Monday, January 20, 2014

Appeal Session #9: Sollecito Team Concludes, Prosecutor Crini Rebutts Defenses’ Claims

Posted by Our Main Posters

[Above: Sun hits the facade of of one of the most modern courtrooms in Europe]

5. Andre Vogt’s Excellent Post-Court Reporting In The Week

From Amanda Knox’s fugitive fears: she’s right to be worried

Sources close to defence lawyers confide that they, too, fear it may not go their way.

It didn’t help that Knox ignored her lawyers’ pleas to travel from Seattle and attend court in Florence - she sent an email instead - nor that she repeatedly requested to meet the Kerchers, only to be sternly rebutted by their lawyer, who suggested she act more like a defendant.

Then she started a new blog and began blithely responding to comments ““ most recently posting an admission that she had once faked a break-in as an April Fool’s prank before she left for Italy (a staged burglary is a key part of the case against her).

Have the wheels come off Knox’s public relations machine now that she’s safe in Seattle? She may need them again soon, because this appeal differs radically from the first one in 2011 which resulted in her acquittal, but which was harshly criticised and eventually annulled by Italy’s Supreme Court earlier this year.

There are three good reasons why this trial is different ““ and why Knox has reason to be nervous:

First, her co-defendant Raffaele Sollecito’s lawyers have distanced his defence from Knox’s.  “He may have brushed her hair and cleaned her ears, but he would not have killed for the love of Amanda,” his lawyer Giulia Bongiorno told jurors in closing arguments earlier this month. “Turn off Amanda,” she said. “Raffaele is not Amanda’s other half.”

Second, the uncompromising Perugia prosecutor Giuliano Mignini has stayed away from Florence. Without him in court as a convenient villain, the “innocent American abroad being railroaded by a rogue prosecutor” narrative no longer holds water. The Florentine prosecutor, Alessandro Crini, has distanced the state’s case from the always controversial kitchen knife that may or may not have been the murder weapon. He’s also given less credence to the “˜sex game gone wrong’ theory that was central to the prosecution case in the first trial. Instead he’s considered all the evidence as a whole. There might have been a fight about missing money and hygiene, he said, but motive doesn’t matter: murders happen all the time for banal reasons. And convictions happen on much less evidence.

Third, the strict Florence judge, Alessandro Nencini, has curbed all antics by lawyers, public and media. There are no perp walks with popping flashbulbs this time. However the appeal ends, no one can argue that this trial wasn’t professionally managed.

4. Tweets by freelance reporter Andrea Vogt

14. Sollecito defense on bra clasp: For us, the condition of the room and conduct of the forensic police tells us there was contamination.

13. Judge interrupted Sollecito lawyer with a booming “No!” saying wiretapped conversations of Sollecito family not to be discussed this trial.

12. Maresca: Whatever you decide, we believe justice will be done & all elements considered in depth. We will serenely accept your decision.

11. Kercher attorney Maresca: Perugians reacted angrily to amanda knox acquittal because it was scandalous: acquittal was decided in advance.

10. Fabbiani, attorney for Meredith’s brother, urges court to look beyond motive. Perna for her sister: one person alone did not kill Meredith.

9. Lumumba attorney Pacelli concludes with this phrase to the jury: “Convict liar Amanda, the diabolical slanderer.”

8. Presiding Judge Nencini has cut Pacelli’s amanda knox monologue short. Says going off track. Pacelli promises to finish in 5 min.

7. Lumumba’s attorney Pacelli is delivering a vitriolic rebuttal on amandaknox - mixing his unbridled contempt w/her own statements.

6. Prosecutor asks (in case of conviction) cautionary measures so defendants can’t flee. Options are: passport, house arrest or arrest.

5. Prosecutor Crini: a lack of motive does not equal proof of innocence.

4. Trial back in session after “pausa caffe” during which Sollecito and his accusers were in tiny court coffee bar at same time. Only in Italy!

3. Sollecito attorney: The only things certain are the death of Meredith Kercher and the presence of Rudy Guede in the house that night.

2. Sollecito attorney: This case is an anomaly. Various judges interpreted facts differently over the years. There’s reasonable doubt.

1. In court, Sollecito attorney Maori contesting prosecutor’s arguments point by point. Knife, bathmat, alibi, witnesses. Afternoon rebuttals.

3. Tweets by our main poster Machiavelli

[At this point Machiavelli signed off]

62. Crini: Nencini asks the clerk’s officer to write down formally the exact terms of prosecution request to issue cautionary measures [if verdict guilty]

61. Crini says his conclusions are unchanged. Prosecution suggests arrest decrees are issued immediately if defendant(s) is(are) guilty

60. Crini points out the crime and motive originate from group dynamic.

59. Crini: Bongiorno had pointed out that anyway Sollecito should be accounted only for what he had done (implicit: not what Knox did)

58. Crini: The excessive and too quick reaction to a situation of rising argument is typical of group reaction.

57. Crini: Argument about cleaning was also reported by Meredith to her father John Kercher

56. Crini: Massive rejection of English [girls] testimonies is “weak” on the part of defence; tensions and dislikes in the house are recorded on paper

55. Crini: Movite cannot be assessed preliminarily as if it was a piece of evidence to be discussed

54. Crini: if you need to prove a crime, it is opportune to detect a motive, but a motive is only a plausible conjecture not basis for deduction

53. Crini: Bongiorno called all English girls ‘unreliable’ (because English, maybe coached by lawyers etc.)

52. Crini calls ‘amusing’ Bongiorno comparing her client with captain Schettino

51. Crini: Some thoughts about the motive.

50. Crini: It makes no sense to say the large kitchen knife is ‘incompatible’ with the big wound.

49. Crini: To the court: can you imagine a ‘surgical operation’ with a small knife producing a wound with clear margins on a live struggling victim?

48. Crini: it is difficult to produce an 8x8 cm large wound with a small 8cm long knife, it would produce at best a wound with irregular margin

47. Crini: The blade hypothesized by defence from the bed sheet stain is anyway larger; these are anyway conjectures. Datum is compatibility

46. Crini: thinking you can preemptively deduce the size of the blade from bed sheet stain is ‘unrealistic’

45. Crini: The “double knife theory” is based on the small size of the right wound, experts point to a likely much smaller knife with thin blade.

44. Crini: no defence wounds, no fight bruises, nothing under nails, bruises indicate forced restraint of victim; how she was immobilized

43. Crini: Massei court did not decide about attribution of pillowcase shoeprints, Crini objects Vinci’s finding, thinks prints are too small

42. Crini: Knox defence: says when Guede leaves palm print on pillowcase leaves a signature

41. Crini: Bongiorno called the murder scene “flooded” with Guede’s DNA. Crini points out his traces in room indicating he had free hands (no weapon)

40. Crini: The defences also dealt thoroughly with the use of the knife, wounds, blade size

39. Crini: The dynamic of the crime. Maori attributed all traces to Rudy Gede alone

38. Crini: All alleles of the victim were found in a scratch on the knife blade. Human DNA is normally not on knife blades

37. Crini: Vecchiotti admitted there was a scratch on the blade

36. Crini: The same defence experts did not object to the attribution Y haplotype of Guede found in the victim’s vagina

35. Crini: Calls Vecchiotti’s reasoning on bra clasp “a priori”, dismissed for reasons totally general and vague. Doesn’t read Y haplot. and X together

34. Crini: Points out a passage where Vecchiotti’s report misquotes police findings inserting the word “only”, built a strawman

33. Crini says let’s look at the Conti-Vecchiotti report, to see what it says, if you can subscribe with the report.

32. Crini: Tagliabracci in 2008 objected to quotes of prof. Gill calling them “too recent”

31. Crini: Objections referred to Low Copy Number are obsolete, and also partly undermined by the RIS report

30. Crini: Calls “embarassing” Bongiorno when alleges the police was wrong in attributing stains to cat’s blood

29. Crini: Disproves Bongiorno’s allegation that the clasp was stepped over.

28. Crini: Novelli rules out there was contamination in laboratory, as well as tertiary transfer in situ.

27. Crini is “pleased” the defence did not attempt to allege laboratory DNA contamination. Points out findings by Novelli

26. Crini: report says had there been internet surfing or writing activity, this would have resulted as obvious.

25. Crini cites arguments about computer expert reports, hearings of 14 Mar 2009 and Dec 2010 say further investigation is unnecessary

24. Crini: Maori omits to quote pieces of Curatolo’s testimony.

23. Crini will deal with Maori’s “theory of alibi” only very briefly

22. Crini says defence arguments on bathmat print are conjectures. Rinaldi is actually same person who correctly attributed shoeprint

21. Crini: Bathmat print: compatibility assessment can be done on what is measurable

20. Crini: Guede knew the hous and apartments, would have chosen logical entries and logical behaviour, Crini calls burglary theory ‘not credible’

19. Crini: alleged small wounds on Guede’s hand, inconsistent with absence of his blood on scene

18. Crini: Talks about Bongiorno’s criticism to staged burglary scenario - the scenario of Guede already inside apartment

17. Crini says police report timings, records of CCTV video camera and phone calls are ‘consistent’

16. Crini does not see corroboration of alleged 7-minute late clock error of CCTV. The 13.29 call was from Carabinieri HQ and don’t change anthg

15. Crini tris to “strain” the timing of police arival to favor the defence, to see if scenario fits. Considers possible CCTV time error

14. Crini: Sollecito calls Carabinieri too late, also because last phone call to Romaneli was at 12.38

13. Crini: Call to Sollecito’s sister, and then Sollecito’s call to Carabinieri at 12.51-45. Crini: this timing is late independently from Battistelli

12. Crini: Battistelli arrives on foot about 10 minutes eariler than postal police car

11. Crini wants to look better at some arguments about Sollecito’s declarations to postal police. Battistelli recalls 12.35 consistent with CCTV

10. Crini talks about Sollecito ‘sidetracking’, talking about statements to postal police

9. Crini: Knox’s Calunnia also contains details that have external corroboration and she could not have deduced from simple burglary scenario

8. Crini: A Calunnia is itself incriminating (require strong defence explanation), but Knox’s Calunnia also contains furth incrimiating details

7. Crini: Knox maintained her calunnia against Patrick over a period of several days. Crini points out the logicality of Cassazione argument.

6. Crini: Knox statements: ‘Patrick had sex with Meredith’ and ‘there was a loud scream’ were new elements, unrelated to known facts and not retracted

5. Crini: On calunnia, Crini points out that there was an argumentation about Knox defence about usability of Knox’s statement. argument is wrong

4. Crini: Theoretically all defense points could be replied to, Knox’s Calunnia, Sollecito statements to police, the staged theft, the mat print; DNA evidence

3. Crini says he will talk briefly only about a few selected points, without repeating himself, and without discussing old arguments again

2. [After the break] Prosecutor General Crini begins to reply.

1. [After the break] Sollecito entering the court, asked what he expect, says “no comment”

2. Tweets by reporter Barbie Latza Nadeau

44. Judge especially hard on Sollecito sub lawyer, reprimanding her for introducing new arguments when she is only supposed to be refuting.

43. Sollecito sub lawyer argues no DNA from Meredith Kercher on bra clasp w/Sollecito’s DNA, failing to mention she was wearing the bra..

42. Six years of Kercher trials and some lawyers still pronounce the K in Knox.. “ka-nox” as Sollecito’s sub lawyer just did.

41. Kercher lawyers finished, now Sollecito lawyers up for rebuttal, but both his principal lawyers had to leave early.

40. Kercher atty Maresca: Perugians reacted angrily to Amanda Knox acquittal because it was scandalous: acquittal was decided in advance.

39. Kercher lawyers ask court to consider all the previous testimony they say proves more than one person killed Meredith Kercher.

38. Lumumba lawyer says his client has not received any of the €22k he is owed by Amanda Knox even though the slander conviction is final.

37. Judge reprimands Lumumba lawyer for veering off course, he is only to discuss slander aspect of case, not murder itself.

36. Lumumba’s atty Pacelli is delivering a vitriolic rebuttal on Amanda Knox - mixing his unbridled contempt w/her own statements.

35. Lumumba keeps referring to Amanda Knox as “the American”, says she had a penchant for drugs, alcohol, sex.

34. Lumumba lawyer calls Amanda Knox a “diabolical slanderer” “¦

33. Lumumba lawyer says Amanda Knox substituted Patrick for Rudy Guede.

32. Court back in session with Lumumba lawyer up. Sollecito back in court after break.

31. Prosecutor Crini: a lack of motive does not equal proof of innocence. Amanda Knox

30. Prosecutor focused on knife, says traces of Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox are valid.

29. Sollecito staring at prosecutor as he delivers rebuttal, jury taking notes, judge listening intently, journalists trying to stay awake.

28. Prosecutor in new Amanda Knox appeal says motive in murder is never simple and clear, like murder itself is complex.

27. MeredithKercher lawyer says her brother and sister plan to come for verdict Jan 30.

26. Prosecutor just referred to Amanda Knox as “la nostra Knox” as he tries to refute defense arguments.

25. Trial back in session after “pausa caffe” during which Sollecito and his accusers were in tiny court coffee bar at same time.

24. Prosecutor making brief rebuttal, pushing Sollecito and Amanda Knox back together after Sollecito lawyer clearly tried to separate them

23. Sollecito just told group of reporters he was not sure if he would come for verdict.

22. Sollecito lawyer finished. Judge asks lawyers how much time they need for rebuttals. 15 minute

21. Sollecito lawyer says his client is not guilty. Does not mention Amanda Knox in final moments of closing arguments.

20. Sollecito atty: This case is an anomaly. Various judges interpreted facts differently over the years. There’s reasonable doubt.

19. Sollecito lawyer tells the court they can only accept that Meredith Kercher was murdered and that Rudy Guede is the lone killer.

18. Sollecito lawyer G Bongiorno has just arrived in court with three male assistants.

17. Sollecito lawyer says Sollecito was never with Guede, Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox. Says testimony that they were was false.

16. Sollecito lawyer working to discredit witnesses. Says store owner who says he saw

15. Judge in response to Sollecito lawyer asking if jury is tired: if we are tired now we will have to kill ourselves by the end of the day.

14. Sollecito in court today. Will he come for verdict on 30th?

13. Sollecito lawyer lays out why homeless man in park who testified he saw Amanda Knox and Sollecito arguing night of murder is unreliable.

12. Patrick Lumumba also absent from court today.

11. Judge in Amanda Knox new appeal rarely looks at Sollecito lawyer, writing notes, scrolling tablet, but minimal eye contact.

10. Sollecito lawyer on mass media tangent, says the “super witnesses” for prosecution in earlier trials were all for show.

9. Judge in Amanda Knox 2nd appeal asks for clarification on hard to follow techie evidence.

8. Sollecito lawyer showing computer records for Raf’s computer access, says access was human, not automated. Jury squinting at slides.

7. Sollecito lawyer moves on to Raf’s computer, how computers belonging to Amanda Knox, Meredith Kercher were all “accidentally” destroyed.

6. Sollecito lawyer back on break in. Frequent reference to Guede “the real assassin”. No mention of Amanda Knox at all yet.

5. Sollecito lawyer focusing on staged break in.

4. Sollecito lawyer G Bongiorno not in court this morning.

3. Sollecito lawyer Maori says luminal also picks up fruit juice, not just blood. Judge taking notes.

2. Sollecito lawyer showing slides of famous footprint on bathroom rug in Meredith Kercher blood.

1. Sollecito lawyer now summing up in Florence, then rebuttals. Verdict expected Jan 30.

1. Tweets by reporter for La Nazione

46. Lawyer Colotti (Sollecito) : “In a process based on circumstantial evidence motive is the glue of the whole thing.”

45. Lawyer Colotti (Sollecito defense) begins.

44. Sollecito defense : “The Meredith’s bra clasp was contaminated as evidence “

43. Sollecito defense : “It was Rudy Guede who entered through the window after breaking the glass “

42. Sollecito defense : “There was no misdirection in statements of Sollecito “

41. Now it’s up to the defense again, Sollecito team begin their final responses

40. Lawyer Maresca (Kerchers) : “On the blade there are traces of the victim “”

39. Lawyer Maresca (Kerchers) : “Hellmann appeal, the acquittal was a pre-cooked judgment”

38. Lawyer Francesco Maresca (Kercher family) begins

37. Lawyer Perna (Kerchers) “Wounds on the body victim compatible with the knife found at Sollecito’s house “

36. Lawyer Perna (Kercher family) begins

35. Lawyer Vieri Fabiani , one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs, the Kercher family

34. Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba) : “Judges, sentence the liar Amanda , the devilish slanderer “

33. Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba) : “Meredith could not stand Amanda”

32. Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba) : “Amanda is on Lumumba’s mind constantly “

31. Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba) : “Amanda hoped Lumumba slander would not be discovered “

30. Lawyer Pacelli (Lumumba) : “the defense of Amanda was rancorous and non-existent “

29. Lawyer Carlo Pacelli (for the plaintiff Lumumba) begins.

28. Crini: “If Sollecito and Knox are condemned then precautionary measures should be decided to ensure execution of the sentence”

27. Crini: “There were tensions in the house for reasons of hygiene ”

26. Crini: “The absence of sure motive is not a defensive threshold “

25. Crini : “At the scene there was no contamination “

24. Crini : the prosecutor carries on his indictment reaffirming the validity of the clues

23. Crini : the prosecutor continues rebuttal,  the Tuscany Attorney General Dr Tindari Baglione enters the court

22. Crini : “Slander of Lumumba in itself is an important element “

21. Crini : the Prosecutor General starts his rebuttal

20. Sollecito’s father::”That’s understandable , too much stress”

19. Sollecito :”I do not know if I’ll be in the courtroom on the day of judgment

18. This ends the argument of Maori (defense of Sollecito )

17. Maori: “The only possible verdict is an acquittal”# meredithnazione

16. Maori: “In the various processes motive , time, and the murder weapon changed ontinuously”

15. Maori: “The witnesses who say that Raffaele and Rudy knew each other, said things false”

14. Maori:”The witness Quintavalle for many days after the murder of Amanda did not speak”

13. Maori: “The witness Quintavalle speaks thirteen months after the fact”

12. Maori: “The witness Curatolo is unreliable , wrong date and report things that are false”

11. Maori: “Some witnesses have had access to financial sinecures”

10. Maori: “The witnesses are characters created by the mass media”

9. Maori: “At 21.26 Sollecito opened from his PC the cartooon Naruto”

8. Maori: “At 21.10 there was interaction Sollecito with his pc”

7. Maori: “Analysis of the computer shows that Sollecito ‘s alibi is true”

6. Maori: “No simulation , glass window broken by a stone from the outside. No glass outside”

5. Maori:”No simulation of theft. Blinds on window with broken glass were not closed”

4. Maori: “The bloody footprint on the bath mat is not Sollecito’s foot”

3. Maori: “Meredith was killed at 21”

2. Maori: “The kitchen knife is the murder weapon . Wounds are not compatible”

1. The hearing begins : now it’s up to the lawyer Maori

[Below: previous image of Attorney General Dr Tindari Baglione who is in court to hear Dr Crini]


Maori’s claims are very repetitive and distorted. All these claims that good people got it wrong and some were paid must be tiresome.

So who paid who, and with what money? All the big bucks were on the side of the defense, the world-record blood money, and they sure spread the big bucks around. Remember Aviello who is still on trial in the same courthouse said bribes were waived around in his prison.

Judge Nencini seems to be showing strong signs of having heard enough from the defenses. He knows like every judge in Italy that these lawyers sabotaged the 2011 appeal by illegal means and really deserve to be in jail.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/20/14 at 01:48 PM | #

Very reassuring to read of Crini’s usual lucid arguments and points.

I was especially glad to read these, re motive :

“55. Crini: Motive cannot be assessed preliminarily as if it was a piece of evidence to be discussed

54. Crini: if you need to prove a crime, it is opportune to detect a motive, but a motive is only a plausible conjecture not basis for deduction

Thanks to Machiavelli too for up to the minute reports.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/20/14 at 03:43 PM | #

Apparently Crini has asked for cautionary measures in case of conviction so defendants can’t flee.

This puts Sollecito’s ”I do not know if I’ll be in the courtroom on the day of judgment” (19)(and his father’s comment “”That’s understandable , too much stress” (20)) in a whole new light.

Posted by Odysseus on 01/20/14 at 03:53 PM | #

I hope they do keep him in Italy now that he is there.  I see nothing wrong in a ‘precautionary’ order until the verdict.

He is, after all, on trial for murder.

Posted by thundering on 01/20/14 at 04:03 PM | #

Hi Thundering

The measures would seemingly not take effect until end-of-court on the 30th, though in the Italian (and US) system they would normally have been kept locked up for the past two years. (Gee thanks again Judge Hellmann.)

As Knox is in the US I guess she could be ordered to Italy for house arrest with passport removed, though only a full arrest warrant could be used as the basis for immediate extradition.

US officialdom might be quite happy to see her off on a plane. Private citizens highjacking foreign policy does not win many official smiles.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/20/14 at 04:11 PM | #

Hi Pete.

Haha.  Yes, I agree. 

I really hope that they do something this time.  Everyone is so weary of the two perps’ histrionic antics.

Posted by thundering on 01/20/14 at 04:42 PM | #

Latest from Andrea Vogt Twitter,

“Kercher atty Maresca: Perugians reacted angrily to #amndaknox acquittal because it was scandalous: acquittal was decided in advance.”

Posted by True North on 01/20/14 at 05:36 PM | #

This is looking like the real thing this time.  Machiavelli great in his summation.  Crini very good, Nencini is no fool.

Trouble if there is an edge in Nencini’s language on the 30th [as there was with the SC report and quite rightly so] is it might give defences a hook for appeal on legal process grounds.

These ten days now are critical.  Surely justice will finally be done.

Posted by James Higham on 01/20/14 at 05:49 PM | #

I am very happy that the justice is finally waking up from its deep hibernation.

Also delighted to see that someone is now at last thinking that “arrest or movement-restriction decrees should be issued immediately”.

Finally I hope that the US will not drag its feet over AK: after all, she is not a CIA agent. At best, she is close to some strange and retired FBI agent!!

She desperately needs some rest from the hectic life! I also hope the playboy also has finished enjoying his life’s quota of fun.

I only hope they will not write more diaries.

Posted by chami on 01/20/14 at 06:43 PM | #

Dear All,

Over the years since 2007, I have never posted (I send emails to Pete, and he posts them for me) or joined discussions - largely because I always felt I didn’t have anything to offer that could meet the level of intelligence in all your posts, nor did I feel that I had any information or views that could significantly contribute to your discussions. I felt that all I could offer was my ability to translate Italian information, and share that with you…

But I have enjoyed reading everyone’s posts over the years, have benefited from the insightful and informed views of those posting and commenting, and I have always enjoyed (as All4Justice comments), the sense of community, fairness and openmindedness that has prevailed.

I have also tried to keep an open mind: it’s not a pleasant thought to consider that a young woman and her cohort might have slaughtered such a lovely girl as Meredith. At the beginning, all I could think of was that - if Knox hadn’t done it - then Meredith must have been horrified, up in heaven, at the injustice being done to her flatmate. But equally, if Knox WAS guilty, then there would be no real justice for Meredith unless people perceived and understood that Knox had been rightly convicted: seeing the suspects as “victims” would only diminish the righteousness of any conviction, and not be a true form of justice for Meredith. Only correct, and complete, information can allow people to understand the extent of Knox’s (and Sollecito’s) involvement.

I also found it distressing to witness the demonization of a country and people that, warts and all (and of course, they do have warts!), have become a second home and family to me.

It was for this reason that I initially started participating on TJMK: I could see that there were differences between what was reported here in Italy, and what was reported in the English-language press, and I was horrified to think that those who couldn’t read Italian would form their opinions on the basis of only what they read in English. For example, when the Italian press was reporting that the knife was not compatible with ALL the wounds but not incompatible with others, the English-speaking press was screaming “knife not compatible”, which is part of the truth, but not all of it.

Personally, although I have really tried to keep an open mind, I have never been able to see how Knox could be innocent. For one thing, how could she have traced Meredith’s blood through her own (Knox’s) bedroom, down the corridor, and into Filomena’s bedroom? If Meredith’s room was, as she claimed, shut when she arrived in the cottage, then how did the blood get on her feet? She made no mention of having mopped the floors with bleach, or sprinkled fruitjuice liberally through the flat in her otherwise highly detailed email… That has always been a clincher for me - especially since these footprints, although only “negatively identifying” (as Massei says), are too small to be those of a grown man, so who else’s would they be likely to be, except Knox’s? Who else would clean up after a murder in a house they didn’t live in? Who would write a detailed account to folks at home, or accuse another of having done it? So many elements…. and of course, if Knox is guilty, then so must Sollecito be, and vice versa.

Anyhow, all this is really in response to All4Justice’s earlier comment about the TJMK community: I AM part of this community, whether I participate actively or not, and I appreciate everything you have all input over the years. As January 30 approaches, I really feel that sense of community, since I, like you, will be hoping that justice is finally served…

Warmest regards to everyone,

ZiaK (katsgalore on PMF)

P.S.: I’ve just previewed this, and I see I’ve made up in length and verbosity for all those years of silence… my apologies!

Posted by Ziak. on 01/20/14 at 07:14 PM | #

Welcome to Comments Ziak, and thank you for the above.
It’s good to put a name to another of the silent readership!

Your participation is appreciated, as the ‘lost in translation’ aspect is vital for true understanding.
I only have a smattering of Italian, but even what I have compared has shown up subtle discrepancies.

Please don’t hesitate to inform us of anything you become aware of - especially phrases the Italians have that don’t have a direct translation.

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/20/14 at 07:53 PM | #

I’ve just corrected Michael Day from The Independent for claiming Knox and Sollecito are being retried in this article:

He also claimed that some independent observers claim that prosecutors didn’t prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. He hasn’t said who these “independent” observers are.

They could be Curt Knox, Edda Mellas, Deanna Knox and Anne Bremner - head of the Friends of Amanda for all we know. It wouldn’t surprise me as most journalists have relied almost exclusively on the Amanda Knox’s family and supporters for information without bothering to verify it.

Please retweet my tweets to Michael Day. Thanks. My name on Twitter is @harryrag

Posted by The Machine on 01/20/14 at 08:04 PM | #


“US officialdom might be quite happy to see her off on a plane. Private citizens highjacking foreign policy does not win many official smiles”.

Makes sense, I can well imagine.

In an ideal world officialdom would have quietly and subtly intervened earlier and told the too-clever-by-half Marriott and his company of professional liars to stick with hyping baked beans and celebrities - and politely asked the Knox entourage to desist from maligning allies and leave foreign policy to those with sufficient brain cells to see the big picture.

In this imaginary scenario the message would be subtly conveyed that it won’t do for an angry (and frightened?) Seattle family in crisis - big time - to imagine they can undo diplomacy simply because they are in long term denial of rearing someone capable of murder.

Back to the real world…

Posted by Odysseus on 01/20/14 at 09:44 PM | #

I was stunned by Crini’s statement that ‘precautionary measures’ should be taken to ensure the execution of the sentence. Of course, I agree and am led to wonder if the terrible two are already being watched?

Thank you very much.

Posted by Bettina on 01/20/14 at 09:44 PM | #

Hi Bettina

I hope they are! And I think they (or at least their lawyers) are aware of the likely outcome.

Now the 10 days of uncertainty…

Posted by Odysseus on 01/20/14 at 10:00 PM | #

For our friends with overactive imagination who plan on lending a helping hand to beautiful/innocent Amanda Knox on Jan. 30, here are a few examples of what’s considered aiding and abetting a fugitive in the US, I am sure the *real* FBI can nail you for much less than this:

- acting as a driver to or from the place where the unlawful act takes place
- being dishonest with authorities who are investigating the case
- holding stolen possessions or other items related to the crime
- sheltering the perpetrator after they have committed the crime

However, if you think you can outsmart the Keystone Cops, why not, go for it, it’ll be fun.

Posted by Bjorn on 01/20/14 at 11:00 PM | #

It seems to be dawning on journalists that Knox and Sollecito are going to be convicted:

Amanda Knox Faces Another Guilty Verdict

Meredith Kercher murder trial: Possibility grows that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito will have guilty verdicts reinstated

Posted by The Machine on 01/20/14 at 11:41 PM | #

Below is the summary of last full day debate in the Amanda Knox appeal trial by Andrea Vogt.

Posted by True North on 01/21/14 at 12:32 AM | #

I’m not a lawyer and I’m quite likely to be missing something obvious to many others but Andrea Vogt says:

“The Sollecito defense finished closing arguments and the court heard rebuttals by the prosecution and the civil parties (lawyers for Lumumba and the Kercher family). Sollecito’s defense then completed rebuttals and Knox’s lawyers agreed to complete their rebuttals in the first hour of the final January 30th hearing, before the judge and jury retreat to the deliberation room for a verdict”.

Why did the prosecution and civil parties get the opportunity to rebut following the Sollecito defense closing arguments but they apparently won’t get the same opportunity to rebut after the Knox defense closing arguments?

Also, how come - according to Andrea - both sides are “rebutting”. I thought the defense teams would make their appeals against the original conviction and then it was up to the prosecution to rebut their arguments.

Posted by Odysseus on 01/21/14 at 01:03 AM | #

Hi Odysseus

Yes its complicated. Your answer lies in the fact that this is a first appeal by RS and AK of their 2009 conviction. In a sense its their show. So they get the last, last, last word - apparently to Judge Nencini’s increasing impatience as they are spouting PR not making real legal arguments.

Back in 2010 after Massei the prosecution would not have appealed any part of the Massei findings and sentence if the AK and RS forces had not signalled that they wanted their own appeal - and opportunity to make the process bent.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/21/14 at 02:02 AM | #


OK thanks, understood. They get the last word.

Posted by Odysseus on 01/21/14 at 02:26 AM | #

There is HUGE confusion (deliberate!) over what this is. Even the “good” media reports the Machine link to above manage to get key parts wrong. We will work on that. Tweets sure help.

Many in the media now claim it is “a new trial” or “a second trial”  and AK and RS could get “re-convicted” at the end.

Its isnt. They wont. This is still a first appeal (rerun, because the 2011 one was bent) of Massei 2009 by AK and RS. Legally the Massei 2009 verdict and sentence have stood ever since, as the Supreme Court did not ever sign off.

The prosecution did not appeal Massei 2009, they were happy with the Massei 2009 outcome at the time (why not!).

We have watched as in this rerun of the first appeal AK and Rs have been losing big in recent weeks (like death by a 1000 cuts) as both Cassation and the Florence Court have insisted on a tight legal focus and a minimum of PR and silly science.

So the appeal verdict due on the 30th is expected to confirm the Massei 2009 verdict, and possibly make the sentences even harsher, because certain “mitigating factors” Judge Massei allowed in 2009 this court doesnt seem to like.

If the 2009 verdict is confirmed on the 30th, the judge will probably say “enough is enough, we want those perps in custody pending final sign-off by the Supreme Court” (standard practice here and there).

At that point, custody in the US for Knox or extradition to Italy would be requested. The State Dept probably wont interfere to stop this, as they monitored the process and reported nothing wrong.

Plus the State Department value good Italy relations too much. And they are already embarrased enough at their helping this guy on the run from Italian law.


Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/21/14 at 02:53 AM | #

The Daily Mail article, by Jill Reilly, refers to the current Florence Appeal as a “retrial” 7 times, and as “the pair’s third trial” 1 time.

Are their persistent misrepresentations willful?

Posted by Cardiol MD on 01/21/14 at 04:58 AM | #

In the demise of Knox’s and Sollecito’s Perugia acquittal appeal, journalist Andrea Vogt reporting from The Freelance Desk reveals from today’s Florence court session,

” Another important moment in this last full day of debate, however, was the opening of Francesco Maresca’s rebuttal, in which he, for the first time publicly, suggested that the 2011 acquittal in Perugia had been somehow decided ( and announced ) in advance.”

Posted by True North on 01/21/14 at 05:17 AM | #

Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream, Knox reserves the hottest place in hell where the fallen angel waits. It is not yet over, we hold our breath even in expectation

Posted by Macthomas on 01/21/14 at 11:16 AM | #

If the cautionary order does not come into effect until the 30/01 is there anything that would prevent them from going on the run before then? I am sorry if this has already been discussed but sometimes there is just so much info to go though 😊

Posted by distemper on 01/21/14 at 11:22 AM | #

Sorry I also forgot to ask, if found guilty this time, is there still another appeal to go through?

Posted by distemper on 01/21/14 at 11:23 AM | #

@ Distemper:  there theoretically might be another appeal but only on legal points, e.g. irregularities in procedure.

Not sure if Peter/Machine would agree but it seems unlikely.  This does seem the endgame and the extradition fight the last play.

Posted by James Higham on 01/21/14 at 12:20 PM | #

Hi Distemper and James

The final word should be the endorsement from the Supreme Court maybe late in summer. Appeals would be filed for Knox and Sollecito but likely summarily dismissed, as Judge Nencini’s court is like a train on rails following the roadmap Cassation set out.

There have been hints from one or other of the two that they might try for a life on the run.

Sollecito wouldnt last long financially, and without his family, and with an Interpol Red Notice asking every country in the world to apprehend him.

Knox also would soon run out of money. Her camp seems to hope that even now they can demonize Italian justice enough that they end up in a standoff - Knox in Seattle going about her life and the US ignoring Italy’s extraditions requests and Interpol Red Notices.

Official US shows no inclination to do this and a supportive paper trail has not been laid. Many US lawyers would wade in who have not spoken up so far and say the process really was fair. Some already have spoken up, for example Nancy Grace and Wendy Murphy and Alan Dershowitz and Ann Coulter (who is a lawyer as well as a political activist!)

However, say official US attitudes change and someone up top for all the wrong reasons is persuaded to give Knox a break.

Knox’s problems there are at least two: (1) she would be essentially unemployable for life and soon run out of money. (2) Those she defamed and hurt can sue her, and she could be facing court action and legal bills for much of her life and at the end huge financial judgments.

There is one other alternative: that it is agreed that Knox serve out her time in a US jail. Good luck with that one! Foolishly, in her book she slimed the Italian prison system and people in it, despite the fact that she was treated really well, so she may end up in the worst of all worlds, as usual by her own hand.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/21/14 at 02:47 PM | #

There is another game Amanda Knox is playing, her appeal to ECHR. I enquired and got this reply:

Received a while back:

“Dear Ahmad,

Thank you for your mail and your interest in the Court.

An application lodged by Amanda Marie Know (sic) has indeed been registered by the Registry of the Court on 6 December 2013. The Court will examine it in due time.

With best wishes,

ECHR – Press Unit

Dear Sir,

The application number is 76577/13 and the applicant is represented by Avv. Carlo Dalla Vedova (Roma).

With best wishes,

ECHR – Press Unit”

Will post more on PMF.Net and TJMK when information become available, but I doubt the ECHR will hear the case.

Posted by Ergon on 01/21/14 at 04:39 PM | #

Hi Ergon

Exactly! Your exchange - the ECHR responses - amazed me. She could claim she is waiting for that outcome, which might take a year or more till Italy shoots it out of the water.

Here are our three posts building on that which show that, in the long run, Knox’s phony ECHR “appeal” isnt going anywhere,

By Kermit:

By James Raper:

By FinnMacCool:

As the radioactive Knox AGAIN accuses people of crimes without any evidence - to the contrary, at trial she admitted she was treated well - she only postpones the inevitable.

And she could face even more calunnia charges and lawsuits (as could Dalla Vedova for knowingly supporting a big lie) and big fines and more prison..

Posted by Peter Quennell on 01/21/14 at 04:56 PM | #

@Cardiol MD

“Are their persistent misrepresentations wilful?”

The first trial is the original one by Massei. That was de novo, original or new, or one that considered all aspects. That one focused on the crime committed and reasonable justice being delivered.

The second trial is the appeal of the original trial of Massei. The focus here is on the errors of omission or commission, or errors in the application of mind, in the first trial. In the second trial the focus is not on the crime and punishment per se, but on the errors and mistakes in the evidences or on the application of mind (law) in the first trial. The verdict may or may not be affected.

This trial by Hellman has been annulled by the higher court. For practical purposes, this does not exist any more. However, the files have not been destroyed and records are not deleted. They do exist but cannot be referenced by a court of law.

The third trial is the current one. This is virtually re-enacting the annulled trial- the appeal of the Massei verdict.

Appeal trials are also trials but with restricted features. I do not think that most FoA get it correctly.

It is a problem of the language. I do think that people are making too much fuss unnecessarily- in particular about double jeopardy. Everyone understands that the three trials are not independent- the one original one is the root and the remaining two appeals are the trials about the original verdict.

It does not matter much if you understand the basic system. The Massei report never went away completely.

Posted by chami on 01/21/14 at 05:14 PM | #


“I was especially glad to read these, re motive…”

This is a basic cornerstone of science. Every effect must have its cause. The causality.

In dynamics, which applies not only to motion of heavenly bodies, but to diverse areas like economics, society and several other areas- we talk about motion under forces.

Newton defined force as the causative agent that makes change of state (of inertial motion) of an object. The change of motion is an observable and can be quantified. Newton claimed that the cause of this is the force- that cannot be seen and hence cannot be quantified. Newton’s laws are attempts in the direction of quantification of the intangible cause of motion- the force.

The crime is the effect. The motive is the cause. The crime is an observable. The motive is not.

Newton’s laws of motion were generalized by Lagrange and Hamilton. They introduced concepts like generalized motion and generalized forces. These concepts are very appealing philosophically.

Several motives may combine to produce one crime. In such a case it will never be possible to dissect the individual motives- just like the case in physics (the law of physical independence of forces).

Motive can be demonstrated only at a philosophical level and cannot be proved because it is an intangible quantity. Today dynamics has progressed a lot because of the three elementary laws propounded by Newton.

Posted by chami on 01/21/14 at 05:36 PM | #

Thanks chami, that is good to put it in this context.
(I do actually come from a family of engineers and mathematicians!)

In fact, I find the more one studies in any discipline, the more one sees the subtlety of combined effects and modifications.
It is certainly true in psychology, and a reason why one veers away from labels which can be too simplistic.

I did chuckle at your plea for no more diaries. Well, perhaps they can write them - perhaps they need to - but please no publication, and please, I hope not to be asked to review them!

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/21/14 at 06:18 PM | #

I really am weary of the tired old strategy of both the FOA and the lawyers of both Knox and Sollecito that if a lie is repeated often enough, it will be accepted as the truth, (Copyright Josef Goebels).

The final defence submissions are an affront to Meredith’s family and her memory.

BTW: I could not help but notice the statement of Sollecito to the Police on Nov 5 2007:

“She opened the door with her keys and I went in. I noticed that Filomena’s door was wide open and there was broken glass on the floor and the room was in a mess. Amanda’s door was open but it was tidy. Then I went towards Meredith’s door and saw that it was locked”.

Q: Since there was no key in the door, how could Sollecito know that the door was locked just by looking at it?

A: Sollecito already knew it was locked because he and his murderous hag of a girlfriend had locked it, as they left the cottage, after the clean up on the morning after they had murdered poor Meredith.

Once again and as Knox has repeatedly shown, the knowing sub-conscious overrides the facile lies of a careless statement.

Posted by Mealer on 01/21/14 at 09:02 PM | #

Then they kissed in the garden “because he was the only one she could thrust”. (as he explained)

Posted by Helder Licht on 01/21/14 at 09:54 PM | #

Hi, Mealer, Helder,

Yes, yes, yes, yes! And on November 8, 2007 this critter started his statement to the police with “I wish to not see Amanda ever again”. Now why would a sweet and gentle person say something like that about another sweet and gentle person? She must have made the animal lover do something that actually traumatized even him, he who walked around ALWAYS with a flick knife in his pocket, take a look at this by the way, the Spyderco Delica4 fast action gives me the creeps:

(here’s the full link from a few years back:

Posted by Bjorn on 01/21/14 at 11:00 PM | #

The fact that arrest or movement-restricting decrees are being requested in case of a conviction is a very good thing.  It would be naive to imagine that Sollecito’s visits to Santo Domingo have been “vacations” - rather, it’s likely that he’s been making arrangements to move there in case of a guilty verdict. 

Limiting his ability to escape to his safe haven would probably also cramp Knox’ options, in case she was planning to join him.  Her long-term options as a fugitive are less rosy than Sollecito’s, considering that she doesn’t own property or has any serious skills to speak of. 

She should have finished her college degree while she had a chance, because doing so while running from the law might be a little challenging.

Choosing to do her time in an American prison would be sheer folly.  While I don’t imagine prison is pleasant anywhere, it seemed like Capanne had humane conditions, and that’s not even taking into account the preferential treatment she was receiving. 

Compared to the fear and abject poverty that millions of innocent people live in around the world, both in conflict areas and in Western refugee detention centers, her life there was more than decent.  She had clean quarters to live in, access to heating and running water, clean water to drink, acceptable food to eat, clothes and toiletries to use, access to personal development (books, music, programs, etc.), a counselor, and pastoral care, a part-time job, a chance to study, visits from family and friends, etc.

There are people out there running from unimaginable nightmares who are being placed in crowded, insanitary facilities, treated like cattle, and denied access to anything even remotely humanizing (and that’s right here on our doorstep, in the EU).  Unlike Knox, they aren’t hardened murderers, but good men and women and innocent children, few of whom ever got a chance or is likely to get one.  Most of them would be more beneficial to societies accepting them than Knox has ever been.

I’m sorry for the rant, but I find the coddling of murderers revolting, especially when combined with hatred and intolerance towards the most unfortunate.  It also sickens me that people have donated tens of thousands to these two and to parasites like Frank, when that money could have been used for truly charitable purposes, like supporting centers for abandoned children, problem youth, abused women, refugees, etc. 

All these people need a safe, clean place to live, counseling, and a chance to learn some skills and integrate/reintegrate.  The same money that allowed a murderer to take a string of tropical vacations could have fed a lot of people over several months, or been used for permanent improvements to a center.

In relation to that, I’m curious about something: if Knox and Sollecito are definitively convicted and decide to go on the run, wouldn’t it be illegal to assist them in any way, including via donations?

And wouldn’t it be extremely difficult for them to accept donations, considering that any Paypal accounts would be surveilled and traced? Maybe that’s something they need to consider, if they were planning to enhance their lifestyle with donation money.

Posted by Vivianna on 01/21/14 at 11:58 PM | #

Hi, Vivianna, assisting a fugitive is illegal in the US, and probably in a bunch of other law-abiding countries (I had spelled “contries” above and corrected, probably a bad omen).

However, Britons probably remember o senhor Ronnie Biggs (Great Train Robber) who lived a relatively happy life in full view in Rio de Janeiro away from an outstanding warrant in the UK, had a quaint bar up the hill in Santa Teresa, and even allowed himself to appear in the same picture with the agent who was supposed to bring him back. I think he even sold T-shirts saying something like “I’ve been to Rio and seen Ronnie Biggs”.

He had to return to the UK because of poor health, Brazil was fine with accepting a criminal like him, but they wouldn’t give him health benefits (“That’s not fair!” would cry Amanda ...) If Knox can manage to escape the long arm of the law, she can go under in a really big city, join some gang, and quite possibly benefit from charity directed at other people.

I don’t see her surrendering easily, and I don’t see her serving her sentence in Italy, I hope I’m wrong—one has to keep in mind that she is already a hardened criminal, a felon capable of pulling a whole range of dubious stunts, and she will spare no effort or resource.

From a human standpoint, though, Amanda Knox is probably finished, thanks to her stupid parents who didn’t let her confess. Going to prison in the US is probably what she deserves, if that’s indeed worse.

Posted by Bjorn on 01/22/14 at 12:53 AM | #

The long arm of the law. You can run, but you can’t hide.

It’s time. It took too long. The book deal should have never happened. Sad that.

It’s time.

Meredith’s time. God bless the Kerchers.

Posted by mylady007 on 01/22/14 at 04:59 AM | #


“I’m sorry for the rant, but I find the coddling of murderers revolting, especially when combined with hatred and intolerance towards the most unfortunate.  It also sickens me that people have donated tens of thousands to these two and to parasites like Frank, when that money could have been used for truly charitable purposes…”

Plus you also consider that

1. an army of supporters consisting of judge(s), politician(s), lawyer(s) and common men (and women) ...

2. blind support without thought and reason…

3. misplaced patriotism…

4. racial overtones…

5. making money with book deals…

6. callous insensitivity towards the real victim.

These two have not murdered Meredith (only). They have murdered everything we consider humane and decent. Do you really think they can be integrated back to the society (as we believe it to be)?

At least Rudy Guede said something like sorry.

With that, he became far better than these two criminals.

And where do you place the dear Frankie?

Posted by chami on 01/22/14 at 05:49 AM | #


Thank you for expressing all that.  These things SHOULD be said out loud and in public if only to educate the ‘public’ and enable them to see how absurd it is to ‘coddle’ murderers.

Posted by thundering on 01/22/14 at 02:06 PM | #

Whoa! Just in via Twitter, looks like Sollecito tried to marry an Idaho belle for citizenship to avoid jail time in Italy (how?), what in the world is our little Joran thinking, and what was that poor woman thinking, she’s lucky she didn’t get whacked:

Posted by Bjorn on 01/23/14 at 01:09 AM | #

From the link in Bjorn’s post above:

Kelsey Kay speaking: “Raffaele had been in Seattle in March visiting with Amanda,” Kay reveals. “Initially, we had decided that it wouldn’t be best … for me to say we had met the way we had met online in July. His wheels started turning and he had asked me to find a time in March … sometime [when] he was visiting Amanda in Seattle that maybe I could have been unaccounted for. So I was instructed to tell people [who asked] when we met that I had met him in March in Seattle at a bar called Montana, and that our romance had started there.”

“... his wheels started turning ...” i.e. he started concocting a lie! He is a calculating liar through-and-through. A lying liar. Apparently he visited AK to coordinate their own lies. May he be defeated by his own lies!

Posted by Patrizio on 01/23/14 at 03:37 AM | #

“Kelsey Kay said that he proposed to Knox in an attempt to become a U.S. citizen and dodge potential jail time”…

Posted by Spencer on 01/23/14 at 07:18 AM | #

Raffaele, I hope you read this site. You still have a week to tell the truth. Reading the news you seem too desperate to avoid jail time, telling the truth before the verdict on the 30th of January will help you with that. At this point you have nothing to lose…
Amanda can run but she can’t hide (for long).
You still have a chance….

Posted by Hungarian. on 01/23/14 at 08:18 AM | #

Kelsey Kay has leaked this story about Sollecito to the media just before the most important court date of all. Her timing is impeccable. David Marriott would be proud of her.

Posted by The Machine on 01/23/14 at 09:39 AM | #

The last sentence in the daily mail link (thank you spencer) :

‘His conviction specified that he did not carry it out alone.’

This is an improvement, at least. Still wrong on the ‘overturning of verdict’ and ‘retrial’, but more factual….

Posted by SeekingUnderstanding on 01/23/14 at 09:44 AM | #

Hats off to Kelsey Kay.
A good independent insight to whom the Knox Mellas clan affectionately refer to as “Raffy” and looney tunes Moore proclaims is a “hero”.

Quite a different take from the friends and family side - it’s a shame that all the media have done nothing but listen to them and propagate their bare faced lies for them.

A warning to all the groupies indeed, as Kelsey Kay seems initially to have been ‘starstruck’ by “Raffy” just as they are, but dear old “hero” Raffy walked all over her and treated her like dirt even though she was an ally and supporter.

Sforza and Sollecito are kindred spirits it seems.

Posted by DF2K on 01/23/14 at 10:51 AM | #

I’d like to alert the Italian media that Sollecito intends to flee Italy and evade justice. I’ve sent tweets to a couple of newspapers - La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera. Please retweet. Thanks. Hopefully the authorities will confiscate his passport.

Posted by The Machine on 01/23/14 at 02:39 PM | #

@True North

“...that the 2011 acquittal in Perugia had been somehow decided (and announced) in advance”- Maresca

The gift that keeps on giving…

In retrospect, we can all see the subtle hint he dropped on the way…

The only “hero” in the FoA camp. Need one say more?

Posted by chami on 01/23/14 at 04:29 PM | #


How times have changed!

In good old days, damsels in distress were rescued by white knights in shining armour…

Today the tables have been turned:

White knights in distress are saved by cute and charming damsels…

Only problem is with happily ever after…

Anyway, I think moonstruck would have been more appropriate.

Posted by chami on 01/23/14 at 06:14 PM | #

I’m finding this RadarOnline story a bit bizarre and I think we should probably take it with a grain of salt until some hard evidence emerges.

The problem with marrying a US citizen to escape prison is that it’s something Sollecito would have needed to start about 3-4 years ago, at a time when he was still behind bars.  The process of obtaining US citizenship has several stages (conditional permanent residence, permanent residence, naturalization) and takes about 3 1/2 years in the best of cases (the extra 6 months are there because the clock only starts when conditional permanent residence has been granted, and it takes 4-6 months for the temporary green card).

So even if he had succeeded in marrying Kelsey Kay last year, at best he would have conditional permanent resident status at the moment.  That certainly wouldn’t have given him immunity from extradition, so what exactly would have been the point?  Delaying the inevitable by a few months?

I admit I’m skeptical about his efforts to marry an American woman, whether Knox herself or a random online groupie, because the process is lengthy, bureaucratic, expensive, and intrusive.  Given the fact that he is undergoing a very public murder trial in Italy, I am not at all certain that he would have even been able to obtain his temporary green card.

In addition, other than Kelsey’s statements, there doesn’t seem to be any solid evidence that this really happened.  You see, one of the things that people do when they set up a sham marriage is publicly document the relationship.  I would have expected Sollecito to mention the relationship and post numerous gag-worthy pictures of him hanging out with this girl before any marriage rumors started floating.  If she didn’t go through with the marriage, it could have simply been passed as a short-term relationship.  The absence of any leaks makes me very suspicious, considering that Sollecito’s other attempts in Switzerland and the Dominican Republic have not gone unnoticed.

There are several things I’m wondering about.  Obviously, I wonder if the story is true.  But I’m also wondering whether Kelsey saw an opportunity to make some quick and dirty money on her own, or whether this is Marriott’s hand. After all, just like Amanda is an afterthought for Bongiorno & Co., so is Raffaele for the PR campaign.  Is Amanda worried that Raffaele may escape to the Dominican Republic, leaving her to deal with a risky extradition process? Is she worried that she may end up shouldering a greater portion of the guilt thanks to Raffaele’s defense?  Is this a warning to Raffaele?

Curiouser and curiouser.  I’m going to withhold judgment for now.  I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the story turned out to be true, since it’s been obvious for the past year or so that Sollecito has been attempting to set up escape routes.  At the same time, I would be equally unsurprised if the story were fabricated, either because the tabloid was looking to profit from it or because the PR machine decided to go for the throat.

The appeal has been remarkably circus-free up to this point, minus Bongiorno’s antics in court, so I suppose that something like this was bound to happen.

Posted by Vivianna on 01/23/14 at 06:44 PM | #

Thank you to all you tenacious truth seekers out there who have always communicated with integrity, and sourced information that has been soundly researched. Whatever the outcome of this appeal, you should hold your heads up high because your motives have been to search for the truth, and not to fuel your own egos for whatever reason.
I am hopeful that justice will ultimately prevail.

Posted by Truthendures on 01/24/14 at 10:17 PM | #

I’ve sent tweets to numerous people who reviewed Waiting to be Heard in the media - many of whom unquestioningly accepted the word of Amanda Knox as the gospel truth. Please retweet. Thanks. My name on Twitter is @harryrag

Posted by The Machine on 01/24/14 at 10:33 PM | #

Has the Ash brown hair with auburn hue not deserted you-
yet no streak of grey, but there’s time, there’s time.
Was there no truth in your good looks, mature one shade more as the seasons fall-
guilt- fear-shame- abandonment-embrace the emotions feel the pain,
these are the lies your beauty bought, such beauty clothed the dead girl in a duvet shawl,
but time has held your beauty up for sale, remember that when you seek to hold time back
the beauty which please the eye has a canker in the flower.
Who killed the girl you once had been? aother woman’s child.

How pastiche your past, your fictile life.
How we are left to elevate the motive as a lobotomy of the truth,
impress it with all the moment of an after dinner speech.
The anguish we experienced is undiminished
-years of pain stands alone of a loved one gone, because another mothers child took yours, at what a cost,
trauma made worse from the suddenness of the loss—and why?….
that becomes the focus of a life, as if consumed by all the fires of the earth in that final holocaust, 
you take refuge and beguile yourself with trust. But it was not enough, others breathed and you..
you awoke distraught to find the world had not reached its end. Why then?

the sum of factors beyond control of will is the circumstance that we contend
The “why” becomes the fact with all the substance that determines death withdrawn
and at most makes tomorrow a survival call
That is what means most to the bereaved in the aftermath,
in the next week, month and years, who was responsible for the loved ones demise and why?
The protracted process to ensure justice is seen to be done in the absolute
the worst breakdown of our rules and norms in the unlawful taking of a life
and you are alone-the body gone that was so beloved
You have ceased to be a mother and a wife
so appropriated the bereaved lose all control over our own flesh and blood
even after the police have done their work after they have barbed their words
there is no control over what was said and done,
you felt a need to own the questions asked,
you cant spit in the face of the miscreant the culprits, unwhipped, uncensured,
the body exclusively possessed outside ourselves, trial, verdict, sentence, appeal,
little voice, little influence, little power, let tragedy alone conceal
the answers to the most basic question of life.
Why did my child have to die? Because a sow couldn’t keep her sty?

Posted by Macthomas on 01/25/14 at 09:31 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 An Investigation Into The Large Knife Provides Further Proof That This Was THE Knife

Or to previous entry False Claims In Bongiorno’s Summation: That The Wound “Proved” Sollecito’s Big Knife Was Not The One