![](https://truejustice.org/ee/images/website/tjmkfrontpage.jpg)
Wednesday, April 10, 2024
Knox Calunnia Retrial: Prosecution Makes Strong Case For Letting 3 Year Felony Sentence Stand
Posted by Our Main Posters
The Prosecutor General of Tuscany
1. Today’s Happenings
The Florence court met for its first tense and briefly heated session today.
The verdict for Knox in the calunnia retrial, in which she is accused of criminal slander against Patrick Lumumba, her boss, is postponed to 5 June.
The Florence Prosecutor-General Dr Ettore Squillace Greco (tellingly a very big gun) asked for confirmation of the three-year sentence for Knox, who was provisionally acquitted of murder by the Supreme Court’s Fifth Chambers (bizarrely, that is the family court) in 2015.
During the session’s opening, the fiery lawyer Carlo Pacelli, Patrick Lumumba’s lawyer, shouted “Amanda is a liar” to Ms Knox’s lawyers.
He was interrupted by the judge, and Ms Knox’s lawyer replied: “We cannot restart the murder trial again, we are here for a defamation case.” (An odd response, as that is why Patrick’s team is there too.)
According to the Prosecutor General, when Knox wrote her “memoriale” on 6 November 2007 she would have been “aware of Lumumba’s innocence” and “aware of suggesting to investigators the name of a person who had nothing to do with the murder”.
It was explained to the court that the ECHR was simply mistaken in its summary of Knox’s treatment on the night of her arrest.
The court has before it all the documents we summarized in the two posts just below.
2. Some Context
Knox of course repeatedly undermined her own case by testifying under oath in December 2007 and at trial in 2009 that she was treated well.
We now know that a major reason for the ECHR’s confusion was a pretty fictional account by Knox lawyer Dalla Vedova, who did not seem to have anything compelling to say in her support today.
The case Dalla Vedova made to ECHR was kept confidential by Knox’s defence for years. When Italian prosecutors finally got to see it, they were amazed and amused. All it asked for was the equivalent of about $1 million in damages. No verdict rollbacks. The ECHR only recommended a payment to Knox of about $20,000.
Amanda Knox wrote her “memoriale” in English before being transferred to Capanne Prison, and she handed it to Officer Ficarra (who has no English) with a gleeful laugh. In it she seems to be trying to walk back damage done in her sessions with Ficarra and Dr Mignini before daylight on that same day.
Knox’s memoriale makes no mention of having been pressured or abused except a claimed tap on the head that all witnesses and her own lawyers denied. (In her other calunnia trial Judge Boninsegna in effect accused the cops of being too kind!)
Nor did she claim this to the supervising magistrate, Dr Matteini, several days later, or to Dr Mignini on 19 December when she was interrogated (actually her first interrogation) at her own request.
Even Knox’s own lawyers made a public announcement denying any abuse in early 2008. They never filed a complaint - something they could be disbarred for if they really believed Knox.
Knox did not actually go looking for this appeal, which could have major impact on her “I’m the victim” flow of cash. The Italian Parliament dropped it in her lap with a change of the rules. Did Sollecito lawyer and Member of Parliament Bongiorno not think this thing through?
Or maybe she did. Like the Sollecitos, she has always seemed to want to see Knox brought down.
Tuesday, April 02, 2024
Nailing In Advance Amanda Knox’s Expected Lie-A-Thon At 10 April Retrial #2
Posted by KrissyG
Florence courts, venue of callunia retrial
Recap of Knox’s and Sollecito’s earliest written records
The Recorded Statement taken from Amanda Knox re the afternoon and evening of 2 Nov 2007 is timed at 3:30pm. Dr Mignini had arrived about 3:00pm. What jumps out is the following statement:
Amanda Knox [statement 2 November 2007]
“Around 5 pm I left my house together with Raffaele to go to his house where we stayed the whole evening and the night.”
So, from having been at Via della Pergola for lunch, during which time, Sollecito joined her, and Meredith had got out of bed after arriving home in the early hours, who according to Knox and Sollecito, still had the remains of vampire makeup on her chin, was wearing her ex-boyfriend’s jeans, and had gone out at four, “Without saying where she was going”, the pair claim to have gone straight to Sollecito’s apartment in Via Garibaldi, ‘At about five’.
The next written record we have comes from Knox’ email home to 25 people in her address book:
Amanda Knox [email Sunday 4 Nov 2007, in the early hours circa 36 hours or so after Meredith’s body was found]
“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. [sic]”
The next written record is Sollecito’s first written statement to the police:
Raffale Sollecito [November 5th 2007 at 22:40 in the offices of the Flying Squad of the Perugia Police Headquarters]
“QA Around 16:00 Meredith left in a hurry without saying where she was going. Amanda and I stayed home until about 17:30-18:00.
QA We left the house, we went into town, but I don’t remember what we did.
QA We stayed there from 18:00 until 20:30/21:00. At 21:00 I went home alone because Amanda told me that she was going to go to the pub Le Chic because she wanted to meet some friends.”
For the first time we are made aware that the pair went somewhere after leaving Via della Pergola at between ‘5:30 and 6:00’ according to Raffaele’s statement, this glides neatly into Popovic’s visit at 6:00pm at Raff’s abode. No visible gaps in the timeline here.
Next comes Knox’ handwritten statement to the police:
Amanda Knox [Handwritten Statement to the police 6 Nov 2007]
‘Thursday, November 1st I saw Meredith the last time at my house when she left around 3 or 4 in the afternoon. Raffaele was with me at the time. We, Raffaele and I, stayed at my house for a little while longer and around 5 in the evening we left to watch the movie Amelie at his house.’
So Knox says they left at 5:00 – as she set out in the email home, above, whilst Sollecito makes it an hour later. So, we are led to believe, they didn’t stay in town long at all, and in any case, ‘I don’t remember what we did’.
This is a big red flag. When people say, ‘I don’t remember’, they are telling you they recall an event, but are unable to retrieve it from their memory. In fact, Knox and Sollecito do not even try to ‘remember’, not even when elite detectives are carrying out a crucial murder investigation of your girlfriend’s own roommate. A person who was not involved would surely say, ‘I don’t know’ when asked a straight question, not ‘I don’t recall’.
Sollecito sticks to his script: ‘We left via della Pergola at six’:
Raffaele Sollecito [7 Nov 2007 Prison diary]
“An amusing thing I remember is that Meredith was wearing a pair of men’s jeans which belonged to her ex‐boyfriend in England. She left quickly around 4 pm, not saying where she was going. Meanwhile, Amanda and I stayed there until around 6 pm and we began to smoke cannabis.
My problems start from this moment because I have confused memories. Firstly, Amanda and I went to the centre going from Piazza Grimana to Corso Vannucci passing behind the University for Foreigners and ending up in Piazza Morlacchi (we always take that road). Then I do not remember but presumably we went shopping for groceries. We returned to my house at around 8 ‐ 8:30 pm and there I made another joint and, since it was a holiday, I took everything with extreme tranquillity, without the slightest intention of going out since it was cold outside.”
Note the signifier, informing the reader, ‘it was cold outside’ implying, ‘therefore we would not have gone out that night’.
So, whilst Sollecito on 7 Nov 2007 jotted in his Prison Diary they were out between ‘six and eight’, Amanda writes to her lawyers a couple of days later adhering firmly to her script of not going anywhere at all.
Amanda Knox [Letter to her Lawyers 9 Nov 2007]
“Around 3 or 4 Meredith left the house wearing light-colored clothing, and all she said was “Ciao”. She didn’t say where she was going. I continued playing guitar and after a while Raffaele and I left my house, probably around 5pm.
We went to his house and the first thing we did was get comfortable.”
Then comes Knox’ next written affirmation of what she did the day of the murder:
Amanda Knox [Page 1223 Prison diary27 Nov 2007]
“Here is what I did that night:
5pm: Left my house with Raffaele and walked to his apartment.
5:05pm - ???: (1) Used the computer to look up songs to play on the guitar.
(2) Read Harry Potter in German w/Raffaele.
(3) Watched Amelie.
(4) Prepared and ate dinner – Fish.
(5) While cleaning the dishes a bunch of water spilled on the floor.
(6) We tried to soak up a little with small towels but there was too much.
(7) Raffaele rolled a joint.
(8) We smoked the joint together and talked.
(9) We had sex.
(10) We fell asleep.
It’s that simple.”
Still no mention of going into the old town. None. Note the qualifier, “It’s that simple”. Note the triple question mark as if she is unsure it took half an hour to an hour to arrive at Sollecito’s, when it would only have been five or ten minutes away, at most.
Raffaele helpfully offers us an insight in his book several years later as to why he revealed – even if Amanda NEVER does, not once – they went into town in his police statement of 5 Nov 2007.
Andrew Gumbel and Raffaele Sollecito [From Honor Bound 2012]
P 17
“It was the last time I ever saw [Meredith Kercher].
Amanda and I smoked a joint before leaving the house on Via della Pergola, wandered into town for shopping before remembering we had enough for dinner already, and headed back to my place.”P53 (in the Questura 5 Nov 2007)
“I mentioned [to police] Amanda and I had gone out shopping, something I had apparently omitted in my previous statements.” [note the plural].
So, we see, Sollecito has not voluntarily offered the information ‘We went into town’ either, on the afternoon of 1 Nov 2007. He concedes he only proffered it, because the police brought it up. When asked the purpose of the trip, he claims they went ‘shopping’, but on not being able to prove they bought anything via receipts nor state which shops the pair frequented, Sollecito had to retract this claim, by now adding to his 6 Nov 2007 official police statement, later, that once there, they suddenly realised ‘We had enough for dinner already’.
So, we are led by this to conclude the purpose of the expedition into the old town was ‘shopping for dinner’.
So Sollecito says they set out to do something – shopping - but then didn’t do it. Sollecito omits to even mention to police going into the old town, and Knox persistently does not mention it at all, even though Sollecito told police she was with him, in a signed statement. He only mentions it when detectives ask him why he omitted to in the earlier police statements.
Sollecito then suddenly remembers this implied unimportant detail and tells the police they were there, shopping. But wait. The pair then suddenly do not do any shopping at all because once there, they realise they ‘already had’ provisions for the evening meal. Amanda Knox makes clear that the evening meal was FISH. Yet she claims she couldn’t remember exactly what she did at Sollecito’s, for at least three weeks. (Fishy indeed.)
Astonishingly, years later, Knox still refuses to mention the pair’s mysterious excursion. Here in her book Amanda Knox resolutely omits the detail of ‘going into the old town’.
Amanda Knox [Waiting to be Heard 2013]
P61
“Sometime between 4:00pm and 5pm we left to go to his place.”
There then follows filler sentences about how “we wanted a quiet cozy night in.
As we walked along, I was telling Raffaele that Amélie was my all time favourite movie.
‘Really?’ he asked. ‘I’ve never seen it.”
[Forgetting completely, forensic police discovered he’d downloaded the movie way back on 28 Oct 2007].
“Oh my God,’ I said, unbelieving. ‘You have to see it right this second. You’ll love it.”
The narrative then completely jumps to:
“Not long after we got back to Raffaele’s place, his doorbell rang.” [Enter first alibi Jovanna Popovic, whom Raff states appeared at 6:00pm].
A whole hour is omitted. One whole hour to get back to Raff’s, just around the corner, four to ten minutes away at the outside. And once again Sollecito sets out to help Popovic with her suitcase but that doesn’t actually happen after all, either.
From all the evasions and omissions we see that what happened between 4:00pm and 9:00pm on the afternoon of the murder and where the pair went, is deeply significant. The trip into the old town which took up to two to five hours of their time seems rather more sinister than some kind of coyness or embarrassment about perhaps buying some drugs. They talk quite openly about smoking dope in their police statements and books.
In his statement to police on 5 Nov 2007, Sollecito claims he came home alone from town at “20:30/21:00”. As we now know, the pair both switched off their phones together, between 20:45 and 21:00, so we can be sure this time is supremely salient. Meredith was on her way back around then. From Knox not ever mentioning the trip into town, it could be she indeed never did go into town, and that Raff went alone; after all it was Amanda, Popovic claimed to have seen at six.
When Knox wrote in her follow-up memorandum to the police – which was not allowed to be used as evidence in court – after having named Patrick Lumumba as the perpetrator, she portrays herself as having been dreadfully confused. But the importance of concealing ‘going into town’ between 4:00pm and 6:00pm seems to be closely connected to what happened vis-à-vis Patrik Lumumba-cum-Rudi Guede.
Amanda Knox [memo to police 6 November 2007]
“In my mind I saw Patrik in flashes of blurred images. I saw him near the basketball court. I saw him at my front door. I saw myself cowering in the kitchen with my hands over my ears because in my head I could hear Meredith screaming. But I’ve said this many times so as to make myself clear: these things seem unreal to me, like a dream, and I am unsure if they are real things that happened or are just dreams my mind has made to try to answer the questions in my head and the questions I am being asked.”
And indeed, the annulling final Fifth Chamber confirms that Knox, as a finding of fact, covered up for Guede by naming Lumumba.
Can we really believe Knox was simply stressed out by the police when she named Lumumba? If so, why the great desperation to conceal what she did between 16:00 and 21:00?
And what were her exact whereabouts when her room mate was killed?
Wednesday, February 14, 2024
Nailing In Advance Amanda Knox’s Expected Lie-A-Thon At 10 April Retrial #1
Posted by Our Main Posters
Perugia Central Police Station at night (left-center)
Overview
Right now, Amanda Knox is a convicted felon who served three years.
Knox still owes damages of about $100,000 as well. This award over a decade ago was to Patrick because Knox had framed him for murder when under no pressure (as all courts agreed).
Because of an absurd mistake by the bungling European Court of Human Rights - falsely concluding from “evidence” that one of Knox’s lawyers made up that Knox was (1) a formal suspect (2) under extreme police pressure, and (3) should have had a lawyer present (4) when she was “interrogated” - Knox is being given a chance to annul her felony.
She will present her evidence if any before an appeal court starting in Florence on April 10.
Knox’s endemic false claims and smears that make up this interrogation hoax took a team of more than 30 of us three years, with extensive document gathering and translation, and over 20 posts (see all links below) to definitively put to bed. This text below was our final overview, first posted here in 2014.
1. Masterlist Of Posts In The Pre-Trial Series
The Interrogation Hoax pre-trial series consists of a total of 20 posts. Numbering of posts is not chronological. It represents the original order of postings.
These posts quote from a large number of transcripts only recently acquired and translated. There are no serious conflicts, no gray areas. One can assume with total certainty that this is the real thing (see Part 3 below), and that any other versions (see Part 4 below) are fabricated.
1. What Happened At AK & RS Q&A Prior To 6 Nov
Click for Post: #19: ALL Knox Q&A Sessions 2-6 November 2007 WERE Recorded #1
Click for Post: #20: ALL Knox Q&A Sessions 2-6 November 2007 WERE Recorded #2
2. What Happened At Knox Q&A 6 Nov Ending 1:45 AM
Click for Post: #2: Trial Testimony From Rita Ficcara On Realities 5-6 Nov
Click for Post: #3: More Defense Pussyfooting Toward Rita Ficcara, Key Witness
Click for Post: #4: More Hard Realities From Rita Ficcara, More Nervousness From Defense
Click for Post: #12: Ficarra & Knox Notes PROVE Knox Merely Worked On Visitors Names List
Click for Post: #5: Key Witness Monica Napoleoni Confirms Knox Self-Imploded 5-6 Nov
Click for Post: #7: Testimony Of Witness Lorena Zugarini On The Knox Conniption 5-6 Nov
Click for Post: #8: Testimony Of Interpreter Donnino On Events Night Of 5 November
3. What Happened At Sollecito Q&A 6 Nov Ending 3:30 AM
Click for Post: #6: Sollecito Transcript & Actions Further Damage Knox Version
Click for Post: #9: Officer Moscatelli’s Recap/Summary Session With Sollecito 5-6 Nov
4. What Happened At Knox-Rights Session Ending 5:45am
Click for Post: #15: Knox Is Told Her Rights And Repeats Fake Murder Charge
5. What Of Relevance Happened In Ensuing Months
Click for Post: #13: The First Two Pre-Trial Opportunities Which Knox Flunked
Click for Post: #14: The Third Pre-Trial Opportunity Which Knox Flunked
Click for Post: #16: The Fourth Pre-Trial Opportunity Which Knox Flunked
Click for Post: #17: Sollecito April 2008 Before Supreme Court Again Coldshoulders Knox
Click for Post:#18: The Final Pre-Trial Opportunities Which Knox Flunked
Click for Post: #21: Illustrating How Batshit Crazy The Interrogation Hoax Has Become
6. Why Investigators’ Version Won Hands-Down At Trial
Click for Post: #10: Why Prosecution And Defenses Never Believed Knox’s Version #1
Click for Post: #11: Why Prosecution And Defenses Never Believed Knox’s Version #2
2. Explaining Overall Arc Of Events
Much of the testimony listed above was about events at the central police station pre-arrest in early November 2007 and subsequent court attempts to achieve some believability and relief.
Early in 2009 at trial Knox and Sollecito sat glumly through all of the investigators’ pre-arrest testimony and cross-examination at trial. They were downhearted and apprehensive, and there were no smiles and few interruptions.
Subsequently Sollecito chose not to get on the stand, so from his team there really was never a rebuttal.
But Knox HAD to get on the stand, in July, for two days. She had no other way to defend herself against the serious felony crime of falsely framing Patrick for murder.
It was her word against theirs. It contradicted in many places what she had heard months earlier in sworn testimony from many investigators.
Knox’s version inevitably weakened a lot under cross-examination, and was ultimately a fail at trial and several appeals, even the annulled one.
Knox ended up serving three years. While on the stand she confirmed that she had been treated well, stiffing thousands of supporters duped into believing she had not been.
3. Explaining Court-Accepted Narrative For 6 Nov
This is an overview of Knox’s so-called “interrogation” at Perugia’s central police station, the subject of the first ten posts.
It led to her arrest and three years served. To make this picture really firm we will quote a lot of the testimony at trial. The Case Wiki carries all of these transcripts, many in English translation, and more.
Senior Inspector Rita Ficarra testified that she arrived back at the police station late on 5 November, and finds her way blocked by a cartwheeling Knox.
She rebukes Knox, who testily responds that she is tired of the investigation. Rita Ficarra tells Knox to go home and get some sleep. Knox testily refuses, and remains there.
Shortly after, Ficarra suggests to Knox that if she really wants to help, she could add to the list of possible perps - men who Meredith knew and who might have visited the house.
This was a recap/summary, a simple checking of facts with someone who might or might not be of help. This could have been done on a street corner or in a house by a single officer. It was not a witness or suspect interrogation. From the transcript:
Ghirga: “While this interrogation - let’s call it thus - was in progress, some colleagues arrive…” Ficarra: “It was not an interrogation, Attorney.” Ghirga: “They are called recaps/summaries.
Knox eagerly agrees. So they begin on the list.
This goes slowly because of language problems, until an interpreter, Anna Donnino, arrives. In total only Knox and four others (three of them women) are present.
Knox builds a list of seven people and adds maps and phone numbers (placed in evidence) in a calm proceeding. These were the names: Peter Svizzero, Patrick, Ardak, Juve, Spiros, Shaki and “a South African [Guede]” who played basketball near the house.
At several points in the evening Knox is provided with refreshments. No voices are ever raised, no bathroom breaks are refused.
In a separate wing Inspector Napoleoni and a couple of colleagues are seeking facts from Sollecito. Shown conflicts between what he has said and what his phone records show, Sollecito backtracks, and declares that Knox went out alone on the night, and made him lie.
Napoleoni moves through the questura to suggest to Ficarra to discuss the night of the attack with Knox in more detail and clarify who might have been present. Knox is not informed of Sollecito’s backtrack. She is asked for more names and spontaneously shares her phone. There is an outgoing to Patrick but no prior incoming. Knox is asked who Patrick is.
Suddenly, to the considerable surprise of others present, Knox has a yelling, head-clutching conniption (the first of several that night) and says “It’s him, it’s him, it was him, he killed her”. The session is halted.
Despite warnings she should not do so without a lawyer, Knox insists on a recorded statement which says she headed out to meet Patrick that night after he texted her. She accuses Patrick of killing Meredith.
Efforts are made throughout the next several hours to try to help Knox to calm down. Knox is put on hold, given more refreshments, and made comfortable on some chairs so she might try to get some sleep.
A second session ending at 5:45 is intended as merely a formal reading of Knox’s legal status and her right to a lawyer, with Dr Mignini presiding. She is to be held as a material witness and for her own protection.
Again warned that she should not speak without a lawyer, and no questions can be asked, Knox still insists on a second spontaneous accusation culminating in a second recorded statement.
This also says she went out to meet Patrick that night, also accuses Patrick of killing Meredith, and now also hints that Sollecito may have been there.
Just before noon, now under arrest and about to be taken to Capanne Prison, Knox insists on writing out at length a third statement this time in English.
She gleefully hands it to Rita Ficcara who cannot read it as she as no English. In the statement, Knox included this damning remark, without any mention of having been coerced: “The questions that need answering, at least for how I’m thinking are… 2. Why did I think of Patrik?”
Knox’s lawyers never ever substantially challenge this version. At trial they accept that there was no interrogation, leave standing that Knox insisted on all three statements, and dont ever pursue Knox’s claims that she was coerced.
Courts all noted that there is no mention in that third note of Knox having been coerced, although this note was her idea and she could put in it anything she liked. From this there never was any going back.
In July 2009 at trial, in face of days and days of prior investigator testimony, Knox brashly tried to substitute this scenario above with the one below. Of course she was disbelieved.
For the calunnia framing of Patrick Lumumba Judge Massei in 2009 sentenced her to a year more than Sollecito, amended by Judge Hellmann in 2011 to three years served.
The Supreme Court definitively overruled her calunnia appeal so for her false framing of Patrick she is a felon for life.
4. Explaining Knox Family & PR Alternative
Knox’s Italian lawyers were not a part of this; in contrast the American PR lawyer Ted Simon sought to introduce major confusion.
In Italy, lawyers are REQUIRED to report tales of abuse of their clients or face possible criminal charges. Contrariwise, if they knowingly report false charges they can face similar charges. So what they do is a strong indicator of truth.
Amanda Knox’s lawyers not only did not ever report any abuse. They even announced publicly, in face of incessant claims of abuse by Knox, family, and PR forces, that they had seen no evidence of abuse and so would not be reporting.
Though her precise claims vary and often contradict one another, Knox herself has on and off ever since November 2007 tried to put the investigators on trial - tried to blame the police for causing her conniption and her false accusation of Patrick for the death of Meredith.
Her fail rate has been spectacular.
Knox failed to convince (1) Supervising Magistrate Matteini and (2) the Ricciarelli review panel in November 2007, (3) failed to convince Prosecutor Mignini in December 2007, (4) failed to convince the Supreme Court in April 2008, (5) failed to convince the Micheli court in late 2008, (6) failed to convince the judges and jury at trial 2009, (7) failed at annulled appeal 2011, (8) failed at repeat appeal 2013, (9) failed to convince the Supreme Court in 2012 and (10) failed again in 2015.
As Knox’s team simply did not ever believe her, they may not have given this their hardest shot. It was not part of their largely spurious complaint to the EC HR.
And yet despite all of these failures, the huge and very nasty Knox PR effort went full-bore ahead with the abuse allegations anyway.
Read this post of 11 February 2009 which was about two weeks before the Knox “interrogators” were cross-examined at trial, and several months before Knox herself took the stand. Dozens of media reports repeated the Knox claims as if true.
Knox repeated them in her April 2013 book, and her December 2013 email to Judge Nencini, and her appeal to EHCR Strasbourg, and in some TV and newspaper interviews, including one with the Italian weekly Oggi which caused that paper legal harm.
This version has been blown up by Knox PR shills in internet posts, articles, TV interviews, and books. Among others propagating it have been Raffaele Sollecito (in his book), Doug Preston, Saul Kassin, Steve Moore (especially), John Douglas, Jim Clemente, Paul Ciolino, Michael Heavey, Greg Hampikian, Chris Halkidis, Mark Waterbury, Doug Bremner, Candace Dempsey, Nina Burleigh, Bruce Fischer, and many posters on the Knox sites and Fischer sites and on Ground Report.
Main claims included 50-plus hours of “interrogation”, numerous officers in teams, no food or drink, no sleep, no bathroom breaks, no lawyer, no recording, and much abuse and yelling and suggestions and threats. Way beyond anything even Knox herself and notably her own lawyers ever claimed.
- Here is Steve Moore claiming that around a dozen cops in rotating tag teams of two assaulted a starving and sleepless Knox over 20/30/40 hours, threatened her, and refused her a lawyer throughout.
- Here is Saul Kassin claiming that Knox was interrogated over the entire night of 5-6 November, until she was finally broken and a coerced “confession” emerged - even though the “false confession” actually framed Patrick and was in reality a false accusation. That Kassin ignores.
- Here are several former FBI profilers blatantly embellishing the same claims in a book, with (today) 60 five-star reviews.
And yet Knox’s own Italian lawyers specifically denied her accusations! No complaint against the police was ever lodged. All courts disbelieved her. Knox served her three years. But still the PR-driven hoax keeps resounding.
Sunday, December 24, 2023
Meredith & Some Of Her Many Friends At This Time Of Year
Posted by Our Main Posters
Happy Christmas, Everyone
Meredith’s family and friends especially.
Meredith’s next birthday would have been this Thursday. Those of her friends in touch with us still regard it as a solemn what-might-have-been day. We wish them all well.
News on the case in 2024 is likely to be pretty explosive. Do take a look at Meredith’s childhood neighborhood before her family moved to the south edge of London.
Click for Post: Meredith’s London #1: Her Connection With This, The Coolest Part Of Town?
Click for Post: Meredith’s London #2: More On Where She Came From, And Probably Had Some Fun
Friday, December 15, 2023
Twenty Ways To Smarten Up American Police Systems
Posted by Peter Quennell
Uploaded a year ago; 600,000 views now
1. Wider Context
Again and again we see US police in serious shortfall, in major part because of this globally unique arrangement.
There are about 18,000 state and local police agencies in the US. These generally fall into the following categories: state police, county police, county sheriffs, municipal police, and special district police.
Resultant problems? Generally low pay, difficulty in recruitment and retention, on-average poor training, amateurish elected or politically-appointed leadership, huge problems in nation-wide modernizing, and almost complete absence of learning from other countries.
Cops shoot hundreds annually, and are very widely mistrusted. Gun ownership is incessantly on the rise in part because of this situation.
2. Uvalde Texas Case
There is ONE important bright-spot development; the growing torrent of recordings from the huge array of cellphones and CCTVs and police bodycams and police-car-windscreen cams. The Uvalde case highlights that.
Eighteen months ago, nineteen elementary-school children and two adults were killed by yet another heavily armed mass murderer.
The lack of preparedness at the school and the (frankly cowardly and uncaring) local law-enforcement response have been enormously criticized. It will take years for full correction and the planned building of a (vastly enhanced) new elementary school.
At bottom is a 53-minutes Frontline analysis of thousands of hours of bodycam and other recorded evidence by the American Public Broadcasting Service.
Highly worth reading is this 20-point online analysis by highly regarded police trainer Lt Dan Marcou. In summary:
1. Believe it can happen! One officer shared, “None of us ever thought the situation would happen here.”
2. Train realistically, regularly and together!
3. Communication is a critical component of tactical success.
4. Immediately move toward the threat, identify the threat and stop the threat!
5. Manage your fear.
6. An active shooter in a room with victims and potential victims is an immediate emergency.
7. An inner perimeter should contain only the problem and the solution to the problem.
8. The first rule in breaching is to check to see if the door is unlocked!
9. You can’t wait for ballistic shields to be brought to the scene during an active killing in progress.
10. If you have no distractive device, improvise.
11. Know the layout in advance.
12. Someone needs to take command immediately.
13. For large events establish a command post and learn to use the incident command model.
14. If you can’t solve the problem don’t impede someone who can.
15. If you are not the cavalry, step aside when the cavalry arrives.
16. Pre-practice room entries/clearing even if you are not SWAT.
17. Shoot accurately under stress.
18. There should be a staging area.
19. Realize that once the threat is over, there is an incredible amount of work to be done, such as [examples].
20. Realize everyone processes incidents like this differently.
Sunday, November 19, 2023
American Woman Kills In Jealous Rage… Does This Ring A Bell?
Posted by Peter Quennell
Overview
Above, Kaitlin Armstrong is sentenced to ninety years.
She raged Knox-style at Moriah Wilson over a man, shot her three times, and went on the lam. She was extradited from Costa Rica (see saga discussed below) where she was halfway to assuming a full disguise.
Now she pays, and pays. Rightfully. No bent courts here.
Tuesday, October 31, 2023
Maine US Mass Shooting: Awesome Systems Brought Into Play - After A Major Systems Failure
Posted by Peter Quennell
Overview
The impressive briefing above took place in Maine last Saturday.
Well above par for such things. The body of a mentally-disturbed killer of 18, a highly trained ex-military marksman, had just been discovered inside the trailer of an 18-wheeler overlooked in the first search of a likely area.
He had a gunshot wound to the head - from a military style weapon designed to quickly kill many people in combat.
The lead briefer is the Maine equivalent of the head of a national public-safety entity like Scotland Yard or the Carabinieri or FBI.
Exceptional here is his vivid description of just how many seemingly excellent systems were brought into play after the fact. One can readily list 3 or 4 dozen.
However… In fact the mass shooting had been easily preventable.
Previously he had VOLUNTARILY committed himself to a psychological facility, but after only a few days he was released without further monitoring. And his family had WARNED the police about him.
See Monday’s headlines:
- Click for Post: Maine gunman spoke ‘aggressively’ of guns, former co-workers say, as more warning signs emerge
Click for Post: Maine shooter’s family warned cops he was armed and dangerous FIVE MONTHS before massacre
Click for Post: Suspect’s family warned police months before massacre
Click for Post: Cops Warned of Maine Shooting Suspect’s Declining Mental Health in May
Click for Post: Cops were sent to Maine gunman’s home weeks before massacres amid concern he ‘is going to snap and commit a mass shooting’
Click for Post: Maine gunman’s family contacted police months before massacre, sheriff says
Yet again the US’s plague of thousands of way-too-often under-funded, badly-trained, badly-managed, badly-connected local police forces is causing outrage.
Contrast with eg Italy.
Saturday, October 14, 2023
Explaining The New Attempt To Annul Knox’s Calunnia Conviction & ECHR’s Role
Posted by KrissyG
Florence court where decision will be made
1. The History
Knox has provisionally won a Supreme Court appeal against her 2009 calunnia conviction for framing Patrick. A Florence court will now check the facts and rule whether she did win.
It is worth looking back to see on what grounds Knox had a limited victory at the ECHR in Strasbourg which gave its findings in January 2019, and in which Italy unsuccessfully appealed against.
Back in 2008, the European Court of Human Rights issued a groundbreaking decision in the case of Salduz v. Turkey. The court held that people detained at police stations have the right to access a lawyer. If people are interrogated by the police without getting the benefit of legal assistance, this could be a violation of their fundamental right to a fair trial. It is on this point that Knox succeeded.
But we can readily see that (a) Knox was not being detained at a police station when she made her false allegations against Lumumba, she arrived of her own volition, and (b) as of that point she was not a suspect, ergo nor was she scheduled for an interrogation. As soon as Knox accused Patrick Lumumba of being the rapist/killer of Meredith, the interview was terminated.
So where did the ECHR get the idea Knox had been ‘interrogated’? From the fact of Knox’s defence lawyer, Carlo Dalla Vedova’s submissions to the ECHR, relying heavily on the Motivational Reports of Boninsegna, 2016, and Hellmann-Zanetti, 2011.
Problem is, Boninsegna was not the judge in Knox’s callunia conviction case; that was Massei, 2009. Massei was largely ‘overturned’ by 2011 Appeal Judges Hellmann-Zanetti, who in turn was largely annulled by the 2013 Chieffi Supreme Court, and the Knox-Sollecito first apeal was reverted back to the 2014 Appeal Court Nencini, 2014, in a different legal region (Tuscany).
Judge Hellmann nonetheless upheld Knox’s Calunnia conviction, as did final Supreme Court Bruno-Marasca. Thus, the Calunnia conviction was never at any stage rescinded or referred back on appeal.
But it was Judge Hellmann who introduced the concept of ‘interrogation’ and Judge Boninsegna, who oversaw the second Calunnia trial, this time relating to a different charge of slander, against the police, and which was thrown out, relied heavily on Hellmann’s descriptive narrative of an ‘interrogation’.
Yet Knox was not in custody and was there only as a person of interest. She volunteered to hang around, having arrived at the Questura with her then boyfriend, Sollecito, who had been summonsed by the police to attend. Thus, volunteering information is not technically an ‘interrogation’ in the legal sense.
The ECHR upholding Knox’s claim under Article 6, right to a fair hearing:
•relied on comments by Hellmann Appeal Court, which was largely superseded and replaced by the Chieffi Supreme Court.
•relied heavily on police minutes and the fact, it says via Boninsegna, that an interpreter, Doninno, and a police officer, RI, failed to record details of their expressions of familiarity with Knox, or make a note that (i) Knox was asked if she wanted a lawyer and declined, (ii) that start and end times are not recorded, and that (iii) hours are condensed into minutes. These police minutes represented a failure of procedure, the ECHR reasoned.
But if Knox was not technically under police interrogation nor detained, that would explain the lack of ‘start’ and ‘finish’ times and obviate the need to read the informant their rights.
2. The Evidence
So what is the evidence of Knox falsely, of her own free will, accusing Patrick Lumumba of raping and killing Meredith?
According to Prosecutor Mignini in his recent book, the facts are these:
When Amanda receives that message in her mobile phone 3484673590, precisely at 20.18.12 […] the users were “hooked” to the cell “Via dell’Aquila n. 5 - Torre dell’Acquedotto sector 3” […].
Amanda replies to Patrick at 8.32.34 p.m., with the SMS message whose screen Lumumba recognized […]. Amanda writes: “Of course. See you later. Good evening!”, in Italian but which was thought by Amanda in English as equivalent to “see you later”, an equivalent of “See you later” or “to resent”, indicating an indeterminate future, next meeting, just of people who see themselves regularly. That evening, in fact, there was no work.
Amanda and Patrick had no appointments whatsoever […]. When Amanda sends the SMS message in reply to Patrick, the reference cell, to which Knox’s users are “hooked”, is that of “Via Berar- di sector 7”, which gives coverage to Corso Garibaldi, where the Sollecito’s home is located. This means that the girl from Seattle, as it was said, had gone out […] from where she was returning to the Sollecito’s house when she received Patrick’s SMS. It is quite likely that Amanda returned from Sollecito at about 20.30, after getting off via Ulisse Rocchi or passing through Piazza Cavallotti, where she received Patrick’s SMS.[…]on the night between Monday and Tuesday, that is between 5 and 6, is the centre piece of the trial, […] because the most important event of that week was precisely the false accusation made by Amanda Knox against her employer, Patrick Diya Lumumba, owner of the Pub “Le Chic”, in the historic centre of the city. This slander, repeated on several occasions in the hours and days after, and which would be completely unexplained if Amanda had not at least been present at the crime, played a fundamental role in the judgment of responsibility against Knox and constitutes, so to speak, the painful point against which Amanda defended herself, […] in front of the policemen to whom she accused Patrick and to me who, however, arrived at the police station later. I would stress that, for the offense of slander against Patrick, Knox has been definitively convicted, so that she can no longer claim invoked pressure from the investigators, which made her falsely accuse Lumumba. This crime was committed with full conscience and self-determination by Amanda, who is the only author of it and who, for this reason, was sentenced to an exemplary sentence.”
There is also the issue of the police wiretap which caught Knox confessing to her mother in the following week of knowing that Patrick was in prison wrongfully, but neither informed the police to rectify the situation.
Mignini further explains in his book that Knox said in her statement to the police that she lied to Sollecito that she had to go to work that evening:
...that, therefore, she had gone out and met Patrick in the nearby basketball field, and that she had then returned with him to the apartment of Via della Pergola. There, again according to Knox’s account, Lumumba would have secluded himself in Meredith’s chamber with her, had sexual intercourse with her, then degenerately killed her. Amanda would have heard everything from the position where she had stayed. It’s evident that she must have heard screams, fuss and then cries of Meredith before she was killed.’
[…]… and, therefore, the need to hide from Raffaele the encounter with Patrick (or, perhaps, with the other black, hidden under the guise of Lumumba, that is Rudi Hermann Guede), the next story may have a more or less innocent side, in the sense that Amanda would have only wanted to make Lumumba meet with her British roommate, but also, on the contrary, a disturbing side, alluding to a real participation of the girl from Seattle in the violence suffered by Mez and in her killing at the hands of Lumumba, having knowingly allowed him to meet Meredith in the apartment. However, Amanda accused Lumumba, not herself. They were statements that were “straight incrimination of another party”, not “self
incrimination”.
This is an important distinction. One has the right in law not to incriminate oneself but no-one has the right to falsely accuse another of a crime that leads directly to their detriment. Lumumba was arrested in the early hours, in front of his wife and children, wearing nothing but underpants, and thrown into jail accused of a particularly heinous rape and murder, as a terrified African man from the Congo. The photograph of his arrest appeared in the worldwide press.
2. The Court Judgments
Then of course, there is the finding of the Supreme Court, Marasca & Bruno, Sept. 2015, who made it clear that Knox’s confirmed Calunnia conviction was borne out of a need to cover up for Rudi Guede, by virtue of his being also Black, as was Lumumba, and by reasoning that had a neighbour seen someone of that description near the cottage, that could be interchangeable with the person Knox had pointed a finger at, insofar that Marasca and Bruno upheld as a fact that Knox was present at the cottage when Meredith was murdered.
“All this took place in Perugia, during the night between the 1st and 2nd of November 2007. Knox […], knowing that he was innocent, with statements filed during declaration to the Flying Squad and the Police of Perugia on the 6th of November 2007, she falsely blamed Diya Lumumba called “Patrick” for the murder of the young Meredith Kercher, all of this to obtain impunity for everyone and particularly for Guede Rudi Hermann, coloured as is Lumumba; in Perugia, during the night between the 5th and the 6th of November 2007.
[…]4. Meanwhile, it can’t be ignored, on a first summary overview, that the history of these proceedings is characterized by a troubled and intrinsically contradictory path, with the only fact of irrefutable certainty being the guilt of Amanda Knox regarding the slanderous accusations against Patrick Lumumba.
[…] On the other hand, in the slanderous declarations against Lumumba, which earned her a conviction, the status of which is now protected as final judgement [giudicato], [they] had themselves exactly that premise in the narrative, that is: the presence of the young American woman inside the house in via della Pergola, a circumstance which nobody at that time – except obviously the other people present inside the house – could have known (quote p. 96). According to the slanderous statements of Ms. Knox, she had returned home in the company of Lumumba, who she had met by chance in Piazza Grimana, and when Ms. Kercher arrived in the house, Knox’s companion directed sexual attentions toward the young English woman, then he went together with her in her room, from which the harrowing scream came. So, it was Lumumba who killed Meredith and she could affirm this since she was on the scene of crime herself, albeit in another room.’
[…]
‘Another element against her is certainly constituted by the false accusations [calunnia] against Mr. Lumumba, afore-mentioned above. It is not understandable, in fact, what reason could have driven the young woman to produce such serious accusations. The theory that she did so in order to escape psychological pressure from detectives seems extremely fragile, given that the woman [47] could not fail to realize that such accusations directed against her boss would turn out to be false very soon, given that, as she knew very well, Mr. Lumumba had no relationship with Ms. Kercher nor with the Via della Pergola house. Furthermore, the ability to present an ironclad alibi would have allowed Lumumba to obtain release and subsequently the dropping of charges. However, the said calunnia is another circumstantial element against the current appellant, insofar as it can be considered a strategy in order to cover up for Mr. Guede, whom she had an interest to protect because of fear of retaliatory accusations against her. This is confirmed by the fact that Mr. Lumumba, like Mr. Guede, is a man of colour, hence the indication of the first one would be safe in the event that the latter could have been seen by someone while entering or exiting the apartment.’
FIFTH CHAMBERS MOTIVATION REPORT (PRE-FINAL DATED 1 NOVEMBER 2015
For completeness of facts, here is what Massei, the trial court judge, had to say about Knox’ framing of Lumumba:
“It must therefore be asserted that Amanda Knox freely accused Diya Lumumba of having killed Meredith, and so accused him with full knowledge of the innocence of the [419] same Lumumba. The incriminating evidence against Amanda Knox and her boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito which has been presented also highlights the goal that was thus pursued: to lead the investigators down the wrong track, far away from that which might have led to an investigation of her own and her boyfriend’s responsibility. A behaviour and a choice, therefore, [that were] purely defensive: Amanda had good relations with Lumumba, by whom she had always been treated well, as she herself stated, and thus there could have been no reason for rancour, animosity, revenge which could have justified such a serious accusation; the sole reason for unjustly accusing Lumumba was that of distancing herself and her boyfriend from every possibility of suspicion and the necessity of further investigations. To obtain this it was necessary to indicate a different perpetrator and so Amanda pointed to Diya Lumumba. A behaviour, therefore, which follows the same defence strategy as that already put into effect with the staging implemented by breaking the window of Romanelli’s room, and constitutes a further confirmation of Amanda Knox’s capacity for fictitious representations and contrived manipulation of the events.
SENTENCE OF THE COURT OF ASSIZES OF PERUGIA 2009(PRESIDED OVER BY DR. GIANCARLO MASSEI)
3. Conclusions
So we can glean the following conclusions from this. During the very earliest days of the course of investigation of Meredith’s murder, on the very next Tuesday evening after the Friday of 2 November, 2007, Knox pointed a finger at Lumumba knowing he was innocent and of her own free will, as found by all of the criminal courts. The Italian criminal charge of Calunnia equates to the US charge of Obstruction of Justice or the UK equivalent of Perverting the Course of Justice, and is quite separate and distinct from any associated charge, such as the Aggravated Murder charge. In the recent submission to the Court of Cassation, Knox relied heavily on the fact that the Aggravated Murder charge was annulled, and thus, ipso facto, was the argument that the Calunnia charge was also void. However, the Court was not buying this and instead of the immediate annulment of the Calunnia conviction, a retrial has been set.
Did Amanda Knox seek to derail the police investigation by pointing the detectives in the wrong direction of an innocent man, Patrick Lumumba? This is what will need to be determined once again.
Why would Knox use the heavily criticised judgement of Hellmann - who found her guilty anyway - or that of third-party Judge Boninsegna who didn’t even deal with the Calunnia case against Lumumba, but who, to Dalla Vedova’s delight -ever the defence lawyer looking for a ‘get-out clause’ - quoted Hellmann’s imprecise description of her voluntary police statements as an ‘interrogation’, when there were other, more completely, legitimate and more authoritative judgments that said otherwise, including the final Supreme Court Judge Marasca & Bruno of 2015. Not forgetting that after she had signed her statement, she went away to her own private space and wrote a letter to the police underlining her belief she saw Patrick at the cottage, entirely unasked for and off her own free will. Imagine the astonishment of the police officer when Amanda Knox crammed this letter into her hand, calling it ‘a present’.
Far from being cowed or confused, it seems as though Amanda Knox was determined to direct the police to the wrong person. As many people are unaware - especially in the USA - of Knox’s Calunnia conviction, this whole new retrial might be a shot in the foot for Knox as well as a waking up surprise for those who had no idea of this aspect of her involvement in the Meredith Kercher case nor of her true character.
Sunday, September 24, 2023
Knox’s Misleading Petition To The Supreme Court
Posted by James Raper
Dalla Vedova also wrote untruthful Knox ECHR petition
1. Setting The Record Straight
With reference to this MailOnline article and numerous Italian reports (see one translation below) on Knox’s attempt to have Italy quash her calunnia conviction.
It should be borne in mind that the conviction was:
1. Rendered definitive by the 1st Chambers of the Supreme Court following an appeal by Knox on the issue
2. Effectively confirmed as definitive by the 5th Chambers of the Supreme Court
3. The 5th Chambers also poo-poo’d any attempt by the ECHR to interefere with the conviction whatever decision the ECHR came to.
4. The ECHR, in it’s ruling, did not in any event request the Italian justice system to review the safety of the conviction
5. The 5th Chambers also held, as a fact, that Knox was present in the cottage when Meredith was murdered. Accordingly she was perfectly well aware that Lumumba was not there and thus innocent.
There is an argument for saying that with a lawyer present she probably would not have made the accusation incriminating Lumumba.
That rather depends on what we cannot know, but it is hardly an excuse since she did (though there was no justifiable reason as to why she should, and she knew she was lying when she did.
The argument being used is like saying “Well I would not have shot him if there had been someone there to stop me”. Hardly an adequate defence.
I suspect that the hearing to which the MailOnline refers is really for leave to appeal - the route Guede took when challenging his definitive conviction, only to be denied leave.
Again Knox is drumming up interest so that she can continue with another round of grift and money making appearances.
But again - as always with the Italian Justice system - it is a question of watch this space.
2. Italian media report
Translation from Italian News Service TGCOM:
Meredith Kercher Case: Amanda Knox asks to cancel her sentence for slander against Lumumba
Appeal to Cassation of the American for the three years of imprisonment on the basis of one of the articles introduced by the Cartobia reform. Congolese opposes “out of respect for truth and justice”
Amanda Knox is asking that the definitive sentence of three years of imprisonment arrived for slander against Patrick Lumumba and linked to the trial for the murder of Meredith Kercher (for which she and Raffaele Sollecito were aquitted) be canceled.
She is doing this with an appeal to the Court of Cassation on the basis of one of the articles introduced by the Cartobia reform and after the European Court of Human Rights recognized the violation of her defense rights during the investigation.
However, Patrick Lumumba, the Congolese owner of the former pub Le Chic of Perugia, who was accused by the girl from Seattle and unjustly arrested for the murder, is opposed to the application. His motivation: “No to the cancellation of the sentence out of respect for truth and justice”.
Acquitted for the crime of Meredith Kercher but condemned for slander towards Patrick Lumumba, Amanda Knox presented the application in the Court of Cassation through the lawyers Carlo Dalla Vedova, her historical lawyer, and Luca Luparia Donati.
The appeal will be examined, in the council chamber and in non-participatory form [only lawyers present] at the beginning of October by the Fifth Chambers of Cassation. The appeal is accordingly opposed by Lumumba, represented by the lawyer Carlo Pacelli, “out of respect for truth and justice”.
This court may reject the American appeal, revoke the sentence of conviction for slander, or order a renewal of the trial, which in that case would be held in Perugia.
However, the possibility of a new trial is deemed very remote by Knox’s lawyers on the basis of the sentence of Cassation which acquitted her of the murder charge.
A possible cancellation of the conviction for slander would not however open the way to a request for compensation for unjust detention by Knox, since the terms have expired, though she could still make a request for damages.
Patrick Lumumba opposes the request of Amanda Knox to cancel the sentence against her slander towards him “out of respect for truth and justice”.
“Especially in the memory of Meredith Kercher” Patrick underlined with his lawyer, the lawyer Carlo Pacelli who will also represent him in the Court of Cassation. “Lumumba immediately became a civil party against Knox and that remains party to every procedural act” added the lawyer.
Lumumba was arrested for the murder of Meredith Kercher accomplished in Perugia in November 2007 based on Knox’s initial statements, but after 14 days in the cell he was released, because he was totally recognized as foreign to that crime and immediately acquitted.
Amanda Knox will not be in Italy for the hearing of the Cassation which will examine her request to cancel the sentence suffered for slander to Patrick Lumumba. “The procedure will be in the council chamber and without the parties. And also Amanda is awaiting a second child ...” explained the lawyer Carlo Dalla Vedova, her defender from the initial stages of the investigation for murder. A charge from which she was definitively acquitted [actually, untrue].
It was Knox herself who asked to present the application to cancel the sentence of conviction. “She has always considered the accusation of slander unjust because she believes she had not committed that crime”.
Wednesday, September 20, 2023
US Justice Systems Much In The News: #1 Lethality Assessment Protocol
Posted by Peter Quennell
Maryland State training video, similar to many
1. Context
Too many US justice systems are locked in stone because of for example this:
There are 17,985 police agencies in the United States which include municipal police departments, county sheriff’s offices, state troopers,and federal law enforcement agencies.
Compare that to for example Italy where the forces are essentially two: the polizia and the carabinieri.
Plus US laws are often badly written. Plus most judges and prosecutors are elected or politically appointed, and so tend toward a hard line. Plus forced plea-bargains are endemic. Plus for-profit prisons lobby to keep the prisoner numbers enormous.
And there are all those guns of course. Right now police recruitment is at a crisis point in many small towns which can only afford to pay peanuts - in the Gabby Petito murder case local cops were making an average of below $50,000.
Compare that with the median family income of the US: $74,580. In part this is because most Americans don’t much like or trust their cops and resent paying so much for them. (Generally inferior US education is also essentially locally funded on a shoestring.)
2. Lawsuit
The family of Gabby Petito are suing the Moab Utah police in part for not implementing a key system now saving many lives elsewhere. The state-level Lethality Assessment Protocols as described for Maryland above.
According to the family’s attorney, Moab City Police did not use a Lethality Assessment Protocol (LAP) when they spoke with Petito and her boyfriend Brian Laundrie, during a traffic stop in August 2021.
The attorney said Moab police had agreed to implement the LAP in 2018, but that “Moab was not doing anything to employ the LAP at the time … Moab responded in Gabby’s case.”
The subject of a Lethality Assessment Protocol is the basis for [new state-level law] S.B.117 [for all forces]. The bill requires[all] Utah law enforcement agencies to ask a series of questions during a domestic violence call. The questions help determine whether the victim is at risk of lethal violence.
At Moab, Gabby was never asked those questions and a day or two later was murdered.
In fact Moab police has a domestic violence advisor on the force. There was/is a strong rule that she MUST be brought in. She would have asked those questions.
But the cops at the traffic stop who misread the situation ignored this.