Monday, September 19, 2011

Several Cautious Overviews Of The Possibilities In The Final Sessions Of The Appeal

Posted by Peter Quennell

[Above: the central London area of Southwark where Meredith was born]

We note that Andrea Vogt is reporting on the prospects from Coulsdon in south London where Meredith grew up and went to school.

Hellman and his lateral judge, Massimo Zanetti, will guide a jury of six civilians toward a decision. If there is disagreement, the matter could go to a secret vote. Each juror has one vote, Zanetti has one vote and Hellman has two.

The jury members have free reign to fashion their decision as they please. They could acquit, convict or also choose to convict on lesser charges, reducing sentences, or even opt to release Knox from prison but order house arrest with electronic monitoring in Italy as the case moves on to the final phase in Court of Cassation.

If there is a full acquittal, Knox would go from court to Capanne penitentiary and after two hours of signing papers, walk out of prison a free woman.

“It is common for Italian courts of appeal to review sentences, and I would not be surprised if the two defendants in fact receive a more lenient sentence, also given the final outcome of Guede’s trial,” said Stefano Maffei, who teaches criminal procedure at the University of Parma.

But it ain’t over untill it’s over, though, given Italy’s automatic two levels of appeal where the prosecution too can advance grounds. The Supreme Court Of Cassation will hear the final appeal next year. As Tom Kington notes in the Guardian.

Mignini claims he is “satisfied” with the disputed forensic work, finds the triumphalism of the Knox camp “questionable”, and also has a new legal argument up his sleeve.

“The legal code states that any review of evidence must be requested immediately, not two years later.”

If the couple are acquitted, he added, the verdict could yet be annulled if Italy’s high court decides the recent DNA review was illegal.

Judge Hellman of course refused a prosecution request for a re-test of the DNA material which Judge Hellman’s consultants had failed to do. That could be appealable too.

Mr Mignini also believes that the Supreme Court made a mistake in disallowing Knox’s first written statement implicating Patrick Lumumba and placing herself firmly at the scene with facts no-one who wasn’t there could have known.

His reasoning is that Knox ASKED to write out this statement. Mr Mignini merely observed while she went ahead and he asked her no questions, and so she did not need to have a lawyer present for that.

So far the Supreme Court has been firmly on the prosecution’s side except for the above, and the court specifically noted a taped conversation in Capanne Prison where Knox appeared on the verge of a confession (one of several times where she seems to have come close).

Her parents interrupted her, apparently, the court thought, to stop her dropping herself even further in the soup. Seeming proof that her parents have all along known of her guilt is suggested also by their not passing on that Knox said to them that Patrick had been framed.

And suggested also by this hot potato of a post by Finn MacCool.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/19/11 at 05:32 PM in Appeals 2009-2015Hellmann 2011+


So Knox , a sadistic killer, could actually walk out of prison soon. But one thing is for sure: If she´s going to appear on TV or write a book , I certainly won´t be buying it.

Posted by aethelred23 on 09/19/11 at 08:39 PM | #

aetheired 23

Knox will not be walking anywhere at any time soon you can bet on that. Unless it’s from one side of her cell to the other. She’s not going to write anything either. Don’t forget that in order for that to happen then they have to exonerate Sollecito as well and given Guede’s right of appeal that won’t happen. Don’t forget that an appeal works in two directions.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/19/11 at 11:01 PM | #

What burns me up most is that Kington after endless corrections continues to write, “When Knox, at the end of all-night questioning, said she had witnessed local barman Patrick Lumumba entering Kercher’s room…”

These zombie lies just won’t die.

Vogt gives a good overview of the endgame. The truth is not in doubt. Everything rests on whether the gold-plated defence has succeeded in poking enough holes in the prosecution’s case. I didn’t realize that Hellman will also decide Lumumba’s appeal. Don’t forget to say a prayer for him too.

One thing Knox most certainly won’t be doing if she’s freed is helping the wrongly convicted. Madison Paxton is as scripted as a Broadway musical. The idea that an American could find a job as a photographer when Italy is teeming with unemployed photographers, and reporters like Kington don’t question this story, epitomises how insidious is the defence PR campaign.

Posted by brmull on 09/19/11 at 11:20 PM | #

All of this speculation about Knox and Sollecito going free seems premature to me.  People act as if there is something magical about the Independent Experts’ findings that wipes out the prosecution’s entire case. I find it hard to believe that two experienced judges and the six lay jurors would ignore the lack of alibis, the mixed blood evidence, the phone records, Knox’s framing of Patrick, Sollecito’s footprint, Knox’s and Sollecito’s lies about their activites the morning after murder, etc.  In such a high profile case, one would think the judges and jurors would be especially careful to review all of the evidence including the various courts’ previous rulings in this case and in Guede’s case.

Posted by Sailor on 09/20/11 at 07:38 AM | #

Hi Sailor. Agreed. The evidence summarised on TJMK and PMF is truly massive and very hard to simply put aside. This seems just cautious hedging reporters talking, and at least in Andrea Vogt’s case (Kington is obviously still a shill) giving it an honest shot.

But it is not lawyers talking, except second hand, and then not very well (Stefano Maffei gets it wrong on Guede’s sentence), and all of our own lawyers in the US, UK and especially Italy continue to see things this way.

The six jurors are likely to continue to reflect majority informed opinion in Perugia which is strongly pro-guilt despite the notorious CSI Effect which the defenses have tried hard to invoke.

And the two professional judges if they differ have only three votes out of nine, and the impossible task of writing a verdict and sentence report that explains why all the four previous reports got it wrong, the Supreme Court’s included - one which is not thrown out by the Supreme Court.

Making the prosecutions’ many strong options public like this is a way of showing judges and jury that it really ain’t over and that Judge Hellman who seems to have often come down rather hard against the prosecution will not have the last word.

There is also the possibility of the suit for wrongful death scenario, where the victim’s family or friends or independent lawyers sue the perps if they are released because of shenanigans and dirty tricks, on the same grounds as Ron Goldman’s family did OJ Simpson and won. We will post at more length on that possibility if it becomes relevant, but for now here is the Wikipedia description of what happened.

“On February 5, 1997 a civil jury in Santa Monica, California unanimously found Simpson liable for the wrongful death of and battery against Goldman, and battery against Brown. Daniel Petrocelli represented plaintiff Fred Goldman, Ronald Goldman’s father. Simpson was ordered to pay $33,500,000 in damages. However, California law protects pensions from being used to satisfy judgments, so Simpson was able to continue much of his lifestyle based on his NFL pension. In February 1999, an auction of Simpson’s Heisman Trophy and other belongings netted almost $500,000. The money went to the Goldman family.”

Though Ron Goldman’s father struggled, he got OJ in the long run. It was because of one of OJ Simpson’s schemes to evade payment and assert control over his dwindling sources of income that he now sits in a north Nevada jail.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/20/11 at 09:55 AM | #

If Madison ‘Permanent Sad Face’ Paxton is working in Italy, I would like to know how she got a work permit.  Unless you are in a relationship with an EU citizen, or have at least one grandparent from the EU (and in the latter case, you would have to apply for a passport), a work permit is not easy to get.

Posted by Janus on 09/20/11 at 10:10 AM | #

@Janus - That’s not quite true.  The situations you cited come in handy when applying for permanent residence, but many non-EU people are able to work in the EU without having family connections.  Some countries also run Highly-Skilled Migrant schemes for non-EU citizens or special programs for areas experiencing a labor shortage.

Once you secure employment, your employer applies for a work permit on your behalf.  I think you need to have your permesso di soggiorno first, but I assume that’s not a problem if you have a serious job offer.

Now, the question of how Madison got her job is a different matter. She may be an amazing photographer or she may have received some help securing a job, but I don’t feel comfortable deciding either way in the absence of evidence.

Posted by Vivianna on 09/20/11 at 12:17 PM | #

Once again Peter an excellent post. You expose the parents as aware of her involvement and guilt. I don’t understand the talk of allowing these murderers to go free when there is a mountain of blood evidence, cell phone evidence, timeline evidence, conflicted stories, lack of alibis, blaming Lumumba and numerous attempts of trickery and schemes to allow them to walk. If ak walks with her ...ehh I could have dreamed ,...I might remember,... maybe…defense .. well then justice will lose. It will not change this fact that ak and rs murdered Meredith and their families both act like scummy and have no class.

Posted by friar fudd on 09/20/11 at 01:42 PM | #

Janus, simple. Madison Paxton is employed as photographer by “Corriere dell’Umbria” newspaper. CEO of “Corriere dell’Umbria” group is Rocco Girlanda.

Posted by ncountryside on 09/20/11 at 03:09 PM | #

What is this time, and the other several times, that she has come close to a confession? I’d like a transcript of that; I’m curious what she said.

(And yes, I prefer a transcript to video/audio as I try to reduce my bandwidth consumption.)

Posted by kpva33 on 09/20/11 at 04:11 PM | #

Hi kpva33. The words were in fact “seems to have come close” not “has come close”.

Mr Mignini seemed to believe she came close to a confession on the night of 6 November 2007 when she wrote her first note at her request.

This was the one that was disallowed by the Supreme Court although Mr Mignini believes wrongly as he asked her no questions.

Also he seemed to believe she came close later that month in an interview at the questura. That has been discussed repeatedly over on PMF.

Also the Supreme Court of Cassation seemed to believe she came close when talking with her parents in a recorded conversation at Capanne. They mentioned the conversation in the report issued on Guede’s second appeal.

Since November 2007 it seems not really anything further, though her own lawyers publicly cautioned her about her tendency to be frank in speaking out.

Based in part on things they said to prison psychologists AK and RS were denied house arrest in 2008 as an alternative to jail before trial, but those interviews have not ever been made public.

By trial in 2009 and her chilling testimony on the stand, Knox seems to have swung far the other way.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/20/11 at 05:39 PM | #

It ain’t over till the fat lady sings, that’s so true. This case could rumble down the road for a long time. Thank you for suggesting the outcome’s many options: acquit, convict, lesser charges, house arrest or a reduced sentence.

It’s interesting that Mignini suggests that the defense request for a DNA review was made illegally late, two years too late.

I’m just back from a beach holiday, clothes shopping spree with daughter and movie “Lion King 3D”. In catching up with this case I found a lot of crowing and premature celebrating on FOA sites, a new interview with Madison, but better yet the good words of Maresca. He compared Stefanie Kercher’s recent letter she wrote during the appeal, to “David and Goliath” with the bigger presence of media fighting on Knox’s side. (but we know who won that famous battle, David not Goliath)

I also read in the Madison Paxton interview that Knox during prison visits is asking Madison to bring in articles about false confessions and wrongful imprisonment. This is supposedly so Amanda can one day help inmates. My guess is that she wants information on these topics to give her better ideas for herself on how to act like a falsely condemned person for future appeals.

Madison said Knox only writes letters to her now in Italian, to test her. “To test me”, these are Madison’s exact words. At the one hour visits at the table in Capanne, Knox also now speaks in Italian to Madison, perhaps not exclusively, that was unclear.

I would think Paxton has passed any test of friendship and loyalty to Knox already. This forcing Madison who is already visiting her regularly, to speak in Italian and read Amanda’s Italian seems quite hostile and offputting, a very dirty trick as Madison is trying to communicate so directly with her. As much Italian as Amanda speaks in prison out of necessity, it would seem she’d want a nice break to speak in her native tongue with her closest friend. Rather than do this, she switches to a lesser known language for her friend, even in letters. This seems very aggressive to me as Amanda regains control of the communication. She writes in Italian maybe to excuse herself as she did in court hoping to persuade others it was the language barrier that caused misunderstanding, in this case a barrier she has energetically built against Madison, pretending to be a teacher. I could be wrong, perhaps Madison knows Italian very well by now and desires this kind of challenge, but it strikes me as being quite the opposite of wanting closeness. Power in the relationship has swung to Madison, and Foxy doesn’t like it. 

Paxton said Knox speaks in terms of “we”...when “we get out” of prison. Madison assumes Knox uses this incorrect pronoun as a bid for companionship, a mark of togetherness, to use “we” instead of “I”, but it could also be one more manipulation of the Fox to force Madison to feel that she and the rest of the Knox/Mellas family included in this “we” must be obliged to suffer along with Knox.

The royal “we” could also be a repudiation by Knox that she alone, her “I” is responsible. She prefers to hear it’s “we” in prison. The suffering she has caused the family is modified in her mind. Her family’s unique sufferings on the outside of prison don’t count, or are part of the “we” who’s incarcerated. In other words, the only suffering going on is what’s done in prison, and she wants family suffering there with her, negating anything on the outside that they face.

Madison and Chris Mellas better get comfortable in Italy. It’s not over. All those photos Madison is taking all over the countryside for her job may be needed to decorate her new house in Umbria, or wherever the dear Amanda is transferred to serve the full sentence. Rome, anyone? Viterbo? Bari? George Clooneyland? Capri?

Posted by Hopeful on 09/20/11 at 05:49 PM | #

This comment is more about the forensics than the appeal, but there was a question on about the date of the drug testing done by hair analysis.

Here’s what I found: according to this site the hair analysis on the suspects may have been conducted too early to provide meaningful results

(emphasis mine)

8. How soon after use can a drug be detected in hair?
It takes approximately 4-5 days from the time of drug use for the affected hair to grow above the scalp.
Body hair growth rates are generally slower and cannot be utilized to determine a timeframe of drug use.

9. What is the shortest time period that can be evaluated?
The minimum time period is approximately two weeks (1/4 inch)

I was going by my recollection from Angel Face or Darkness Descending that the hair anaysis was conducted after they were arrested, on November 6 or 8.

Posted by Ergon on 09/20/11 at 09:27 PM | #

Hi Kpva33. I was able to track down the recorded prison conversation between Amanda Knox and her parents (Edda and Curt).  Here are some relevant snippets:

1.Edda: Like I said, the lawyers believe that they are doing it on purpose, because they sure have nothing, so they are trying to put pressure on like when they interrogated you to see if you would say something more and so you have to keep calm and do not say anything to anyone.

Obviously, a not-so-veiled attempt to warn Amanda not to talk without her lawyers present.

Amanda: Yeah, when I was in the room with him I said what? ... (Laughs) and then when I returned to my bedroom I was crying. I’m very, very worried for this thing about the knife… because there is a knife from Raffaele ...

Why is she so worried about the knife if she’s innocent? This is a partial confirmation that the knife her defense has been trying so hard to have thrown out is important.

Curt: Well, here, here, here are the facts… we talked yesterday with the lawyer and asked him about the knife. Every time that they have to review an item we have an expert there that will review it with them. This is an example of… this knife of which they are talking about, they have never notified anything about the knife.

E: So, it’s bullshit!

A: Is it bullshit?

E: It’s bullshit. 

Curt cuts her off, probably because he realizes the conversation may be recorded and doesn’t want her to talk too much.

Notice the subtle difference between Edda’s reaction and Amanda’s.  Edda wasn’t there that night and she doesn’t know exactly what went down and whether that knife was used.  Her reaction is one of relief when she finds out that the knife might not be used as evidence.  Amanda’s reaction, on the other hand, is circumspect - “Is it really BS?” / “Do they really think it’s BS?” It’s the kind of reaction someone might have when they know something is true and someone else tells them it’s not.

2. A: It’s stupid. I can’t say anything but the truth, because I know I was there. I mean, I can’t lie on this, there is no reason to do it.

This is what has been considered as the beginning of a confession.

C: Yeah, yeah, so what you have to do is not to talk about anything with anyone. Don’t write anything.

Again, Curt interrupts her before she can say too much. I don’t think they trust her not to incriminate herself, hence the reminders to not talk to anyone.

Based on this conversation, it’s not unreasonable to imagine that Amanda may have confessed in the early stages, had it not been for her parents’ interference. 

At this point in time, I think it’s impossible for Amanda to confess, given the weight put on her shoulders by her family.  They’ve spent a large amount of money on the PR campaign, some of which came from donations.  There’s a fair number of people out there, not all of them paid by the campaign, who believe in her innocence as a result of PR efforts.

Granted, it’s their fault for choosing not to read non-FOA material about the case, but the end result would be the same: a lot of people who spent considerable time and money supporting her innocence would feel betrayed.  They might even ask her why she didn’t just confess four years ago. I don’t think the PR campaign was her idea, so I think her parents made a grave mistake when they pushed her to plead innocent and started this entire circus.

It’s hurtful for both Meredith’s family and for Amanda, who may have been met with more compassion and clemency if she confessed and showed some genuine remorse.

Posted by Vivianna on 09/20/11 at 11:01 PM | #

Amanda will not walk free despite a last-minute tsunami of optimistic publicity.
Mignini, whenever at last he speaks again, will demolish the defense’s position.
And if Dr. Stephanoni presents slides to show the match-up of DNA graphs between the traces on the fatal knife & Ms Kercher’s DNA, the jury will reject the opinions of the Roman professors.

Or in brief: there is no argument for Amanda Knox except that of which the evidence speaks. It is she who conceived the rape of her roommate in a psychopathic groundless malice & it was she, no other, who thrust the fatal knife into Meredith’s neck.

We may expect that a self-respecting Italian court will not be swayed by bigotry & ranting arising from Amanda’s champions in Seattle.

It is precisely our society’s acceptance of a moral standard (however broadly conceived) that requires the upholding of Amanda’s conviction.

The court has taken its time in a case which has aroused a world-wide attention because every last thing has to be considered thoughtfully.
And when that has been done, the verdict will be affirmed.

Posted by Ernest Werner on 09/20/11 at 11:41 PM | #

@Ergon - Hair testing may be significant if it’s positive but it doesn’t mean much if it’s negative. Marijuana in particular may not show up. Also the collection is often done improperly. I would ignore it.

@Vivianna - Amanda will never confess. Being a celebrity defendant is her job. It’s all she’ll ever be known for. Probably she has even convinced herself that she’s innocent. As a result the Amanda cultists will never accept her guilt. Of course I will never accept her innocence, but at least my decision is based on facts not emotional pleas. See this article yesterday from Ground Report:

“Edda Mellas and Curt Knox reflect American heroes in the truest sense. ... Yet they fight an entire country, without hesitation to free their beloved, Amanda. They are the epitome of American values and indomitable American spirit! ... Amanda has already won the love and admiration of an entire country!”

Wow, that’s crazy. Anyway Nick Squires also has a Cautious Overview:

“I never quite believed that Knox was the wide-eyed innocent abroad that her supporters made her out to be; there were just too many odd things about her account of what happened that night.” (Hint, hint: he thinks she’s guilty.)

He adds, however, that he believes the two would have been acquitted in the UK. I can’t speak for the UK, but for the US I would have to agree. Our lay juries have a terrible record in these high-profile high-money cases. Italy having judges on the panel could make all the difference.

Posted by brmull on 09/20/11 at 11:59 PM | #

@ Sailor

“six lay jurors would ignore the lack of alibis, the mixed blood evidence, the phone records, Knox’s framing of Patrick, Sollecito’s footprint, Knox’s and Sollecito’s lies about their activites the morning after murder, etc”

Thank you for bringing common sense to this debate. The fact is that the evidence speaks for itself. Amanda Knox is GUILTY, and the conviction is very safe. If Knox is not sent back to jail next week for the rest of her murderous life, there is only one conclusion (since her folks aren’t rich). The US Government has intervened and done a private deal with the Italian authorities to get their perfect little sociopath killer back to Seattle.

Has anyone else noticed how everything outside the West is “second rate”. Italy’s justice system OF COURSE can’t be as good as England and America. You ONLY have a brain if you’ve been to Harvard and Cambridge, but go to an Italian university, and it’s somehow “less of an achievement”. Anything which isn’t made in England, or made in America OF COURSE IS SUPERIOR to Italy, which despicable reporters have portrayed as a third-world slum for finding Knox guilty.

There is a nasty thread of Anglo-saxon nationalism running through this whole case. If Meredith had not been from a bi-racial family, and looked like Cameron Diaz, the killer Knox would have been cooked right from the start after she voluntarily gave her first testimony which totally implicated her and proved she knew things only the KILLER would know.

Posted by proud-american on 09/21/11 at 02:37 AM | #

I have read a lot of your posts since 2010 and there’s one fact that I just learned from another website. When Meredith told Amanda about her boyfriend Amanda replied: I like him too, but it’s ok you can have him. WOW for me this is so shocking, because this is a stronger motive to fight, more than cleaning, strange men at the house etc.

Of course I dont know how british girls are regarding couple relations. But we, latin girls (I think americans too), are very cautious with our boyfriend (sort of jealous); that comment is enough to stay away and break the friendship, specially at those ages (20-25). It’s very clear, Amanda envies Meredith; perhaps drugs help to do the dirty job. Maybe if she’d haven’t used drugs, she would got afraid and stop the plan.

And for FOAs I do not blame or judge them, definitely most of them really believe her. The have their right to object. But Hayden Panettierre (the actress who plays Amanda) said once: I want see her free regardless her innocence or guilt. For me that was a sad and unfortunate expression. I do not know why people did not get mad.

Posted by lulupr on 09/21/11 at 06:57 AM | #


People do get mad; the problem is that when you have the majority of the US media supporting a biased view then you’re chasing an uphill battle. Can you imagine a Judge from any country writing to an US Judge giving him advise?

Can you imagine a senator from any country accusing the US of injustice in a local murder trial.  Can you imagine the outcry and backlash?

But it’s all ok for the US knuckleheads to do this to Italy?  What is missing deeply here is a respect for a country’s legal system and its personnel.

How could the Court, Judge, Jury, Prosecutors have avoided US and international criticism with US Embassy officials, dozens of international journalists and independent witnesses present?

And what would you say about your defense lawyers who would sit idly by without objection?

What is truly on trial for me is more than K/S guilt or innocence. At stake is the truth and how the media behave. I once was naive and ‘believed’ everything that was in the press and TV. Now, I make it a point to remind myself that maybe 10-20% is reliable. What a pity.

Luckily, we have dedicated people who have at their own cost provided a site to expose the truth and a forum to discuss it.

We need more TJMK sites!

Posted by Zoff on 09/21/11 at 08:04 AM | #

We are all holding a vigil here for Meredith Kercher as we await the outcome of this appeal.  By reminding ourselves of the evidence of guilt that was presented against Knox and Sollecito, we are honoring Meredith.  As her sister wrote in her recent letter, people who lose sight of the evidence, forget about Meredith and how her life was taken from her and her family.

Knox’s popularity with the media outlets doesn’t mean she’s innocent.  The massive PR machine hopes to create a windstorm of doubt to blow away the guilty verdicts.  I’m hoping the judges and jurors will be wise enough to tell the difference between hot air and hard evidence.

Posted by Sailor on 09/21/11 at 09:19 AM | #

Just found this link, from Ann Coulter.

Every time you read the early days, you just understand how guilty she is !!

The Cat

Posted by Skuttie on 09/21/11 at 02:35 PM | #

@brmull - It’s funny you zeroed in on that particular fragment from Denver’s article at the GroundReport because I wrote a small comment on PMF about the same bit. I think everyone agreed that “wow, that’s crazy” pretty much describes it.

Lulu’s comment made me wonder about something.

[Parenthetical thought:  I don’t think Amanda was particularly interested in Giacomo, given her one-night stands with different guys, but she may have been miffed when Giacomo and Meredith started dating, simply because this meant one less guy interested in her.]

If my timeline is correct, Meredith started dating Giacomo before Amanda met Raffaele.  I wonder if Amanda was in elevated boyfriend-finding mode at that point simply because Meredith had one. Raffaele was easy prey - not an unattractive guy by any means, but socially crippled by his shyness, awkwardness, lack of experience, etc. (probably fairly desperate at that point).  It’s not hard for an aggressive, decently attractive girl to get a guy like this to commit to her fast.  Bam, instant boyfriend, Italian to boot, so Meredith didn’t have anything on her anymore.

So, to answer Lulu’s question, I don’t think that Giacomo was a major reason.  I don’t think Amanda was invested in him at all, but she was invested in being dominant and being the most successful, admired, etc. The problem is that she couldn’t achieve that status at the cottage, which was likely a huge source of frustration for her.

There’s no question that the alpha girl in the house was Filomena, by virtue of being older, Italian, and owning the lease; Laura was second-in-command.  The fact that they were Italian and Amanda wanted to be liked by Italians meant that she couldn’t antagonize them.  Also, they were probably not interested in the 20-year old boys she was flirting with, so that made them less threatening.  That left Meredith as direct competition.

If Amanda had acted normally, done her cleaning, not brought random guys at home, not gone out of her way to be annoying and hog attention, etc., her status in the house would have been equal to Meredith’s.  Due to the aforementioned behaviors, however, she was likely relegated to omega status. I have no doubt that she realized this in the days before the murder.

What must have made it worse for her is the fact that outside the house, Meredith was the alpha girl - the one that guys probably flirted with, the one with a lot of female friends, the one who wow-ed Patrick with her mojitos, etc. For someone with a dominant/competitive streak, this situation would have been very frustrating (and I’m guessing that for Amanda, it was getting to be unbearable).

Posted by Vivianna on 09/21/11 at 02:55 PM | #

Hi Everyone

Time for a reality check. Go to Google and type in ‘Amanda Knox P/R Campaign: Have The Talking Points Become Albatrosses.’  It’s not totally up to date but it explodes the myths, disinformation and outright lies put out by

Gogerty-Start-Marriot plus Knox’s family who have continuously shot themselves in the foot by making the prosecution be very very careful about getting all their ducks in a row. I’m sure the defense would sooner have them simply shut up concerning their anti- Italian rhetoric, and let the defense get on with its job.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/21/11 at 03:35 PM | #

i Grahame.

Yeah a great analysis. A must-read on false claims made by the campaign. That’s our post of course, from February 2009. This is the link to it here.

Posted by Peter Quennell on 09/21/11 at 03:58 PM | #

Thank you Peter

I just read the latest Reuters clip. I love the way they inserted in the last paragraph,  “An Aquittal of Knox and Sollecito would be a major blow to the image of Italian police procedures and the Italian judicial system.”

Thereby hedging Reuter’s bet concerning blame.

Of course, and as I mentioned before, this will just strengthen the spine of the prosecution (Mignini et al;) to win the case, hence Gogerty Stuart Marriot continuously shooting themselves in the foot.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/21/11 at 04:27 PM | #

I m not good in english so sorry if you don t really understand what I want to say.

I read the post from “Hopeful”, and I read that AK is speaking and writting in Italian. For me this is very weird, I can Understand that after 4 years in Italy she speak and write Italian (good for her to understand at court) but what I cannot understand it is how a personn which is convicted unfairly (for her) for 26 years prison can write at the end of his “journal”, especially in the early days, sentences in Italian, the language of her “tormentors”? Normally she have to hate all what is related to Italy unless you know thay have been fair!

Posted by Beevor on 09/21/11 at 05:44 PM | #

Hi Beevor
      Simple reaction to your post. Don’t be sucked in by thinking as a normal person would. Getting inside Knox’s method of thinking where she want’s more than anything to be better than anyone else in a mine field. Take the visits by Madison Paxton where Knox only wants to speak in Italian, a language Paxton does not understand, or at least has very little grasp of.

Posted by Grahame Rhodes on 09/21/11 at 08:09 PM | #

Hi Vivianna.

In my experience, obtaining being able to work in Italy took about 1.5 years after initiating the process, and that was with my husband (to whom I was not married to at the time) and his family sponsoring me (to work in his family’s business). I initially got my work visa while I was back home in the States (my husband got it for me) but once I got to Italy, I had to wait another 4 months to get my permesso di soggiorno, which comes after you have demonstrated you have a job offer; in fact, I was told I couldn’t work until having the permesso di soggiorno.

It “only” took four months because my in-laws are well connected; otherwise, I’m told it could’ve taken at least a year. In fact, not long ago, there was a report in Italy about people who were waiting to start working but couldn’t because it was taking them too long to get their permesso di soggiorno and during the wait, their work permits had expired. So from my personal experience, it can be a long process to work in Italy for non-EU citizens (I’m American) even when you have a job offer.

But I completely agree with you- the question is how did Madison get that job? Someone here mentioned that MP Girlanda got it for her. That should explain many things.

Posted by Sunflower on 09/21/11 at 08:15 PM | #


Thank you for providing this information.  I’m only personally familiar with how things work in the NL, as I might have to move there permanently in a few years. The websites about working in Italy mentioned a current situation which is very similar - permesso di soggiorno first, based on job offer, then work permit via employer.  But it sounds like they might not have fully transitioned to this procedure, since you mention people with work visas still waiting on the residence permits. 

All in all, your experience makes the evil Dutch bureaucracy sound like a joke.  To be fair, I don’t need a visa or residence permit to be there, but since I’m still a second-class EU citizen, I’d still need a work permit.

I didn’t know that Girlanda was behind the Corriere job until I read it here, but it makes perfect sense.  I don’t think Madison had to wait long for her permesso/work permit thanks to these connections.

Posted by Vivianna on 09/21/11 at 10:07 PM | #

One of PMF’s regular posters came up with the lovely, simple idea of expressing support for the Kerchers and justice for Meredith by donning a white rose. Though she didn’t know it when she suggested the white rose, it turns out that the white rose has been a symbol of Yorkshire (where Leeds University is located) since the 1400’s. Many of our posters have changed their avatars to a white rose in honor of Meredith.

I put a white rose and an explanatory comment as my facebook status. Some are changing their profile pics. There are many ways to wear a white rose for Meredith Kercher as the appeal moves into closing arguments tomorrow.

Posted by Skeptical Bystander on 09/22/11 at 01:11 AM | #

Make a comment


Where next:

Click here to return to The Top Of The Front Page

Or to next entry Reflecting On Andrea Vogt’s Fine Report “Knox: Innocent Abroad Or “˜Getting Away With Murder’?”

Or to previous entry Slate’s Katie Crouch Comes Across Like A Callous, Ill-Informed Knox PR Puppet