bit. Yet something tells me AManda might be the one who let Rudy IN that night in the first place.

All I do know is that Rudy hasn’t changed his story as much or been caught in nearly as many lies as little miss angel face Knox. 

I also think she and Guede knew eachother and there was more to it that night. 

Also, where did I read that there was an overheard conversation between AK and RS before they were arrested and they were talking about what people think was Rudy, saying, “He doesn’t have many friends”...etc.  Wonder what that was all about.  Seems like they planned to frame him after the fact.  Which would make sense of the unflushed toilet.  BOTTOM LINE, I think it’s more than fishy that AManda showered and yet DID NOT FLUSH that toilet.  Why else other than to make sure Rudy’s poo was available to the police. 

Also, if there was none of Guede’s sperm, it convinces me that he probably didn’t murder Meredith directly.  The reason I say that is he would have taken MORE STUFF.  Rape just doesn’t seem like the main motive for him, but if there was sperm perhaps I could be convinced it was since he did NOT make off like a bandit with the Robbery.  A burgler could have just punched Meredith and run. 

And yes it bothers me he went to a disco after her death.  Doesn’t speak well for his character even if he is innocent.  Most likely he was trying to figure out what to do, and he knew Knox and Sollicito would likely pin it all on him.  Yet if her were the murderer his lack of cleanup and flushing the poo makes ZERO sense.

Posted by JenE on 11/17/11 at 11:54 PM | #

Thanks for the update Pete.

I don’t suppose this conviction of criminal slander will carry the same punishment as her last?

Posted by Spencer on 11/18/11 at 02:08 AM | #

JenE and Beevor, I have had many of the same conflicting thoughts about Rudy Guede’s involvement.

I’m still puzzled about the smear on the wall, as it is so large.  I don’t see how they didn’t find any DNA in it, or explain how it came to be there in the report.  The drops in the bathroom I could explain by a botched clean-up, which was thorough but not quite thorough enough.  The footprint on the mat is harder to explain.  Either I would have expected the mat to be destroyed (burned, thrown away, put in the trash) if it were RS’s, and they must have known it was RSs because AK saw it, or else for it to have other footprints around it, if it were RG’s.  There must have been mixed prints around it on the floor which were mopped up, which would explain it being alone, and AK hoped it was RG’s footprint, or imagined that everyone would think so?  Even though it was a bare foot rather than one with shoes on?

I get the impression that the investigators just did not have enough budget to do this investigation more thoroughly.  It seems like there must have been other people who saw either RG, if he acted alone which seems very improbable, or AK plus RS plus RG, on that night, coming or going.  Still, those who did see them or hear things were not believed.  The strange thing about the woman hearing a horrible scream that disturbed her and then doing NOTHING - not calling the police - still really bothers me and must haunt MK’s parents.  Maybe she could have been saved if that idiot just didn’t cower in her room but had done something.

I just saw a show on Dr. Phil (famous TV show psychologist) who was interviewing the prosecutor from the Casey Anthony case, and said how could it go so wrong for you, and the prosecutor could not believe that the jury did not fully take into account the duct tape found on the little girl’s face as well as other evidence, but kept saying “show me the DNA” to prove that she murdered her child.  And yet the ridiculous stories the defense attorney told were believed instead, i.e. that the little girl drowned and then she and her father covered up the crime by hiding her in the woods. They did not want to believe the most likely scenario which linked all the evidence together, including her telling everyone that the little girl was with her nanny for a month, and going out partying after the date of her disappearance.  She was also just ‘dealing with stress in her own way’.  What a load of malarky.

Posted by believing on 11/18/11 at 04:32 AM | #

I just read Rudy’s translated 29 page letter that he wrote in prison.  Wow!  I had never seen that before, nor heard it talked about much.  29 pages of many many details.  I have to say, it appears unlikely to me that he made all of those details up.  I wonder how many of the friends he mentions were interviewed about his statements, about his character?  I know some people say he lied a lot, at least his stepfather, but maybe he was just disgusted with him.  Many teenagers lie.  People say he changed his story about Amanda not being in the house. However he didn’t, really.  When you read it, he stated that when he arrived at the house to meet Meredith to talk, and as he hoped, to make out, AK was not there.  I do think it is possible that MK wanted to meet him to talk, perhaps to flirt, perhaps to make out.  It’s possible that she did see him at a club the night before without her friends knowing.  It only takes a few minutes to flirt in a bar.  The other English girls were drinking, maybe laughing, maybe not paying attention every minute.  People who say ‘MK wasn’t the type” - it could have been quite innocent, or just a flirtation on her part.  That doesn’t make her a slut.  She was only 20 after all.  It’s normal to flirt, to want to meet people of all types, to trust people.  She’s only ‘dated’ the guy downstairs recently and it was not serious yet.  RG had hung out with all of them at least once already, and he was someone who played basketball with the boys downstairs many times, not a drug addict from the homeless shelter as many people try to say about him.  He also states that he didn’t sleep on the toilet downstairs that time, but on the sofa, which I’m inclined to believe.  Who sleeps on a toilet, even if you are drunk?  At worst you sleep on the floor, right? 

When he says the doorbell rang loudly twice, what I think is that the two of them, AK and RS together, came back drunk and rang it loudly to scare Meredith, or just because they were high and to laugh, or to have her come to the door and scare her with the knife? They were at loose ends that night.  AK wasn’t exactly known for being subtle or considerate at the time with her loud singing and love of attention. 

Different things he says seem to ring true, the way he describes meeting the two girls from time to time, at the club and downstairs, smoking with them, not dealing drugs, the way Amanda arrived in the room with a big smile, the way the boys fantasized about having sex with her, the amount she smoked pot (this matches with what the boy at the Univ of Washington said about her smoking pot all the time and going wild).  The way he says AK and he did talk a couple of times together, and yet she denied in court ever seeing him except in court.  That was a big lie on her part.  At least he admits and details the conversations that they had, and they ring true to me.  His listening to three of his favorite songs on the IPOD is possible while on the toilet, which would be about 10 minutes, and I know it is very hard to hear anything else with the ear phones on and the music loud.  The way he describes coming rushing out because he heard a loud scream, the somewhat shorter Italian man there (RS), the razor sharp knife of RS cutting him, and as we know, it also slashed MK.  It could have happened quickly.  RS could have easily got rid of that knife afterwards in a ravine. 

I do accuse RG of cowardice, of manslaughter for leaving her there bleeding.  No excuse but I think he was definitely in shock, that’s pretty obvious from his story, as well as he was a coward and he admits it, and he says how he wants to die for being such a coward and not trying harder to save her.  He was definitely trying to save himself instead. I could be wrong, but it was an eye-opener to read his 29 pages and thank you for the translation whoever did that. 

The only other explanation is that the whole thing is a lie and they should have been able to prove it, that he never spoke to those persons on that night.  I think they did interview at least one of the friends he mentions who denied seeing him.  But what about several others that he mentions?  Did they interview the girls who were his friends?  Why did the Italian basketball boys downstairs act like they didn’t know him when they often played on the court nearby?  I feel like the judge was too hasty in refusing to believe anything RG said during his appeal.  Who has Rudy really had to help him or defend him during this process?  He certainly didn’t have the USA PR machine behind him.  I think he deserves to be in jail for not saving Meredith, but I don’t think he came there to rape her and kill her.  I might be wrong, but I have never thought so.  I think MK saying “AF AF” was her saying that Raphael did it.  Maybe AK egged him on, and was actually in the kitchen at the time cowering at the time which is why RG didn’t see her at first, and then she ran out, as she sort of confessed to doing in her statement to police, but with Patrick being the killer. It would also tie in with the Albanian guy who said a crazy guy (RS?) with a knife ran at him in the street afterwards.  I have to read that part again.  I believe he was discredited afterwards for being a drug dealer. 

Rudy also mentions seeing a drug dealer being in the driveway, someone well known.  Could he have sold something to the other two, or possibly all three, which they took on the basketball court, shortly before the crime (shortly before ringing the doorbell loudly and coming in and engaging in a fight about the missing money??)  Maybe it was a drug which acts quickly and wears off quickly, but can make you violent.  I’m sure that exists.  You dont’ have to be a drug addict to try something once or twice either.  I don’t know everything about drugs but I was at college parties with perfectly nice people usually boys who became violent or strange after drinking too much or taking something as well as drinking and didn’t even know what they were doing.

Posted by believing on 11/18/11 at 05:40 AM | #

@Melanie

One of the most pertinent statements occurs on p. 411 of John Follains book.
This statement is in regard to the ‘sloppy’ collection of forensics. 
He quotes Stefanoni ‘If there was contamination,how come our forensic team’s DNA was found only on some bloody handkerchiefs outside the cottage, when we took a total of 460 samples in all, including at the cottage and at Raffaels flat? I didn’t leave my DNA anywhere!’

Why was this argument not put more vigorously before the court? Did Hellman block it as he did to other things in the trial?

On p412 John reports that Comodi relates to the ‘ruling of the Cosenza court…’ regarding the evidence of Vecciotti, without explanation.
Does anyone know what this ruling was?

Posted by starsdad on 11/18/11 at 12:19 PM | #

I agree with previous posters that Amanda’s post-murder e-mail is very strange and incriminating; as has been pointed out, what is strangest of all is what is *not* there, and the overall structure of the e-mail.

Amanda talks in great detail about what she did on the morning the body was found, including her emotional reactions to the strange things she encountered. However, she describes absolutely *no* emotional reaction to the actual discovery of the body, that is, the moment that she (like everybody else) supposedly first learned that Meredith was dead. Nor does she in any way express her feelings about the death of her flatmate later on. After the discovery, she only describes the facts of what she did, with the exception of her emotional reactions to having to eat food from a vending machine and having to pay the month’s rent, but absolutely nothing with regard to Meredith’s death.

I think that in an innocent person’s description, the discovery would be the emotional “climax” and would therefore take up a significant part of the e-mail. Even someone who had not truly been sad about the death might still use the opportunity to get some sympathy for the death of their flatmate. But Amanda’s e-mail focuses much more on the events leading up to the discovery. I almost get the feeling that she wrote this e-mail to convince herself and get her story straight. That’s probably why she remarks at some point that she will write slowly so that she gets everything right.

Another thing that occured to me is that it is kind of interesting how the truth hides in the lies. It seems as if the liar, when coming up with a story, is always bound by knowing the truth. The lies are often only twists of the truth which are constructed to be less incriminating for the liar, yet they often end up being somewhat odd and highly implausible. For example, Amanda accused a black man of having raped Meredith while she covered her ears, which was true except that she gave the wrong name, and it is unlikely that someone would cover their ears while somebody is being murdered in the next room. Rudy stated that he had consensual sex with Meredith - probably lying about the “consensual” part. Raffaele stated that the only reason why Meredith’s DNA was on his knife was that he accidentally cut her while they were cooking together. Note that in his explanation *he cut her*. He takes what is probably the truth and puts it in a different context yet it is very difficult to imagine the situation he describes. It would have sounded plausible to me if he had said that Amanda borrowed the knife for cooking with her flatmates, and that Meredith had accidentally cut herself. But I have never experienced a situation in which somebody accidentally cut somebody else while prepraring food…

To be honest, I have often found myself wondering whether Raffaele was actually there during the murder. Sometimes I think that maybe he just helped Amanda with the clean up and covered up for her afterwards. But his statement makes me think otherwise, that he must not only have been there but also actively injured Meredith. What do you think?

Two more things that struck me as potentially telling are from Follain’s excellent book:

1. (After Amanda’s father told her that the police were looking for ‘the fourth man’, Rudy)
‘I know, I know… I mean… I’ll have met him, but it’s pretty strange that… him just there, because I never invited him to the house before,’ Amanda said. (p. 190)

Isn’t that somehow suggesting that she did invite him that night? Rather than saying ‘It’s strange that he was there because Meredith had never invited him before’, or something like that?

2. (Two weeks after the first verdict, when Amanda is talking to Edda about Rudy) ’ I hope that one day he’ll say the truth at last and stop dragging me into this horrible thing. I’ve never pointed a finger at him, I’ve never accused him.” (p. 370)

How would she be in the position to point a finger at him, if she wasn’t there? It seems to me like disappointment about the fact that Rudy didn’t stick to some sort of implicit deal not to accuse each other, because they knew they were all guilty.

There are so many other things, like Raffaele worrying in his prison diary about Rudy “inventing things” after having been caught, etc.

Posted by Mara on 11/18/11 at 05:21 PM | #

I have a question for all the posters and lurkers out there.

Could you write a few lines (or a lot, which will be moi) about what drew you to this case? I’ve written about how some criminal cases establish themselves in the public consciousness. Some like Casey Anthony’s, are a mile wide and an inch deep, and forgotten when the next big one comes along. I believe this one will fascinate us for a long time to come.

I promise not to write a book about it It’s really just to start a conversation with all of you. Your reasons might be personal, or you’re interested in the psychology, or you know a crime victim. No prizes either, so think of it as a writing assignment.

Why do people care so much about this case? I hope they’ll write their stories, because I think we all can learn a little bit more about ourselves, and, I’m interested
in what you have to say.

I’ll start with my own story.

What drew me to this case

I’m an inveterate writer, having written on various chat forums for the last twelve years or so. Most of my writing there was political and concerned with social justice as opposed to my main interest of spiritual writing. Finally, after three years and 20,000 comments on Huffington Post I got tired of endless debate that seemed like a substitute for action. I’d returned from a trip to Bulgaria and decided to quit. I wrote a blog, Bye Bye Huffington Post, and then, got sucked into the Murder of Meredith Kercher.

What I noticed was that there were two, well defined camps of opinion. One side, that Rudy Guede, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were all guilty of the crime of murder, and the other, that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito had been railroaded by a crazy prosecutor and the crime had been committed by one person, Rudy Guede.

Now, I’m a long time reader of crime fiction, starting with the Ellery Queen mysteries (that pegs me as quite old) From the legal perspective, I read Perry Mason novels before there was TV. Movies, and I loved Hitchcock. I was 7 years old when I watched “Rear Window”. Chills, man.

What drew me to this case was the debate on Huffington Post. People seemed so sure of their views. This was when Amanda Knox had been found guilty. It seemed like her supporters were deranged. Calls to invade Italy, that she was ‘not the type to commit murder’, attacks on the victim’s family, oh dear.

First, I wanted to know which side I chose. I hope you’ll also share what convinced you. For me, it was very simple. She’d accused an innocent man. Her story kept changing. Her boyfriend refused to corroborate her alibi. There was a clearly staged break in; a window no self respecting burglar would have climbed through. Her blood mixed with Meredith’s, Raffaele’s DNA on Meredith’s bra, his bloody footprint on the bathmat, Amanda’s DNA on the knife, witnesses who placed them at the scene, cell phone and computer activity, and. most tellingly of all, her strange behaviour before and after the crime was discovered convinced me the two were also guilty. Rudy Guede, their accomplice, first denied their involvement, then when he lost his appeal and no longer had anything to gain by lying, named them as the killers.

In contrast, the mental gymnastics of her defenders to try and refute every point really mirrored that of Amanda’s: the excuses a child makes to avoid punishment. The fingerprints of a PR agency determined effort to absolve her of guilt. The antics of her and Raffaele’s parents, who seemed to be in denial. The abusing of a whole country, Italy. American hypermedia using the same florid style they use to sell wars.

But that was what my brain told me. The emotions were deeper. I knew she was guilty. And unlike most people nowdays, I trust my gut even more than my brain. I almost always go with my first impression, which serves me well. I still examine that impression for mistakes, but confess, this case got me from the beginning.

Meredith Kercher was a Capricorn, like me. But then, so was Rudy Guede. Rafaele Sollecito was an Aries, and, Amanda Knox was a Cancer, with the same birthday as OJ Simpson, July 09. The similarities between that case and this was interesting. The day of the murder, November 01, 2007, had many astrological significators which showed the power to capture the public imagination. My blog articles, What Might Have Been, The Criminal Mind, and The Psycho-Astrological Perspective on the Relationship of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were a reflection of my own perspective.

On a deeper, more visceral level, Meredith Kercher looked like my daughter. I could identify what the Kerchers must be going through. That was not what convinced me though. I read the reasoning of the Massei court’s guilty verdict. The Micheli court had already made that very clear, and the Supreme Court ruling on Rudy Guede also filled out the gaps in the story. I did not want to rely only on emotion, but, wanted an intellectual reasoning behind that. Yet, ironically, it was my feeling, once again, that convinced me the appeals court would acquit the two defendants. I didn’t want to say that too openly, though, but there really were too many signs to indicate there was a political element to the whole trial, and wrongful influence of the verdict at the Hellmann court.

What keeps us coming back to this story? I think it is because the story has not ended. Like all good stories, we want to know how it turns out. There is an old Italy which allowed the two accused to walk free. Now that a new Italy is here with a change of government, hopefully justice will be done.

I know I will be here till the final ruling comes down, to see how the story ends.

Posted by Ergon on 11/18/11 at 08:05 PM | #

Excellent work believing!

Now I want to read that 29 page letter.  I too don’t think it’s “slutty” if Meredith had him over for a talk and ended up making out with him.  Actually, I think Rudy when he’s groom is not a bad looking man at all.  And I have a feeling he could be suave when trying to seduce a woman.

I do however think Amanda was more hands on in this crime or she would have send the real murderer up the river.  She could have claimed to be a scared accomplice.  I think she had a knife and used it.  And I think they were all drunk to some extent. 

Yes Amanda’s lack of emotion about the murder and her way of focusing on details like the unflushed toilet is telling.  Yet American media has spun that to say that she is “autistic” or mentally unstable and was unable to process the emotions.  Had she not told so many endless lies and all the physical evidence as well I might be able to believe that. 

I also am not sure I believe Rudy wasn’t somehow complicit, I think if he wasn’t there was still more to his interaction with them that night.  It’s possible Amanda told him “if you come forward we’ll finger you” or something.  I think there was some deal.  Raf worrying about Rudy “inventing things” implies so much to me.  I have also seen how close they lived to eachother, it would be impossible for them not to have had encounters, at least passing on the street.  There was a familiarity there between all three of them and I feel it’s a key element.  I think Rudy fled because they told him they would finger him unless he got out.  AK and RS were sure they could easily convince the police of some random burgler, and if it came back to Guede later on, no one would believe him if he fingered them anyway.  They knew the bulk of the DNA, the poop, and the direct physical evidence on Meredith would nail Rudy.  They also knew there were people out there stupid enough to dismiss the faked break in and the broken window wasn’t at all well thought out because of this over confidence.

So yeah, I think somehow Rudy innocently or not so innocently got caught up in the middle of this, but I don’t feel strongly that he’s the stabber.  I really don’t.  Yet I think he was just as interested if not more so in getting into AManda’s pants as he was Merediths and therein lies the element that I think is where Rudy has some guilt - he was invited by Amanda that night most likely.  And how he ened up with Meredith might have been by force or not, but if not could AManda have gotten jealous?  It’s all just weird but that video of CCTV and what might be Amanda coming home right before Meredith, well isn’t there a video or Guede or did he come in from another angle?

I hate to state it but I am a bit disappointed in the police work here, and I don’t fault them becuase this is a little town of Perugia, and like any quaint place they aren’t prepared.  I think the DNA evidence was processed properly, etc, but I do think there are questions and tidbits that a more experienced investigative team would have paid attention to.  I think a seasoned team could have easily convicted Knox and RS with a much more compelling forensic picture.

Posted by JenE on 11/18/11 at 08:20 PM | #

Ergon, I was drawn to this case mainly because I thought Amanda was innocent, just from reading the tid bits of news stories here and there, and then she was convicted which made me do a double take.  And when I started looking into all of it what compelled me to go deeper was in fact the derangement of her supporters and their utter defiance in the face of logic.  It disturbed me.  Also, the fact that AManda, when you look past her mask, is one of the most obvious female sociopaths I’ve ever encountered, and yet continues to fool so many people.  Plus the PR campaign…and I’ve come to realize a lot of the deranged supportive posters aren’t just “concerned citizens” like myself.  No.  They are hired or close to the KNox family. 

The sick way these people cannot acknowledge for one second that yes, Amanda is a perp.  She was convicted for what she did to Lumumba but they will still say lines like, “the police are at fault for Lumumba”.  They seem to think Amanda the eternal victim here and yes, they love to forget or deminish Meredith in any way they can.

Posted by JenE on 11/18/11 at 08:33 PM | #

Can’t recall: did RS ever complain of police roughing HIM up? I mean beyond removing his shoes and subjecting his tender, privileged soles to the cold stone floors.

Reading Follain (arrived yesterday). Again, the mention of “blonde hairs” stuck to the blood on M’s hand.

Posted by mimi on 11/19/11 at 12:36 AM | #

mimi - i think you’ll find that RS has never complained of police roughing him up.

Posted by nopassingby on 11/19/11 at 02:36 AM | #

People seem to think AK was the one to do the final blow to MK, but what about her being part of the initial fight and attack and tormenting, due to the missing money and maybe some angry words exchanged initially?  Maybe first she and RS barged into the kitchen drunk and high, and then she began to hit or to threaten MK after she yelled at her about the money, and then it escalated when RS Mr. Boyfriend stepped in to ‘defend’ his cherished love mate. 

With his knife collection and violent porn fantasies, maybe he then had a strange inclination to act out a scene in one of his Manga comics or films.  The quiet calm ones can often be the ones who are more violent or weird.  Then perhaps AK retreated in shock to the kitchen after the last blow, and tried to block the whole thing out of her mind.  It seems to have been what she tried to do, with all that hitting of her head later on.  Meanwhile RG emerged from the toilet, had a brief fight with RS, then AK plus RS fled out the door leaving RG to be paralyzed with fear and horror and to make a weak attempt to staunch the bleeding. 

This seems to make more sense to me than an attempted rape and then murder, especially given AK’s cold and unemotional reaction to the murder.  It was as if it didn’t happen, and the behavior at the police station that day/night and her later email was particularly strange, as some people pointed out, with the total lack of feeling towards MK’s death.  I don’t see her as autistic at all, having some family members with it, and having experience studying this syndrome and being pretty familiar with the characteristics. 

Someone autistic would have been horrified and overwhelmed by what happened at the cottage, even if unable to comprehend other people’s emotions or feelings very well.  He or she would totally freak out.  As well they are generally very honest and blunt.  Generally people with autism like routine and do not like chaotic loud situations like parties, and would not be into flirting constantly with different men in a bar. Someone with ADHD might more likely be into partying and impulsive risky behavior, but that still would not explain the lack of emotional reaction to this horrible event involving one’s roommate who lived right in the next room.

I still have problems with any of these attack scenarios.  I know they found MKs hoodie and the police were handling it in one video clip. It was worn during the attack as it is covered in blood, sad to say.  How is it possible that there was an attack and yet no DNA left on this hoodie from any of the three?

Posted by believing on 11/19/11 at 05:07 AM | #

One more point on Mr. Rudy Guede.  I did see in his 29 pages of details that he mentioned working like a slave in that restaurant for only 70 euros per week, and therefore he did not have a well-paying job as was mentioned by some people as a reason he would not have been a burglar or taken money from MK.  Nobody can live in Western Europe on 70 euros per week and then he lost that job anyway. I think he was pretty hard up for money although he really doesn’t mention that at all in his 29 pages.

From his diary: “in Pavia I worked in a bar, actually was being paid under the table, where whores were circulating, but I worked in that bar to make ends meet. I actually worked from morning through the night for 70 euro/week, and there is much to say about this as well. And at the same time I was trying to play with Edimes, that is a team from Pavia in A2 series. There I met many nice guys, great and strong. But I had to leave Pavia because the bar owner fled, leaving me with nothing, and I went back to my aunt in Lecco. Therefore don’t finger me as a dope-head and a maniac.”

Posted by believing on 11/19/11 at 05:19 AM | #

@starsdad I’ve just finished Follain’s book, I need to read it again but I’ll wait a few weeks. I can’t believe I’m writing this but Hellman’s court was corrupt. I only posted the other day that I didn’t believe that there could have been corruption there. What swung me was Edda’s upbeat response to questions from reporters on a day when the Prosecution had slated knox in court…I’m so hurt for Mez and her family.

Posted by Melanie on 11/19/11 at 08:46 PM | #

This is a strange case of Jessica Davies.  There are some parallels.  She said she was influenced by Meredith’s murder.  I hadn’t known about it before.  The big difference is that she called the police herself, so there is no mystery.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/12/quentin-davies-niece-jailed-for-murder

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1242296/Jessica-Davies—I-monster-What-Defence-Ministers-niece-told-police-slashing-lovers-throat.html

Posted by believing on 11/20/11 at 06:55 AM | #

@Ergon

I saw it in the newspapers just days after the crime. I was struck by the callous attitude of AK and her photos.  I cannot read or speak italian but I felt that she knows a lot and hiding a lot.  I expected her to be released as she is young, white, female and AMERICAN!

When she is under trial (recent appeals case), I read through most of the documents available online and I have now got interested as I see that many scientific points are wrongly argued.  For example, bleach is a generic name, and all bleach will not react with luminol.  Phenolphthalein is an ordinary indicator that can show where lots of detergent has been used to clean up a surface (it is not a test for blood).  I have decent idea of the DNA testing methods and protocols.  Another misconception is that DNA gets transferred to any surface just by touch (a vigorous rubbing is needed).  So I posted a few comments here and there.  Also I understand that the totality of the evidences count rather than any single indicator.  She is also having a serious psychological problem and she needs professional attention (I am surprised that she was not examined in the jail on this aspect).

I have not yet read Follain’s book but I have ordered it out of curiosity.  I have read the Massei report and the Michelli report (the google translation is a strain on the brain).  I have missed many details but I am most bugged with the experts’ statements on the DNA evidence.  I have a feeling that money can do a lot.

Amanda may be innocent, but she has not yet come clean on her role.

Posted by chami on 11/20/11 at 05:04 PM | #

You know, the one piece of factual sleuthing I keep going back to, is that the body was moved. The blood pooling in a certain spot, the way the blood dried - Machine, I know you could be more articulate with what I’m trying to say.  Rudy left, Rudy had an alibi after the fact. 

It’s very, very sad that some one can commit a brutal murder and walk away.  It’s very, very sad, that someone can commit a brutal murder and it not bother them.  I wish it were not so. 

When the story first broke, I thought, no way.  No way this American girl would do something so nasty.  But as time passed, as facts emerged, as people lied,- the truth came into focus.  I don’t blame Italy for not wanting to deal with it any longer.  If you can discard your trash, why not?

Posted by mylady007 on 11/20/11 at 06:23 PM | #

Guede comes from a poor background and he is used to hard life and is quite insensitive to other person’s pain and sufferings.  He was interested in the girl but not to the extent of developing any compassion or feeling.  When he was adopted, he did not develop intellectually and his feelings for the affluence actually worsened. That is be beginning of his career of petty theft. He became somewhat hostile to the “other class”.  To him killing a person, to whom he has no emotional bond, is just like killing an animal, say a pig or a chicken. He feels no remorse.  It is just an accident, in his mind, that he happened to be there and he has no sense of any kind of guilt and bad feeling.  We all read in the newspapers everyday some murder and we all feel in a vaguely similar way.  When we witness a murder, we feel more strongly but because of his background in poverty, he is dull in his senses.

On the other hand, Amanda does not have this luxury.  The murder is haunting her (that is the reason she is learning self-defence) and she is technically scared. She cannot say “Meredith” and never looked at the picture of the murder scene during the court presentations.  She is afraid that her well rehearsed presentation will develop some cracks and she will be unable to recover.  if she does not get proper therapy, she will have to live this double life.

The Italian is halfway between the two; he knows that a crime has been committed and he is partly responsible and he wants to get away using any means whatsoever.  But I feel that his sadness is genuine.

Posted by chami on 11/20/11 at 07:24 PM | #

Melanie,
That’s very upsetting news - though not surprising. I feel sick from the injustice of it all.

Posted by Spencer on 11/20/11 at 11:05 PM | #

JenE,

Do you have any study supporting your theory that drugs alone won’t drive you to commit a murder other than your experience? Remember that quality of drugs varies. In the past year we (in my country) had saw several outrageous murders committed by youngsters under drugs influence, there’s a specific one in which two boys beheaded a neighbor. One of the assassins is getting crazy and has tried committing suicide because he can’t understand how he did that to his friend.  Authorities made a press conference (including health professionals) alerting people that many drugs are being manufactured with high concentrations of their respective “raw material”. This results in loose your mind and thinks how cool is playing with the life of others.

I do not have problem accepting that maybe she is in fact a sociopath, but you also should accept there’s a possibility that if she wasn’t under the influence of drugs the ending would have been different. Just because, we have evidence of their guilt but not of their motive; we do not have a psychological test neither.  They did it, period, why? A lot of possibilities would arise. If I was the prosecutor I would have argued that she met several characteristics of a sociopath: promiscuous, liar, charming and narcissist.  But nobody (of my knowledge) never brought those points to the table, I guess you have to evaluate her in order to use that type of speculation.

Posted by lulupr on 11/21/11 at 01:32 AM | #

JenE,

Guede’s sperm wasn’t found anywhere in or on Meredith, though some early media reports said otherwise. In his skype chat he claimed it was “oral sex”. The problem with Rudy having a “date” with Meredith is it doesn’t explain how Knox and Sollecito got involved, as they surely were. The most likely scenario in my opinion is that Guede had been eating at the kebab shop just off Piazza Grimana when he ran into Knox and Sollecito, who knew that Meredith was home alone and decided to play some sort of prank.

The recorded conversation between AK and RS before they were arrested and they were talking about what people think was talking about the Moroccan guy “Shaky” that had tried some dirty dancing with Meredith. To those of us who are convinced AK and RS were involved, it does seem like they considered framing him.

Amanda’s story about the unflushed toilet is totally unconvincing. How did she know it wasn’t one of her roommates friends? It makes no sense that she would run to Sollecito’s to report a poo. It also makes no sense that a poo could “sink” like she claimed because the poo and the toilet paper were both stuck to the side of the bowl. The whole story stinks.

I agree Guede may have had some kind of deal with AK. She may have alerted him to the fact that Meredith kept her rent money in the bedside table. She may have told him to get out of town so he could follow the news so if they were caught he could fill in any holes in their alibi. Later Guede may have thought that Knox was likely to get off, so there was no point in implicating her.

My opinion is that the initial investigation by the scientific police couldn’t have been done much better, given what was known at the time. They come from Rome, remember—there’s nothing “small town” about them. It would have been nice to have photographed glass on top of the clothes before they were moved, but that was the local police. Stefanoni should have documented the DNA testing better, and she made some slip ups on the witness stand, but I don’t think any of these things was decisive.

Posted by brmull on 11/21/11 at 10:40 AM | #

believing,

I am also puzzled as to how they didn’t find any DNA on the smear on the wall. If I’d been Stefanoni I would have gone back and re-tested it.

The drops in the bathroom, as well as other blood stains in Meredith’s room, were in my opinion part of a selective clean-up. AK and RS weren’t interested in removing all traces, just those that belonged to them. The only other explanation is that they ran out of time, which seems unlikely since it was Knox’s choice when to notify Filomena of the break-in.

The footprint on the mat is interesting. In Knox and Sollecito’s early statements neither mentioned the footprint at all. It’s possible they didn’t recognize it as a footprint—the lighting is not great in the bathroom. The floor was tested with a luminol-like substance and did not show blood. They must have put something down on the foor to avoid leaving prints. Indeed there is evidence that Meredith’s jeans were used in this capacity as they were notably smushed.

It is frustrating that none of the witnesses called police. That seems to be a cultural difference. Furthermore one or more of these witnesses are probably wrong—we just don’t know which ones. It seems very unlikely however that they plus Curatolo and Formica are all wrong.

Rudy is a different kind of psychopath than the other two, but he is still a liar, and was in all likelihood a full participant in the murder. Guede’s DNA was on the hoodie, on the left sleeve, indicating that he struggled with her.  There is no evidence he came to Meredith’s assistance. He could not have met Meredith on Halloween because the party he claimed he was at was different than the one she was at. I think Rudy shrewdly gave as alibi witnesses the night of the murder a couple of “stoners” who might plausibly not remember who they were with. Micheli found their testimony unconvincing and even entertained the thought that they might be complicit with Guede.

You could be right that the attackers rang the doorbell to scare Meredith, but it’s odd that there is no sign of a struggle anywhere else but in her room.

It’s possible that alcohol and drugs were involved but they were not the major cause. I doubt that people who are heavily intoxicated could carry out a cover-up that is even superficially convincing. The underlying psychopathology was the major cause, and between the three of them there was more than enough to carry out this crime.

Posted by brmull on 11/21/11 at 12:42 PM | #

Hello my friends. I am still very sad for the outrageous aquital.

What do I think? Politics got involved.Nancy Grace had predicted it a few days before.She said “Amanda will be aquitted, but not because she is innocent. But because America will put a lot of pressure on Italy”.This is the reason why the people,outside the court room,shouted: “Shame shame”. They understood that America was behind it.

The Knoxes knew too much.How come the aeroplane had already landed, before the verdict? How could they be so sure of the acquital? Who told them? Why was there a judge who has never done criminal cases? Very suspicious thing. I believe the verdict was written at the State Department in Washington. Did you notice that they could have given to Amanda up to 6 years for slander, or just 4 and half; but in that case she couldn’t leave. She would have had to wait 6 more monthe, but in 6 monthes the Suprime Court would have answered to the prosecutors appeal and, maybe, reopen the case. They wanted her to be able to escape before the Supreme Court decision.

Didn’t you understand that everything was organized? What a shame.If Amanda wasn’t american she was convicted this is the truth.  SHAME AMERICA.

Posted by Matteo_65 on 11/21/11 at 01:39 PM | #

And SHAME MY COUNTRY, ITALY.

Posted by Matteo_65 on 11/21/11 at 04:24 PM | #

Hi Ergon, I remember the original reporting of Meredith’s murder and, being the same nationality I suppose, and her being just a few years older than my own niece, I read every newspaper article written both during and after the lengthy trial. I didn’t doubt the original trial verdict until a few months ago, in the lead up to the appeal. I found myself reading about AK (and only AK) being this sweet smitten girl, gullible, courageous and wrongly convicted. After doing a double take, I actually started to feel something like sympathy toward her - what if it was true?

I expanded my reading, knew for sure she was correctly convicted, and then found this site. Like many many people, I am aghast at the appeal and really believe that both political pressure and bribes bought that young woman’s freedom. RS and RG trouble me greatly and I have found reading what other people believe happened that night helpful; hand on heart, I do not know.

Also like other people, I simply can’t move forward and leave this case alone. MK was truly a smart, bright, “who wouldn’t want to know her” girl. The way that AK has been made to fit into a victim mould, and RS has largely escaped notice is breath-taking.

AK will not be brought to book for this I fear. But I am sure that she will not be able to live a quiet life - I rather expect this manipulative woman will find herself in the media glare with handcuffs on her again at some point. She is a parasite on society - a genuine sociopath.

The relationship that we’ve seen of her strong opinionated mother and big, yet shallow/weak father leads me to conclude that AK was interfered with as a child. Her promiscuity and continuous need to be centre of attention are indicators of abuse. Big flags.

As for me, I think at some point I’ll visit this site less, but Meredith will always be in my mind as someone rubbed out by pure evil -it’s easy in our current life style to find answers for everything, or will an answer to everything. Truth will float to the surface eventually.

Ergon, I am fascinated by people and am a budding writer - but evil and self-delusion is something that really distresses me. I just wish one of them would remember that it isn’t all about them, and tell the Kerchers what really happened and by whose hand she died.

Posted by TruthWillOut on 11/21/11 at 10:03 PM | #

@Ergon
Back before the original trial abc ran a special on amanda Knox. Like they continue to do they showed her as an American girl being railroaded by the Italians. That lead me to do start my own research because listening to that I thought how awful it was. I found myself on this sight for hours reading everything I could and watching all the power points. I followed the entire original trial on here and pmf because clearly after doing my own research I realized the American media had it wrong. I remember waiting the months for the Massei report translation ( for which I am grateful Ty) and then following the appeal. I hated hearing all the reporting being done in America it made me ill watching her being portrayed as an “all American girl”. I was even more sickened when the appeal verdict was read. I have never invested so much time reading/watching about a murder before. I can not say what made me feel so strongly about this one except looking at pictures of poor Meredith and thinking how awful it is that Amanda Knox and her supporters have so many snowed as to what she truly is. I like so many others can not wait for the Hellman reasoning to try to understand how IMO they could have gotten this so wrong.

Posted by Amber2670 on 11/22/11 at 04:00 AM | #

Hi Ergon and those like Amber who responded to him above. Great question. We could jump it to a main post. Many new members, when they sign up, email us on what it was that brought them in, and since the appeal outcome the new registrations are at a peak.

Identification with the qualities they see in Meredith is a main one, sadness for the loss of a needed talent, and empathy for her hard-pressed family. Repulsion at what they see in AK and RS is frequent, two lives that will add nothing to the planet.

A professional interest is common, especially among lawyers. Mistrust of the main media is common - the FOA are reactionary in trusting it so much - and so is a knowledge and liking of the real Italy. Knowing the patterns of other crimes is a driver.

The repellent early Candace Dempsey sent PMF and TJMK over many, the Machine included. Many still arrive on both sites after finding Marriott’s gang simply too nasty, too flaky, and too uptight.

Some posters including Skep and Kermit go all the way back to late 2007 and their peeling of the onion on PMF’s predecessor sites through to the Micheli report in January 2009 was absolutely gripping. It took over a year to fully dawn on everyone there that RG and RS and AK all just had to have been involved. Probably the most intelligent crime group on the web.

I found out about their posts in May 2008 from another blog specific to one alleged crime (Durham in Wonderland) and read some of their posts. I happened to be cruising in France and Italy in July 2008 with some Geneva work in between and made a beeline across the northern plains to Perugia. My own first posts were simple requests for where and what to go and photograph, because only Kermit of that group had been to Perugia and we had little idea of what everything looked like.

TJMK initially was only a vehicle for those shots and then a vehicle for the trial reporting. If there was to be a lot of text we all hoped Skep might be editor but PMF kept her tied there. The Machine arrived the same time that I did and he set in motion and set the tone for all of the analysis. Most of the 1,000 plus pages of translation was done by the Italian speakers on PMF though we have a number of readers with Italian and quite a few now posting from Italy.

I believe in three act plays as I’ve seen things play out so often in development in three acts, and it is usually the broad sensible middle that has the last word. It’ll happen here.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 11/22/11 at 03:20 PM | #

Make a comment

Smileys



Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Facts Of Melania Rea’s Stabbing Death In Italy Last April Are Also Proving Hard To Get Straight #1

Or to previous entry Italy Really Lucks Out With An Exceptional President And Now An Exceptional New Prime Minister