Saul Kassin Framed Many Fine Italian Justice Officials - And Played Whiny Victim When Fraud Exposed

Williams College President Dr Falk, and head of psychology Dr Fein

1. The Mass-Victimhood Phenomenon

We often take note of a common “they can’t take what they dish out” phenomenon among the Sollecito & Knox supporters.

If you show unequivocally that their FACTS are wrong, and that they have illegally framed (in English) good Italian officials, they melt down with numerous shrill claims that the meanies ridiculed them - because their mission and the two perps they champion are so moral and so divine.

Doug Preston, Nina Burleigh, Greg Hampikian, Steve Moore, Doug Bremner and many others have exhibited this paranoid victimhood phenomenon.

Doug Preston even wrote an entire book-long wail about his supposed victimhood.

Foolishly perverse behavior. No police or prosecutors anywhere ever appreciate being framed.

In the US it is rare indeed. In Italy a single official complaint can spark a prosecutor’s investigation, and probable felony charges against any or all of them for obstruction of justice. 

The Saul Kassin case surely has to be one of the worst of all faux victimhood cases, because his huge and very nasty swipe at Italy, with dozens of wrong facts and false accusations, was delivered as a keynote address to dozens of top justice officials from around the world.

To this day, he perpetuates this enormous academic fraud.

Presumably 100% of that global audience, ignorant of the real story (including a probable serious new felony by Knox) was frauded into believing Knox was tortured by Italians into some making a classic forced confession on Kassin’s guidelines. 

2. A Historical Synopsis Of Kassin’s Fraud

Saul Kassin, an academic psychologist, established himself as an acknowledged authority-figure on the subject of prosecutor-induced false confession by develeoping a profile of such confessors.

Prosecutor-induced false confession is, of course, a real phenomenon, which has existed throughout recorded history, notoriously exemplified in modern history at the Moscow Show-Trials of the 1930’s.

Years ago supporters of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito (FOA), claiming that the pair were wrongly convicted of murdering Meredith Kercher, alleged that their “wrongful” conviction was based on a prosecutor-induced false confession, among some other things.

FOA concocted a false description of the events surrounding the “interrogation” using as many as 50 barefaced falsehoods to create a match to the characteristics of false confessors described by Kassin.

Strong fact-based reactions to this fabrication resulted in the exposure of numerous falsehoods and deceptions, in the course of which Kassin’s shilling for Knox was also criticised.

Offended by such criticism, Kassin wrote a new paper, defending his work, but sustaining the multiple falsehoods and deceptions created by the FOA.

On April 30th 2012 the American Psychologist [AP] published an Advanced Online Paper titled “Why Confessions Trump Innocence” authored by Saul Kassin (see the final version here).

In it he “described” the case of Amanda Knox, the American college student who had been convicted of murder in Italy, arguing that Knox was not guilty, and had been induced by prosecutorial-oppression into making a False-Confession.

In June 2012 Kassin presented his misleading keynote address about Knox to the John Jay College global conference (see page 31 of the program). Soon after that he made TV and radio appearances.

3. AP Publishes Non Peer-Reviewed Paper

In September 2012 the American Psychologist journal published Kassin’s paper in print-form (AP Vol.67 (6) Sept. 2012, 431-445).

When it did so, the paper was newly accompanied by Corrections and Updates, in which Kassin states that minor (sic) corrections “should be made in the description of the Amanda Knox case.”

They are not minor in their effect on the meaning of his text, but it remains untruthful as before.

The first change substitutes for one misleading false statement, a more clearly worded false statement; changes 4 and 5 modify the allegation that Guede had raped Meredith, and that Guede’s DNA had been found in sperm at the crime scene.

Not only are Kassin’s changes by no means “minor”, they are only a few of the many changes needed to acknowledge the true facts. They amply confirm the depth of Kassin’s fall into deception.

And in a ludicrously surreal development, Amanda Knox’s 2013 book Waiting to be Heard at great length parotted Kassin’s wrong claims about her wrong claims.

4. The Pro-Justice Community Dissents

TJMK and the two PMF forums and other pro-justice, pro-victim and pro-Italy websites have long explained in Posts and Comments that the Kassin paper containing 50 or more false or deceptive statements is so contrary to the actual facts as to be sheer obfuscation.

The first TJMK reference to False Confession was a comment by Faustus on Jan. 13th 2009. The first TJMK post questioning Saul Kassin was written by the Machine and published on 10 July 2012.

Since then TJMK has published more than a dozen articles focusing on the false facts and false accusations in Kassin’s presentations, with scores of comments expanding the corrections further. This rebuttal and this one were particularly key.

5. Some Relevant Kassin Background

Saul Kassin is a Distinguished Professor of Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. Recently, he was listed as in a “phased retirement” as Massachusetts Professor of Psychology from Williams College, in Williamstown, Massachusetts. He received his Ph.D. at the University of Connecticut.

Kassin’s “resume” reveals that he was once very aware of the phenomenon of self-fulfilling rophecy, and very scornful of people to whom he attributed it.

In 2004, C.U.P. published a multi-author book entitled “The Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts”, defining “˜forensic context” as any context in which legal questions are raised.

Kassin was the author of chapter 8, entitled “True or False” He then claimed “˜I’d know a false confession if I saw one”. Then Kassin repeats the well-known fact that Oppression-Induced False Confession is a real phenomenon, ridiculing other professionals with the quote “I’d know a false confession if I saw one”.

Then he describes his own recipe for “˜knowing one”, providing a profile ideal for use by Knox and FOA, after Meredith’s murder in 2007.

Kassin’s ridicule relies upon what he, himself, describes variously as “˜self-fulfilling prophecy, interpersonal expectancy effect, and behavioral confirmation’. He provides the reader with 6 references to the phenomenon, the first 2 focusing on Pygmalion, as the classic exemplar of seeing what you want to see.

[Pygmalion was a Cypriot sculptor who carved a woman out of ivory. His statue was so realistic that he fell in love with it. Making offerings at the altar of Aphrodite, he quietly wished for a bride who would be “the living likeness of my ivory girl”. When he returned home, he kissed his ivory statue and found that its lips felt warm. He kissed it again, touched its breasts with his hand and found that the ivory had lost its hardness. Aphrodite had granted Pygmalion’s wish.  Shaw used this story as the subtext for his play “˜Pygmalion”, the musical version of which is “˜My Fair Lady”.]

Kassin’s “resume” also records that he served as a U.S. Supreme Court Judicial Fellow, working at the Federal Judicial Center .... Dr. Kassin is past president of Division 41 of APA (aka the American Psychology-Law Society).

Given these items from Dr.Kassin’s “resume” a reader would expect Dr. Kassin to be professionally knowledgeable in the law relevant to his specialty; Kassin definitely OUGHT to be that knowledgeable.

In “Why Confessions Trump Innocence” readers are directed by Kassin to FOA shill Dempsey, 2010, and FOA shill Burleigh, 2011, noting “personal communications with Amanda Knox, [shill] Madison Paxton, and Nina Burleigh”.

Consistent with Kassin seeing what he wants to see, his paper contains phrases such as “the case of Amanda Knox and others who are wrongfully convicted”. Kassin’s own deception seemingly promotes receptivity to deception by others.
In January the Nencini Appeal Court in Florence declared Knox and Sollecito to be Guilty-Beyond-Reasonable-Doubt. All that remains is the Supreme Court’s expected firm endorsement.

As we await the Nencini Motivazione report, the senior Florence prosecutor Dr Giuliano Giambartolomei has recently announced his findings that many claims in Sollecito’s “Honor Bound"are spurious and justify new charges being brought against Sollecito. Sollecito’s shadow-writer, the shill Andrew Gumbel, who recently published a self-incriminatory rant in The Guardian, has also been named by the court.

So now seems a great time to refresh TJMK’s reader’s awareness of Kassin’s arguments. Kassin’s false arguments were apparently communicated to Judges Hellmann and Zanetti by Knox’s lawyers, so Kassin himself may be liable under Italian Law.

6. How Dr Scott Sleek Enables The Fraud

Dr Scott Sleek

Remember, Kassin is the cowardly man who lied about good investigators half a world a way, and quite deliberately stirred up whatever hate he could. 

Here are some quotes from an article by the duped psychology colleague Scott Sleek amazingly excusing Kassin’s serial framings and obfuscations.

“Studies (as well as real-life cases in the United States) also specifically show that the presence of a confession, because it creates a strong belief, can contaminate latent fingerprint judgments, eyewitness identifications, and interpretations of other types of evidence,” he wrote.

But what particularly inflamed the blogosphere was Kassin’s use of a headline-grabbing example — the case of Amanda Knox, an American college student who was convicted of murder. Kassin had provided a pro bono analysis of Knox’s case in her appeal to the Italian court, recommending that her confession be treated with caution.

He noted that Knox had been immediately identified as a suspect and presumed guilty, confessed after three days of denials and interrogations, and did not have any attorney present when undergoing questioning. In addition, Kassin pointed out, her statements were not recorded. [Actually they were, and Knox signed every one.]

“I used it as an example, not realizing the depth of a couple of Amanda Knox hate groups that track professionals who support Amanda Knox,” he said.

Kassin said the hate emails he received, and the blog posts criticizing him, didn’t focus on the science itself, but on his motives for analyzing Knox’s case. In essence, the attacks were personal. Some of the messages he received felt threatening, he said, and included statements such as: “We know where you work.” A few bloggers also wrote posts lambasting Kassin’s integrity, in one case even calling him a “shill.”

Scientists who have been subjected to these tactics say universities, journal editors, professional organizations and others need to support scholars who face these threats to their academic work.

7. Conclusion: Fraud Kassin Now Plays The Victim

TJMK readers know very well that the above précis is an outright falsehood.

That is not at all what took place.

In his “defence” Kassin also claimed: “I used it as an example, not realizing the depth of a couple of Amanda Knox hate groups that track professionals who support Amanda Knox.”

WHAT hate groups? There are only professionals pro-justice. And why that mere “example”?

Actually Kassin placed his framing and his wrong “facts” front and center, again and again and again.

WHAT other professionals if any support Knox? The real professionals posting and reading here handily exceed Kassin’s pay-grade.

Kassin also claimed, without showing proof, that he received hate mail, and the (very detailed) posts criticizing him didn’t focus on the science itself, but on his motives for analyzing Knox’s case. In essence, the attacks were personal, he stated.

Kassin also claimed that some of the messages he received felt threatening, and included statements such as: “We know where you work” and that a few bloggers wrote posts lambasting Kassin’s integrity.

In one case they even called him a “shill”. Really? Is he not?!

TJMK is as opposed as Kassin to hate-mail. We can correct wrong facts and serial defaming right here.

But we also believe that Kassin’s adoption of Knox’s, Sollecito’s, Paxton’s, Dempsey’s, Burleigh’s, and other FOA’s falsehoods, deceptions, and his serial framings of Italian officials, was far more improper, biased, and compromising of his own integrity.

The attempt to do real damage begins and ends with Kassin.  And far from not focusing on Kassin’s “science” his TJMK critics focused sharply on the falsehoods Kassin used to support his self-fulfilling prophecies. Click on links to past posts above.

The historical trap Kassin has fallen into is that of “Experimenter Expectancy”, or seeing what you want to see [c.f. Chapter 6, pp107-108 Betrayers Of The Truth, OUP, 1982, By Broad & Wade]:

Expectancy leads to self-deception, and self-deception leads to the propensity to be deceived by others.

Having fallen into the very trap Kassin himself had described in great detail in 2004, and recited in his “resume”, a legal background that ought to inform him that he was entering a potential legal minefield, Kassin proceeded, in writing, to satisfy the common-law definition of Defamation-Malice [making false statements, knowing them to be false, or made so recklessly as to amount to willful disregard for the truth].

Under Italian law, if any of those he framed complains, Kassin may be chargeable with a felony. 

Kassin’s MO does entail defaming the conduct of Italian Police, and Prosecutors. He has adopted many falsehoods. There is good reason to bring his integrity into question.

His best course now would be to publicly withdraw all the many versions of his false claims. And, finally, apologize to all those he framed and the real victim’s circle,


Everything in this post applies equally to the ludicrously inaccurate claims of ex FBI “mindhunter” John Douglas in his books and his lobbying at the State Department. Relevant posts:

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

Click for Post:  Was A Vulnerable John Douglas Hijacked By ‘First Generation Crackpots’ To Lie About The Case?

Tweet This Post


I always struggle with the so called false confession allegedly beaten out of her that the fans, friends and family of Amanda Knox claim happened.

It was not a false confession.  The statements Knox made orally to investigators and then later written in her own hand and at her own request are quite clearly the malicious accusation of an innocent man.

What could be worse than being falsely accused by someone known to you of rape and murder?  This is not to be swept under the carpet or sniffed at, they are very serious allegations indeed.

The accusation of Patrick Lumumba of rape and murder is an absolutely despicable act by Amanda Knox second only to the torture, sexual humiliation and murder of Meredith that Amanda Knox has been found guilty and sentenced to 28 and a half years prison for.

Knox herself, her friends, family and fans know the seriousness of these charges and have worked hard to limit their damage using people like Kassin to obfuscate and spew falsehoods.

The enormous lies spouted consistently by Knox require even more lies to cover them, so this is where Kassin comes in.  At the end of the day a false accusation of an innocent man is in no way shape or form a false confession.

This has to be made clear and it is the reason Knox served four years locked up in prison for.

Posted by DF2K on 04/23/14 at 06:41 PM | #

Thank you, Cardiol.

I am so cynical. I read Kassin and about Kassin and just think he fits right in with the “experience tellers”, acting coaches, service accused murderers. He fits right in with the shills, too.

I can’t rate him as a psychologist if he has read what really happened and hasn’t got a decent handle on Knox’ quirkiness and what constitutes her false “confession”.

No hate here, Saul. Dismay.

Posted by bucketoftea on 04/23/14 at 10:12 PM | #

Cardiol himself has a distinguished career in criminal science and it’s no surprise that he pokes away at where Kassin came from to see if the seeds of corruption go way back.

John Jay College here in NYC (behind Lincoln Center) sets undergraduates and graduates up for fast-track careers in law, police and investigation sevices. Telling the truth and being diligent at all times are bedrock values for the place.

One would for example never, never falsely impugn law enforcement in the US or elsewhere - the whole point is to build law enforcement up!! And yet, somehow false impugning happened here. 

I cant imagine any college anywhere in the US less likely to incubate this kind of fraud or turn a blind eye. This is part of a public university (CUNY) dependent on taxpayer funds. A damaging media firestorm could result if media get their noses beneath the tent.

Despite our repetitive posting, we have actually been quite gentle on the guy, and we’ve given Kassin every chance of a u-turn to save some face and wind back some of the damage done.

But maybe he is already jumping, or being pushed out of the academic life? See below. That blank entry for his biography is a real surprise. I know some faculty staff at the college and I know they can work there till they drop. There is no age ceiling, and they like to stay connected even if they no longer teach.


Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/24/14 at 12:00 AM | #

Thanks for this excellent article, Cardiol. Yes, we all had a hand in refuting Kassin’s multitudinous false allegations.

Here’s a link to dot Net’s investigation, along with my first post ““AN “EXPERT” CAN ALSO BE AN “IDIOT” - DR. SAUL KASSIN” published July 08, 2012:

Along with several of his voice and media interviews in which he repeated several false statements, which we documented.

Bruce Fischer had come over to dot NET, boasting how “<u>Saul Kassin reviewed the Amanda Knox case for the defense on appeal</u>. He concluded that Amanda’s confession should be treated with caution”.

Bruce also claimed “Kassin’s analysis poses a major problem for Amanda’s critics. Kassin is a highly respected expert in the field of false confessions. <u>The entire case took a wrong turn as soon as Amanda signed those statements. Without those signatures, the wrongful convictions would have never happened</u>.”

My conclusion:

“Anyhow, the statements above are confusing, so:

1: Did Saul Kassin “review the case for defense on appeal” or, was “His work presented during the appeal”? I don’t recall him being cross examined, please clarify.

2: Could he explain the source for his assertions as to how long Amanda Knox had been interrogated? Did he review the Italian police records or Massei and Micheli judgements, or even speak to Knox’s Italian attorneys? Because much of his statements were never raised in court, and would negate his basic premise for the way in which the innocent can be coerced into making false confessions.

3: Why is the full report not being released so we can review his findings? Knox is supposedly home free, and the Supreme Court isn’t going to hear any new evidence. Surely he must realize that making such accusations requires he back it up with something more than the statements of an accused person. Why’s he (and Bruce Fischer) afraid to prove their argument?

In the end, we are left with several, sad thoughts:

- the number of ‘experts’ willing to compromise their professionalism to hop on to a media bandwagon and get on the paid expert gravy train.

- how justice can be weakened by such creative stretchings of the truth.

- it appears that in order to sell Brand Knox they must negate the greatest point against her; she accused an innocent man. For that, they’re trying to promote the ‘false confession’ scenario.

- that the behaviour of Amanda Knox when she fell under suspicion was not that of an innocent person, but, of a sociopath who, along with her drugged up boy friend, thought they had got away with murder.”

Posted by Ergon on 04/24/14 at 04:47 AM | #

Very sharp and to Cardiol’s point, Ergon. Thanks for linking and quoting that.

Amanda Knox clearly wanted to use Kassin as her Exhibit A in her misconceived appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in the utterly unlikely event her case is picked up.

And her Exhibit A in her sleazy, dishonest reasons for not paying Patrick the award the Supreme Court said she must. 

But now it seems Kassin is no longer anywhere in sight. In his area on the John Jay College website (see image above) he is apparently in the process of becoming a non-man.

In her book Amanda Knox said her (former?) avid supporter Madison Paxton tracked down Kassin and brought him in. Then Knox burbles on for several pages about how he amazingly explains her mindset in face of those horrendous investigators, while leaving out the bits about her being put under no pressure, collapsing like a creampuff, being hard to shut up, framing Mignini, not actually confessing, and not remotely even fitting Kassin’s own false-confessions “likely type”.

But the Machine, in our own first post on Kassin which Cardiol linked to, quoted Bruce Fischer crowing that it was a Sara in his toxic team who brought Kassin in, and had him connected to the Knox-Mellases and the defense as sort of a reverse smoking gun:

“Curt Knox’s chief hatchet man Bruce Fischer, himself notoriously unqualified in every field relevant to the case who for a long time masqueraded pompously under a false name, claimed on his website that Saul Kassin gave help to Amanda Knox’s lawyers in Perugia.  Also that his work was presented to the court during the 2011 Hellman appeal.

Many may not know this but Sarah was instrumental in bringing Kassin in to analyze Amanda’s interrogation. His work was presented during the appeal…

The family had asked that we not release Kassin’s work to the public until they received clearance from the attorneys. I know I often state that this case is over but the attorneys rightfully want to keep everything professional until the Italian Supreme Court confirms Hellmann.

Yeah, well, how did the Supreme Court confirming Hellmann due to Kassin’s great help work out?!

Hellmann himself seems to have picked up on Kassin’s slant, it’s in his report - but precisely how? Did Kassin and the defense secretly meet with Hellmann in a back room to present his “work”? Was that why the Knox family wanted to keep Kassin under wraps?

Fischer is as much of a Typhoid Mary as Knox herself in his “talent” for recruiting sockpuppets, having them spout the “wrong truth” on behalf of the apple of his eye, and then seeing themselves publicly exposed as frauds. Ask Michael Wiesner. Ask Greg Hampikian. Ask Steve Moore.

Having brought Kassin in, Fischer makes sure Kassin is linked ONLY to the likes of Nina Burleigh and Candace Dempsey, PR shills for sure and hardly experts of any kind, and ensures he goes nowhere near the central police station in Perugia - does not even make one call - to check if what he is being spoonfed holds up.

Kassin doesnt even get to read John Follain, who gives the best description so far of Knox’s panic and hair-trigger framing of Patrick in any report or book. Cardiol has this great observation from Broad & Wade:  “Expectancy leads to self-deception, and self-deception leads to the propensity to be deceived by others.”

Eager expectancy >>> wrong paradigm. Hackwork for the defense >>> a spurious non-peer-reviewed academic work. And here the hapless Kassin is. The slowly-disappearing man.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/24/14 at 10:10 AM | #

Kassin began his energetic public splash early in 2012, as Cardiol describes, but (see Fischers claims in the comment just above) he was active behind the scenes (apparently including in Perugia but not at the questura) much earlier than that, some time in 2011, some time during the Hellmann appeal.

Cardiol mentions how the lies about the Knox interrogation grew and grew and were a complete alternative reality by whatever time Kassin was drawn in. So. Who preceded Kassin?

Steve Moore for one. Steve “man in a bubble” Moore has originated a lot of very strange stuff - though despite his incessant awe at his own sheer amazing-ness, the jobless security guard still wont release his resume:

This quote below from a post by Steve Moore (which as usual is 1/2 about his wonderful self) falsely claims some 43 hours of interrogation (never happened) and tag-teaming by some 12 detectives (never happened) which Moore seems to have first posted in 2010.  It can be found replicated at thousands of places on the web.

However, Amanda Knox herself repeatedly contradicts Moore’s lurid version 2-3 years in advance, in her own statements, her letters home and to her lawyers, and her testimony to magistrates and on the stand at trial mid-2009. Saul Kassin could easily have found that out.

[From The Interrogation That Never Was by Steve Moore]

In the five days after the murder of Meredith Kercher, Amanda Knox was interrogated by detectives for 43 hours. [Wrong] Think about that [lie] for a minute. That’s not a number in dispute. [Really?] 43 hours of sitting at a table being badgered by questions from detectives in five days. 8 hours a day for an entire work week. In a foreign country. In a foreign language. [Odd how Knox herself doesnt back this up.]

Of even greater ignominy are the last eight hours of the interrogation. This took place from 10:30 p.m. until 6:00 a.m. All night. [No, questioning took less than one hour.] Why would detectives schedule an interrogation overnight? [They didnt.] Detectives are for the most part different from other policemen in that their regular schedule is 8a-5p or 9a-5p or something similar. Sure, they get called out in the middle of the night, but all things equal, unless you are in a department like NYPD or LAPD where a skeleton crew covers the evening shift; normal schedules for detectives are not overnight.

But that night, Amanda was interrogated all night. [Wrong] And by not just one or two detectives, but by a dozen (12) detectives. [Wrong] Again, the police not only do not dispute this, but they have entered this evidence into court. [Again, wrong.]

In the real world, 12 detectives all night is something that has to be signed off by higher-ups. [Ah, lets also frame some top Italians.] What does this tell us? [That Steve Moore makes stuff up?] It tells us the interrogation was NOT a rapidly unfolding case where lives were at risk—they planned this interview well in advance, and INTENTIONALLY overnight. [Or tells us that Moore frames many cops?] They knew Amanda was available all day (as they had interviewed her for 35 hours in the past four days). [No they hadnt.] There was no deadline. The lead detective in the case, Giobbi, had already said they “knew” Amanda was the murderer by this point. So they did not believe there was a murderer on the loose “out there.” (And yet there was). [Because Knox had pointed out the wrong guy.]

No, the reason they interrogated Amanda all night was to break her. [See how Moore frames the cops.] Not get the truth, not get answers, not make Perugia safer; but to break her so that she would say what they wanted her to say. [See how Moore frames the cops.] They used a technique [See how Moore frames the cops] that I unfortunately became aware of while serving overseas in counter-terrorism. [Moore is so amazing.] We used to call it “tag-teaming”. I am aware of its use by intelligence/law enforcement officers of other countries. It takes dozens of operatives/officers to make it work. Two officers are assigned for approximately an hour at a time to the suspect. [Knox herself never noticed any of this. Who will Moore turn to as his witness?]

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/24/14 at 04:29 PM | #

If I had come to the realization that all my careful life’s work had been subtly twisted by an arch-manipulator for their own selfish, immediate use… And there am I, whose business it should be to have recognized such manipulation… well, I think I’d want early retirement too.

And just to repeat, yet again : there was no confession, either a false or a true one, of the major crime of murder. There was an accusation, not recanted on reflection, that caused great deliberate suffering to another.

The only thing to have been confessed was the admission of having been at the scene of the crime, and then not having reported it. This confession was later proved to have been true. There was no false confession.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 04/24/14 at 10:57 PM | #

I read and like everything. Must keep response to 140 characters. smile

Posted by Bettina on 04/24/14 at 10:58 PM | #

DF2K, bucketoftea, Ergon, and SeekingUnderstanding, you are so right!

This is Not a case of False-Confession; it Is a case of False-False-Confession combined with False-Accusation.


Posted by Cardiol MD on 04/25/14 at 09:23 AM | #

Nothing keeps one awake at night like the thought that some highly-trained and much-respected law enforcement officials, who one has foolishly framed in front of the whole world, may soon set in motion a freedom-threatening process to correct things.

The smartest among the Knoxaholics might soon waken to the thought that their last best shot at appeasing Italian law could be to throw their colleagues under the bus and offer to provide the goods on all of them.

Already Sollecito is in the soup in a similar situation. He could roll over on just about everybody. Calls to Kassin must be getting pretty frantic. Not least because as Bruce Fischer very helpfully pointed out, Saul Kassin was under the direct control of Knox’s lawyers and the Knox-Mellas family.

The under-the-bus-throwing target list sure seems a long one. Could Kassin now give the push to the Knox-Mellases? To Knox’s lawyers? To Judge Hellmann? To Doug Preston? To Bruce Fischer? To Steve Moore? To Ted Simon? To Robert Barnett? To Michael Heavey? To Frank Sforza? In fact, to anyone who ever misrepresented the interrogation?

From their narrow points of view this aint pretty. It looks like saving Amanda is about to take a back seat. Who could she throw under the bus… oh yes, Of course. Been there, done that.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/25/14 at 01:47 PM | #

The entire point of of the Knox innocent project is that it took on a life of its own.

This stopped being about Knox some time ago and simply became a means of making money. the Knoxaholics (good name by the way) are so very easily manipulated in their fervent desire to be right

In other words Knox has just become a figure head and as time goes forward I can see very clearly that the only way to keep the money rolling in is to create Knox as the ultimate victim (even more so than now)

That will come about when the only recourse will be to throw her under the bus using CNN et-al as a spring board.

Knox and Sollecito’s guilt is so obvious (see previous post) that the only thing left for them to do is create and add onto the “poor little me” scenario.

The Ground Report site has been forced to regurgitate old copy and try to make it relevant. I see the Bruce Fischer has re-posted copy attacking the Kerchers in order to try to make this relevant.

He, and others (Chris Mellas) do this by stirring up old resentments and hate proving once more just how sleazy these people really are.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 04/25/14 at 03:47 PM | #

Hi Grahame

Framing the Kerchers, the family of the real victim, is as much of a felony as framing Italian officialdom. Maybe worse, no Italian court will tolerate that.

Fischer is in a pretty desperate position, though dont expect him to notice - he is notorious for closing his eyes and blocking his ears to bad news for his foolish enterprise.

See a good example quoted right above where in his own words Fischer says Cassation’s endorsement of the Hellmann outcome was inevitable.

Framing for profit? Fischer really needs to get into a better line of work. Or any line of work. Ask the expert.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/25/14 at 04:16 PM | #

Scott Sleek also commented:

“Kassin had provided a pro bono analysis of Knox’s case in her appeal to the Italian court…”

” pro bono “, on the surface, seeks credibility by being in Latin, and is so highly regarded by the American Bar Association that they award a career-enhancing Prize for it.

It refers, of course, to the provision of $Free professional services to people who can’t afford them.

This is laudable, also of course.

Are pro bono providers aware of its laudability? Of course they are.

Kassin’s Resume states that he “lectures frequently to judges, lawyers, psychologists, psychiatrists, criminal justice commissions, and law enforcement groups. He has appeared as an analyst on ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, and various syndicated news shows; has served as a consultant and expert witness in federal, military, and state courts; and appears in Ken Burns’ 2012 film, The Central Park Five.”

He also writes “Attorneys needing assistance in cases that involve coerced and possibly false confessions should know that while I have served as a consultant and expert witness on the subject, I am highly selective in my willingness to do so.

Eyewitness Testimony

Attorneys needing assistance in cases that involve problematic eyewitness identifications should know that while I have served as a consultant and expert witness on this subject, I am selective in my willingness to do so”

“Kassin typically charges about $15,000 to “consult for the defense,” in other words to pompously declare a confession coerced. It’s not clear in this case if he was paid by FOA or the Melloxes (it wouldn’t surprise me), or if he just did it for the publicity. More publicity = more consulting work, more paid speaking engagements, more book sales, etc. A classic carpetbagger.

Posted by brmull on 08/09/12 at 07:13 PM | #”

So, if Sleek is correct re Kassin’s pro bono provision of his analysis to the “Italian Court”, and “typically charges about $15,000 to “consult for the defense,” “, how laudably “pro bono” is Kassin in reality ?

Is Kassin’s Integrity unblemished?

Posted by Cardiol MD on 04/25/14 at 06:13 PM | #

Anybody not yet convinced that Steve Moore is a few bricks short of a wall really should read these:

(1) his lurid description (in the box in a comment up above) of the “all night” witness interrogation with “tag teams” of 10 officers long planned and authorized from above;

(2) and then the really quite mundane testimony of the couple of people beside Knox who were actually there in the room. and

Monica Napoleoni wasnt there. She never even looked in.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 04/26/14 at 04:37 PM | #

I hope Professor Kassin will be very careful about what he says on American TV about this case. Defending Knox might not bode well for his future aspirations to be an expert for hire.

Likewise, the Innocence Project, which looks more like a federal fund grubbing and media aggregating business for DNA researchers looking to get rich on their ‘patents’ than a genuine charity motivated by the altruistic principle.

Posted by Ergon on 04/27/14 at 08:48 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Calling Planet Knox: Maybe Chris Mellas And Bruce Fischer Need To Rein In Their Crackpot Brigade

Or to previous entry On Saul Kassin: Our Letter To Dr Douglas Starr Who Wrote An Effusive Profile In The “New Yorker”