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

Peter Gill seen indoctrinating non-expert viewers on Italian TV

Follow the money trail…

So many of Amanda Knox’s high-profile supporters such as Frank Sforza, Candace Dempsey, Doug Preston, Bruce Fischer, Nina Burleigh and Steve Moore have something in common - they have cynically tried to make a profit from Meredith’s tragic murder.

Now we turn our big guns on tendentious DNA expert and Johnny-come-lately Dr Peter Gill.  When Gill tried to cast doubt on the bra clasp and knife evidence with copious innuendo in the media early in 2014, it was a fairly safe bet that a book would follow suit.

Predictably, Gill’s book Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice was published later that year in June.

This first in a series of posts about Gill draws on some excellent previous posts - please do read in particular Fly By Night and Olleosnep, Machiavelli and KrissyG.

In this article I will explain the weak basis for his claims about the Meredith Kercher case and examine them to see whether he did real research.

Any hopes that Peter Gill did meticulously research the Meredith Kercher case before writing his book are almost immediately dashed. He embarrassingly refers to Meredith as “Meridith”. Is it too much to expect him to be able to spell the victim’s name correctly, especially when he is putting himself forward as an expert on the case and using his DNA credentials to bolster his credibilty?

In three specific places in his book, he refers to the case as a “miscarriage of justice” even though at the time Knox and Sollecito were still appealing their convictions for murder and sexual assault back in 2009. The appeal judge Judge Nencini then also found them guilty of murder and sexual assault in Florence in 2013.

Peter Gill was never in a position where he could conclude there had been a miscarriage of justice. Unlike the judges and lay judges, he hadn’t attended any of the court hearings in Perugia or Florence, he doesnt speak any Italian, and he has never been to the two labs that processed the DNA in Rome. 

Upstanding forensic scientists limit their comments solely to their specific area of expertise, and they allow the courts to ultimately decide whether defendants are guilty or not guilty - and not act as partisan advocates. That’s certainly the stance Peter Gill took when replying to an e-mail to TJMK poster Swansea Jack on 28 June 2014.

Thanks for your email.

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

Regards, Peter

It was dishonest of Peter Gill to claim he wasn’t getting involved in a debate that specifically addressed the ultimate issue of innocence or guilt when he had already done that by categorically stating the convictions of Knox and Sollecito were a “miscarriage of justice” in his book.

It wasn’t the first time Peter Gill had blown backwards and forwards on an important topic and made contradictory comments. Here is judicial criticism of some of his comments during his testimony at the Omagh bomb trial.

Dr Peter Gill, an exponent of the Low Copy Number DNA technique, conceded some of the results presented in the bomb trial were “valueless”.

Mr Justice Weir warned Dr Gill about “blowing backwards and forwards” on “an important topic”.

The judge said it was “very unhelpful” to give apparently contradictory evidence. Sean Hoey denies 58 charges, including 29 murders in Omagh in 1998.

Mr Hoey is a 37-year-old electrician from Molly Road, Jonesborough in County Armagh.

Low Copy Number DNA - a technique whereby DNA profiles can be obtained from samples containing only a few cells - is an important part of the prosecution case.

Dr Gill had been asked to comment on claims that control samples tested at the same time as parts of a device in Lisburn had come up positive for Mr Hoey’s DNA type.

That finding, said defence QC Orlando Pownall, should have meant that the tests were run again. The fact that they weren’t meant the results were invalid, he claimed.

“I think it invalidates the result,” Dr Gill agreed.

Dr Gill was also challenged over what appeared to be conflicting evidence on the reliability of Low Copy Number DNA testing.

Mr Pownall was questioning him about the amounts of DNA below which results could be relied on.

Giving evidence, Dr Gill said at a certain DNA level information taken from the results could be “informative”.

But Mr Pownall pointed out that in papers Dr Gill had written on the subject he had said that at that level the results were “uninformative”.

Mr Justice Weir intervened to say it “seems rather an important topic on which to be blowing backwards and forwards on.

In July 2016, Peter Gill wrote an academic paper about the Meredith Kercher case for Forensic Science Genetics: Analysis and implications of the miscarriages of justice of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito. He made the following false claims:

“The final judgement exonerated the defendants” and “Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were exonerated in March 2015”.

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito weren’t exonerated in March 2015 - they were merely acquitted with the weakest language available under Italian law.

There is a significant difference here. They were acquitted under paragraph 2 of article 530, which is merely an insufficient evidence acquittal. Had they been acquitted under paragraph one of article 530, then that would have been a definitive acquittal or exoneration.

Judge Bruno and Judge Marasca, the Supreme Court judges who acquitted them, said it was likely they would have convicted Knox and Sollecito of Meredith Kercher’s murder if the police hadn’t made claimed errors in their investigation:

“If it were not for the weak investigation and if the investigation had not been affected by guilty omissions, the court would, in all likelihood, be allowed right now to outline a framework, if not on absolute certainty at least of tranquil reliability, in view of the guilt Knox and Sollecito for killing the British student Meredith Kercher in Perugia on Nov. 1, 2007.”

Bruno and Marasca stated Meredith had been killed by Rudy Guede and others. They also said it’s certain that Amanda Knox was at the cottage when Meredith was killed and she washed Meredith’s blood off in the small bathroom. Furthermore, they said Sollecito was probably there. It’s not difficult to work out who the others are. Bruno and Marasca didn’t exonerate Knox and Sollecito - they clearly implicated them in Meredith’s murder. 

I don’t know whether Peter Gill knows about Bruno and Marasca’s comments. If he doesn’t know about them, it was remiss of him not to read the whole report and refer to these comments in his academic paper. If he does know about them, he’s guilty of deliberately misleading the forensic community as well as the general public.

Is it just a coincidence that filmmakers responsible for the Netflix documentary Amanda Knox also cherrypicked comments made by Bruno and Marasca which were favourable to Knox and Sollecito, but completely ignored all their comments which were not?

Amanda Knox’s advocates in the media have always brushed inconvenient facts under the carpet. Their intention has always been to persuade the public that she’s innocent - not inform them and let them make up their own minds. Anyone who deliberately hides information that shows Knox and Sollecito in a bad light doesn’t care about Meredith or truth and justice.

More to come.

Posted by The Machine on 02/22/17 at 04:15 AM in Hoaxers from 2007Hoaxers from 2011Peter Gill

Tweet This Post


It is clear Peter Gill is informed of the facts.
It is also clear he is heavily allied to the Knox family which beggers the question why?
On his level, it is a question of money.
Filthy Lucre.
I sometimes think -
‘Do they really think this is going away’?

Posted by Deathfish on 02/22/17 at 07:19 AM | #

I have thought this from the very beginning that Knox and Sollecito was able to dance away from things when they heard what investigators said to them - it was clear to the partners in crime that the investigators didn’t know what had happened at that point so they acted accordingly.

Dont mention the phone calls to mother or the pricking Meredith on the hand while cooking at Sollecito’s apartment.

Posted by Deathfish on 02/22/17 at 07:28 AM | #

Amanda Knox why on your MySpace page did you post pics of the Italian girls at your new “cool” place, but no mention whatsoever of Meredith Kercher?

Posted by Deathfish on 02/22/17 at 07:44 AM | #

Gill says that he did nothing more than draw up a list of all the possibilities for innocent transfer. Anyone can do that. Any defence team worth it’s salt would do that. You don’t have to be a DNA expert.

What then has to happen is that each and every one of the possibilities has to be evaluated, and Gill makes a ham fist of that particular exercise.

Notwithstanding that, he enthusiastically becomes part of the PR for Knox and Solecito and even, incredibly, his remarks are noted in the defense’s appeal recourse to the 5th Chambers, well after the evidence phase has concluded and, even more incredibly, picked up on and used by the 5th Chambers.

The defence needed somebody of his status and so he was enlisted. The question is why he allowed himself to be used in this way.

Posted by James Raper on 02/22/17 at 01:46 PM | #

Has Peter Gill ever received any payments from the defence teams?

According to Barbie Nadeau, Peter Gill’s friend Vincenzo Pascali received €50,000:

“Vincenzo Pascali, the chief forensic consultant who was set to give expert testimony about the possible contamination of the bra clasp, walked off the case last month, reportedly leaving a €50,000 bill. Back in September, Pascali, who declined to comment for this story, hinted that the clasp also contained Knox’s DNA.”


Posted by The Machine on 02/22/17 at 02:22 PM | #

I understand that Vinci, for the defence, did indeed find partial alleles of Amanda and Rudy on the bra and the report led to Pascali’s walk out.  No-one knows why he walked, but it is an accepted fact that legal representatives cannot represent clients they consider guilty.

The amusing thing about Gill, is that he appears to have depended on Conti & Vecchiotti for his information, who themselves depended on the Friends of Amanda Knox, 5,000 miles away, campaigning against ‘the railroading of this poor American girl’.

The ‘rail road’ reference comes form Nathaniel Rich who wrote the ROLLING STONE article with information fed to him by Madison Paxton….girlfriend of Amanda Knox who moved to Perugia to be near her.

Circle complete.

Posted by KrissyG on 02/22/17 at 05:25 PM | #

Hi Krissy,

Richard Owen from The Times reported that Professor Vinci had said Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra.

“Lawyers for Mr Sollecito have told the judge that, according to a forensic expert called by the defence, Ms Knox’s DNA is on Ms Kercher’s bloodied bra-strap as well as that of Mr Sollecito and Rudy Guede.”

Luciano Garofano also thinks Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra:

“My conclusion is that the bra clasp certainly works as a piece of evidence - it is a strong clue against the suspects Amanda and Raffaele. The RFU number is high enough. So the result is perfect.” (Luciano Garofano, Darkness Descending, page 379).

Posted by The Machine on 02/22/17 at 06:00 PM | #

This is a fantastic article, highlighting Peter Gill’s wilful ignorance in relation to this case. it was during my email exchange with him that I realised how badly influenced and misinformed he was by the FOA.

It was actually on Twitter that I first noticed @Guilterwatchin who now masquerades as @Justiceinrome messaging Gill and requesting him to review the FOA analysis of the evidence, this in turn prompted me to contact Gill directly. It was evident from our exchange that Gill was completely ignorant of the basic facts of the case.

Gill’s dishonesty has been highlighted by The Machine in this article by drawing attention to Gill stating “I am not getting involved in a debate that specifically addresses the ulitmate issue of innocence/guilt of individuals since that is the purpose of the court. ” While referring to the case as a miscarriage of justice in his book.

Bemusingly in the same email exchange while I was pressing Gill to substantiate his views he also replied “YES YOU ARE CORRECT IN EVERYTHING YOU SAY, I CAN ADD A LOT MORE POSSIBILITIES, THAT’S WHY THERE IS A PROBLEM, WE CAN ONLY SPECULATE WHAT THE TRUTH IS”.

Interestingly Gill never did provide the “lot more possibilities”. Questions have to be asked of Gill’s agenda and involvement in this case.

Posted by Swansea Jack on 02/22/17 at 07:04 PM | #

Great, article and comments here. No one’s criticizing Gill’s credentials, only that he based his conclusions on an incomplete reading of the data, whatever was selectively fed to him by Pascali, Conti and Vecchiotti. 

By appearing on Rome TV as a defense expert just before the acquittal and the fact his findings were presented to the court (which then repeated his and CV’s criticisms without allowing the prosecution experts to rebut) only made it more questionable.

Balding in his PNAS paper disagrees with Gill whether Knox’s profile was there on the bra, but still finds Sollecito’s presence very likely.

But credit to Gill for developing the method of STR profiling for blood and semen still in use today http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v318/n6046/abs/318577a0.html

One wonders what he would have said if Sollecito’s semen had also been found and he was asked to write a report to explain that away?

Posted by Ergon on 02/23/17 at 04:00 AM | #

Hi Ergon

“No one’s criticizing Gill’s credentials, only that he based his conclusions on an incomplete reading of the data, whatever was selectively fed to him by Pascali, Conti and Vecchiotti.”

Hampikian was in that mix also…. Isn’t this shades of “forced confessions” Saul Kassin? He lectured a global conference about imagined Italian police brutality, so dont take the ripple effects of these pro-perp experts lightly.

Kassin was very cool-headedly corrected right here on the facts in his area. Examples:



But he then turned around and gave interviews claiming he was personally attacked, for supporting Knox, but nobody questioned his substance!


After that post Kassin’s name disappeared from the John Jay College staff list and he did, finally, go silent.

At the moment I incline to agree with the Machine that Hampikian, Kassin and Gill all hoped to gain at least career benefit, and there may well have been costs or fees paid too.

Gill’s ill-informed innuendo should not have survived Berti, Barni and Nencini.

But his appearance on the national Porta a Porta crime program had the host being very sarcastic at the police for DNA supposedly flying hither and hither.

This smoke-blowing appearance on the Porta a Porta program came six months AFTER Berti, Barni and Nencini presented their detailed conclusions.

<iframe frameborder=“0” width=“480” height=“270” src=”//www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x2k745h” allowfullscreen></iframe>

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/23/17 at 06:38 AM | #

Peter Gill used his status as a world-renowned DNA expert to influence the legal proceedings. This couldn’t have happened in the UK because of the sub judice rules which prevents anyone in the media from commenting on a case until a verdict is reached in order to prevent the jury from being swayed.

Peter Gill’s ridiculously far-fetched theories about contamination were never tested in court and he was never cross-examined. If he had been cross-examined by the defence lawyers, he would have been exposed as a fraud. He has made a number of false claims about the case e.g. the police didn’t remove any other knives or test them - which is a Friends of Amanda PR lie.

Posted by The Machine on 02/23/17 at 12:22 PM | #

In every facet of life and work, it has always been inordinately easier to pick apart and find fault with someone else’s work than it is to create something yourself. The chance to enhance your reputation or career on the back of someone else’s errors (real or perceived) can be a heady brew. Not to mention highly lucrative; surely another main driver.

I think people who tend to exclusively appear as expert witnesses for the defence at trial or indeed defence lawyers themselves, with few exceptions, are more likely to be driven by the factors above than some lofty ideal of ensuring that the innocent aren’t incarcerated.

Nothing else explains to me why people like Gill or Henry Lee become embroiled in high profile cases where the totality of the evidence clearly shows the guilt of the people they are trying to con a jury into believing are innocent; albeit Gill only appeared in the court of public opinion rather than the trial itself or subsequent appeals. His contradictory statements on whether he was proclaiming the guilt or innocence of Knox should be a career inhibitor rather than enhancer. But it won’t be.

I’ve often wondered how these people sleep at night and have concluded that they sleep like babies; comfortable on a pillow stuffed with dollar bills or pound notes. There is nothing moral about defending the likes of Casey Anthony, Amanda Knox or OJ Simpson; the rewards are entirely financial and reputational.

We have a famous defence lawyer in Scotland called Donald Findlay. His reputation is built on getting plainly guilty people off on our anomalous “not proven” verdict. He inevitably fails more than he prevails given the low life types that he almost exclusively represents but he is one of the highest paid QC’s in the country so his motivation is there for all to see. A courtroom showman who manages to persuade the terminally stupid that often comprise our juries.

I have little doubt that our Donald will have many of the characteristics of a psycopathic personality type, commonly held by a worryingly high percentage of senior boardroom executives of large corporations. People who care less about people than they do about money and status.

Great piece by The Machine incidentally and insightful comments by all. The diligence and tenacity of everyone at TJMK continues to be an inspiration to me and, hopefully, Meredith’s family.

Posted by davidmulhern on 02/23/17 at 12:52 PM | #

This is an excellent report. Peter Gill is a paid shill, nothing more and nothing less. I imagine that at least 25% of that four million dollar book advance for “Waiting To Be Hired” went straight to him. The FOAKers knew that they had to produce enough doubt about the DNA evidence in order to get some kind of chance for an acquittal. And, even though it was a illegal one, they got their acquittal when the Italian Supreme Court contravened articles 617 & 628 of their own judicial code in rendering it.

Also we all know the truth that, one could eliminate all the DNA evidence and everything else would still point to Knox, Sollecito and Guede as the killers. Bloody footprints alone convict all the time and there is an indisputable footprint of Knox dead center in Meredith’s bedroom. Plus the CCTV cameras, cell phone records, witnesses and the fact that none of the three have any alibis etc. etc.

I’ve only seen some of the Italian court system through this case, but for sure if these three had killed Meredith in Knox’s home state of Washington back in 2007, they all would have been tried together. And they all would have been convicted together and would now be doing life without parole or looking at needles as this would have been deemed a capital murder case committed during the commission of another violent felony, such as burglary or sexual assault. And back in 2007, Washington State still had the death penalty. The entire nation would have screamed for their executions. They would all have been vilified by the press and all photographed and put on TV together all the time. Amanda Knox, the ringleader, would have been eternally damned by all of America for her drug use, sexual deviancy, mental illnesses and her family would have had to go into hiding or permanently leave the US altogether. Even now, I would not be surprised if they all wind up filing restraining orders against Knox when she reaches middle age and her permanent poverty becomes reality in the not so distant future.

Her current BF of the month is Chris “Party Rock” Robinson who is some kind of self-titled “writer” whose books absolutely suck and he and Knox recently went stone broke again and had to move from NYC back to his parents’ basement in Seattle. His father is Knox’s employer at the WSH. So when “Party Rock” decides that Knox is worth more to him as a non-fiction tell-all gossip column book (i.e. “My Life With Amanda Knox”) then out the door and over the cliff she goes!

Posted by Johnny Yen on 02/23/17 at 07:03 PM | #

A footnote to the remark above about the arcs of Peter Gill and another fringy defense expert, Saul Kassin.

Ergon posted this about Gill:

But credit to Gill for developing the method of STR profiling for blood and semen still in use today http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v318/n6046/abs/318577a0.html

Kassin also had an invention to his name, a test for telling whether a suspect was psychologically prone to induced false memories.

It was Kassin’s own test that Knox definitively fails, when it is applied objectively.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/23/17 at 10:58 PM | #

The scale of deceit in this case is incredible.
I agree with Jonnny Yen - restraining orders.
Letting Knox go to Perugia led to murder. Releasing her, well, she is now a major headache.

Posted by DavidB on 02/24/17 at 12:24 PM | #

Very interesting post on this great report by The Machine Johhny Yen.

So this Chris Robinson character is the son of Knox’s WSH employer?
What a tangled web they weave!
Could this be part of her unraveling as it slowly becomes clear how her release was engineered?

Also the name"Party Rock”, does this suggest he is one of the people pelting rocks at moving cars in the street during Knox’s ‘just ordinary kids’ party when she got a ticket?
He is a first class weirdo, that’s for sure.

I was wondering how she constantly meets the new men she enters into relationships with and it appears now they are all connected in one way or another.
Where is number 3 while she is keeping number 2’s bed warm and vice versa?
Does she give them turns?

Also interesting to hear they returned to Seattle due to being broke, she can’t be broke yet surely given all the blood money she has earned?

She must still be receiving regular cash flow from various sources, she will not be appearing in any mass media without being paid for it surely but she doesn’t look broke considering her enormous wardrobe for one thing.
Perhaps when she is teetering on total financial collapse we will see some big cracks appearing in her desperation to get some more media appearances out there.

Posted by Deathfish on 02/25/17 at 01:22 PM | #

My, my, my, my. This is great stuff. Thank you, The Machine and all commenters. Whew! Slay the dragon, this Mr. Gill is smart, yes sir, smart but partisan. Partisan for Knox, and basing his stuff on partial information that was spoon fed to him by Knox activists. Mr. Gill is the big LCN guy, so why does he stab Patrizia Stefanoni’s LCN lab results in the back, figuratively speaking? And why in the world doesn’t he examine the blood drop they found in Filomena’s room, you know the blood from the dying Meredith that had Knox’s DNA mixed with it? No innocent transfer here, no way.

The Machine says Vincenzo Pascali chief forensic consultant walked off the case and hinted they had found Knox’s DNA on the bra clasp. (they’d already found RS’s on it)

Thank you Ergon for reminding us of David Balding’s expertise (Balding’s from Oxford, hello). Balding confirmed that RS is on the bra clasp.

Krissy G said Luciano Garofano (he’s wonderful) he said in quote from book, Darkness Descending: “the bra clasp works as a piece of evidence—it is a strong clue against ...AK and RS. The RFU number is high enough…so the result is perfect.” Garofano has spoken, the bra clasp condemns AK and RS.

So you have Balding, Vinci, Garofano all convinced that RS certainly touched the dying woman’s bra clasp to remove it. Yet RS says he did nothing wrong, he was home snuggled up with a woman.

And why does Peter Gill try to throw doubt on the knife evidence? And try to throw doubt on the bra clasp? These are genetic samples of the killers!! He wants to mutter about vague dna transfer, when the knife had dna deep in the metal groove of the knife blade, not a matter of a person lightly touching the knife or even lifting the blade or slicing food w/ it. Deep in the grooves of the metal. The knife had even been washed scrubbed until scratches on the metal showed, so the dna was deeply imbedded in the metal, no innocent transfer. Why would a man of science try to trash these lab findings by competent technicians?

I agree with Ergon that we are grateful to Peter Gill for his discovery of STR profiling for blood and semen,(not that I know what STR test is, but) important tests that are still used today.

Credit where credit is due, honor where honor. Thanks to Peter Gill for the STR work he did, bravo, that is the best use of Mr. Gill’s mind, but he has been sucked into this partisan, blind cheerleading for a killer’s acolytes and sycophants who demand his dreadful clouding of science to promote their worthless cause. It’s awful.

And the main point another commenter makes is that if all the DNA evidence were thrown out, the lies and phone records and other real evidence from conflicting statements, eye and ear witnesses, showed clearly who the killers were, along with their history of togetherness, Rudy visitor to the house, Raf visitor to the house and involved with the female whose blood was found in the bidet, a female shoeprint in blood found on a pillow under the deceased, RS hammertoe blood on rug, on and on and on. 

The comments by Deathfish, Johnny Yen, davidmulhern, DavidB, Swansea Jack, James Raper, Peter Quennell, Ergon, The Machine, et al and forgive me if I’ve overlooked anybody, you had informative and superb comments. Like the “Waiting to be Hired”, and info about AK boyfriend Chris Party Rock Robinson.

This along with the post about the OPPORTUNIST Mr. Gill, these have more truth in them than the entire FOA waterfall of nonsense the last 9 years. Remember Dr. Sollecito trying to say maybe Amanda had borrowed Meredith’s bra and worn it (girls rarely do that, outside of close families in extreme need or exigency), to excuse AK’S dna on the bra? The FOA make similar lame excuses about RS’s dna on the bra.

Gill has turned a blind eye to the facts of this case, one can only wonder why and speculate: the money motive, the friendship motive, who knows? Love blinds the greatest minds to truth.

I have always been flabbergasted at how the Knox PR did such a dishonest firebombing of the blood evidence, how they laughed off the Luminol results, they dismissed the “hard evidence”, when there was so much of it. They just handwaved away the Italian labwork, lying about it and trying to diminish it. Knox is a liar, Raffaele is a tremendous liar, and the Knox family and Sollecito family began to lie like breathing the minute their dear babies were involved in this crime.

Great truth here today, great post & comments.

Posted by Hopeful on 02/25/17 at 05:22 PM | #


The origin of the ‘Party Rock’ tag comes from Christopher Robinson’s appearance at the Toronto Film Festival, see here:


It put people in mind of the Party Rock Anthem video, see here:


It’s also much quicker to write!

Posted by KrissyG on 02/25/17 at 05:56 PM | #

Thank you KrissyG, I see now!

Knox looks as contrived as always in the DM images and party rock comes across overwhelmingly as the weirdo he is - simply made for each other adorned in the clothes and shoes that are wearing them.

The 3rd paragraph describes Knox’s current muse as ‘The author’.

Turn it down DM, you would have people think he was on a par with Martin Amis or someone instead of an unknown daddy’s boy with a fame fixation.

Posted by Deathfish on 02/25/17 at 08:42 PM | #

Corrections: I wrongly attributed the Garofano quote to KrissyG, but it was The Machine who quoted Garofano. Also, in recalling Dr. Sollecito’s “maybe Amanda borrowed the bra” excuse, the doctor was seeking an innocent explanation for why his son’s DNA was on the bra clasp, as he knew Raffaele was intimate with Amanda. The doc was not trying to exculpate Amanda, but Raffaele. (or maybe both of them, after Vinci hinted AK’s dna was also on the bra, but primarily his son).

Also, it is strange that Gill who wrote a book about the case claiming injustice, should not bother to determine the supreme court findings, and know that Amanda and Raffaele were not exonerated nor found innocent, but that they were found not guilty based on insufficient evidence, while in the same breath the Supreme Court of Italy stated Knox was at the murder scene and Raf was probably there as well. This is a recipe for doubt and suspicion, not a statement of innocence, and supremes said they would likely have convicted the two except for some flaws in the police investigation.

Hint: supremes gave the two the benefit of the doubt as is right in law (when real doubt has been established), but the final judgment from them was not EXONERATION.

Mr. Gill should have known this if he wrote a book on the subject, and he should have shown care to spell Meredith’s name correctly, if nothing else were spelled right, as a sign of respect for the truly innocent (and in fact remarkably special, loving and gifted) victim of undeserved violence, the goodhearted Meredith Kercher who had been a good friend to Amanda despite Amanda’s various rude behaviors in their home and at the clubs. Patient, understanding, compassionate Meredith. Meredith was her name.

Meredith: she went to Rimini, she went to the Lake District, to Brighton Beach, to Leeds, to London as tour guide on the bus, to dance classes, to visit elderly neighbor lady and ride her son’s backyard train; she tutored her schoolmates at John Whitgift School, she led a full life, crowned by a love of reading and study. Miss All Around Cutie Kercher, Perugia’s Sweetheart. Croydon Cutie, too.

Posted by Hopeful on 02/26/17 at 03:09 PM | #

Hi Hopeful,
So many great points you make I’d need a full page.
“Waiting to be Hired” yes, an absolute classic!
Regarding Mr.Gill I think you have to keep your eye on the money there for sure.
They are still slowly unraveling that is for sure.

Posted by Deathfish on 02/27/17 at 04:05 AM | #

Hi Hopeful (and Machine and Deathfish and Ergon)

Show all the FOA “evidence” and none of the real evidence, and many experts can be real suckers.

In fact a number of those who were on the pro-Knox bandwagon have or had pretty good credentials but got sucked in in that manner. Many went silent subsequently and after they found Machine etc on their tails. As Hopeful said:

Thanks to Peter Gill for the STR work he did, bravo, that is the best use of Mr. Gill’s mind, but he has been sucked into this partisan, blind cheerleading for a killer’s acolytes and sycophants who demand his dreadful clouding of science to promote their worthless cause. It’s awful.

(1) Do we know HOW Gill got sucked in?

We are pretty sure “false confessions Kassin” (mentioned in 2 comments above) was worked on by FOA specifically because of his outstandingness.

In her book Knox says it was Madison Paxton who worked on Kassin for the same reason. See the quote from pages 270-272 here.


But Bruce Fischer claimed one of his group captured Kassin and put him in touch with the Knox lawyers in Perugia.


(2) In recent months, has Gill popped up anywhere? (Also, Madison Paxton?)

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/27/17 at 04:50 PM | #

Maybe you saw IMDB just dropped their forums for movies and actors?


I’ll miss them. I quite often posted glowing reviews of actors we see on Broadway.

I think though the trolls and the flamers were causing way too much upset, as with too much of the Internet, and hurting IMDB’s marketing (it makes good money out of the professional area of IMDB which I pay around $100 a year to access and think it is worth that).




Could YouTube be next to drop its often abrasive comments, I wonder? The Knox nasties were pretty active with their fake news on both boards.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 02/27/17 at 06:20 PM | #

Raffaele’s aunt Sara Achille denounces the refusal to compensate Raffaele. New poster rocklee1957 at PMF shares the Panorama interview of Aunt Sara, dated February 28, 2017.

Raffaele’s aunt who has been his Perry Mason and guardian angel studying his case for years in order to help his legal team, says the decision to reject Raf’s compensation, “trampled his dignity.”

She spouts the party line of how his civil rights were violated because the police first questioned him merely as a person informed of the facts but then transitioned him to a suspect and:

He wasn’t allowed to call his dad.
He wasn’t allowed to call a lawyer.
He was forced to take off his shoes.
He was walked to his cell barefoot.

She thinks that the many contradictions Raffaele made in his story were him being cleverly led by the police into those remarks. Police’s fault of course, after they told Raffaele that Amanda admitted to going out on the night of the murder, getting both defendants confused and to turn on each other. It was the police who led poor Raffaele into contradictions. The result of this was that he was later denied the compensation.

Aunt Sara said she chewed Raffaele out about his crude Facebook remarks that referred in bad taste jokes to murder and told him it was wrong.

She reminded him he will always need to watch his words extra cautiously, and in that sense “He does not realize that until the end of his days, Raffaele will never again be a free man.”

“But as a boy who wants to regain his life, he refuses to accept this reality.”

Aunt Sara told him he must decide if he wants to preserve his serenity or carry on “being devoured by this scum who does their job in a seedy way…because they end up exploiting his every word.”

She named Selvaggia Lucarelli who condemned Sollecito’s Facebook remarks, as an example of this media scum. I have no doubt that anyone who believes in her nephew’s guilt is also scum. Poor deluded loving relative, always the last to face the truth. She is married to Dr. Sollecito’s brother.

Posted by Hopeful on 03/01/17 at 01:23 AM | #

Poor ‘Raffy’ was awfully upset they took his shoes from him.

I can’t comprehend Aunty still whining away for her poor snowflake.

Did all those nasty old people really hoodwink your young and very smart boy and his girlfriend aunty?
Really aunty?

Posted by Deathfish on 03/01/17 at 02:04 AM | #

English translation of the Florence Appeal Court’s refusal of compensation to Raffaele Sollecito is out! Copy sent to you as well, Peter.

Posted by Ergon on 03/01/17 at 05:51 AM | #

Thanks Ergon for this copy of the vital English translation. Q.E.D.

Posted by Cardiol MD on 03/01/17 at 09:25 AM | #

Hi Ergon, thanks for the translation.

It has seldom, if at all, been reported anywhere that the 5th Chambers said that Knox was present in the cottage at the time that poor Mez was murdered, and scarcely credible that if she was there that Sollecito was not.

The other side oft asserted that our translation was incorrect or a mis-interpretation of what the 5th Chambers had said, or that the 5th Chambers’ remarks were ambiguous or meant something else. The translation of the Florence Court’s rejection of Sollecito’s claim for compensation lays the other side’s bogus claims to rest. It could not now be clearer to the english speaking world that the 5th Chambers had held that Knox was there.

It is also fairly obvious, at least to me, that although the Florence judges had to pay lip service to the final acquittal, as the definitive judicial truth, eg by referring to the DNA on the knife as failed evidence, they nevertheless regarded that, and much else, as a load of hogwash.

Posted by James Raper on 03/01/17 at 05:41 PM | #

Hi Ergon, many thanks, email received, main post follows at your convenience.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/01/17 at 07:26 PM | #

Hi Hopeful

“Police’s fault of course, after they told Raffaele that Amanda admitted to going out on the night of the murder, getting both defendants confused and to turn on each other.”

It says that?! If so that made me laugh. It’s not usual to claim that she turned first.

How does aunty explain this statement RS made in writing to Judge Matteini? “I never want to see Amanda again. Above all, it is her fault we are here.”

Or numerous other betrayals of one another over more than eight years, such as these ones?





Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/01/17 at 07:45 PM | #

Hi James Raper

“It has seldom, if at all, been reported anywhere that the 5th Chambers said that Knox was present in the cottage at the time that poor Mez was murdered, and scarcely credible that if she was there that Sollecito was not.”

Agreed, there never was any good reporting on this late in 2015, not even in Italy. We started posting our translation on 26 September. No UK or US media translated any of the report, Andrea Vogt did post segments.  You among others did numerous follow-up analyses in these series.


The Knox people had got their inferior translation done first and on 23 September 2015 Machiavelli corrected one of their worst “mistranslations” (there were many others) in this post.


Our first really big pass at the media which we expect to be very high-impact is coming up soon, with all our corrections of the report by Netflix. This series is still ongoing.



Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/01/17 at 08:01 PM | #

Yay! Site is showing again at 11:30 East Coast time after some hours down - I was warned by email about 3 hours ago.

Sorry all. No report yet from our excellent hoster but I can tell it was a software issue on their side because when trying to access the control panel this issue showed:

HTTP Error 500.0 - Internal Server Error The FastCGI process has failed frequently recently. Try the request again in a while.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/02/17 at 07:57 PM | #

Thanks for the update, Peter.  I’m always uptight when I see the site go down.  Glad to see things up and running again.  I appreciate all the hard work and look forward to the Netflix series.

Posted by whatswisdom on 03/02/17 at 08:43 PM | #


Sure thing. Computer techies like Chris Mellas probably have the skills to organize a DOS attack and possibly to hack in to a “regular” site, but the plan we are on with this fine hoster (biggest in the world for Microsoft sites) deliberately has very tough “walls”!

The hoster has told me we could not have loaded a message on the blank site as their software (not ours) developed a problem with the application pool.

We have never received even one legal threat since 2008 which says something in itself about the truth of what we post. Ann Bremner did once get in touch but she was trying everywhere to get reports of her drunk driving removed. She claimed to be bipolar (like her brother) and as both go nuclear at times I guess that could be true.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/03/17 at 05:23 PM | #

Next post will also be by Machine so as not to disrupt the flow. He has found things in the Sollecito judgment that help.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 03/03/17 at 05:34 PM | #

I have to say the English translation of the judgement ruling against Sollecito’s compensation claim is excellent. Dr Silvia Martuscelli and Dr Paola Masi have produced a report that makes clear. Logical sense and is irrefutable. Unless you happen to be an accolyte of the murdering little deviant Sollecito who has willingly suspended all disbelief in the way you must when going to see movies such as The Lord of the Rings.

Now facing a legal bill for bringing his spurious claim in the first place, little stabby boy has launched a begging effort of kickstarter as seen in the link below. How splendid it is to note that after four days of campaigning, he has amassed the princely sum of diddly squat.


Not sure who was responsible for the English translation of the statement by Sollecito on the kickstarter page where he tries to explain why he needs the money and why people should contribute but it’s so poor that it could very well have been the manboy himself.

When this latest attempt to con money out of the deluded fails, as it surely will, one can only hope that the penny finally drops with this fool. He is widely held in contempt and will never be free of the mental prison of his own making. He’ll reach for the bottle of pills to end his pain long before Knox ever would.

He seems to be having a much harder time of it than Poxy Knoxy. Although psychopathy clearly is a part of his make up, that particular trait doesn’t appear to be nearly as strong in him as it is in Knox herself. Hence he was little more than her poodle; dazzled, like Guede, by the offer (or in Guede’s case, the potential) of free sex from a morally bankrupt but admittedly pretty (back then at least, she’s as rough as a badger’s ar*e these days) part time prostitute (sex for drugs with “Federico”).

Posted by davidmulhern on 03/04/17 at 01:15 PM | #

I would like to thank all who worked on the translation of the document.
Well done and thank you!

First impressions after the first read and this is from memory as I read it when it was first posted (thanks Ergon)
- is here again we have a legal document that states clearly that Sollecito lied right from the beginning and his partner in crime, Amanda Knox did too. It seems they think not only that, but worse - and more obvious than Sollecito himself!

Back to Sollecito - his stories, alibis or versions are bouncing all over the place from the walls to the ceiling to the floor everywhere!
It is quite a stunning document as it more or less states they are guilty as charged.
I am sure Bongiornio has stuck her neck in with an appeal already so that is yet another court date in this ever saddening saga.
It would be interesting to hear what Knox has to say about this translation, or her weirdo boyfriend with the Casey Neistat fixation.
One things is for sure this isn’t over by a long way. Justice for Meredith and her family will come.

Posted by Deathfish on 03/05/17 at 01:56 AM | #

You’re welcome, Deathfish, from all the people who worked on it.

This ruling has adverse implications for Knox’s ECHR referral and the Sollecito Gumbel trial which was deferred till April.

I know there have been three rounds of communications between ECHR and the parties, and ECHR hasn’t even ruled it admissible as Knox’s lawyers flail around.

I was concerned abt the effect the Boninsegna ruling against the police calunnia complaint. This ruling applies even more as an indictment of Knox’s behavior, and the Italian reply will definitely include this in the next round with ECHR.

Posted by Ergon on 03/05/17 at 06:22 AM | #
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 Exposing Peter Gill #2: Nailing His “Proven Miscarriage Of Justice” False Claim

Or to previous entry Problems With Fred Davies #2: His Claims On Knives, Wounds And Stains Also Highly Mislead